reasons why fundamentalist aspects of religion need to go

[widows son]

Any thoughts??

 

[jwhoff]

Plenty! Surfice to say, fundamentalism, no matter where it shows it's ugle head is a curse on mankind.

Franchise it or go it as a lone wolf ... it's one damn fine way to make money selling guns and holy books.

Great way for the opportunists to fill a power void or two.

 

[widows son]

But do you agree it should be abolished? By the way you spelt ugly ugle, do you mean united grand lodge of England?

 

[Tony Uzzell]

You'll never eliminate fundamentalism for the simple reason that there are too many people in society who can not be bothered (or perhaps, are not qualified) to think too deeply about the subject of religion. Such thought requires education, meditation, study, etc. These people will always be willing to buy the snake oil of the first convincing salesman to come through. When that salesman is selling simple solutions without talking about the intricacies of reality, their snake oil will be bought and drunk.

What we, as champions of light, must do is to continue asking people to think about what they believe. Do their actions truly reflect those beliefs? Have they thought about the consequences of their beliefs? Are they truly willing to do what those beliefs require?

We also must continue to preach and practice pluralism. We must champion the idea that multiple ideas and multiple opinions must be accepted and discussed before we come to a solution. We must teach people that we can disagree without being enemies and that we can argue without hating one another. We must, finally and in a world that has become so politically and socially divided, that it's okay to compromise sometimes. Show them that you may not get everything you want and I may not get everything I want, but we can both get some of what we want.

That's how you fight fundamentalism and the hatred it always seems to breed.

TU

 

[widows son]

I agree brother but fundamentalism is actually holding back society, such as science, we could be years ahead of our time if it wasn't for irrational superstitious people who are narrow minded and hate being told that they're believing in something too literal

 

[Tony Uzzell]

And that's why someone has to lead the way to the broadening of people's minds and ways of thought. People must learn to get beyond the automatic denial of ideas that conflict with their own. You mention that people hate being told they are taking something too literally, which is a very true statement. And, it is also a statement that displays the thought process at the very heart of fundamentalism. Fundamentalists tend to believe in "revealed truth" quite literally. And it is a thought process that must change to allow enlightenment.

My question then becomes: What role are we, as Freemasons, going to play in leading our fellow citizens/subjects/humans to enlightenment? Because, only in an enlightened society, a society that Americans once prided ourselves on being a part of, can we Asa a civilization ever truly advance.

TU



Sent from my iPad while I'm rocking' with Tapatalk.

 

[widows son]

You are right, but try telling that to pat Robertson, he would go down burning than change his thought pattern. You can't eliminate fundamentalism unless all religion is gone, which will never happen

 

[Tony Uzzell]

What you say is very true. And it doesn't help that so many people follow Pat Robertson (and the anti-Masonic ideas he continues to profess) and would follow him, if you'll pardon the conceit, to Hell and back blindly.

Here's the next question, though: Should every man be a Mason? Or is it an order that is not designed for everybody, but only those who are willing (by nature,, education, training, whatever) to welcome new thoughts and ideas?

Please understand that I'm not being flip. These are questions I struggle with and that are regularly part of the discussions I have with other Brothers in and about my Lodge and the other Masonic bodies I'm part of going all the way back to when I was in DeMolay.

TU

 

[widows son]

Freemasonry is for ever man that ways to be in the lodge, participate in community events, love their fellow man, and want to divulge into the origins and history of the greatest organization ever to grace earth

 

[T.N. Sampson]

Any thoughts??

Would you care to define the term? Cordially, Skip.

 

[jvarnell]

Would you care to define the term? Cordially, Skip.

This is odd that I agree with skip on this one. Who will define what is a fundamentalist? When stuff like this has to be defined to make a law it causes a real problem. You know like what is rich. That is why I think things are done because of envy not greed. Is it envy that makes a man to want to limit the others by calling them fundamentalist?

 

[widows son]

I don't think that a non fundamentalist would envy a fundamentalist simply because their reality is clouded and boxed in. The definition of fundamentalism is the demand for a strict adherence to specific theological doctrines, this means no change, to room to grow, no advancement, just stagnant. Who would envy that?

 

[T.N. Sampson]

The definition of fundamentalism is the demand for a strict adherence to specific theological doctrines, this means no change, to room to grow, no advancement, just stagnant. Who would envy that?

Not quite. My problem is the number of comments on this without regard for the meaning of the term. It strikes me as intellectual laziness. This definition of the terms comes from Dictionary dot com:

a movement in American Protestantism that arose in the early part of the 20th century in reaction to modernism and that stresses the infallibility of the Bible not only in matters of faith and morals but also as a literal historical record, holding as essential to Christian faith belief in such doctrines as the creation of the world, the virgin birth, physical resurrection, atonement by the sacrificial death of Christ, and the Second Coming.
2. the beliefs held by those in this movement.
3. strict adherence to any set of basic ideas or principles.

The 3rd point can be applied to any belief structure within the overall term.

I'm a fundamentalist in line with the first definition. As an example, where the Bible makes this statement:

Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6)

I hold the view that he meant just what he said.

Masons are fundamentalists in their own way. When a GL teaches that Masonry is not a religion, all Masons fall behind that statement and hold it up as a fundamental belief. Same with the requirement that all candidates believe in a Supreme Being, in which the fundamental belief in such existence becomes clear. So, your criticisms of fundamentalism seem premature as they do not reflect a proper understanding of the term. As well, they undermine your own expressed beliefs. Cordially, Skip.

 

[CajunTinMan]

I take issue with a few things being said here. It sounds a lot like the Renaissance era when you had elitist groups who believed that they were right because they were, "Enlightened", and secular. And those that were Christian and fundamentalist couldn't belong because they were ignorant and wrong. I honestly never understood how some people can call themselves enlightened if they have such narrow views.

