|
It's
Time to Evolve (Sept/Oct 2007)
Let’s be humbly honest. We don’t really
know what folks are describing when they use words like God or
Allah or Oneness. None of us can be absolutely sure if the beliefs
entire afterlives are gambled on are the least bit valid. And
even assuming the unlikely scenario that one of the world’s
religions is right about everything it purports, what are the
odds that you’re lucky enough to be counted among its adherents?
Certainly not very high, considering the number of possible choices.
Why then are most of us so sure about things we
can’t possibly be sure about?
The history of our species is a veritable train
wreck of religious conflict: men, women, and children being killed,
enslaved, or tortured simply because so many of us place faith
before reason. So many of us sedated with guarantees of salvation,
the larger problems facing our species are written off as a side
note. So many of us holding onto notions of divinely ordained
human superiority, the planet is approaching ecological meltdown.
But we’re not supposed to talk about this. When it comes
to civil discourse, a person’s religious beliefs must never
be called into question.
Perhaps it’s time to ask ourselves why this
is. Whatever the sphere of discussion, be it politics, fashion,
or the weather, we require others to back up statements of belief
with solid rationale. If someone running for political office
believes they can solve our energy problems with gumdrops,
we demand a reason. Yet, the belief that the Creator
of the Universe has authored some sort of instruction manual for
life apparently requires no logical justification and warrants
no discussion. We are just supposed to tolerate temperamental
human beings arguing about which of these mutually exclusive magic
books is right. Instead, we should be determining whether any
of these ancient texts – filled with ethical inconsistencies,
advocations for barbarous acts, and scientific fallacies –
are even still applicable.
Sure, many moderate religious individuals manage
to selectively draw from their scripture to support acts of benevolence
or civil disobedience. They’ve clung to Christ’s Sermon
on the Mount, while rejecting entire books in the Old Testament.
They’ve interpreted Jihad as a personal spiritual struggle
rather than a war against infidels. They’ve realized that
prohibitions against pork and shellfish were likely necessary
before refrigeration was invented, but no longer. Such exercises
in logic should be applauded, but they were only achieved by taking
these supposedly inerrant texts less seriously.
So why not take this deductive reasoning to the
next level and finally retire these divisive “holy”
books to their rightful place on our shelves: next to the works
of Homer, Plato, Aristotle, Shakespeare, and the Brothers Grimm.
After all, gaining wisdom through studying the deeds of Zeus,
the tribulations of Macbeth, or the teachings of Socrates is all
well and good – so long as none of us begin to claim that
any of these stories are divine and therefore above scrutiny.
Let’s finally leave behind our addiction
to myth, ditch all the labels that divide us into fanatical factions,
and plunge forward into the great unknown. Let’s come together
and develop a new interpretation of transcendental and spiritual
experiences that jives with what we’ve come to understand
about the natural world and modern ethics. With open minds, we
might even finally come to terms with our place in the scheme
of things: within and not above the symphony of life.
-Jason M. Glover, Editor
In the words
of the legendary satirist Bill Hicks:
“The
reason our institutions, our traditional religions, are all crumbling
is because they’re no longer relevant. So it’s time
for us to create a new philosophy and perhaps even a new religion.
And that’s OK because that’s our right, because we
are free children of God with minds that can imagine anything.”
|
