wilbjammin

A literal more direct translation from Hebrew of Genesis is that God created man in "our" image... that is, God is a "we" not an masculine "I"

You can see how social order and hierarchies have been adapted by the simple misuse of pronouns.



I propose this about religions, and these are my ideas (not in response to anything specific, just me spouting off what I think):


I. Religions are symbolic in nature.

II. Large religions represent social and political standards (more generally in practice, than in direct intrepretation).

III. Immersing children at a young age in any religion isn't fair because they don't have the mental faculities yet to tell the difference between symbolism and reality. Exposure is fine, I would encourage it, but with a balanced perspective towards many religions instead of one.

IV. God, too, is a symbolic concept... and to make declarative statements about God may metaphorically make sense within the symbolism, but is simultaneously abstract and completely indecipherable on a literal level.

V. One reason that humans are attracted to religions is that it gives them meaning in life. Religions do this by A) creating a frame of reference for all perceived phenomena, B) creating purpose and/or the metaphor of a "path" by which one can procede through live without a teleological crisis, and C) providing major social benefits.

VI. Contradictions found in religions are commonplace because of the metaphorical nature of religions (see point #1).

VII. Some religions are more inquisitive and less declarative about the nature of existence and meaning in life than others. These religions, from my perspective, allow for more critical thinking and tolerance.

VIII. A lot of fear and intolerance from religion comes from a fear of being wrong and not having a clear grasp of the symbolic nature of religion. Power structures that support the religion are embraced, and absolutely anything that threatens this power structure is viewed as evil.

IX. The focus on death and the afterlife is understandable, because no human has experienced being dead (for more than a few minutes, if that is really death...) and come back to tell us about it. It is a mysterious unknown. Nothing could be more metaphorical the ideas dealing with existence after death. It is my perspective that living for these ideas and directing life towards them is nihilistic and negates the only life that we truly know that we have.

I could go on and on, but I'll stop with this last one:

and finally...

X. There is no absolute Truth, and anyone declaring that they know an absolute Truth is deceiving their self. There are a few truths in life - we live, we die, and we don't know why we exist (though we generally try to find out). The rest we figure out through socialization, reflection, and experience. So - the rest is all relative.

These are just some of my views. I have held off on sharing them for a while, but it seems like an adequate time. As for Halx's points, I typically agree with him. I think he brings out some important points about the individual's ability (and responsibility) to choose as well as some inherent contradictions and the implications of taking symbolic ideas as literal fact.

Alright, I have said enough for now...

__________________
Innominate.