The Conflict of Religion

The Conflict of Religion

In our last session we discussed the views of four individuals who oppose religion: Friedrich Nietzsche, Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, and, Bertrand Russell. Nietzsche explains, “If God exists then Nietzsche can not, but Nietzsche is, therefore, God is not”. He also held that if Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution is true then the idea of an existing God cannot be true. Karl Mark expressed, “religions are addicting, and therefore, we use them as power.” He also believed that “we follow religions to alleviate problems, however, because religion is nothing more than an addiction it can not fully solve the problems.” Marx also held that “because religion is an addiction it is dangerous”. Sigmund Freud expressed the idea that, “God is a man made creation”. He believed that, “man created God to witness their daily activities”. In addition, he said, “The creation of God was important to the survival of mankind.” Bertrand Russell held the view that, “the problem with religion is that it gives one a sense of empowerment that we don’t need. Therefore, religion is dangerous”.

In order for me to form an opinion of my own, I had to examine both sides of each claim. Take for example Nietzsche’s idea “because He exists God can not”. What if one were to turn this thought into “because I am, God is” or better yet because god is, therefore, I am. One can also give is and am meaning by saying something like, “God is perfect, therefore, I cannot be perfect.” All these sayings can be true but also false logically; therefore, this claim cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. The claims of Marx, and, Russell are similar, however, these ideas are based on the idea that religion is man made. Marx believed that religion is an addiction that we use as power. Russell believed the idea of religion gives us too much power. His idea is based on the question, “do we do God’s work”? He does not believe that we do God’s work, but his claim suggests that his answer to that question would be that we do. If Russell would have answered the question by saying no, then he would have come up with a conclusion like, “because we don’t do gods work religion is not dangerous”. But to say we don’t do gods work that religion is dangerous does not make sense to dispute. Because if we don’t do gods work then why would religion be dangerous? Therefore, the only way that one can conclude that religion is dangerous is if you believe that one does gods work. Freud has the idea that we use God as a parent. That is too say that everything that we do means nothing if it is not witnessed. In a certain manner that is true. For example, if one was to write a book but no one has read it, such a book is just a collection of words. Similarly, if God has created us, and no one acknowledges it, then does that mean that Gods creation did not exist or was useless? To assume that a book was written to be read but was not is therefore a useless book, is to exclude the possibility of the writer writing the book to bring out desires, anger, pressures, pain, or any other emotional feeling. Therefore, if the writer achieved those goals by writing the unread book then it was useful. Comparatively, to say that an action that is not noticed is useless can be proven false in a spiritual sense and can only be true when it comes to acquiring material goods or receiving compliments from material beings. The same thing holds true with Nietzsche’s idea that “if evolution is true then God is not. It is very possible that evolution is the product of a divine plan. If God is perfect then why wouldn’t he / she or “it” plan for evolution?

Living For a Higher Purpose

The question that I am trying to answer is whether or not it makes sense to live for a fulfillment beyond this world? I think that it is more important to live for the purpose of preserving our Gods creation than it is to live for the purpose of achieving an everlasting life in heaven. I think that if we do something just because we think God wants us to; we are living a selfish life. Does God want us to live for the purpose of his creation or for the purpose of our interest to be in heaven? I think that we should live to promote the processes which God provided us to enhance growth of our humanity. What are some of these tools that God has provided us?
Firstly, God has provided us with a body. You may be familiar with the saying “my body is my temple, and my temple is my guide.” One may look at this quote as individualistic. I view it as the “world” being my temple and my temple is my guide. I feel that it is my duty to take care of my temple and I will be taken care of in return. The body is mystical on its own. It is made of cells that only last seven years. Every seven years new cells are generated. How is it that we obtain all of our genetic information if the cells are the carriers of this material? Is it mitosis and meiosis? I don’t doubt that they are involved that would be a contradiction because they are the reproduction processes of cells. However, it seems that the death of a cell would have to occur if we are to maintain a living status. The body and all it wonders is made up an average of 55% to 65% water depending on your age and your fat content. Children seem to have a larger percentage of water. Is death the result of a process of slowing loosing water? There are researches that have been done that suggest that dehydration occurs from the lack of water this causes your body to become highly acidic. The human body should always remain neutral (between basic and acidic) about 7 on the ph scale. If the water level falls, the power of hydrogen will degrees to 1-3 and could cause problems like, high blood pressure. There is also evidence that cancer can develop in this environment. I think, like Lao stated in the Tao Te Ching, there seems to be something about water that is amazing. And I think that it is of our interest to protect this wonderful resource.
Secondly, God has provided us with a consciousness. With this consciousness we are able to have emotions, feel sensations, see, hear, and make rational decisions. We can also make non rational decisions. These decisions are usually influenced by sources that are unknown to us as we make them. They usually are the result of something that we have heard or something that we have seen. They are past memories that influence most of our actions whether we know it or not. When we make these decisions they can result in perfection or they can end up being a tragedy. However, when we examine the consequences and their opposites we tend to have a better chance of making the right decisions. What does this mean? If I had made any sense at all, this means that when we make our decisions on the basis that we want to be saved we are living outside of our consciousness. If conciseness is truly a gift from God, then why not live inside it?
Thirdly, God gave us spirituality. Spirituality seems to be something more than just mere consciousness. If I take the idea of the world and me, I can separate the two by saying I have a separate I.D (energy balance) than the other individuals in it. I have choices and if I have a choice than I can speak my own mind and if that is the case than the world revolves around something more than just my consciousness. There seems to be a spiritual since that is feeding all of us. Everything from what we see, what we hear to what we smell, and taste seem to be our conciseness but how these things make us feel is our spirituality. Every spirit seems to be the same however, when it works with the consciousness it transforms because every individual has a different energy balance. We are not all alike in our experiences. We are not all alike in our body and physical structure or in our genetic makeup. However, we seem to hold the same general sense of our surrounding. This seems to be the result of our spirit. In addition, it seems to be the ultimate gift we have received from God and it seems to be the driver of all things.