 

[jvarnell]

I don't think that a non fundamentalist would envy a fundamentalist simply because their reality is clouded and boxed in. The definition of fundamentalism is the demand for a strict adherence to specific theological doctrines, this means no change, to room to grow, no advancement, just stagnant. Who would envy that?

When defining anything you need to first figure out who should define it because my def. may be deferent than yours. What is clouded realaty? yours or mine? And boxed in the the defention of a defention.

The person that envy's a defention is the person that gave the defention that was not used.

 

[widows son]

To Skip, I don't think I'm a fundamentalist, but when I think of some one who is a fundamentalist I think of definition 3. I don't think Jesus is my lord, saviour, or has anything to do with my path to God. My opinion on Christianity or any religion doesn't belong on this forum because : A I don't want to offend anyone and B: it goes against my own beliefs of If nothing good can be said then don't say it. Skip if you think your path lies with Christ then all the power to you and I hope your path is smooth. And as far as masonry goes, religion no but it's a spiritual institution, so in many aspects it resembles a religion, I take the spiritual lessons from the lodge and apply them to life as does any mason, and just like you or anyone who goes to church takes the lessons of the bible and apply them to life as well, but I don't go saying that Hiram Abiff walked the earth and that the temple of Solomon actually exsisted, as in the lodge these are but symbols of higher truths, as in the bible which is a book of morals and tradition, displayed using allegory. There may be some historical aspects of the bible but are usually exaggerated. The bible is not a history book, we have archeology for that. The topic of this chat was the reasons why fundamentalist aspects of religion need to go, and here are my reasons:
1. There is no room for growth intellectually due to dogma being finite and constant
2. When new ideas are presented they are refuted if they go against the dogma
3. To combat those ideas that go against the dogma, new reasons are created, which may or
May not be entirely true( for example the biblical history museum in Kentucky that shows dinosaurs and humans living together even though the earliest bones of a human have been carbon dated to 4 million years and dinosaurs the earliest 65 million years)
4. Violence and oppression are usually used against other who disagree with the dogma
5. Fundamentalism tries in most cases to Influence the politics of its homeland, which in the western world is constitutionally forbidden. In the middle east it's tearing society apart. Skip my beliefs are not concrete, stagnant or final, but are changing and evolving as I learn and grow as a human being, the only thing I can say is that GAOTU exsists, and from the galactic to the sub atomic he/she/it has revealed itself to us.

 

[widows son]

Jvarnell,
Everyone and anyone is what defines things, it doesn't matter who's defining something of something is what it is, then that's what it is, as humans we need to box things in order to understand them, but interpretation is up to you, and whether your mind is boxed in or not, and everyones reality is clouded, as nobody knows absolute truth, and as for "envying a definition", I'm not sure what you mean, but if referring to me, i gave a definition fundamentalism and Skip kindly expanded it. With out definition there would be no concepts to grasp

 

[jvarnell]

Jvarnell,
Everyone and anyone is what defines things, it doesn't matter who's defining something of something is what it is, then that's what it is, as humans we need to box things in order to understand them, but interpretation is up to you, and whether your mind is boxed in or not, and everyones reality is clouded, as nobody knows absolute truth, and as for "envying a definition", I'm not sure what you mean, but if referring to me, i gave a definition fundamentalism and Skip kindly expanded it. With out definition there would be no concepts to grasp

When a statment is made about "Fundamentalist" and the need for them to go. So with out a defintion what need to go. It is to me a foundations which all reality's are built. With out foundations nothing stands and it is amorphous. Even freemasonery starts with a foundation or moral codes that are repsented by the working tools. So that being said who's foundation of knowalage do you throw away. Facts and data with faith are what all religions are built on.

Faith is the only thing that can't be proven so what faith should be thrown away again.

 

[widows son]

I never said anything about throwing away faith, the reasons I listed above are what I think should be thrown away, if you can't adapt to a changing world then you will be left behind in the dark( not you specifically jvarnell) all religions that display fundamentalism are just one sect of the religion, such as Christianity with the many sects that go with it, and not all of them are fundamentalists, they accept many ideas and beliefs from other sources than the bible. Catholicism and Protestantism condemn freemasonry. There is zero evidence to show that anything in the bible is fact, or "data."Certain things may be accurate, such as wars but are usually exaggerated in the favor of who's writing the story. Fundamentalism is one sided, bias, and in some cases contradictory to the religion it is a part of

 

[jvarnell]

I never said anything about throwing away faith, the reasons I listed above are what I think should be thrown away, if you can't adapt to a changing world then you will be left behind in the dark( not you specifically jvarnell) all religions that display fundamentalism are just one sect of the religion, such as Christianity with the many sects that go with it, and not all of them are fundamentalists, they accept many ideas and beliefs from other sources than the bible. Catholicism and Protestantism condemn freemasonry. There is zero evidence to show that anything in the bible is fact, or "data."Certain things may be accurate, such as wars but are usually exaggerated in the favor of who's writing the story. Fundamentalism is one sided, bias, and in some cases contradictory to the religion it is a part of

First look at the word fundamentalist know that it is the foundation not the outliers.

I see what you are saying but the fundimitals mean the foundation so should we agree to say outliers must go. Also I am still stuck on who are the outliers/fundamentlast that must go and how do we decide who they are.

Are the outliers those who don't beleive the way I do or those that don't beleive the way widows son if they are deferent. This is what I am trying to say is it the government, the pope, some imom.

I know I am being to legalistic but as a person that writes regulations word of art like this cause more problems than they help.

I am not saying widows son is wrong but how do we do this?