Really Awfully Serious Religious Questions


islam-comic-book Jesusbomb 6 buddhist compliment Reincarnation

Does your God love violence, mindlessness, or making you very confused when it comes to time?

Muslims and Christians have
                thinking that’s twisted?
Jesus, Muhammad, both
               never existed
According to many
               historical types
Who say the accounts are
               hysterical hypes.

While others indignantly
               claim there to be
Quite considerably more
               historicity
For both than supporting
                all those who will state
There was a real bloke:
               Alexander the Great.

 ‘Did!’  ‘Didn’t!’  ‘Is!’  ‘Isn’t!’
               sums up the debate,
Where logical thinking
               is not very great,
And leads to conclusion
               which one has to face,
That neither opinion
               has proven its case. 

Some people believe in
               ancestors and spooks
Supported by numerous
               very old books;
And this can no more be
               disproven nor proved
Than those with opinions
               more mainstream-ly grooved.

 The Great God Smogwobble,
               constructed of smoke,
Would be, come to think of it,
               less of a joke
Than concepts today quite
               devoutly believed
Instead of with utter
               derision received.

 But whether or not there’s
               a god up on high,
Or whether it boils down
               to pie in the sky,
An inner conviction,
               which deep thought brings out,
Is surely the best to
               resolve any doubt.

With maths and with science
               one’s able to plot
Quite accurately how
               everything has now got
To stage it is at,
               but no answer comes by
To answer the question,
               not how, but just: why?

 All natural laws, all
               things dead or alive,
Do demonstrate purpose,
               direction, and drive;
Conclusions that no master
               plan there can be
Are thus quite the height of
               crass idiocy?

© Colonialist June 2015 (WordPress)
Advertisements

About colonialist

Active septic geranium who plays with words writing fantasy novels and professionally editing, with notes writing classical music, and with riding a mountain bike, horses and dinghies.
This entry was posted in Philosophy, Really Awful Rhyme, Religious absurdity and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to Really Awfully Serious Religious Questions

  1. Mél@nie says:

    excellent post and interesting, common sense approach, Sir… admiration & respect, Mélanie – convinced Darwinian-Cartesian 🙂

    Like

  2. The Asian says:

    People just need to respect each other’s beliefs, something that I don’t think has happened since the beginning of time

    Like

  3. gipsika says:

    Brilliantly written! 😀

    According to some natural scientists, (ok, animal ethologists and biologists) the question “why” is misplaced. At least if you are looking for a purpose-why rather than a causal why. It seems to strive towards a goal, and funnily it always, in retrospect, arrives at a goal – but the goal it arrives at, was that actually predictable? According to them, no, which renders the question for a purpose… purposeless.

    Ok I can’t go into much detail because I don’t know enough, but e.g. in the genetic evolution of certain plants, I could point to certain patterns. The patterns are a constant balancing act between improving specific adaptations to a given environment, and remaining unspecific enough that, should there be a sudden environmental shift, the species isn’t in a dead-end. Typically, if a plant adjusts perfectly to a cold environment such as high up in some mountains, and a few of its members are carried off (e.g. in a river) to warmer areas and stranded, the fully adapted plant will not be able to grow there, whereas a more generalized relative will.

    So the “purpose” of being the perfect mountain plant is not really a purpose but an over time, trial and error adaptation that must not become too perfect for the species to survive across time or environments.

    Nevertheless the same natural scientists see the very life force that causes the plants and their adaptations, as the Divine. There need not be a humanoid, brain-devised plan for this energy to be divine. To paraphrase one of them (I believe it was Lorenz): It would be a poor watchmaker who would have to keep readjusting his creation all the time.

    Like

    • colonialist says:

      The point largely missed is that the inherent striving of everything from microbes to man indicates that there is something to be gained on a macrocosmic level from the microcosmic urge. Things don’t remain static – some retrogress, but in the main there is an urge towards improvement (although mankind seems on a downward spiral at the moment). This is where the ‘why’ comes in. The Divine, whether a part of everything or a separate `creator` does seem to have a purpose in mind – even if it is just a sophisticated cosmic watch!

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Wow! Where do I begin? First, I applaud you–no easy take to take on religion–especially in such clever verse. So many struck me as I read this.
    1. You can’t offer proof for a belief, though many try (thus the frustration)!
    2. Even science (the supposedly last word on objective , solid fact has reversed itself on many occasions over time.
    3. People can contemplate the mysteries of life, death, and meaning of their existence, so they do. Different cultures come up with different answers to these puzzling questions (thus faith systems emerge out of our universal human need to have answers). What makes these faith systems different is the answers we come up with, not the human origin of them. (That’s my sociology training kicking in). So all this fighting over who is “right” and who is “wrong” is senseless> We all just want answers and came up with different ones that suited us. It’s like adapting to different environments. It’s not wrong that people from hot climates adapted their clothing and food to hot climates while people from cold climates adapted their clothing and food to cold climates. They just did and that makes them different, not wrong! Why can’t people see that religion is the same thing? I suppose because we are convinced that religion is not “of” us but “above” us. But without people, there would be no religion…

