又係 QualiaSoup 的製作﹐有關批判思考﹐和為何需要批判思維。
Friday, December 25, 2009
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Christian Justice (Mirror)
這條片非常傳神的把基督教所謂救贖的公義裡面的荒謬顯示出來。
(1) 強姦犯證據確鑿﹐ 居然法官個仔為佢受罰﹐ 強姦犯接納就可以釋放
(2) 丈夫對太太不終﹐拒絕接受法官個仔為佢受罰要自己承擔﹐居然就要受痛苦的火刑﹐然後法官說﹕我愛你﹗
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
A discourse about my departure from Christianity based on model of Cognitive Psychology
Human has to deal with bewildering amount of information from their surroundings, they cannot take all of them, so we are wired to have some kind of model or templates to let us process information receive and create our mental model of the world around us -- or our worldview.
This is called "person structure" in cognitive psychology, but we can simply refer to it as our belief system or just beliefs.
We understand our world from our five senses (sight, hearing, touch, smell, taste), from emotional experiences, and finally from our upbringing.
For example we learn what is car, a pen, a chair, what is the color green, red, etc. they are all neutral. We register pain if we fell on the ground or hurt ourselves. These experiences are authentic, in a sense is it is something we experience first hand.
When we learn from school, and able to explore, to evaluate its logical consistence and soundness and evidence to support it, again these are authentic to us.
As we gain more and more life experience, our belief system expand based on authentic experience of the world as we see and perceives it
In general if we are open-minded, if we think with logic an reason, we allow the knowledge, facts etc we gain from our experiences to shape, refine and modify our beliefs so that the belief and the experience are correlated -- in cognitive psychology this kind of correspondence (or overlap of authentic experience and belief) is all congruence. Nobody's belief is in 100% congruence with his/her experience. Those that fall outside of congruence is called cognitive dissonance.
If our minds are open, rational and evidence based, the cognitive dissonance will be relative small.
In contrast, Christianity basically asked the believer to adhere to a set of "beliefs", and fight hard to preserve.
It is a virtue to "keep your faith" in terms of Christianity -- to put it in laymen terms, you are required not to alter believe, or not to alter it drastically that it no longer fits the Orthodoxy and thus damning you away from the "precious salvation". The motivation to preserve faith cause the process of shaping world view to be reversed, instead of allowing the the knowledge, facts etc we gain from our experiences to shape, refine and modify our beliefs so that the belief and the experience are correlated, the process of preserving our belief forces the believer to reject information and knowledge that contradicts the beliefs.
This process of rejecting information and knowledge that contradicts the beliefs arises from our own need of preservation. We know there are some experience, that is NOT from our own experience.
We learn say from a very young age that "sex" is dirty, or certain social taboos. These are not from our own experiences or senses, but from figure of authority, and most of all those who we depend upon for survival, and social connections. Our instinct of self-preservation caused us to accept those dogmas/absolute truth so that we gain approval, love and care.
If we do not accept those views as dogma and absolute truth, we will punished with rejection and disapproval, or risk being ostracized.
Our deprivation from emotional bonding and love may also cause yearning for love and approval, to be accepted socially, to bond/connect with a community, therefore as a kind of internalized reaction, people will accept those certain religious views as absolute truth/dogma in order to become part of a community -- as opposed to those knowledge / worldview we formed through authentic experiences, these dogmas/absolute truth are not from authentic experiences.
Christianity in particular appeals to our deep emotional yearnings -- to be able to join our loved ones in an afterlife and live happily ever after, to have a loving "Father" watching over you, to have somebody who loves you uncondidtionally, the emotional appeal magnifies the amount of emotional investments one puts into the belief.
Moreover, these dogmas/absolute truth (plus the assumptions around it) is not like the other authentic experience we gained ourselves, these dogmas/absolute truth involved a lot of our own emotional investment.
For new information we are able to reason through it and there is no opposing/resisting emotional or social pressure, we can easily change our minds, but for the dogmas/absolute truth we accepted (in order to avoid ostracization, rejection etc. and gain approval and love), the opposing/resisting emotional or social pressure is much greater.
Human is both resistant to change in their beliefs, but at the same time is a seeker of truth and fact -- the latter is actually crucial for our survival as much as the opposite (to gain love, approval from the ones who are our caregiver when we are vulnerable) for if we cannot tell what is truth and what is deception, it may become our own undoing.
However with the strong opposing/resisting emotional or social pressure, plus the high regard Christians place on "keeping the faith", Christians turn their experience and world view on its tip.
Instead of by the natural way of allowing what we perceive, we feel and we learn by experience/experimentation, the Christian faith required Christians to look at the world via the view of the dogmas.
Anything that conflicted with the established set of belief either fails to register (denial/ignore) in the believer's mind, or being distorted to fit in to the worldview of the believer.
