Theology (mis)understood

@snoop I maintain that we are still basically ignorant about the origins of the universe - like any quest for knowledge, any progress seems to unearth more questions than answers. As you have acknowledged, the theories of evolution and the Big Bang are theories - the Catholic church had a problem with Galileo, but that has very little to do with the teachings of Christ and the Bible. You confuse 'Wisdom' with 'Knowledge', there is no proof that I know of that people are wiser now than they were 2,000 years ago - if that is your theory, then I think it would be hard to support. Am I saying scientists have proved nothing? No I believe I said that 'our knowledge has increased in directions that have proved profitable'. @Jodi Lynn I think the evidence of history is that 'history repeats' which more or less proves we are no wiser and so not learned the lessons of the past. Certainly there are periods of decline in certain geographical regions, but equally one can point to the incredible feats and highly-developed culture of Ancient communities in other parts of the world that really just reinforce the idea that our societies go in cycles regardless. Each great culture has it's day like the Egyptians, The Incas, The Romans, even the British Empire as a more modern recent example - and then each of these great civilisations falls by the wayside and goes into terminal decline. Whilst I agree that religion can be used in the way you describe, and no doubt has been and is used in this way, this does not mean that the basis of faith is wrong - only that human interpretation can be corrupt. Faith for most people that I come across is about enlightening rather than keeping in ignorance. Spirituality is independent of organised religion, but may then associate itself with organised religion. If the concept of God is accepted (through faith), then one accepts that this God is free to communicate (otherwise this God is flawed and therefore not actually God). If this God communicates, we can presume that God communicates the same thing to more than one individual... and that's how a church begins and religion is established. The problem is that tradition and rules (that were not originated by God) are then also established by man and that is where the concept of organised religion falls flat. However this does not translate as 'there is no God' - so the question remains that if there IS a God after all, what do we do about it? I suppose I am saying don't throw the baby out with the bathwater... just because religion is mis-used does not mean that there is no God. And if there IS a God - then we should maybe try and understand that as much as (or more than) we need to understand the concept of gravity. If it amazes you that people can have a faith in a God they cannot see, then I must reply that it amazes me that people can observe the universe and believe it was all co-incidence. Let me use some 'modern' science in the following way: Presumably we all understand the basis of 'every action has an equal and opposite reaction'. If we accept this modern scientific theory as being true (and I am sure we do) - what kind of action do you suppose it took to generate the 'reaction' which created the entire Universe? let me inform you that it would take the kind of 'action' that we can barely comprehend - nothing the human race has ever done has created something from nothing - therefore the power that created the universe must presumably: 1)be incredible 2)pre-date the universe To accept Newton's law of motion and expanding it to a general law of energy, means that you have to accept that the power to create the Universe always existed since energy is always 'converted' rather than created out of nothing. If the 'Big Bang' correctly describes how the Universe came about - where did the energy for the Big Bang come from? I'm not saying it didn't happen that way, I'm saying that it's no accident... Faith is not opposed to learning, and should encompass and even inspire learning - it is fairly easy to find instances of organised religion flying in the face of scientific fact, this only means that they are wrong - it does not mean there is no God. Sorry it took me so long to reply, I have not been MyLotting lately - I hope you will find this reply and look forward to reading a response. I have no desire to convert you to any religion (organised or not), just the desire that we all remain open-minded. All the best....

Thanks for the 'best response' - that really blows me away, I really appreciate it and enjoyed the discussion..

thank you Snoop for commenting, I had this great post all set up and it went *poof* into the cybersphere (new word for the mylot dictionary!). I will try to grab last nights thoughts (less the actual statistics I had previously dug up) on and comment to Livewyre: I think we are wiser today, in a sense of awareness that historically hasn't happened before. prior to the "great enlightenment" period (renaissance) Europe experienced what is known as the Dark Ages. Literacy was minimal at best, and the few who were educated were taught in a church/temple/mosque, therefore retained a religiously skewed education. religion is a power base, as it structures the followers behaviors, and everyone knows power corrupts. Keeping a community of peoples ignorant means more control by the power holders (such as an Imam, or pope or rabbi).When you make the rules and enforce them, you have an unmitigated power base. Religious leaders have historically always been the go to guys (or gals) when one had a question, about health, the after life, fears etc. The leaders didn't actually KNOW or prove a fact, the science was not there to support a true answer. But it SEEMED true enough, to the ignorant (uneducated) people, and so it was believed without question. religion does not encourage free thought, IMO. Conforming to the structures of a religious doctrine is principal to conversion, I would think. Selling salvation is not a new concept. Greed and bad intent has been around as long as humans have. tithing, (read: SACRIFICE) by the believers has ALWAYS been part of religion, ALL of them. there are absolutely NO original concepts in any of the BIG 3 (x-ianity, Islam, Judaism). nothing about them is original, not the flood, not the virgin birth, hell, not even the MONTH of December for celebrating is original. It amazes me that people still buy into the glaringly obvious piecing together of any of those 3, and take it (the doctrines/books/teachings of) as fact. Do you think people can be "spiritual" without religion?

Thank you for replying, your thoughts are welcome. So your is an endless quest for the "perfect" life? A soul satisfying afterlife? We choose our lives? As fetus? as zygote? when exactly do we "choose" our families, social status etc, before being born?

No. Not the perfect life, but perfection of the soul. It is the enduring of things that we cannot understand, like developing more patience, empathy, taking life as it comes to us. Feeling love and hatred, being good and bad. We choose our next life in the after life when we are souls again. When we die, we remember who we really are, then we get to choose what life we want again. Then when we are born we forget this chosen life (they say that the plasma is the liquid that makes us forget) and we live it day by day. It is fun actually if we see it as a whole big picture. A very perfect cycle engineered by God.

"god" isn't part of my life, per se, but I appreciate your take on the subject. I think I would very much like to think I had chosen MY MOTHER...not so much the other parent. How can one who partakes of your religion explain child abuses/neglect then? Is it the soul searching for balance from a former life? food for thought...

why Thank you, kind sir :)