For the last century, evolutionary anthropologist held that a primitives mind equipment is diverse from that of a civilized man. Since then, different arguments concerning the view that the civilized mind is logical, scientific, and abstract, while feral mind is prelogical, superstitious, and concrete. We must not take this seriously.
The primitive minds lack of knowledge in their worldview does not prove that they are intellectually incapable in reasoning and in perception of things. In some Ethnograpic instance, Furer-Haimendorf (1962) described a Konyak Naga man is not a primitive who lives in the mortal fear of unknown-when an eatrhquake struck its village, in fact, their worldview is simple, Konyak Nagas ideas on nature are derived from logical deduction. Another is Mawries (1981) self interpretation of Khasi religion. A Khasi family having problems financially believes that such events have a cause-displeasing the spirits.
Studies of different tribal groups like the Tharu (Srivastava 1958) and the Khasa (Majumdar 1962), two central Himalayan tribes in North India are good eample of Hinduised tribes. Practicing the beliefs of Hindus concepts of Karma, and observing Hindu rituals, they have adopted the local beliefs of Hindus. Hindu gods and deities are worshipped.
Though there are different principles, there are also similar and common facts about tribal religions. It is common in almost all tribal traditions to worship nature. Such celestial bodies like the earth, the lakes, oceans, mountain, some kinds of animals are being praised and glorified.Christians have embraced monotheistic religion (cited in Mao, Tribal Philosophy Concepts, Issues and Methods It had a great impact in the tribal religion). The tribals gave a model of westernization and in some cases, festivals were reinterpreted in term of Christianized myths. Some previously separated tribal groups accepted marital relations acrosstribal boundaries.
Indeed, there are many beliefs and views that exist which describe the roots of tribal religion. Cultural contact seemed to be a factor in creating these religions. Some of the non-tribal groups were affected by tribal customs and practices. Understanding ones religion is important in studying a particular tribal life and society. The function of religion in tribal society is refelected in their common goals and objectives.
Many religions have place that are considered by adherents to be specially holy or sacred, places where they feel closer to God.. In Hinduism the river Ganges at Benares , one of seven holy cities where early Hindu scholars established their schools is such a site attracting many thousand of visitors each year.
In Buddhism one of the most important sites is the place where Buddha is said to have received enlightenment. This was under a bodhi tree in the 7th century B.C.E. according to the web page Bohd Gaya, India.
There are Jain temples in many parts of the world, although the majority are in India. One was constructed in Mumbai in 1904. It is considered to be one of the most beautiful because Jains consider this is what their idols deserve.
The Golden temple in Amaritser The building is decorated with words from the Sikh holy book s described on the Sacred Destinations web page. . As with all these holy places visitors are welcome but are expected to respect the beliefs of worshippers and so certain restrictions apply in order to avoid giving offence. In this case these include such things as leaving shoes behind and covering the head.
In Taoism certain high places are considered to be sacred. This is because they are suitable places for contemplation and because of the caves present. Also reaching them is a challenge, often involving rock climbing, to worshippers are more inspired. They are also where certain mushrooms grow which are believed to have holy properties according to the web page Chinese Taoism.
Confucianism has no specifically holy places because it is more of a philosophy than a religion as such as can be seen on the Asian ArtMail web page .
All of these religions or philosophies still have adherents to whom their beliefs are very important. As fellow human beings this is to be respected, even if one does not share such beliefs or even thinks they are rather odd.
Hebrews
As the title signifies, this book or epistle was originally addressed to Jewish Christians. In the early days following conversion through the preaching of some of Jesus original disciples, they became exemplary Christians and had helped supply the needs of other Christians. They had taken cheerfully the loss of their own possessions as they were persecuted for Christs name.
However, at the time this letter was written their original teachers and leaders had died ( HYPERLINK javascript Hebrews 137). Now they were on the verge of slipping back from a confession of Christ into the Judaism out of which they had been converted ( HYPERLINK javascript Hebrews 1313-14). The writer of Hebrews encourages the readers to remain true to Christ even at the price of having to shed their own blood ( HYPERLINK javascript Hebrews 123-4).
What is true from the writings is that the writer was outstandingly knowledgeable of the Christian faith. It would be almost safe to surmise the writer had to have been a leader in the early Christian church. It is not known to date who the writer of the Hebrew epistle was but is generally suspected by scholars that it could have been Apostle Paul. Though the writings are similar in style to how Paul wrote it can not be conclusively confirmed to be true.
From the epistle the Christians must as a matter of principle and survival of faith, draw near to God, hold unswervingly to the hope they profess, for He who promised is faithful, consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds and not give up meeting together.
