God Without Religion

[The Kicker]

http://www.godwithoutreligion.com/interview.shtml

An Interview with Sankara Saranam
Author of God Without Religion


There has been a strong movement toward religious fundamentalism over the past several decades. Why do you think this has occurred?
During difficult and complex times, people tend to seek external security in hopes of relieving inner feelings of unhappiness, emptiness, or inferiority. Fundamentalist doctrines promise many forms of security in exchange for winning God's graces. But moving toward an infinite God and subscribing to fundamentalism is a contradiction in terms. Fundamentalism's literal interpretations of so-called divine law entice followers to identify with increasingly smaller and more cultlike segments of humanity rather than with an all-encompassing God. Nor can these interpretations be proven: there is no evidence of a God giving preference to certain people over others, creating miracles to prove his existence, or demanding that his favor be won.
Certainly, it's possible to worship God through an established belief system, yet in doing so we run the risk of stunting our spiritual growth. The guidance we need in hard times is already within us, and all we must do is grow to encompass it.


- top -
In God Without Religion you state that religions have contributed to centuries of conflict and warfare. Do you honestly believe that if the world turns away from religion there will be less conflict among nations? Aren't you being a bit idealistic?
War is caused not so much by religion itself as by the ignorance and narrow viewpoints it fosters. In turning its back on organized religion, humanity could collectively end the phenomenon of war by replacing ignorance with knowledge. Getting to know more about people everywhere and empathizing with their needs, we would then embrace an increasingly expansive identity. Eventually we would be incapable of warfare, because we would realize that violence against another was also violence against ourselves. This view may indeed sound idealistic, but so did the ideas of Mohandas Gandhi, Albert Einstein, Martin Luther King Jr., and Nelson Mandela. A certain amount of idealism is necessary for change.

Religious leaders of all denominations claim their particular faith is in possession of the Word of God. Among monotheistic religions, how can there be so many different and contradictory Words of God? How do you view these "direct transmissions" from a deity?
Calling any scripture the "Word of God" immediately lays the groundwork for prejudice, divisiveness, and even bloodshed, as history has repeatedly demonstrated. Such a claim either depicts God as contradictory, nonsensical, and violent, or implies that God has graced one group of people with the truth while excluding others. Selective interpretations of "sanctified" texts support the ambitions and desires of the interpreters and easily leads to exploitation and persecution of minority groups. In many instances, religious authorities have conveniently added their own words to these texts, as occurred in Matthew 28.19 where Jesus commands Christians to convert and make disciples of all the nations of the world, a segment added centuries later to justify crusades and inquisitions. Religious texts are like inkblot tests-the myths that people construct from reading them, including Word of God claims, tell us more about the readers than about the books themselves. In that sense, they are artifacts-the words of human beings-and are neither holy nor unholy.

--more at link-- enjoy

[Mnemosyne]

1. Very interesting, thank you. n/t