|
And the messenger rebelled, ala lucifer, then the messenger is no longer perfect. And we know such would be the case because if the messenger was perfect such messenger would have not made so many mistakes in their own lives and written them down.
So both were one way, one fell away from that way, then attempted to record to the best of their ability what they did know about the one who created them. Such people are apt to make some mistakes, and taking them too literal would be akin to taking them as perfect, which they are not. Therefore they make some mistakes in recording while in general they are able to convey the basics.
this would be the case whether they be indians believing in wonka tonka (some did) and woodland spirits, tibetan buddhists, aztecs, etc and et al. The idea was we were not gods and therefore could not do things as well as they could. This in turn actually helped free will as people were able to discern that such revelations were subject to a deeper analysis because they were made by mankind (and all could be wrong as well). So mankind now has the leisure to analyze each within a light of openess to find the truth and not have the truth thrust upon them.
We reject some out of hand, others seem to make more sense. Which one is real, if any, is yet to be proven - and won't be during the reign on the earth of imperfect creations.
The same questions are pondered on a scientific level - where did the universe come from, if the big bang then where did the things which make up the big bang come from, is the universe eternal, expanding, collapsing, etc? We have many theories, but not definitive answer (though, like in religion we get people who claim they know only to have their 'facts' overturned years later by better science). the quest continues on all fronts.
While I may think some are wrong, I don't want to ridicule those I disagree with - I want to learn from them and expand my mind, not narrow it to fit what I believe - for in doing so we become like those we seek to ridicule for closing our minds, and we also become like them in that we ridicule those who view the world in a different light. Christians, Indians, Muslims, Buddhists, Pagans, may all be wrong, but science is often wrong as well - the difference of course is that science progresses in it's view as new information is learned; yet we still find some who will seize the theory of the day and swear it is right and not look further.
If science keeps progressing it may well find there is a programmer, and then seek to understand the program the programmer. Religion already holds that belief and seeks to understand it. The core idea there is that a creature, different then us, had a hand in the whole mess with a generalized blueprint - sort of like a program with an underlying logic that inserts random variables (we being part of the random variable).
There are common threads between the two - belief that there is something behind things leads people to understand that something, and often how that something works. Many works in the 1800's in both religion and science are similar in their thirst to understand the hows whereas religion added the whys.
One is a search for meaning, one is a search for how. They are not necessarily at odds (and only have been more in the last century than others). If science disregards the whys there is only cold reason left, and that can lead to a total lack of morals and a might makes right mentality which someone like * would use - morals, and the ideas of right and wrong are not really scientific, so why have them? If I can kill you and take all you have and lose nothing (like going to jail) then why shouldn't I? I would be the surperior of this evolution basically because I was able to conqueor that which was weaker. But we, as humans, have morals and values - why?
What purpose do they have? If we are nothing more than a collection of molecules than why isn't the Iraq war a grand thing? Who cares who suffers for the needs of us, we are the most important thing. Let the kids there die, let the people suffer, for we ourselves gain oil and more and it benefits the larger group of americans. Why should we care at all about others, because caring has a basis in morality which cannot be pinned down because the only authority for it is might. * wins, and we should congratulate him, because he worked harder then we did and used his power to gain - and on the evolutionary scale he is more advanced because he is in power and we are not.
But we don't 'feel' it is right - too bad, because with no god all we have are our feelings and power, and there is no reason people should give an inch to those below them. Who will punish them? No one. * will do as he pleases, and should, because there is no higher moral authority than a nuclear weapon and an army to back it up.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