    Like

  5. Celever as always Col 🌸

    Like

    • colonialist says:

      Thanks – but this one is not trying so much to be clever as to make serious points. I genuinely can’t understand how people intelligent enough to understand complex scientific and mathematical theories are so closed when it comes to the most important field of all enquiry.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Patrecia (with an E) says:

    One word is in my mind..FAITH!,,,,No proof is asked , nor is it needed…My heart tells me all that I need to know, but I can understand others for believing in other thoughts.
    One thing has always puzzled me….war, cruelty, destruction, killing, harming others…why would my God let these things happen

    Liked by 1 person

    • colonialist says:

      Faith is the inner conviction I referred to, but it should not be divorced from reasoning. The mixture of what in human terms are good and evil, joy and tragedy, is all part of the structure, Who knows that they can be viewed from quite the same personal perspective in universal terms? Faith should be accepting all that happens as part of an overall plan towards ‘good’ for everything that exists.

      Liked by 1 person

      • gipsika says:

        I’ve had discussions on this particular item with people of all sorts of beliefs. Some believe that bad things happen because of karmic payback and karmic contracts. E.g. a little baby gets abused to death – why??? The Atheist will take this as proof that there cannot be a god. The Christian will say it’s the doing of Satan. Some New Agers, and also some of the Far Eastern religions, have the concept that in a previous life, the baby was actually the abuser, and is now suffering its punishment. (Logical objection to this: Such a “contract” could go on forever and ever…? Isn’t the Karmic Wheel of reincarnation supposed to give us the opportunity to improve with each lifetime until we’re mature enough to escape it?)

        My personal 2-pennies on this: There are two possibilities. Either there is karmic sense in this – in which case it actually was the poor baby’s experiential life path, for whatever reason (cruel universe theory), and one then seriously hopes for reincarnation so that she can experience something better the next time, or at least a halcyon paradise after death – or it really is only the pointless, predatory style violence that is endemic to this planet, and humankind still needs many more centuries of hanging criminals before we can call ourselves “evolved”.

        Like

        • colonialist says:

          The atheists crow triumphantly that reincarnation is an impossibility due simply to the numbers now living as opposed to the numbers known to have lived over the ages. The reincarnationists counter this with a ‘new soul’ theory (I know a lot of people dim enough to qualify) and that all souls do not necessarily come from Earth.
          So souls need to progress? The Karmic theory still goes nowhere much towards a satisfactory answer as to ‘why?’.
          My own feeling is that any theory holding that humans are a special case is flawed. The universe as a whole is what is progressing. Again, WHY?

          Liked by 1 person

          • gipsika says:

            I agree re the humanocentric viewpoint. Re new souls: Well, while we’re on the topic of parapsychology anyway, anything is possible in these realms. 😀 But it wouldn’t even be necessary, if you’d consider including every living being into the karmic equation. There are many, many exponentially more ants, for instance, than humans could ever dream to be; and that’s just one insect species. Also, from that angle, whole species have gone extinct (never mind; whole 54% of all life on Earth in the largest of the mass extinctions so far) – where did their souls go?

            I think the more pertinent question if one followed that philosophical path, would be where all these souls came from (if the numbers have to remain constant)? Or is it more like in an electron cloud, where a “single” electron can materialize here or there, but mainly the “cloud” is dispersed? (LOL – you realize we’re now in the modern equivalent of the discussion of how many angels can dance on the tip of a needle.)

            Do souls need to progress? Well according to the Buddhistic viewpoint (if I understood this correctly), they ought to try to progress, or else be doomed to reincarnate forever. The Buddhist “Nirvana” as a place of 100% sensory deprivation, a state of “nothingness”, has always spooked me a bit, so I’m sort-of certain I misunderstand some of the concepts here. To me, a place of “nothing and nowhere” would be the only genuine concept I could come up with to “Hell”. Luckily, even interstellar space is filled with star dust, interstellar clouds and “plasma”.

            Like

            • colonialist says:

              I must say that I don’t go with the Buddhist buddies on ambitions to go into nil, zero and zilch. I’d prefer to go on re-petunia-ing, thanks very much!
              Anyway, that’s still absolutely no answer to life, the universe and everything that makes any sense.
              Space – yes, not to mention dark matter, and quantum dimensions!

              Liked by 1 person

  7. Reblogged this on tweetlessblogmore and commented:
    Very true and legit questioning to the hyper-religious and even to atheists-
    This post is for those who truly welcome ideas and question just about everything- love this!
    Cheers to those who fall somewhere in between the extremes 🍻

    Like

  8. Arkenaten says:

    Extremely clever verse. And I was cheering all the way til the last verse. Though I am so glad you included the question mark 😉

    Like

  9. That last cartoon is funny. I’m still working on the Buddhist one … I should probably be asleep.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. disperser says:

    This idiot does not ascribe to a master, monster, messed-up, or any other type of plan.

    “why” is an overrated question, in my opinion, and one that ultimately detract from the experience of this life (again, my opinion).

    Like

You have the right to remain silent - but please don't!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s