Hundreds of people sing "Silent Night" to the glow of candles at a Christmas Eve service at the First Unitarian Universalist Church in San Francisco. The song, lit strictly by the candles, is a traditional highlight of the early evening service. (San Francisco Chronicle picture from Christmas 2008)
0 Comments
A Video for SafeHouse: "Transition to Atheism (Personal)" on YouTube 適合「心靈休息室」之短片:「轉到無神論」19/12/2009 www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0WwZc-Vz7Y
In this video, the narrator uses the seven-stage model of psychological transition put forward by Sugarman in her book "Life-Span Development" to explore the emotional side of personal transition from Christian to Atheist. It is very useful for SafeHouse, a resting place and support group for people in transition of religious faith. The SafeHouse can watch this video and discuss. 這套 YouTube 短片以心理發展的七個階段模型理解由基督徒過渡到無神論者的情緒轉變。看來十分適合「心靈休息室」觀看及討論。(「心靈休息室」是一個為宗教信仰轉變者而設的互助小組。) The world should be alerted about this unbelievably horrible reality. In Nigeria, thousands of children are believed, by evangelical Christians, to be demon-possessed "witches" and some of them are tortured to death (1). Rev Helen Ukpabio of the Liberty Gospel Church is an infamous witch hunter. She made films to educate people that child "witches" exist (2). Her church's supporters have invaded a child rights conference (3), during which a humanist anti-superstition educator Leo Igwere's belongings were stolen. Now, Ukpabio has filed a lawsuit in the Nigerian federal court against Igwere for "religious discrimination" (hearing on Dec 17) (4)! A superstition-spreader who most likely indirectly caused multiple child murders brings to court a humane worker who tried to stop those children from being murdered! What on earth can be more absurd!
This terrible thing forced me to reflect on religious faith, Christian faith in particular. Some Christians in Nigeria believed that certain children are demon-possessed witches, and tried to cast out demons to the point of murdering those children. Faith kills. Christians all over the world should reflect on the nature (and danger) of their own religious faith. You might wonder how that bizarre thing in Nigeria can be related to the faith of Christians in the rest of the world. They are. At the heart of Christianity is a set of supernatural doctrines. A personal God created and is looking after this world. God hears and answers prayers. Bible being the Word of God. Original sin. Jesus is God. Virgin birth. Salvation by crucifixion. Resurrection. Second coming. Eternal life. Satan is real. Spiritual warfare between God and Satan. Satan can possess a human. And more. If Christians believed these, it follows that a child can be possessed by Satan (demon). If a child is believed to be possessed, why not cast out the demon from the child? If the exorcism failed, why not "deliver" the poor child to "eternal life"? The line of thought is logical. More importantly, the concepts of "spiritual warfare" and demon possession are alive in Western Christians, most notably among charismatics and evangelicals. And Christian exorcism is still being practiced in the West, only not to the degree of murder. Christianity, following Judaism, has been praising the faith of Abraham in intending to (though being stopped at the last moment) sacrifice his own son upon God's