No 1445 of Living Life Series 1
In ancient days, people obeyed the ruler out of fear. The ruler was king. When religion was championed by the ruler, the ruler made sure people fear God as much as they fear and trembled before the ruler.
During those days, the only ones with education were the the ruling class. Even if there was doctrine or philosophy in religion, people would not understand, and what they understood was fear. Disobey and they would be punished or even killed. This made people fear God though God is supposed to be loving.
So in modern days of 2017 and beyond, the world is different. The people elect the rulers. The people took over the role of king. They do not buy the need for fear. In fact, even religion fears them.
Moreover, the people are more educated than the priests or leaders who manage religion. Surely the priests will lose out to the people in philosophy. So, they say that religion is no philosophy.
Since the people are the ones who put the priests where they are, surely the priests cannot use fear to control the people.
Both fear and philosophy somehow take back seats. Both become no no in religion.
Thus what is left or to put it bluntly the only recourse is to reassure that all that is needed by the people is to believe in God and all will be saved. Thus the concept of salvation by grace takes over from salvation through fear and philosophy.
Without fear and without stress on logic, religion easily attracts those who want religion to serve their self interests and not God. Even God has to serve their interests - so it seems to be.
Thus there will be many who come to a holy place for unholy personal needs, just like ants and insects coming to a flower for nectar. If there is no nectar, people will move over to another religious place where even those who hurt and harm in the name of religion will be promised that they will be saved by grace. Just ask and their sins will be no longer there.
Do we want religion to be like that? Do we also want to go to a religion out of fear? These are the two extremes. These are not acceptable, or are these acceptable?
Then is there a third alternative? Well, there is the third option and this is in any religion or belief system. This is the only reason left to be in religion if we do not agree with fear and grace.
We have to see the philosophy behind religion.
But are the priests able to handle more educated and well informed people?
Then there is the issue of whether such people are willing to slog it out to understand the doctrine God stands for.
People are too involved with the world, and for religion, they want the easy way out. They want to be saved by grace.
For religion to catch on, the role of grace will take the limelight. The question we are posed with is why we still do not want to accept this?
We have to be thinking people and thinking cannot be wrong. We need to think in almost everything or issue in life. But why are we not to think but just belief in religion?
To make us conform, w are told to just believe and be saved by perhaps the most unlikely lot who go to religion for worldly nectar and not for God and the Word of God. Word becomes a taboo and replaced by belief and worship - no need for philosophy. Religion is no philosophy. But is it not true that the Word is God and God is the Word? Has this not to do with philosophy and logic?
During those days, the only ones with education were the the ruling class. Even if there was doctrine or philosophy in religion, people would not understand, and what they understood was fear. Disobey and they would be punished or even killed. This made people fear God though God is supposed to be loving.
So in modern days of 2017 and beyond, the world is different. The people elect the rulers. The people took over the role of king. They do not buy the need for fear. In fact, even religion fears them.
Moreover, the people are more educated than the priests or leaders who manage religion. Surely the priests will lose out to the people in philosophy. So, they say that religion is no philosophy.
Since the people are the ones who put the priests where they are, surely the priests cannot use fear to control the people.
Both fear and philosophy somehow take back seats. Both become no no in religion.
Thus what is left or to put it bluntly the only recourse is to reassure that all that is needed by the people is to believe in God and all will be saved. Thus the concept of salvation by grace takes over from salvation through fear and philosophy.
Without fear and without stress on logic, religion easily attracts those who want religion to serve their self interests and not God. Even God has to serve their interests - so it seems to be.
Thus there will be many who come to a holy place for unholy personal needs, just like ants and insects coming to a flower for nectar. If there is no nectar, people will move over to another religious place where even those who hurt and harm in the name of religion will be promised that they will be saved by grace. Just ask and their sins will be no longer there.
Do we want religion to be like that? Do we also want to go to a religion out of fear? These are the two extremes. These are not acceptable, or are these acceptable?
Then is there a third alternative? Well, there is the third option and this is in any religion or belief system. This is the only reason left to be in religion if we do not agree with fear and grace.
We have to see the philosophy behind religion.
But are the priests able to handle more educated and well informed people?
Then there is the issue of whether such people are willing to slog it out to understand the doctrine God stands for.
People are too involved with the world, and for religion, they want the easy way out. They want to be saved by grace.
For religion to catch on, the role of grace will take the limelight. The question we are posed with is why we still do not want to accept this?
We have to be thinking people and thinking cannot be wrong. We need to think in almost everything or issue in life. But why are we not to think but just belief in religion?
To make us conform, w are told to just believe and be saved by perhaps the most unlikely lot who go to religion for worldly nectar and not for God and the Word of God. Word becomes a taboo and replaced by belief and worship - no need for philosophy. Religion is no philosophy. But is it not true that the Word is God and God is the Word? Has this not to do with philosophy and logic?
Bo Tien 武 天 says that more important to see the truth in life that is in all religions. This is the doctrine or inner truth. He who sees the truth is near to God and saints than the one who goes to a house of God and knows not the truth or Word. He says thus. "My image is the doctrine. The doctrine is my image."
Religion is not just a philosophy for life but more than a philosophy as it deals with not only the present life but the afterlife. We need to be logical and not blind to reason and logic when everything we do in life, we need to think. For religion too we need to think and not act out of fear or leave matters to grace.
