Recommended Posts

VonNoble   

It has been a point of curiosity to me for more than (50) years....

so a half century of observation on this point.

 

Each religion that attaches "a holy book" as THE ANSWER (the

one, true and ONLY answer) - ends up by followers being NOT

being able to agree on the meaning, rules and adherence. 

 

That is JUST my observation.    Catholics come in more than one

version (Roman, Orthodox and other).....Jews have a range

from ultra conservative to more "progressive" - as do Muslims, 

Buddhists and Hindus.  

 

Another big curiosity is when I ask someone schooling me if 

THEY read the book in question - RARELY have they.  I mean

it is VERY rare that they have read the book in question.   That always

puzzles me.   If you haven't read it yourself and come to believe it 

on your own....then are you not relying on what someone taught you

rather than what you KNOW to be true by working your way through

it?

 

Do the religions that branch off from using the holy reference

book or guide book - fair better over time (such as those that

rely on oral tradition instead of a text?)  

 

von

Share this post


Link to post
mererdog   
41 minutes ago, VonNoble said:

If you haven't read it yourself and come to believe it 

on your own....then are you not relying on what someone taught you

rather than what you KNOW to be true by working your way through

it?

Wouldn't that be the case if you <b>had</b> read it yourself? The whole point of the book is to provide an authority. The whole point of going to an authority is so you don't have to figure things out for yourself. Or am I missing part of the equation?

 

Edited by mererdog

Share this post


Link to post
VonNoble   
25 minutes ago, mererdog said:

Wouldn't that be the case if you <b>had</b> read it yourself? The whole point of the book is to provide an authority. The whole point of going to an authority is so you don't have to figure things out for yourself. Or am I missing part of the equation?

 

I am not sure that it was necessarily intended that way. 

 

When I am sitting with tribal members in a tribe in South Dakota...I can see that they can tell the story

of their people back more than seven generations.  The oral traditions of their beliefs come forward

in contemporary language.  The speaker knows the audience and can emphasis parts of the story (or

play down parts) pending on what the audience needs to hear TODAY that is relevant.  The written

and UNALTERABLE word does not allow flexibility. 

 

Specifically to the book can also be offered as a fable or a general guide. 

It can be the authority that needs a supplement occasionally as society evolves.

The core beliefs might not shift much but that is not wherein lies the breeding ground of contention.

 

Additionally, if you do not absorb the lessons through your own though and process you are

destined to learn ONLY WHAT the teacher offers.  I am not sure that is what the original writers 

intended.  Perhaps they intended for each to read and absorb it on their own.   They did not start

out with written documents.  ALL OF THEM started out with oral traditions. 

 

So the authority thing....may be an unintended by product?  Or maybe I just don't know enough.

Observations alone don't tell the whole story either. 

 

von

 

 

i

Share this post


Link to post

As a former Druid, I would say that oral traditions probably hold up better.  Just as a casual observation, of course.  You don't have as much fighting about the specific wording of something.  If someone argues that a piece of the religion sounds wrong, why...just change it.  And with oral traditions, that's a lot easier.  There aren't those pesky copies of books out there to contradict what you have said.

Edited by cuchulain

Share this post


Link to post
mererdog   
4 hours ago, VonNoble said:

I am not sure that it was necessarily intended that way. 

It was. The people who put It together were fairly open about it. The book is a separate and distinct thing from the pieces used to build it. The reasons for making a brick don't tell you the reasons for building a house, eh?

Edited by mererdog

Share this post


Link to post
VonNoble   
47 minutes ago, mererdog said:

It was. The people who put It together were fairly open about it. The book is a separate and distinct thing from the pieces used to build it. The reasons for making a brick don't tell you the reasons for building a house, eh?

 

Clever analogy.   ;)

 

Did you ever see the poster where the railroad tracks were built from two directions and

didn't quite match up.    Sometimes the workers don't follow the blueprints. 

 

Still you make a good point. 

 

Your analogy works better for some religions rather than others. 

The religions that might dampen the analogy are not monotheistic however. 

 

So I guess you have a point re: the brick building.  A point I rather enjoyed.

 

von

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, VonNoble said:

It has been a point of curiosity to me for more than (50) years....

so a half century of observation on this point.

 

Each religion that attaches "a holy book" as THE ANSWER (the

one, true and ONLY answer) - ends up by followers being NOT

being able to agree on the meaning, rules and adherence. 

 

That is JUST my observation.    Catholics come in more than one

version (Roman, Orthodox and other).....Jews have a range

from ultra conservative to more "progressive" - as do Muslims, 

Buddhists and Hindus.  

 

Another big curiosity is when I ask someone schooling me if 

THEY read the book in question - RARELY have they.  I mean

it is VERY rare that they have read the book in question.   That always

puzzles me.   If you haven't read it yourself and come to believe it 

on your own....then are you not relying on what someone taught you

rather than what you KNOW to be true by working your way through

it?

 

Do the religions that branch off from using the holy reference

book or guide book - fair better over time (such as those that

rely on oral tradition instead of a text?)  

 

von

 

 

The core of the Hebrew Scriptures is the first five "Books of Mosses".  I would like to focus on the third.  The Book of Leviticus.  In other words, the Levitican priesthood.  

 

In Leviticus, there are extensive rules for the selection of sacrificial animals.  More rules for how the animals are to be killed and then cooked.  Who eats the sacrifice?  The priests.  In a society where meat is hard to come by, the priests eat well.

 

There are other rules for grain sacrifice.  How the grains are selected.  How they are cooked.  Who gets to eat the grain sacrifice.  Again, the priests.  The priests eat well.  Among other things, Leviticus is a cook book.

 

What are the other things we know about the priesthood?  Being a farmer is a lot more work.  Very hard, tedious work, with long hours.  Being a soldier in the army is way more dangerous.  Some things don't change.  Soldiers have always been "grunts".  It's good to be a priest.

 

Since I lack piety, I have my own take on all this.  The function of the Levitican priesthood, is to give the priests a better life than anybody else.  In the Catholic Church and various Protestant denominations -- that tradition is alive and well.  I think it also holds true for much of Islam.

 

Note please.  I am being careful not to say "religion."  It does no good to over generalize.  

 

:mellow:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
mererdog   
12 hours ago, VonNoble said:

Did you ever see the poster where the railroad tracks were built from two directions and

didn't quite match up.    Sometimes the workers don't follow the blueprints. 

I haven't seen the poster. I did work enough construction as a yoot to see similar things hapoen, though. It was amazing how often plumbers and architects would seem about to come to blows. I only ever worked for the one contractor, and I've never asked anyone with broader experience whether its a common thing. Now I'm curious. First thing in the morning seems an appropriate time for that, so thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/6/2017 at 6:47 AM, mererdog said:

It was amazing how often plumbers and architects would seem about to come to blows. I only ever worked for the one contractor, and I've never asked anyone with broader experience whether its a common thing. Now I'm curious.

 

It's a frequent bugbear that appears in every corner of human society -  too many chiefs and not enough Indians.

Share this post


Link to post

And sometimes, the blueprint is at fault.  Sometimes that one chief just gets the directions wrong, and everyone follows them accurately.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now