Ch'i

Nice.



In my opinion, it would be impossible for a mass, religious reconcilliation. Here's why:

When someone makes an argument they sometimes believe that they're point of view is the correct notion, even if it is not. In most cases it takes a great deal of evidence to pursuade that person to see any fallacies they've made. When an argument, or debate, can only be won by either individuals' preferences (i.e. incomplete or circumstantial proof), both parties declare themselves correct. In other words, it becomes a stalemate. Makes sense.

Now consider this situation applied to religion. Both parties believe themselves absolutely, 100% correct. No evident evidence or facts which would lead to a victor, or clear sign of why either would be wrong. This gap grows into a no-man's-land in which both sides entrench themselves. The grey areas are wrong because if they weren't they'd be black or white. Even the slightest tint or hue withdraws them from the reality of the debate such as a name, or a date. Some become a philosophy, many become a doctrine. Thus more people see why they are right while the other is wrong. Right and wrong. Now the debate has morhped from "correct or wrong" to "morally justified or wrong." For those people who are indoctrinated by these doctrines, it becomes a matter of location, how loud the preacher is, and heritage.


As for my faith, I apply my philosophy of "adapt what it useful to oneself; disregard what is not" to my beliefs. I strongly believe that beliefs of a religious nature should, as in the case of most other things, be determined and discovered by oneself. My religion is practiced as a philosophy and it falls somewhere between Taoism, Agnosticism, and Buddhism; three religions and philosophies which are not prevailent in the areas I've lived and grown up in by the way (not to mention my father was a Lutheran pastor). In a nutshell, it is my belief that there is probably something out there which we cannot comprehend. This thing could be called God. There are most definately aspects of our reality which we do not understand and are ever so slighly aware of. I do not trust anyone to tell me what my religion should be; be it the Bible, Koran, Zoroastrian Archives, Tao Te Ching, Torah, or any other holy written word. I believe we are connected to everything around us and that the connection is either deeper or seems more obvious the more we understand it. I believe that if there is a God, and it initiated the "Big Bang", there are too many possibilities on what it is, and believing it to have a human sense of compassion and logic seems naive. I think science is a tool which is not contrary to philosophy, or religious beliefs. I prefer philosophy to religion; for me, one is a way of life, the latter is a shackle. These are some of the main points in my philodophy.

Religion provides hope, community, and something visceral to express and defend. With these as its anchor, it's influence cannot be understated. These provisions also make it a powerful tool for manipulation, which only increases my believe that people must reach their own conclusions. Ironically, those who are most in need of that retrospect are the least likely to listen to themselves.

Anyhoo, I can't tell if I went off on a rant or helped answer some of your questions. My intention was the latter.