Tuesday, 24 March 2015

Modernity and Some More Arguments as to why We Would Have to Update God's Laws

Lots of old people wonder about the concept of modernity: What would that mean? Why should we bother?

Modernity would have to have to do with modern thinking and therefore rational thinking: All that can be proven to be unfounded should be disregarded as soon as possible or as soon as practicable. 

In reading about world religions, we notice that each one of the religious sects seems to believe that they have the absolute truth. Yet, their truth is this: The Catholics believe that Mary was a saint, someone who has conceived without ever having had an intercourse, and that Jesus was a holy person despite the consequences of his existence, which were, for instance, spiritual blindness for at least 2015 years, and people, since his death, believing, for instance, that instantaneous forgiveness is something possible, desirable, and heavenly. Islam believes that women are inferior and deserve more constraints in their existence than men. The spiritists believe that we accumulate Karma each and every time we do something wrong, morally wrong, but we may pay for that after death only. Sikhism believes that we should go around with a comb in our hair and with hair that has never been cut. 

There should be a limit for how different the orientation of God can be if it all comes from God and God is only one, is it not?

Simple logic tells us that it is either the case that God is not one or we are all insane or at least part of us is and we then invent that we had contact with God but we did not have that contact or God presents Himself in many shapes and varied discourses.

If we study the Bible, we notice that the discourse of the biblical God has changed in many aspects. For instance, God released us from the obligation of killing animals and making altar offers at a certain stage. 

It would be just natural accepting that God changes His mind as human kind changes its behavior, thinking, and actions.

Were God a static figure, then it would not be God, for it would not be superior to us: We keep on changing and God does not change the orientation, like new situations are introduced but the solution is still the same, as if that situation does not exist. God has to be the owner of all wisdom if we talk about only one God, as we do in Islam and Catholicism. In this case, God has to adapt, has to change.

As another point, if God always had many prophets, and manifested Himself through those for so long, and it is all documented in our Catholic Bible, for instance, why would God stop doing that?

We obviously would have to accept updates in God's laws and therefore we are obliged to forget the words given to our ancestors or consider the new additions as soon as there is conflict, which is then our point here: Modernity is updating God's laws as we go, and we must do that as a consequence of identifying and listening to new prophets. 

Each monotheistic religion should have a rule that helps us identify a prophet. A biblical prophet, for instance, is that who has true miracles to show human kind. One miracle is enough, according to the biblical writings, to guarantee that we are before a prophet. To the other side, one false prediction is enough to prove that the person is not a biblical prophet. We still have messengers in the Catholic Bible: Those bring God's messages regarding a certain topic and never speak in the name of God again. For instance, the three kings who visited Jesus at birth were there just to confirm that he was the savior. They never did anything else that connected to God's message.

In this case, it is about moments: That person has been used by God to give us some message that God deemed important. We must accept that and take the message. Unless the person is clearly a sinner, a demoniac or immoral person, a nonbeliever, we should make every effort to listen to them and take note of their message. 




No comments:

Post a Comment