Quote:
Originally Posted by GeddyBass2112
Yeah, I understand what you're trying to say.
|
I'm glad you get what I was trying to say. If a god changes rules only because people sinned against that god, which rules would the god *really* prefer the people to follow: the original ones, or the new ones created in response to people having sinned?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeddyBass2112
Even now study of Torah law and the reasons for it are encouraged.
It's always good to make people think!
|
Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeddyBass2112
One of the things which put me off my old church, and indeed Christianity, was that those people who wished to ask questions or debate matters were often looked down upon or openly criticized. Most of the churches I've attended seemed to want people to learn answers by rote, withiout even really learning or understanding the reasoning behind them.
|
I can understand you feeling put off by anyone expecting you to learn answers by rote without trying to understand the reasoning behind them.
Geddy, I'm thinking this isn't a problem with Christianity or any religion as a whole, but rather with the philosophy of some of the practitioners. People in secular organizations can also be resistant to the questioning of rules or organization philosophy.
Speaking of following rules without questioning them, I remember being befriended by truly very nice members of the Boston Church of Christ, considered by some to be a cult, that was led by a (male) pastor who definitely had a strong aura of authority that didn't seem to invite questioning. During one of his sermons, he talked about how he had once sinned by kissing his wife with lust. He admonished the congregation to rid themselves of lust.
I was surprised, since I thought this was a good way to empty a church, and I hadn't realized that he felt the congregation as a whole should avoid lustful feelings. There didn't appear to be any debate over this issue in the Bible studies I attended as a guest. I thought the lack of debate was interesting and a bit disturbing, since I didn't think the Bible ever said lust shouldn't exist as part of love or should be avoided.
Often following religious laws seems to translate into following people's interpretations of religious texts, and so the exact law that a particular church may expect the congregation to follow comes down to which group of people has the most power within a religious organization.
I do think there must be religious organizations that simply offer a philosophy and leave it up to practitioners to decide for themselves how they interpret it and whether or how they want to follow it. I grew up going to a Unitarian Universalist Fellowship, which originated from Christian beliefs but is no longer dependent on any creed or faith. The people there always seemed very open-minded. I never actually thought of it as a religion, though.
UU is more of a group of people who support some basic principles, most of which I do follow because I think they are kind:
Unitarian Universalist Principles:
http://www.uua.org/visitors/6798.shtml
*The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
*Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
*Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
*A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
*The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
*The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;
*Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.