order. By praising Abraham, Christianity indirectly endorses human sacrifice. Abraham might have nothing to do with the situation in Nigeria, but seeing human life as less worthy than faith in God is the same common core value behind. Religious faiths, including Christianity, can be dangerous. The only safeguard is to put universal human rights standard above all religious faiths and all religious authorities, including the Holy Bible. Put it simply, to make the world safer, we must put human life above God. The Bible says that Satan is real, demon possession is real. The Bible and the Church praise Abraham’s attempted child sacrifice. If you believe that a particular child is being possessed, will you endorse performing exorcism on him/her? Why or why not? If you believe that God demands you to sacrifice your own son, will you obey God out of faith? Why or why not? Is faith a virtue or a vice? Should a believer obey or be critical of religious authorities (Bible, Church, Pope, ministers, the Nigerian children-killing Christian leaders, etc)? These are important questions for all Christians to ask themselves. 尼日利亞:福音派信徒殺害兒童「巫師」 世界應該知道這件令人震慄的可怕事件。在尼日利亞,數以千計的兒童被基督教福音派信徒相信是被魔鬼附體的「巫師」,當中一些兒童甚至被折磨致死(1)。「自由福音教會」牧師海倫.Ukpabio是一個著名的獵巫者。她製作短片宣傳兒童「巫師」的確存在(2)。她的支持者曾闖入一個兒童權利會議搗亂(3),混亂間一位在場的反迷信教育家利奧.Igwere的財物被盜。現在,Ukpabio居然告上尼日利亞聯邦法院,控告Igwere「宗教歧視」,聆訊將於本月十七日展開(4)!世上還有更荒唐的事嗎?一名散播迷信,導致許多兒童被虐待致死的人在法庭控告一個試圖阻止這些兒童被殺害的人道工作者! 這件可怕的事情,迫使我反省宗教信仰,尤其是基督教信仰。有些在尼日利亞的基督徒相信,某些兒童是被魔鬼附體的「巫師」,為他們「趕鬼」,甚至殺害那些的兒童。信仰可殺人!世界各地的基督徒都應該反省他們自己的宗教信仰及其危險性。 你可能認為發生在尼日利亞的恐怖事情與世界其他地方的基督徒的信仰無關。它們實在有極大關係。在基督宗教信仰的核心是一套超自然信念:上帝創造並保守世界;上帝聽禱告;聖經是神的話語;原罪;耶穌是神;處女生子;十架救贖;復活;基督再來;永生;撒旦是真實的;神和撒旦屬靈爭戰;鬼附;等等。 如果基督徒相信這些,自然也相信孩子有可能被撒旦(魔鬼)附體。孩子被鬼附,為何不替他們趕鬼?如果趕鬼失敗,為何不早送孩子入永生?這樣的思路是合邏輯的。更重要的是,「屬靈爭戰」是西方基督徒也相信的,尤其是靈恩派和福音派。西方基督教也有進行趕鬼,只是不至殺人而已。 基督宗教,承繼猶太教,讚揚亞伯拉罕的信心,在上帝的命令之下,打算把自己的兒子獻祭。基督宗教讚揚亞伯拉罕,便間接贊同以活人獻祭。亞伯拉罕或許與尼日利亞的情況無關,但視人的性命低於對上帝的信心,便是兩者背後共通的價值觀。宗教信仰,包括基督宗教,可以是危險的。唯一的保障,就是把普世人權標準置於一切宗教信仰和所有宗教權威之上,包括聖經。簡單來說,使世界更加安全,我們必須把人的生命置於上帝之上。 聖經說撒旦是真實的,鬼附真有其事。聖經和教會讚美亞伯拉罕企圖殺子。如果您相信某個孩子被鬼附,你會否贊同替他趕鬼?為何,為何不?如果你相信上帝要求你犧牲自己的兒子,你會否以信心服從上帝?為何,為何不?信心是一種美德或是一種惡?信徒應該服從宗教權威或批判宗教權威(聖經、教會、教宗、牧師、尼日利亞殺兒童的基督教領袖等)?這些都是所有基督徒要問自己的重要問題。 Notes 註: 1 Saving Africa’s Witch Children (Channel 4) www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/episode-guide/series-8/episode-1 "In some of the poorest parts of Nigeria, where evangelical religious fervour is combined with a belief in sorcery and black magic, many thousands of children are being blamed for catastrophes, death and famine: and branded witches. Denounced as Satan made flesh by powerful pastors and prophetesses, these children are abandoned, tortured, starved and murdered: all in the name of Jesus Christ." 2 End Of The Wicked – Helen Ukpabio www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUeKBibBN0I 3 Helen Ukpabio supporters invade child rights conference in Calabar, Nigeria http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWktZEj6OZ8 4 Witch Hunter Takes Humanist to Court (from a CFI email) In May 2009, the Center for Inquiry (CFI) launched an anti-superstition campaign to highlight and combat the abuse of alleged "child witches" throughout the African continent. Now "witch hunter" Helen Ukpabio, head of the Liberty Gospel Church in Nigeria, has filed a lawsuit in Nigerian federal court against Leo Igwe, CFI's representative in Nigeria. The