Religious Juxtaposition Reason

“A man can no more diminish God’s glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word ‘darkness’ on the walls of his cell.” ―C.S. Lewis.

Religion is a lifestyle that is not absolute, sacrosanct, or faultless. Therefore, there is a need to seek reasoning to integrate such a practice.  The belief in a supreme being is a common thread among various religions, thus necessitating the importance of spiritual congruence.

One may question whether the fundamental tenet of religion, which is rooted in spirituality, necessitates that every religion embodies the imperative for fraternal relations, thereby engendering concordance. Otherwise, despite the likelihood of analogous spiritual encounters across disparate beliefs, there should be a common ground.

Adopting a religion’s beliefs is considered the means of becoming a member of such a religion. Therefore, “religion is like a pair of shoes. Find one that fits you, but do not make me wear your shoes”. —George Carlin

Belief provides a sense of security, whereas faith may induce insecurity, as belief engenders confidence in one’s convictions. Faith offers hope rather than assurance.

Every faith’s foundational tenet and guiding dogmas are essential to its practice. However, a common-sense approach to instruction and application is vital. What sets each religion apart from the others is its unique spirituality. Therefore, spirituality reflects the spiritual master’s life and the supreme being, the ultimate goal, rather than a means to an end.

Furthermore, if one believes in common practical wisdom, it can be deduced that a rational sensibility ought to be enriched by religious and spiritual viewpoints. The practical knowledge gained through life experience, commonly called “common sense,” is not inherently intuitive but must be acquired through education and learning.

This discourse pertains to the acquisition of practical knowledge, precisely the comprehension of exigent circumstances, contradictory states, the interplay between innate and environmental factors, and the fluidity and temporal aspect of such phenomena. The coherence of spiritual rationality is manifested in its ability to maintain uniformity amidst contradictory circumstances.

“Anyone who thinks sitting in a church will make you a Christian must also think sitting in a garage can make you a car,” argues Garrison Keillor.

By employing rational thinking, it is possible to navigate complex and contentious matters that may arise in the context of various religious practices. The approach to handling situations cannot be uniform except for specific instances where diametrically opposed cases may be treated similarly. It is important to note that drawing conclusions based solely on a single verse from religious texts may lead to potential errors unless explicitly stated otherwise.

 In a related development, Dogmatics represents a scientific endeavour that seeks to comprehend and expound upon a specific object and sphere of activity through investigation and instruction. (Barth, 1959).

Regrettably, individuals who adhere to dogmatic religious beliefs exhibit doxastic irrationality, unreasonableness, and imprudence.Baldwin (2012) this discovery advocates for the imperative to critically examine and reassess our individual beliefs and belief systems.

Belief is a cognitive state that motivates individuals to accept certain propositions as accurate, even without concrete evidence or complete certainty. Consequently, our belief system profoundly impacts our actions and conduct. The notion of dogma is not intended to promote intellectual deficiency among individuals but rather to encompass a comprehensive understanding of the divinebeing and to be cognizant of it. According to Barth (1959), Christian dogmatics is a deliberate endeavour to comprehend and articulate precise truths, to observe and listen to these truths, to systematise and harmonise them, and to present them in the form of a doctrine.

Let us take a look at the below extracts:

“The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.” (Proverbs 9:10 NIV)

“Only those who fear Allah, from among His servants, who have knowledge.” (Holy Qu’ran 35:28)

“His form is not to be seen; no one sees Him with the eye. Those who through heart and mind know him as abiding in the heart become immortal.” (Upanishads 4:20)

The quotations mentioned above extracted from various religious scriptures serve as evidence that the primary objective of the Divine Creator, known by multiple appellations, is for humanity to apprehend the Divine not through human perception but rather through the compassionate essence of the Imago Dei, or the Image of God, thereby elucidating the interconnection between the metaphysical and ethical-metaphysical domains.

In precise terms, “Kindness has converted more sinners than either zeal, eloquence, or learning; and these three lasts have never converted any”. ―Frederick William Faber

Ironically, religion, often regarded as a manifestation of principles such as justice, peace, and transformation, has evolved into a wellspring of hatred, aggression, coercion, indoctrination, brainwashing, intimidation, slavery, and untold hardships. It has become a political tool for subjugation, oppression, and suppression; hence, “Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful”. ―Lucius Annaeus Seneca.

Mahatma Gandhi echoed the same idea: “For me, the different religions are beautiful flowers from the same garden, or they are branches of the same majestic tree”.

In contemporary society, individuals who adhere to religious dogma should be willing to learn and be receptive to constructive feedback regarding their aptitude for analytical reasoning. Simultaneously, the conviction ought to be approached or maintained with a demeanour of moral and intellectual humility. The rationale behind this assertion is that certain established beliefs or principles may not only become obsolete or deficient with time but are also expected to undergo continual scrutiny as they cannot be deemed “perpetually sacrosanct”.

To better grasp the issue, there is a need to juxtapose religiosity with spirituality, as a lack of clarity regarding these concepts can lead to problems within religious contexts.

Excessive commitment to external religious practice represents religiosity, which frequently prefers exterior rituals above interior life. In that case, it might lead to an exaggerated desire to demonstrate one’s closeness to the divine, which ultimately holds little significance.