In deed the writer encourages the recipients in their struggle of unbelief that they keep their confidence of faith in addition to persevering in the face of persecution for the rewards are great. This addresses to a great part the challenges that were affecting the Hebrew Jerusalem church. The attitude of perseverance is the main vein that runs through out the epistle. The writer emphasizes that this can only be gotten by faith
James
Though not confirmed, it is extensively considered that the writer of this epistle was Jesus half-brother. A critical look at the epistle one is able to see the thrust of his words. In the epistle, James addresses to the core of Christian faith. He focuses believers on the qualities of heart and life that he points should be the focus of a Christians devotion. In this he seeks to make Christianity a joy despite the call to suffer for and with Christ. A strong characteristic that is greatly emphasized is that of perseverance. This he surmises is only achievable through asking God and in believing unwaveringly.
Aware of the struggle the baptized were going through in reconciling and understanding the concept of temptation, he points out to them that this does not come from God but is rather a result of individual human beings sinful nature. Instead, his advice for them is to put what they learn into practice as a way of showing their growth and maturity in their Christian faith.
Peter addresses the various churches scattered throughout Asia Minor (present-day Turkey). But like James, Peters purpose in writing was to strengthen Christians so they could stand firm against the terrible persecutions by the Roman Empire. He begins by pointing out the wonders of the salvation that his readers possess. Then he gives certain commands that when obeyed will help a person to realize the wonders of this salvation.
2 Peter was Peters last message before his martyrdom. This Epistle is a continuation of the theme of 1 Peter. The sufferings that his readers had just begun to endure when that Epistle was written have continued unabated, and Peters purpose in writing this second Epistle is to encourage his readers to endure steadfastly to the end.
John
During his later years, the apostle John settled at Ephesus among Christians who had found Christ through Pauls ministry. While he was there, a certain false teaching became popular which declared that God did not become truly incarnate in Jesus Christ and that a life of actual holiness was not essential to the Christian life.
The first Epistle of John was written to counteract this heresy. However, it is more than a mere refutation it is one of the most beautiful and inspiring documents of the New Testament.
In John 2, it is not exactly clear who the letter was intended for. However, it is intended for a special lady and her family (Verse 1), and the main thrust of the epistle is on loving each other. Additionally, he emphasizes on the love of God while taking time to warn about false prophets.
The principal characters of this Epistle (John 3) are Gaius and Diotrephes. As church leaders went from town to town establishing new congregations, they depended on the hospitality of fellow believers. Gaius was one who welcomed them into his home. John wrote this Epistle to thank Gaius for his hospitality and faithfulness and to encourage him in the faith. Additionally, he takes the opportunity to scold Diotrephes ho he feels was not helpful.
Jude
Among biblical scholars it is believed that Jude was another one of Jesus brothers who was converted after His earthly ministry. He calls himself the brother of James (verse 1), and in verse 17 he indicates that he was not himself an official apostle. In this epistle, he writes to warn Christians about false teachers. Additionally, in his writings, Jude is looking to cheer them up.
Revelation
Among bible scholars, it is accepted that John was the author of this book. At the time of writing it, the Roman rulers are punishing him by making him live alone in an island. The thrust of the book of Revelation is a dream that John was given by Jesus concerning the future. In the book, John recognizes the challenges of being a Christian. In the writings he encourages them to trust God since He can take care of everything on earth. In the dream, john is shown that Jesus is our judge, who will punish the evil in addition to taking Christians to heaven. The bottom line it Jesus is more powerful that men.
The writings in the Bible, particularly the Old Testament, contain a set of text that is called wisdom literature. No one knows precisely when they first appeared or who in particular wrote them. But if there is one thing (biblical) scholars agree to, it is the belief that God is the source of wisdom and these can be found in the passages of the Bible as Christians from all walks of life regard it as the word of God compiled in a book. When there was no Bible yet, people depended on three authorities for guidance the priests, the sages or scholars and the prophets. The relationship between the three though did not sometimes mesh very well, especially how the prophets feel about the other two since they regard themselves as the true spokespersons of God while the other two interpret Gods words handed down to them (Harris, 244). Nevertheless, they are regarded still as contributors to the early development of the Bible through their works.
These works are expressed in various ways such as stories found in most books of the Bible, which also includes that in the New Testament, as well as riddles, proverbs and verses such as psalms. There were scriptures meant to be studied and interpreted by scholars and priests while there are others that were immediately accessible to the public as they were easy to understand since the language was something they were able to comprehend such as psalms and proverbs.