events were set into motion on July 29 when a mob of about 150 members from Ukpabio's Liberty Gospel Church attacked Igwe and others during a "Child Rights and Witchcraft" event in Calabar, Nigeria. Police finally broke up the mob and arrested one person. Igwe’s bag, phone, camera, and a copy of his planned speech were stolen and his eyeglasses were smashed. The complaint filed by Ukpabio essentially alleges religious discrimination on the part of Igwe, who has been a tireless vocal critic of Ukpabio's claims that many of Nigeria's children and women are "witches". The suit, scheduled for a hearing on December 17, is seeking an injunction to prevent Igwe and other humanist groups from holding seminars or workshops aimed at raising awareness about the dangers associated with religious belief in witchcraft. (The mission of the Center for Inquiry is to foster a secular society based on science, reason, freedom of inquiry, and humanist values.) Holy Day today: "On the Origin of Species" published; Spinoza born. 今日大日子!《物種起源》出版;史賓諾沙出生25/11/2009 The day is November 24, 2009. From the HUUmanists email list: Remember that today is a holy day to Humanists, Unitarian Universalists, and all others who hold sacred our rapidly increasing knowledge of our own precious human nature, and especially its relation to the rest of the universe. One hundred fifty years ago today, on November 24, 1859, Charles Darwin opened the gates of heaven with his publication of "On the Origin of Species by Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life," and suddenly a great light shone down upon us all. Our understanding of ourselves has grown rapidly ever since, is growing today, and will continue to grow forever. Humanity will never be the same again. David Schafer Amen and hallelujah! Phil Spinoza was born on this day in 1632. Happy Birthday to you, Spinoza. Another reason for a Humanist celebration. Gordon Gamm Spinoza is best known for his Ethics, a monumental work that presents an ethical vision unfolding out of a monistic metaphysics in which God and Nature are identified. God is no longer the transcendent creator of the universe who rules it via providence, but Nature itself, understood as an infinite, necessary, and fully deterministic system of which humans are a part. Humans find happiness only through a rational understanding of this system and their place within it. www.iep.utm.edu/spinoza 今日大日子!《物種起源》出版;史賓諾沙出生
十一月廿四日是大日子! UU人文主義電郵列表有人寫道: 今天是所有認為人類知識增長是神聖的人的聖日。一百五十年前的今天,達爾文出版《物種起源》,為人類打開天堂之門,知識的大光突然普照世人。自此,人類對自己的認識突飛猛進;人類從此不再一樣。 阿門!哈利路亞! 史賓諾沙於一六三二年的今天出生。生日快樂,史賓諾沙。這是另一件值得人文主義者慶賀的事件。 (史賓諾沙提出一元論,即神與自然原為一。神不再是一超越者,創造並保守宇宙,而是自然本身,無限而必然,而人是其中的一份子。) King's God: The Unknown Faith of Dr Martin Luther King Jr by Robert James "Be" Scofield Nov/Dec 2009 Tikkun Although Martin Luther King served as a Baptist minister, this article from Tikkun shows that, as a young man in the liberal Crozer Theological Seminary (1948-1951), King rejected majority of the orthodox Christian doctrines, most central of which is perhaps the deity of Jesus. In The Humanity and Divinity of Jesus, a paper written for the class "Christian Theology Today," King clearly lays out his non-orthodox view on the deity of Jesus: "The significance of the divinity of Christ lies in the fact that his achievement is prophetic and promissory for every other true son of man