Opened for debate : Moral relativism & Religious Pluralism
Hello fellow brothers and sisters. Todays burning topics are moral relativism & religious pluralism.
This is up for serious analysis especially considering the amount of people today, particularly in the West who seek “spiritual enlightenment”. So this goes out to religious folks of all denominations, new agers, pluralists, spiritual truth seekers, and basically anyone who considers them selves to be more then flesh and bone ( well you can join too if you wish)
Do you consider yourself spiritual? But not religious.
Do you believe all religions point the same way? Or lead the same?
Where do you ground or establish you morals from?
Pluralism (religious) is the idea, belief or understanding that all religions are fundamentally the same, that they all have a spiritual dimension such as Heaven or Nirvana, and they have deities such as God or Brahman for example. And they are simply different names for the same truth. But when one looks deeper in to each individual religion or ideology, you find that the similarities only go so far, and in-fact the religions or ideologies are all fundamentally very different.
In recent years, post modern new agers have been combining the similar dimensions of selected religions, most notably of recent times is the words of Jesus Christ and Gautama Buddha to name but two, being combined and presented out of context to deliver a message the original texts never had. When the words are edited and chopped out of context they are far easier to manipulate or twist into the opinions of the ones doing the editing and chopping. Doing no justice to the heart of the religions being picked from.
Pluralism is very much grounded on the idea of “open mindedness”, particularly in our current culture more so in the west, we as individuals want to appear very open minded to one an-others sexualities, beliefs, thoughts, backgrounds etc. Its a comfortable feeling and thought that despite ones religious or spiritual belief or view point, that we will all go to the same place, that we all go to God. But can this be true?
Moral relativsim. Where do we get our morals from?
You may say, Well I don’t affiliate myself with any religion, I am consciences itself, and God, the Devine, the source reside within me. My actions are in line with not only the external reality but also the source of both the internal and external world. I don’t need an external source for determining right from wrong, my moral compass is within. You may even go as far to say that right and wrong don’t actually exist, thats its all relative. Either blaming a false perception of reality or the ego or self for a compartmentalized vision of the world.
But who dictates false? And is a false view therefore a wrong view?, but thats assuming there is a right or wrong. Sounds very tricky.
This is the first entry on this topic, it would be good to get a bit of momentum on it and lay this one out, see what we are all thinking on the subject.
My standpoint is that Jesus Christ is my Lord and Saviour. I respect others very much. Lets have a good clean debate. Hard topics no stress.
I’m an atheist.
Religion is me is merely man-made.
And morality doesn’t really exist, as anything goes in life.
“Do you consider yourself spiritual? But not religious.”
I’d say I have a spiritual side, I’d say most people do, what I would suggest is to define how much those beliefs or identity influences your life. Personally I try to keep a clear line between my deductions and the accepted peer reviewed deductions that society produces.
I don’t consider myself religious but I can see how people would see me as such, I have a comprehensive working understanding of the Bible, I originally studied it for religious reasons but turned it into an introspective and academic understanding over time.
“Do you believe all religions point the same way? Or lead the same?”
No, maybe they have, or had, similar intentions but their methods are so different. I’d say the general idea of religion is to encourage people to have discipline over their fears and desires, but it is clear that those teachers understand that people will fail to discipline those fears and desires, and so they introduce methods to tempt and scare people toward good behaviour.
That is the most obvious contradiction I see in the Bible; on one hand it places emphasis on identifying desires and mitigating fears, but then it will promise you rewards and threaten punishment, two things that prey on what we are supposed to be disciplining. So I think a lot of people who can discipline themselves are worlds apart from people that the Laws were written to control.
“Where do you ground or establish you morals from?” I was talking about the difference between Christianity and Judaism; basically in Judaism to prove your Love you have to obey the Law, but in Christianity to obey the Law you must Love. Someone said something about the 10 Commandments being Law, I said not really, the Pentateuch is the Old Covenant Laws, the 10 Commandments are mostly universal common sense, if you are religious or not.
So I certainly believe there are natural moral laws, but also there are as you say, subjective expressions of how they can be translated, and that depends on the awareness, knowledge and discipline of the person.
If you have anything you are interested in me elaborating on let me know, I can talk for a long time on this issue.