It is not surprising that Arthur Clarke said, “The greatest tragedy in mankind’s entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion”.

In contrast, spirituality is a vision of life with a system of values. This statement posits that if each religion is founded upon a solid spiritual foundation, they should share a comparable transformative spiritual experience despite utilising distinct methodologies. The principles and objectives that govern an individual’s existence constitute the authentic rationale and virtues of religion, through which the sagacity of spiritual leaders is conveyed to faith adherents.

Given that God is not the progenitor of discordance, there should be harmony and understanding in the experience felt by everyone. According to George Bernard Shaw, “There is only one religion, though there are a hundred versions of it”.

The Convolution of the Religious Tenets:

Tragically, a clumsy approach to religious literature results from a muddled understanding of religious ideas.

Moreover, the manifestation of religious fervour or irrationality and a holier-than-thou attitude arises from the intricacy of instinct and intuition. The erroneous reading and interpretation of sacred texts lead to confusion, extremism, and fanaticism. We act on instinct without enabling intuition (although fallible) to analyse the message in our impulse. 

 “Fanaticism says George Santayana, “consists in redoubling your efforts when you have forgotten your aim”.

The notion that religious practices may function as a form of opiate for adherents, leading to a state of perplexity, is a concept that is difficult to reconcile with rational thought. The utilisation of this mechanism has shifted from a means of emancipation and fraternity to one of subjugation and servitude.

Moreover, it is widely acknowledged that numerous religious practices represent a deviation from the norm, whereby individuals may engage in actions prohibited by their respective religious doctrines under the guise of religious justification. In fact, “Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction”. —Blaise Pascal

Notably, a significant proportion of individuals who purport to possess clairvoyant abilities can ultimately be traced back to a familiar spirit. Nonetheless, the naive succumb to their delusory belief that they possess the truth regarding their core doctrinal claims.

The Cyclopean eye figurative (in Matthew 6:22), which says, “The eye is the lamp of the body…. but if your eyes are bad, your whole body will be full of darkness”, implies that an individual who lacks sight cannot effectively guide another who is similarly visually impaired.

Religious beliefs and practises have become a barrier to fraternity, justice, and fairness because their teachers have become fearmongers, instilling irrational beliefs and excessively zealous attitudes towards individuals, robbing religion of its conviviality.

According to Voltaire, “Those who can make you believe absurdities; can make you commit atrocities.”

Prioritising strict adherence to religious rules and prescriptions over other aspects is religiosity that lacks spirituality. Meanwhile, when sacred texts are tailored to be accepted uncritically as a rule of conduct, fundamentalism has crept in, a mechanical approach to religious practices, ‘ a hill of beans which has no spiritual upliftment. “I do not feel obliged,” says Galileo Galilei, “to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use”.

However, the most dependable means of determining whether a religious practice is oriented towards the summum bonum or ultimate good is to evaluate whether it promotes peace, love, and unity and cultivates the fundamental elements necessary for developing its adherents in a constantly evolving world. In essence, any religious practice that contradicts fundamental human values and dignity impedes human advancement and lacks justification, even in the presence of evidence drawn from sacred texts or traditions.

Joseph Addison made it clear when he said, “I would have every zealous man examine his heart thoroughly, and I believe he will often find that what he calls a zeal for his religion is either pride, interest, or ill-repute”.

The notion that many religious gurus’ may be uninterested in your Afterlife Mantras may surprise you. Instead, they are more preoccupied with the posthumous disposition of your assets or the exploitation of your loyalty to maintain their power and popularity. They believe they’ve “boarded a gravy train.” 

Napoleon Bonaparte, the French Emperor, once remarked, “Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet. Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich”.

Regrettably, specific individuals who are colloquially referred to as “armchair” headmasters representing various schools of thought may prioritise the indoctrination of their students with a sense of exclusivity rather than imparting genuine truth and knowledge about religion. This approach may lead to a heightened sensitivity among students towards those who hold divergent views.

These individuals called ‘teachers of the law’, have destroyed families, friends and kindreds with their half-baked instructions, brainwashing and one-size fits all ideology.

Little wonder Thomas Jefferson aptly puts it, “In the fevered state of our country, no good can ever result from any attempt to set one of these fiery zealots to rights, either in fact or in principle. They are determined as to the facts they will believe and the opinions on which they will act”.

Most individuals who claim to be open-minded tend to limit their openness solely to their familiar and comfortable surroundings.

Otherwise, any mind-boggling question threatens their life, aspiration, personality or dignity, culture, or religion. In that case, they feel irritated, scandalized, or frustrated.

as a novel discovery disturbs, challenges, or displaces the conditioned mind.

Conclusively, ‘in search of solutions’, It is evident that religion is not the root cause of societal issues. Instead, the interpretation and implementation of religious doctrines have led to a manifestation of religiosity devoid of spiritual essence. This phenomenon has resulted in a persistent disruption of peaceful co-existence. Religion, being an abstract concept, is devoid of inherent power. Instead, we imbue it with the capacity to exert influence over and afflict our existence.

  Keep in touch for discussion.

March 31, 2023 March 31, 2023Categories

Religious Juxtaposition Reason

Do you like it? Read more