who is willing to submit his will to the will and spirit of God. Christ was to be only the prototype of one among many brothers. The appearance of such a person, more divine and more human than any other, and in closest unity at once with God and man, is the most significant and hopeful event in human history. This divine quality or this unity with God was not something thrust upon Jesus from above, but it was a definite achievement through the process of moral struggle and self-abnegation." A few more King's liberal views on core Christian doctrines: Virgin Birth. King is frank here: "We of this scientific age will not explain the birth of Jesus in such unscientific terms." Jesus's early disciples saw his "spiritual life so far beyond theirs," explains King, that they believed that Jesus's uniquesness could only be explained biologically. Bodily Resurrection. Jesus's followers "had been captivated by the magnetic power of his personality," King writes, which led them to believe that he "could never die." Second Coming. "It is obvious that most twentieth century Christians must frankly and flatly reject any view of a physical return of Christ," says King boldly. "The final doctrine of the Second Coming is that whenever we turn our lives to the highest and best there for us is the Christ." Regarding heaven, King understands that it is located here on earth: "When we see social relationships controlled everywhere by the principles which Jesus illustrated in life--trust, love, mercy, and altruism--then we shall know that the kingdom of God is here." The author, therefore, concludes: "It should not be surprising then that while Dr King served a Baptist church, his first choice of religion was Unitarian Christian (which later merged with Universalism). Coretta Scott had been attending Unitarian churches for years before she met and married Martin, and they both attended Unitarian services while in Boston." 馬丁路德金的神:馬丁路德金的信仰鮮為人知的一面 眾所週知,馬丁路德金是浸信會牧師。但這篇在 Tikkun 刊登的文章說,從他在神學院時的學術論文顯示,年青時的馬丁路德金拒絕了很多正統的神學觀點,當中最核心的要數耶穌的神聖。以下的論文文字清楚解釋他對耶穌神聖的非傳統觀點: 「基督的神聖的意義在於,他的成就,對每個願意服從上帝意志的真正人子,具先導作用。基督只是在眾多兄弟中的一個原型。出現這樣一個比所有人都更神聖和更人性,同時與上帝和人聯合的人物,在人類歷史上是最重要和最充滿希望的事件。耶穌的神聖素質或與神合一,不是從上而下強加的本質,而是透過道德掙紮與自我克制過程而獲得的成就。」 馬丁路德金還有其他自由神學的思想: 童女產子。他說得清楚:「我們這科學時代不再如此非科學地解釋耶穌之出生。」他認為耶穌的門徒經驗耶穌之「靈性遠超凡人」,所以相信唯有與別不同之純潔成孕才能解釋耶穌的獨特性。 身體復活。馬丁路德金如此寫道:耶穌的跟隨者「完全臣服於他的人格力量」,至使他們相信耶穌「不可能死」。 基督再來。他大膽宣稱:「很明顯,大多數二十世紀的基督徒必須坦率地斷然拒絕任何基督身體將再來的想法。」他解釋:「基督再來這教義的意思是,每當我們的生命向最高處邁進,基督便向我們再來。」 至於天堂,他主張地上的:「當我們看到世界各地的社會關係彰顯耶穌在生命中示範的原則—信任、愛、憐憫、利他主義—那麼我們就知道,神國在這裡。」 所以,本文作者如此寫道:「這樣,我們便無需驚訝,雖然金博士在浸信會事奉,他的宗教首選是 Unitarian 基督教(它後來與 Universalism 合併)。他的夫人在認識馬丁之前,多年來都是上 Unitarian 教會的;他倆在波士頓的時候,都是參與 Unitarian 的主日崇拜的。」
Carl Sagan's book "The Varieties of Scientific Experience" (New York: Penguin, 2006) explains very well what Religious Naturalism is, although Carl has not identified himself or his religious view with this term. Religious Naturalism approaches religion and spirituality by the way of science. The words of Ann Druyan, Carl's wife and editor of the book, in "Editor's Introduction," are remarkably in-line with this position:
