Saturday, March 28, 2009

Salad Bar Christianity

JonD has stated, "Either the scripture is the word of god or it isn't."

I fear that many mainstream Christians fall into this same type of dichotomic logical fallacy (see Wikipedia Article). And many of these Christians deal with the conflict by stating that ALL scripture found in the Holy Bible is flawless, literal and directly from God. (This is at best anecdotal on my part, I have no statistics on the number of Christians who believe this or who do not.)

If we are to reject a portion of a single book in the Bible, say The Song of Solomon, then the whole book should be thrown out of the cannon. Sounds a lot like what King James had done back in the early 17th century by going through all available script written about Messiah and comparing them to the first five books of Moses omitting books that disagreed. The Bible is a compilation of books written by many different authors it would be silly to decide the cannon is false or true altogether based only on the writings of one author.

Having been compiled in this analytical way should at least lend to the individual Christian the same write to omit what they will.

But Jons real question is, "If you have the sense to decide what is best, independent of the doctrine, then what is the purpose of scripture?" This is a good question that all Christians should keep in mind as they study.

If I know the law of Moses has been fulfilled by Christ then what is my purpose in studying it. As well as if I know and recognize the discrepancies in the gospels Mathew, Mark, Luke and John, and recognize that they were written by finite men who have faulty memories then what is the purpose of my reading their accounts?

This puts scripture in a new light, we see and recognize the hand of finite men in the scriptures, and the scriptures ability to be flawed.

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Salad Bar Christianity

All judeo-christian religions have a doctrine that is said to be the infallible word of god. Why is it that so many believers will point out which passages in scripture are to be taken literally and which are to be interpreted differently or thrown out all together? (absurdities in the bible and book of mormon) Ignoring the parts of the bible that don't fit with what one believes shows, with no uncertainty, that it is to be taken as the fallible work of man. After all, a true christian would never ignore the word of god.

So, are we to consider an inaccurate, contradictory, poorly supported group of arbitrary documents as the sole proof of the existence of a supernatural sky god? Why is the bible considered more accurate than the masses of other books that claim to be divinely inspired? If we have the ability to decide what is best, independent of the doctrine, then what is the purpose of scripture at all? Either the scripture is the word of god or it isn't. Either god is omniscient (see here) or he isn't. Either god exists or he doesn't. There is no gray area.
"God created man in his own image. And man, being a gentleman, returned the favor."
-- Rousseau

Sunday, March 22, 2009

On morality

There are two main elements in the process of evolution. First is mutation, a small chance that a generation will be genetically different from the previous. Also there is natural selection, some individuals will be better suited to reproduce therefore passing their genes more readily on to the next generation. This process also applies to the passing down of learned behaviors as well. Richard Dawkins calls these learned behaviors "memes" (more about memes here). A meme that allows an individual or group to reproduce more readily is more likely spread more quickly and be maintained longer. The meme that will be discussed here is the one we call morality.

Since morality is a meme and memes are spread through communication we see that morals are different in different groups. The more restricted the comunication one group has with another the more differences we can expect to observe in their morals.

Natural selection tells us that the morals that most increase the chance for reproduction are those that are most probable to be kept. You can no more abandon your morality than you could your sexual desires. Both morality and sexual desire are major forces in our ability to reproduce so succesfully. Obviously natural selection favors those who protect their own needs above all, but, without others to reproduce with nothing will be passed on at all. So it can be said that morality is a natural way for all living beings to protect their own genetic line.

There is much more to be said about the evolution of morality and morality today. A book that explores this and many other aspects of the gene-centered view of evolution is The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins (1976).

Your comments and questions are greatly appeciated.

Man Pleaser

Man Pleaser

Pleaser: pleasing entertainer

Man: the natural or uncivilized man who pursues first his basic needs and wants. Starting with breathing, homeostasis, water, sleep, food, excretion and sex. (Maslow's Hierarchy Of Needs)

To please the natural man may be the act of trying to please our own natural man or the natural men around us. Mankind not a singular man. To be a man pleaser is to go through life simply satisfying the most primal needs of ourselves and those around us. to focus only on gratification and comfort of existence. Looking only for the esteem of our friends and neighbors. Not working to lift those around us instead looking to receive praise and reward.

Man pleasers. Peculiar term.