After talking in class today about "seeing is believing" and "believing is seeing", I realized later that this is shown in so many ways from the 9/11 hoaxes. People began searching for foreshadowing and excused and found so many that people began to think it was a premeditated apocolypse. For example, the date of the attack. 9+1+1=11. Now, several people would begin to get anxious about that, but why? It doesn't mean anything to those of us who know better. But does that go the same with religions, a set group of morals that person follows?
If your friend is Buddhist and he is gay, and you are Christian and you are straight, should you tell him, because it is your religion (and therefor the right one?) that he is doing something wrong? Will he go to Hell because you believe in it, or because it exists? Can someone be exempt from Hell because they don't think it's real?
That may be what makes a set belief. In a particular episode of Friends, Ross is outraged when Phoebe does not believe in the concept of evolution. He badgers her for the entire show, attempting to make his points and prove that evolution was true. He even brought in thousand-year-old fossils detailing the events leading up to human evolution. Phoebe began screaming (credit to the Devoted Fans Network), "Wasn't there a time when the brightest minds in the world believed that the world was flat? And, up until like what, 50 years ago, you all thought the atom was the smallest thing, until you split it open, and this like, whole mess of crap came out. Now, are you telling me that you are so unbelievably arrogant that you can't admit that there's a teeny tiny possibility that you could be wrong about this?" Ross stopped, and then said there might be a small possibility. Phoebe laughed at him, and said "I can't believe you caved." Her point was, when you admit that others might be right too, you're probably poking a hole in your own belief system. If you cannot believe in something 100% and be ready to back it up at all times, you probably don't really believe in it.
You just abandoned your whole belief system. I mean, before, I didn't agree with you, but at least I respected you. How, how, how are you going to go into work tomorrow? How, how are you going to face the other science guys? How, how are you going to face yourself? Oh! That was fun.Whether or not the Native American people actually saw their relatives at the ride commemorating The Massacre at Wounded Knee is a question, to me, of science. "Making something out of nothing" (to quote RENT) is not physically impossible. You cannot see those things and believe they are real and true by the laws of science. However, I do not doubt that those people saw them spiritually by their own account because of a true belief they held. I am not calling it "hallucination" because that would mean I thought they were seeing falsehoods. I think whatever you believe it what is true on your account. If you believe in Hell, you have the option of going to hell. If you believe in reincarnation, you will be reincarnated.
My personal view of the afterlife is that when you die, you are buried and your spirit comes back up to perhaps harass your loved ones on earth. There is no way to earn your ticket to eternal happiness, you do not do bad things that will make you suffer forever. If my friend tells me stop doing things because I will go to Hell and it is their duty to make sure I don't suffer eternally, I would not be concerned. Hell does not exist. Hell may exist to others, but it does not exist to me, and I don't see how I can go burn forever in a place I didn't believe existed for my entire life. What afterlife you believe in is where you go.
I have known Christians who have sat through sermons bashing homosexuality when they personally did not think that way. But because it went against their beliefs, it would be undermining the whole belief system and therefor they would not be a true believer of the faith. Once you begin seeing flaws in your faith, you begin to wonder what credibility it has.
I have personally expierenced this with the Bible. Once I found that it had serious errors (looking back to the Renaissance, for example, the astrological fulcrom of the universe was not the Earth) I began picking apart other things. Soon the Bible lost all of its credibility to me, at least in the Old Testament. It was not scientifically proven, its sources were not cited, why should I believe in it? You cannot fully believe and engage in something when you find that you do not agree with parts of it.
This may sound like the horrible early Western Civilization, conservative white man's opinion of religion, but your religion (no matter who you are, including Native American) should make you feel like it is superior. If you think equally of both religions, you can't truly believe your religion is right for you. You may tolerate that religion but still think yours is right.
Without our standpoints, without always thinking you are right, what do you have? You could be easily swayed by the next person to present an idea or religion to you. Who are you without your views?
The truth is, without your definite views on things you cannot be considered an activist for what you believe in.
6 comments:
Even if you don't believe in something does not mean it does not exist.. i dont know that is what you were talking about or not but lets say for example, I believe in hell. because I love my friend should I ignor or not talk about it because he is gay or of different faith then me? no if you love your friend you dont want him to suffer you want the best for him..
What about truth? Example, I can not believ that indians are real because i have never seen them although they are..just because i don tbelieve them doesnot mean they dont exist.
What other points other then the earth space thing did you find that you thought disproved the bible?
"should make you feel like it is superior. If you think equally of both religions, you can't truly believe your religion is right for you. You may tolerate that religion but still think yours is right.
Without our standpoints, without always thinking you are right, what do you have? You could be easily swayed by the next person to present an idea or religion to you. Who are you without your views?
The truth is, without your definite views on things you cannot be considered an activist for what you believe in."
This is an awesome statement, if you don't have morals or values you will fall for anything to try to fill the emptyness in your heart.
Furthermore, I like how you talk about things that you were questioning or feeling youself, and you bring in many ideas.
You are not going to hell if you do bad things (whether you believe in hell or not)nor will you go to heaven if you do good things. Your eternal location has nothing to do with "your good works on earth" people go to hell because they havenot accepted God's gift and love for eternal life in heaven. He died on the cross for your sins and rose again on the third day. So that you have the opportunity to live foreven in heaven. I hope this helps and answers some of your questions.
I totally agree with the first part(which may be because we talked about this for hours in great detail).
What I don't agree with is what you call seeing something that wasn't there not a hallucination. If it isn't there, it is a hallucination. If it's there, it's there. Just because other people can't see it doesn't mean it's not there, but the only thing you can call not seeing something you think you see is hallucination, spiritual or otherwise.
I know you are a person of science (which I am not), so I will attept to make a scientific point. Some people can't see colors that some people can and vice verse. Isn't it then possible that some people can see some things that other people can't, like spirits riding with them? Just because there aren't any scientists who can see things like that doesn't mean they aren't there. If a very learned scientist, who happened to be colorblind, told you there was no such thing as blue, you would tell him he was wrong, you've seen blue, and he doesn't know what he's talking about.
How is this any different?
♥, Angela
Referring to the response you left on my blog, I agree. My intention was to look at the issue from both the side of my viewpoint and the side of someone else (like the whole devil's advoate thing). You can't have both, but you don't necessarily need to force others to think the way you do.
Thanks for the input.
♥, Angela
*advocate
I like how you capture the reader by starting out with the internet thing it makes people continue reading to see where you are goin with it. Nice Job
Wow Kaylee.. this is really interesting. You wrote this very well and it's really neat how you put the actual text in there.
Post a Comment