For Carl, Darwin's insight that life evolved over the eons through natural selection was not just better science than Genesis, it also afforded a deeper, more satisfying spiritual experience. (p. x) He believed that the little we do know about nature suggests that we know even less about God. We had only just managed to get an inkling of the grandeur ofthe cosmos and its exquisite laws that guide the evolution of trillions if not infinite numbers of worlds. The newly acquired vision made the God who created the World seem hopelessly local and dated, bound to transparently human misconceptions and conceipts of the past. (p. x) ...he never understand why anyone wound want to separate science, which is just a way of searching for what is true, from what we hold sacred, which are those truths that inspire love and awe. (p. xi) His argument was not with God but with those who believed that our understanding of the sacred had been completed. Science's premanently revolutionary conviction that the search for truth never ends seemed to him the only approach with sufficient humility to be worthy of the universe that it revealed. The methodology of science, with tis error-correcting mechanism for keeping us honest in spite of our chronic tendencies to project, to misunderstand, to deceive ourselves and others, seemed to him the height of spiritual discipline. If you are searching for sacred knowledge and not just a palliative for your fears, then you will train yourself to be a good skeptic. (p. xi) The idea that the scientific method should be applied to the deepest of questions is frequently decried as "scientism." This charge is made by those who hold that religious beliefs whould be off-limits to scientific scrutiny---that beliefs (convictions without evidence that can be tested) are a sufficient way of knowing. Carl understood this feeling, but he insisted with Bertrand Russell that "what is wanted is not the will to believe, but the desire to find out, which is the exact opposite." (p. xi) Until about five hundred years ago, there had been no such wall separating science and religion. Back then they were one and the same. It was only when a group of religious men who wished "to read God's mind" realized that science would be the most powerful means to do so that a wall was needed. These men---among them Galileo, Kepler, Newton, and, much later, Darwin---began to articulate and internalize the scientific method. Science took off for stars, and institutional religion, choosing to deny the new revelations, could do little more than build a protective wall around itself. (p. xi) To him we were "starstuff pondering the stars; organized assemblages of 10 billion billion billion atoms considering the evolution of atoms; tracing the long journey by which, here at least, consciousness arose." For him science was, in part, a kind of "informed worship." (p. xiii) (This is a Chinese post at the forum of the Hong Kong positivistic philosopher Lee Tin Ming. This excerpt from an article by Erich Fromm says that religions can be divided into totalitarian religions and humanistic religions. The God of the Old Testament is totalitarian. The original teachings of Jesus were humanistic, but Roman rulers later turned them into a totalitarian Christianity. This article is very inspiring. 在《李天命網上思考》,有人貼了這篇文章,甚具啟發性。)