As far as Christians, and to an extent Jews, are concerned, the Scriptures do not only tell the history of their faith, it also serves as a source of enlightenment and guidance to lifes many nuances whether they be good or bad. It teaches one how to have the proper attitude which is pleasing to God as part of the profession of their faith. Professing ones faith is not merely limited to strictly worshipping God, following prescribed rituals and reading the Bible alone, it is about establishing a meaningful relationship with Him by not only reflecting on His words in the Bible, but living them. By living them and experiencing it, one would then understand why the Bible is (probably) the simplest source of wisdom.
The psalms in the Bible is essentially a collection of religious or devotional songs or poems attributed to (King) David though scholars have learned this is not entirely true and only half of them are attributed to him while the rest are credited to groups of temple singers such as Sons of Korah and Sons of Asaph.
The psalms are grouped according to the purpose or message it evokes. One category is psalms that praise God, another one for thanksgiving and the third contains lamentations, usually invoked during times of adversity. The first group is for the purpose of praising God. Hebrews believed that God always wants to be given attention and needs to be pleased and that the Israelites ought to be grateful to Him since He has intervened for them several times when they needed it the most, whether it is personal or societal. Thus, He deserves to be recognized for it conversely, the Israelites should acknowledge the things God has given to them in the form of thanksgiving as well (Harris, 239-241).
But there is also a group of psalms made that serve to complain to God for any calamity or misfortune that would befall anyone. While this serves as a grievance to God, the ones reciting it implore for succor or help from God, which implies that they need Him which is exactly what God wants as He wants all His children to turn to Him always (Harris, 241-242).
In conclusion, psalms, though not containing any historical value still serve a prpose in the Bible. It actually does give one a clue on the history of early worshippers on how they worship God and the psalms serve that purpose. The psalms are also the source of wisdom and enlightenment set into song or poetry which could be considered appealing to simple folks as in the ancient times, not everyone was as gifted as a high priest, a sage and prophet who were authorized to provide moral guidance to the people and were Gods intermediaries. What makes psalms special is that it can be directly absorbed by anyone without going through those authorities and can also be a source of personal meditation which is a way for an individual to establish a meaningful relationship with God.
According to the church the term person refers to an individual intellectual substance that can exist in itself. In theology intelligence and individual wholeness is emphasized as part of what makes an individual. Also a person is deemed as an individual who has responsibilities and rights. On the other hand, to the church nature may refer to the created world. It includes the created things in the environment, the things that we see when we look around (Catholicreference.net, 2010)
The trees, the animals, the lakes and the like are all part of nature. Nature could also refer to the basic form of a person. What is commonly referred to as human nature means those things that happen as a result of being a human being or rather more specifically a person. This definition of nature implies that there are those attributes that a person or a human being may possess owing to the very fact they are a person.
When it comes to the issue of the relationship between the two, nature and person, one realizes that this wholly depends on the approach that one takes. One could view a person as part of nature. The only different thing is that people are intellectually endowed and therefore have responsibility and authority over all other nature.
In this essay however I take the approach of person as understood by the church to be an intellectual being with responsibilities, and the definition of nature as that which is present in a person as an integral part of the way a person or human beings were created.
Nature tells us what to expect of a person. For example one may say that it is in a peoples nature to eat, drink and socialize among many other things. This then means that the engagement of a human being in such activities makes them a complete person so to speak. If a person does not do these things, then that person may not be seen as a whole person because it is in the human nature to engage in such activities.
Though this is true, the Catholic Church agrees that the explanation of some activities by people as a result of human nature can be disadvantageous owing to the fact that this view may be used as an excuse to go against the ideals of the church.
When it comes to the roles played by the person and nature, Christianity believes that the two have roles that are separate yet intertwined. The person has intellect which makes him superior to all other forms of nature. The intellect which is still a part of nature of the person makes a person able to control what he does in reference to the human nature.
Take for instance in the case of sleeping which is a natural thing for a person to do, the intellect that a person possess will make the person able to make an intelligent decision not to sleep by the road side but rather in a bed in the comfort and safety of a shelter. Nature on the other hand is responsible for the urges that a human being has. It is the natures responsibility to make a person hungry or sleepy among others.
The modern definition of the person and nature presents the two as in a manner to suggest that a person has very little that they can do to control actions that are only in their nature. The following are some consequences in the fields of anthropology, marriage and morality that this modern understanding may result to if upheld.
Anthropology primarily deals with the study of human beings. It encompasses such details as their behavior and culture. If the understanding of the person and nature is upheld then anthropologists would have to study people as those who are helpless to their natural tendencies so to speak.
