Best religion
So, what the best religion? It must be plausible, universal, peaceful, useful.
Yes, I start from the premise that we need one and add the rider that I am entitled to change my mind at any time without notice.
In reverse order:
Christianity. Sorry, not plausible. The Holy Trinity does not stand up to comparison with its competitors. The virgin birth and its consequences leave too much muddy doubt for a truly universal doctrine. And there are problems with Jesus, his historicity not his teachings - see other Paradox posts from last year. It is not truly universal and has had to modify itself beyond all recognition in order to make itself relevant to different people (though that could be a strength as well). It has been spread by violence. It has not managed to stop conflict, and indeed has been a cause of conflict between its various canons. Name me a prominent Christian that turns the other cheek. And what was that about the speck in the eye... ? How quickly we forget. To its believers (and semi believers) the idea of a nice man with a beard gives them a warm glow and feeling of usness. But the others do not see it that way. Fundamentally though, it fails because it is too contrived.
Judaism. Getting better. A far more plausible and universal concept of God. Only there is one problem. After magnaminously creating this wonderful world, why oh why did He have to choose a people as his favourites? Was this an act of spite? A feeling that after creating something so perfect, He just needed to over spice the pot a bit, stir things up a bit. Consequences are that Judaism ends up being even more specific and non universal than Christianity, in spite of the universality of the 10 commandments. Its spin off, Zionism, then muddies nationality, ethnicity and religion and zooms them all in on the walls of Jericho. It all sounds far too parochial for me. What does Judaism have to say to the Chinese bicycle rider or the Bolivian Llama shepherd?
Islam. Better still. Keeps Abrahams universal God, keeps the ten commandments and keeps Jesus, but without the miracles. One advantage is that it does not go in for miracles. To me, the Islamic God is plausable and the basic tenets are universal. The problem is that rather than depending on someone lost in the mists of time like Moses, or a mythical figure like Jesus, they go for a real person as the last messenger. A person so real that we can even trace his descendents (and God knows how they try). This individual did some wonderful things, married a divorcee businesswoman, was very pro feminist (for the times), and gave women the rights of inheritance etc. But... he also led military campaigns and used his religion to do so... leading to certain passages that we are still living with today. Conclusion - nearly there but falls down on the last two criteria.
Bahai... Aha, now we are getting somewhere. More on this tomorrow dear reader, including more reading.
Yes, I start from the premise that we need one and add the rider that I am entitled to change my mind at any time without notice.
In reverse order:
Christianity. Sorry, not plausible. The Holy Trinity does not stand up to comparison with its competitors. The virgin birth and its consequences leave too much muddy doubt for a truly universal doctrine. And there are problems with Jesus, his historicity not his teachings - see other Paradox posts from last year. It is not truly universal and has had to modify itself beyond all recognition in order to make itself relevant to different people (though that could be a strength as well). It has been spread by violence. It has not managed to stop conflict, and indeed has been a cause of conflict between its various canons. Name me a prominent Christian that turns the other cheek. And what was that about the speck in the eye... ? How quickly we forget. To its believers (and semi believers) the idea of a nice man with a beard gives them a warm glow and feeling of usness. But the others do not see it that way. Fundamentally though, it fails because it is too contrived.
Judaism. Getting better. A far more plausible and universal concept of God. Only there is one problem. After magnaminously creating this wonderful world, why oh why did He have to choose a people as his favourites? Was this an act of spite? A feeling that after creating something so perfect, He just needed to over spice the pot a bit, stir things up a bit. Consequences are that Judaism ends up being even more specific and non universal than Christianity, in spite of the universality of the 10 commandments. Its spin off, Zionism, then muddies nationality, ethnicity and religion and zooms them all in on the walls of Jericho. It all sounds far too parochial for me. What does Judaism have to say to the Chinese bicycle rider or the Bolivian Llama shepherd?
Islam. Better still. Keeps Abrahams universal God, keeps the ten commandments and keeps Jesus, but without the miracles. One advantage is that it does not go in for miracles. To me, the Islamic God is plausable and the basic tenets are universal. The problem is that rather than depending on someone lost in the mists of time like Moses, or a mythical figure like Jesus, they go for a real person as the last messenger. A person so real that we can even trace his descendents (and God knows how they try). This individual did some wonderful things, married a divorcee businesswoman, was very pro feminist (for the times), and gave women the rights of inheritance etc. But... he also led military campaigns and used his religion to do so... leading to certain passages that we are still living with today. Conclusion - nearly there but falls down on the last two criteria.
Bahai... Aha, now we are getting somewhere. More on this tomorrow dear reader, including more reading.
posted by Administrator at 5:59 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home