獨裁宗教與人本宗教 (Totalitarian Religions and Humanistic Religions) Psychoanalysis & Religion By Erich Fromm http://leetm.mingpao.com/cfm/Forum3.cfm?CategoryID=2&TopicID=4359&TopicOrder=Desc&TopicPage=1 獨裁宗教的基本要點是屈服於一種超人的力量,其主要德性是服從,不服從是最大的罪過。…相反,人本宗教則以人的力量為中心,人必須為了理解他自已,與他人的關係以及他在宇宙中的地位而發展他的理性力量。… 獨裁宗教和人本宗教的區分不僅貫穿於各種宗教,還存在於同一宗教之內。… 舊約的開頭是用獨裁宗教寫的,上帝是一個家族的絕對統治者的形象,他可以隨心所欲地創造人和毀滅人。他禁止人類吃智慧樹上的果子,並威脅說如果人類違反禁令,難逃一死。…當亞伯拉罕為所多瑪祈求,上帝和人之間開始了新的關係。他批評上帝違反他自已的原則:「將義人和惡人同殺,將義人和惡人看待,這斷不是你所行的,審判大地的主,豈不行公義嗎?」。 亞當吃禁果而墮落的故事與亞伯拉罕的爭辯之間的差異是很明顯的。前一個故事中,人被禁止明白善惡,他與上帝是屈從的關係。而後一個故事裡,人運用他的善惡知識,以正義之名批評上帝,上帝也不得不讓步。… 早期的基督教是人本主義的,不是獨裁主義的,這可從耶穌的教導的內容和精神為證。耶穌說:「天國在你們心裡」,這是非權威主義思想簡單而清晰的表達。但後來,基督教不再是窮苦百姓的宗教,開始變成羅馬統治者的宗教。於是,基督教中的獨裁主義便佔優勢了。… 在人本主義宗教中,上帝是人更高的自我形象,是人潛在的或應該成為的形象的象徵,而在獨裁主義宗教中,上帝是人的原始性質——他是理性的愛的惟一擁有者,上帝越完美,則人越不完美。人把自已身上最好的東西賦予了上帝,從而使人自已變得赤貧。既然上帝具備了全部的愛、知慧和正義,那麼人就被剝奪了這些品質,變得空虛和不幸。他從渺小感開始,進而變得徹底的無能為力,他們把全部力量賦予上帝了。這種賦予的手法,我們可在人與人之間的受虐的、服從的性格關係中觀察到,一個人敬畏另一個人,因而把他的力量和希望寄托於那人身上。正是同樣的手法,使人賦予獨裁領導者以卓越的知慧和善良的品質。 當人把他最有價值的力量賦予上帝,他和他自已的力量是甚麼關係呢?它們開始和他分離,異化自身。每一件他曾具有的東西,現在都歸於上帝了,他變得一無所有。他只有通過上帝才能接近他自已。在崇拜上帝的過程中,他試圖與那部分在賦予中失落的自我相關係。在把他所有的東西給了上帝後,他又向上帝乞求歸還一些本來是他的東西。但由於喪失了他自已,他完全處於上帝的掌握之中。他必然感到像一個罪人,因為他剝奪了自已所有的善良,只有通過上帝的仁慈和榮耀,他才重新獲得使他成為人的東西。當他與自我分離時,為了讓上帝給他一些愛,他必須證明自已多麼缺乏愛,為了讓上帝用超人的知慧指導他,他必須證明自已多麼缺乏知慧。 This is an interesting perspective from an Evolutionary Biologist. The emerging field of Evolutionary Religious Studies is fascinating too!
Science as a Religion that Worships Truth as its God October 20, 2009 blog by David Sloan Wilson, Evolutionary Biologist http://scienceblogs.com/evolution/2009/10/goodbye_huffpost_hello_science ... In short, the truth is regarded as sacred within science, more than within public life, with all the obedience commanded by the word sacred in religious life. Science can even be regarded as a religion that worships truth as its god. It might seem provocative to put it this way, but I find the comparison compelling and challenge my readers to show what's wrong with it. Here are some insights that emerge from viewing science as a religion that worships truth as its god. First, being a scientist is not natural. We evolved to adopt beliefs when they are useful, not when then they are true, so being a scientist requires resisting temptation, just as religious believers must resist temptation to achieve the ideals of their faiths. Second, the ideals of science can only be achieved by an entire cultural system. Simply exhorting people to respect the truth is not good enough, just as exhorting people to do unto others isn't good enough. Third, science as practiced often falls short of the goals of science as idealized, just as religions as practiced fall short of the goals of religions as idealized. The third point is especially important because it means that scientists must be vigilant about keeping their own house in order before preaching to others. Anyone familiar with science knows that it is a messy process, like making laws and sausages. If only it was as simple as hypothesis formation and testing leading straight to the truth! Often science is like a bloodhound having difficulty finding the scent or running off baying loudly in the wrong direction. A special problem occurs when all scientists are biased in the same direction. Then there is no diversity of opinion that might cause them to disagree. Everyone knows that Darwin and his contemporaries were biased by the assumptions of Victorian culture, which they didn't know how to question but we can easily recognize with the passage of time. Everyone is prepared to admit that we are also biased by the assumptions of our own culture, but we seldom make a serious effort to examine and correct for them as part of the scientific process. We should. The fallibility of science makes arrogance one of its sins and humility one of its virtues, just as for other religious faiths. Beware of scientific emperors. They might have no clothes and that's not a pretty sight. ... Evolutionary Religious Studies http://evolution.binghamton.edu/religion/ Symphony of Science – We Are All Connected
