Religious Understanding

Religion should not be a substitute for moral thinking, must never blind one from understanding the world.

One should not look down upon the sinners from a personal Noah's Ark in certainty that one meets all of the annointed minimum standards and their corresponding social conventions as dictated in thousand year old books created in the context of their time.

One should not meet the requirements of law with mindless disciplined persistence to the detriment of the spirit in which they were written.

Continuous sublimation of natural human impulses results in erruption of emotion seemingly originating from other sources. In the context of religion, the need to abide by each and every law, no matter what the consequence, may cause an upheaval of built up emotions finding a hole in the particular set of laws thus violating the spirit in which they were written.

I will not here state whether I believe in God or not, but for the sake of argument, let's assume that I do.
What does God wish for?

I think that God prefers a common atheist who acts in respect for his fellow humans and makes an effort to understand the world over a religious dictator and his fanatic followers, who with one hand live by very clear though often misinterpreted laws and with the other act morally indecent always from the perspective that the life of a hethen and worth less than that of a rat.

Is a morally enlightened atheist who tries to create understanding truly of less worth than a religious fanatic who acts as God's policeman with his finger pointing at the sky, arrogant in the certainty of his knowledge, mocking the disbeliever? Is it not only for the prophets to know the essence of the will of God? Why do these people presume to know?

In my opinion God applauds independent thinking and the will to try to understand the world and support the growth of understanding. One does not achieve this by continuouslly dictating to others what is right and what is wrong from a singular perspective, but rather through the appreciation of diversity and also by daring to behold and ponder over the more dim aspects of life.

One does not cultivate understanding by getting hypnotized by the meaning of individual words in a book or by isolating a small community from the world by leading a medieval style of life.

In my opinion the atheists have a point when they argue that religion hasn't evolved much since the medieval ages og the Renaissance. To be able to appreciate true spirituality i believe that one must look past dogmatism and research spirituality in accordance with the mental evolution achieved today.

It is spiritual bankruptcy when one kills random heathens in the name of God and it is likewise a failure to give them the excuse by turning the other cheek. One cannot atone with money or have greater spiritual rights than others because of lineage.

If the roots of ones spirituality comes solely from the hope of a better life after death then one does not appreciate the spirit of the religious. One will not be able to appreciate the depth of oneself or the diversity of the world and ones soul will not have the quantity to roam the infinite happiness and understanding the life after death promises.

For me it is a mystery that so many people practice religion and don't consider its implications in a broader perspective. There is much evidence, clean-cut and circumstantial, indicating that a vast majority doesn't practice religion out of the selfless motives as they claim but is rather concealed egoism. As with many points of denial in our world the need to shout louder and draw lines increases.

Many non-religious people find other things to be fanatically enthusiatic about and forcefully cling to that perceived truth. Maybe it is just a part of human nature in the social context. I'm just fed up with it. It would be nice if people thought for themselves.

Written 13th September 2009