DiaBlogue<A>: It Takes Tao to Tango
Alan has kindly responded to my post about hell, but in a way that I must
confess leaves me with more questions than answers. I think part of the
confusion is that he isn't clear about whether I'm trying to convince him my
views are "true" vs. merely "consistent." Then again, maybe I'm not either.
:-)
At any rate, I think his most important statement is
this:
Would it not be accurate
to say that Christianity and the Bible were the starting point for my personal
observations? And I have left it behind, because in my search for the Tao (as I
suppose you could call it), I have found that much of what I would call
Christianity, as well as other theistic religions, have substantial
deficiencies, and what is left cannot be properly called
Christianity.
Fair enough. [Read more] for my attempt to unpack
that.
In particular, I will try to create a Brickman of what might be called Alan's
Meta-Tao. I think Alan believes:
1. There are universally valid norms for human
ethics, which are necessary and sufficient for both individual happiness and
social welfare
2. These norms are, at a practical level,
discoverable by the use of reason, observation, and empathy, without requiring
any sort of divinity.
3. In particular, religious faith (including
belief in god(s) and/or an afterlife) would
not
appreciably increase
my [his]
ability to either perceive or observe valid ethical standards.
4. Neither does it seem to increase the overall
ethicality of religious communities (including Christians), at least according
to my [his] standards.
5. In particular, the Bible is either not
reliable or not clear enough to provide a suitably strong ethical foundation for
life, and any attempt to follow its teachings in it could well do more harm than
good.
Does that summary accurately
capture your position? If not, how would you rewrite
it?
One more question. When you say
"Christianity", are you referring to:
a. The teachings and actions of Jesus Christ (as
recored, with some non-zero accuracy)
b. The teachings of Paul (whichever ones you may
consider authentic)
c. The entire canon of Scripture as represented
by the modern Christian Bible
d. The various systematic theologies loosely
grouped together as "orthodox Christianity"
e. The various worshipping communities that claim
the New Testament as their basis for existence.
f. Your personal experience as a member of such
a community
I infer from your context
that you mean to include all of them, but I want to be sure.
Thanks.
Posted: Wed - January 4, 2006 at 08:00 AM