featuring Carl Sagan, Richard Feynman, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Bill Nye www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGK84Poeynk A beautiful song synthesized from words of great popular scientists. This song reminds me of the beauty of Religious Naturalism—achieving spiritual depth from meditating on Nature herself as understood by science, without resorting to beliefs in the supernatural. 這首美妙的歌曲組合幾位偉大的科普科學家的說話而成。這首歌讓我想起美妙的「宗教自然主義」——從冥想科學理解的大自然本身達至靈性的深度,無須訴諸虛幻的超自然信仰。 Lyrics 歌詞: [deGrasse Tyson] We are all connected; To each other, biologically To the earth, chemically To the rest of the universe atomically [Feynman] I think nature's imagination Is so much greater than man's She's never going to let us relax [Sagan] We live in an in-between universe Where things change all right But according to patterns, rules, Or as we call them, laws of nature [Nye] I'm this guy standing on a planet Really I'm just a speck Compared with a star, the planet is just another speck To think about all of this To think about the vast emptiness of space There's billions and billions of stars Billions and billions of specks [Sagan] The beauty of a living thing is not the atoms that go into it But the way those atoms are put together The cosmos is also within us We're made of star stuff We are a way for the cosmos to know itself Across the sea of space The stars are other suns We have traveled this way before And there is much to be learned I find it elevating and exhilarating To discover that we live in a universe Which permits the evolution of molecular machines As intricate and subtle as we [deGrasse Tyson] I know that the molecules in my body are traceable To phenomena in the cosmos That makes me want to grab people in the street And say, have you heard this?? (Richard Feynman on hand drums and chanting) [Feynman] There's this tremendous mess Of waves all over in space Which is the light bouncing around the room And going from one thing to the other And it's all really there But you gotta stop and think about it About the complexity to really get the pleasure And it's all really there The inconceivable nature of nature How do Religious Naturalists/Religious Humanists read the Bible and pray? 宗教自然主義者/宗教人文主義者如何讀《聖經》及祈禱?19/10/2009 How do Religious Naturalists read the Bible and pray? God = Nature
How do Religious Humanists read the Bible and pray? God = Love I am turning from Christianity to Religious Naturalism and Religious Humanism. Naturalism believes that everything belongs to Nature as understood by science; Humanism believes that the final authority is in human. Both Naturalism and Humanism are non-theistic. The New Zealand Presbyterian theologian Lloyd Geering (whom our Progressive Christian Fellowship (PCF) is studying) points out that the term "God" is a symbol which has meaning only in the pre-scientific worldview: a personal highest being who has created and is taking care of the world, and