Some thoughts on the notion of religious “meaning”:

So far as I can determine, the more I think about this, religion – in any form – amounts to a sort of cosmological puppet-show.  What I mean is: “God”/the “Gods” are presumed to possess agency, but humans are (implicitly) presumed to lack agency — except when “believers” feel the need to threaten their opponents with an eternity Of “hellfire”, or suchlike.

Fundie Christians are particularly prone to this:  they oscillate wildly between two mutually-contradictory premises, as their “theology” requires:

On the one hand, they make a huge deal about how (supposedly) “noone gets near to the Father, except he draws them to Him”.  (The purpose of this notion is to deprive their victims of even the possibility of taking “pride” in having “chosen” the “correct” religion. (IE: the one presumed to include a “get out of hell free” card.)

At the same time (and with total, blithe ignorance of the inconsistency) the more “honest” ones will straight-out state that Non-Christians deserve an eternity of Hellfire (merely for having been systematically brainwashed into a different system of culturally-sanctioned delusions, because they happen to have been born in an area where Christianity never managed to infest/destroy the other religions in the area) — a literal accident of birth.

Why do (especially Jews!) “deserve” it?

Because they “choose” a different religion, that’s why.

See, Christianity is a matter of “destiny” (IE: TULIP — “P stands for ‘Predestination’) – when you don’t want your “flock” to take “pride” in whatever delusions you’ve foisted on them.   However, it’s a “choice”, whenever you need to excuse your contempt/hatred for “unbelievers”/tacit – or overt – desire to watch ’em all burn!

Now, I’m incapable of the sort of “self-induced stupidity” involved in “believing” the above dichotomy:  Either/or, folks:  EITHER you do the Calvinist “predestination” thing, OR you admit that your “beliefs” necessarily imply that all the members of an isolated Amazonian tribe “deserve” an eternity of hellfire, merely because they happen to have never heard of some guy who might never have existed int he first place.

I don’t – can’t – derive “meaning” from that – other than the observation that: if Yahweh exists, “He” is a fucking psychopath, whose “wrath” amounts to the equivalent of a petulant child burning ant-hills with a magnifying glass, simply for the “fun” of it.




2 thoughts on “Some thoughts on the notion of religious “meaning”:

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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