The issue of culture then would not play an important role as culture is maintained by intellectual decisions. In fact if a person is deemed to be at the mercy of their natural urges then their standing as those responsible for all the other creation will be challenged.
In the sphere of marriage, the vows on fidelity and the responsibilities ascribed to the husband and wife persons would be meaningless. In the church for instance, the only place that is seen to be right for sexual engagement is within the boundaries of marriage. Although intercourse is a natural phenomenon in people, the understanding that a person is helpless to urges would then be the excuse given for infidelity. Responsibility would then be relegated to the back as urges caused by the human nature take center stage.
On the question of morality, all morals would go down the drain and any questions arising over the same brushed aside by the simple fact that the activity in question occurred as a result of nature. The principles that govern a person would be abandoned and in my view this would lead to nothing short of an animalistic society. When people believe that they can act in a certain way as a result of nature then they imply that they choose to withdraw from engaging their human intellect in responding to natural urges.
In conclusion, although there are activities that are driven by natural urges this should not be mistaken as rendering a person helpless in the face of an urge. It is true that the presence of these urges make us people but it is also true that the other thing that distinguishes us from all other creation is the fact that we have intellect and so can be able to respond to our natural human urges appropriately. This will in turn help us to maintain our nature as persons and nothing less than that.
This paper seeks to explain ultimate sacred reality, specifically its characterization, the reasons for it, as well as how it addresses the problem of evil and the idea of religious diversity. This paper also presents a description of a sacred reality firmly based on logic and opposed to traditional religion.
Sacred reality is traditionally regarded by the majority of people as a reality where God exists and imposes his will on all his creation. Almost everyone in this world has been born and raised in a home and society of traditional theism. Religion and religious tradition have undeniably shaped the lives of generations of people from the oldest religion, namely Hinduism, to among the youngest, such as Islam. Nevertheless, religion has failed to give definite answers to the most basic questions about truth and reality as well as the problem of evil. Sacred reality is definitely not based on any religious doctrine that presupposes the existence of a human-like God nor is it based on the idea of a constant struggle between good and evil. It is rather about the existence of a Being who encompasses everything and everyone without any regard for its goodness or evil.
Being instead of God
Traditional religion almost always believes in a human-like God who, by such description, falls short of so many things. The very fact that God is portrayed as a human being, or even an animal or plant, limits God and his power. Why Because it is simply impossible to believe in an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent God who would after all just look like you and me. If God should be all-powerful, then it must logically defy any limiting description and hence God must remain, at least to some degree, mentally inconceivable. Ultimate sacred reality is therefore one where an indescribable Being encompasses all reality.
Neither Good nor Evil
Now, on the subject of good and evil, traditional religion believes that good is rewarded and evil punished. Nevertheless, several religions teach forgiveness even before punishment, and which therefore cancels the punishment. Consequently, the sacred reality imposed by religion on people is that of injustice on earth and where real justice is only possible in a faraway place after death. This notion therefore opposes the idea of an all-powerful God who is supposed to command good and banish evil. True sacred reality is therefore one where the Being who encompasses all of it has no judgment of good and evil. Everything is neither good nor evil but just another aspect of this Being one can roughly call God.
On Religious Diversity
The question then arises on what really is the reason behind religious diversity and how ultimate sacred reality can explain it. The explanation is twofold. First of all, ultimate sacred reality presupposes a Being that encompasses all both the things one would basically label as good and even those traditionally considered evil. This implies that this being does not take sides and therefore does not impose judgment. This Being therefore is just, kind, generous and forgiving and at the same time evil and inhuman. This Being is neither only Good nor only Evil but rather One, Whole and Perfect. The second part of the explanation is therefore hinged upon the premise that basically around 84 of all human beings (Major Religions. 2007) may fail to see this idea of a One, Whole and Perfect Being. Most people see either only the Good or only the Evil aspect of this Being. For those who have seen only the Good, they have built religions of a good God. For those who have seen only the Evil, they have built religions of a just God who delivers endless punishment. And for each learned person who sees another singular aspect of God, his salvation or saving grace for example, another religion is born. Religious diversity therefore is nothing but a result of an incomplete view of the total, complete Being that is God.
Conclusion
Ultimate sacred reality is one where God is a Being which defies any singular characteristic normally attributed to humans and things and anything that can be conceived by the mind. The Being is therefore indescribable and unnamed and the only thing that can be deduced from its supposed existence is the idea that it is the sum total of all things. This Being also disregards Good and Evil. Moreover, it remains One, Whole and Perfect, and where one fails to see this completeness, he clings to a particular aspect of God, which is usually supported by one of the many traditional religions.