loves human. Since Enlightenment, the Western worldview has drastically changed and now the Universe is understood to be impersonal, running according to physical laws. This causes the term "God" to lose its meaning for modern people. I still go to Christian churches occasionally. Today, I go to my old church, an Anglican church. When the word "God" is uttered while reading the Bible or saying a prayer, I have difficulty in dealing with that word. Today, right during the worship, I figured out the following solution: When a Religious Naturalist reads the Bible or says a prayer, when the term "God" is encountered, (s)he can replace it in his/her heart by the term "Nature." Then the integrity of intellectual conscience can be maintained. Naturalism understands the "God" of the Bible as follows. Human projects to an external being "God" his/her own feelings of praise, awe, and gratitude towards Nature. Human then personalizes "God" in order to make "Him" an appropriate subject for interpersonal relationship (a familiar mode of relationship since everyone's infancy) and worship (affirmation of worth). When a Religious Humanist reads the Bible or says a prayer, when the term "God" is encountered, (s)he can replace it in his/her heart by the term "Love" or "benevolence." Then the integrity of intellectual conscience can be maintained. Humanism understands the "God" of the Bible as follows. Human projects to an external being "God" his/her own highest values and meaning of life. Human then personalizes "God" in order to make "Him" an appropriate subject for interpersonal relationship and worship. Christians often say that Jesus is "Son of God" or "God Incarnate." In fact, the core of Jesus is Love or benevolence. Jesus is really "Son of God' or "God Incarnate" in the sense that Jesus fully expresses Love in his life to the extent that Jesus is experienced as "Son of Love" or "Love Incarnate." "God is love" (1 Jn 4:8,16). Which word to use, then? "Nature" or "Love"? Does this imply that Naturalism and Humanism are two conflicting theories, one worships Nature as God, the other worships Love as God? My present thought is that: In the realm of Nature, "God" symbolizes Nature; in the realm of human relationship, "God" symbolizes Love. I worship both Nature and Love. 宗教自然主義者/宗教人文主義者如何讀《聖經》及祈禱?神=自然;神=仁愛 宗教自然主義者如何讀《聖經》及祈禱?神=自然 宗教人文主義者如何讀《聖經》及祈禱?神=仁愛 我正從基督教轉向宗教自然主義和宗教人文主義。自然主義相信萬物皆屬於科學理解的自然;人文主義相信最終權威在於人。無論自然主義或人文主義,都不相信有神,是非神論(non-theistic)的。我們的「進思基督徒團契」正在研讀新西蘭長老會神學家基榮(Lloyd Geering)的神學。基榮指出,「神」一詞是一個象徵(symbol)。這個象徵,在科學前期的世界觀中,才有意義:祂是一位坐在天堂之上創造世界、掌管萬物、與人對話的有位格(personal)至高者。但在啟蒙運動之後,西方的世界觀產生了巨大的變化,人基本上以科學的觀念理解無位格、以物理律運行的宇宙,令「神」這個詞在現代人心目中失去意義。 我間中仍然有到基督教會聚會。我今天返我的母會,是聖公會。在教會讀《聖經》或祈禱,讀/聽/說到「神」一詞時,小不免感到為難。就在今天的崇拜當中,我想出了以下的解決辦法: 宗教自然主義者讀《聖經》或祈禱,只要每次遇到「神」一詞,都在心裡以「自然」(Nature)一詞取代,便何通達無阻,對得住智性良心。自然主義者認為,《聖經》中的「神」,是人把自己對自然界的讚美、敬畏、感恩之情,投射於一個外在者「神」,並將之人格化,以便將「祂」塑造成合適的人際關係(因為人自小便熟識人際關係)與敬拜(表達珍惜)的對象。 宗教人文主義者讀《聖經》或祈禱,只要每次遇到「神」一詞,都在心裡以「仁愛」一詞取代,便何通達無阻,對得住智性良心。人文主義者認為,《聖經》中的「神」,是人把自己心裡的最高價值與人生意義,投射於一個外在者「神」,並將之人格化,以便將「祂」塑造成合適的人際關係與敬拜的對象。基督徒常說耶穌是「神之子」、「道成內身」。事實上,耶穌的核心,就是仁愛。因為耶穌充份表現人心裡的最高價值「仁愛」,耶穌可說是「仁愛之子」、「仁愛成內身」。稱「仁愛」為「神」,耶穌便真正是「神之子」、「道成內身」了!「神就是愛」(約一4:8,16)。 還有一個問題。用那一個詞?「自然」或「仁愛」?兩個詞的出現,是否意味著自然主義與人文主義實在是兩套矛盾的理論,一個敬拜「自然」,一個敬拜「仁愛」?我目前認為在自然界的範疇,「神」一詞象徵「自然」;在人際範疇,「神」一詞象徵「仁愛」。我同時敬拜「自然」與「仁愛」。 |
Categories
All
Archives
February 2022
AuthorAlex from UUHK |