A person cannot go on like that forever, for it is evident that the Christian world view is based a the very lack of understanding of human being, nature and the world, and a feudalistic society, and is outdated, and over the years, the overlapping of the belief and the reality diminishes -- when belief and reality matches there is congruence, and less cognitive dissonace.
However, for Christianity, the more we subscribed to the Orthodoxy or "Fundamentals" the sharper is the conflict and we have greater cognitive dissonance.
Christianity asked us NOT to base our belief on what we see, hear, feel or touch, but by "faith" -- we say we "know" by faith, but in reality, we simply have nothing solid to support the belief so we have to "accept" it with "faith" -- we did not KNOW the truth, we did not KNOW Jesus or God -- all of them are dogmas/absolute truth which are totally from unauthentic experience -- we have to accept to satisfy our many deep yearnings -- or else we faces the pain of reality.
I did not suddenly become an atheist in short time -- my first step, ironically is me trying to refute all kinds of challenges to Christianity hurled to me in the Internet -- books and materials in the church were soon proven inadequate, I researched on the Internet, acquire more and more Christian reference books, read more and more different kinds of theology. Today I have at least 4 boxes of books on Christianity and with the knowledge gained I can become a fake preacher if I want to.
Over the years of finding convincing answers to questions from non-believers, I clearly cannot ignore the many questions put forward to me by non-believers anymore. Others could have ignored them and hide behind "faith", but I cannot. If Christianity is such a body of truth, surely there will be answers available that don't require twisting of logic, fabrication of data or evasive answers -- I was wrong -- logic is often twisted, fabrication is widely practiced, and evasiveness is actually a tactics in apologetics (i.e. to bring the questioner of faith to the Bible).
I am no longer willing to distort the reality because it is against my conscience -- if it is not right, it doesn't make sense, I cannot say the opposite or deny what I see, feel or evaluate from logic -- but Christianity requires you to do the exact opposite -- so long as it is against the faith, you have to deny what you see, feel or reasoned. This is when many Christian scholars display dire anti-intellectual behavior. They can have PhD in Philosophy, eloquent in "logic", but the reality is they are intellectually dishonest, they do not respect truth, fact and logic -- they use knowledge, facts, logic to serve their religious agenda.
That conscience of me was what changed me -- I let reality in and follow wherever reality, evidence and reason leads, instead of using my faith to guard my mind or so called God's words, prayer -- I place reliance on reality, evidence and reason which are solid and can be objectively evaluated -- and as the increased reality I accumulated, it started to conflict with my belief more and more -- instead of trying to hang on, I follow the lead of evidence, reason and reality, even though it is not comforting -- and I departed further and further away from the Fundamentalist/Evangelical Christianity views.
I start noticing Bible passages, dogmas (Calvinism or Once Saved Always Saved) that are at odds with each other or unreasonable, or contradicting to historical accounts and scientific facts.
Then I was deeply troubled by many preachers lack of integrity greed and lust, believers narrow-mindedness, and hypocrisy (those who proclaim love of God but can hurl the most hideous abuse over the Internet at me).
I saw good people who were ostracized, abused because of their sexual orientation, I saw Christians willing distort facts or fabricate "scientific studies" to justify their agenda
Initially the contradictions are trivial and I can find "standard answers" from Christian apologetic materials, but very soon I found that those materials are logically flawed, they side-stepped challenges, try to come up with lots of further arguments without evidences, and I found myself began looking at Chrsitian answers very critically -- I said to myself, the answers were just not good enough -- they are logically flawed, factually wrong and has no evidence -- I started to push harder to find answers, only to discover that my attempts to explain away these contradictions require me to give up intellectual integrity, reasoning or freethinking -- I cannot bring myself into doing this.
This is the turning point -- between the sweet, warm loving "salvation" /"heaven" and intellectual integrity, reasoning or freethinking I found myself choosing intellectual integrity, reasoning or freethinking -- I gradually experience deep alienation from my Christian friends.
My effort to try and reconcile faith and reality with good answers (logically robust, evidence based ones) leads me to find out more and more flaws about Christianity, and more and more flaws about the apologetic answers.
In reality if we saw inconsistent witness accounts about an event, say a crime, we immediately will say the witness accounts cannot be relied upon, but the Christian agenda to maintain faith will twist our sense of consistence -- instead Christians say "inconsistency" is proof of the trustworthiness of the accounts (e.g. the conflicting accounts of Jesus' resurrection in the Gospels) -- I find this silly and really disgusting -- but many Christians passionately say it makes sense!!!! I gradually found the worldviews of Christians greatly distorted and even turn morality upside down when it comes to God -- God can torture his children in the name of giving a test that His children can endure, God can drown men/women/children/babies alive, sanction genocides, justify slavery, justify hate crimes (killing of homosexuals) -- had it been a human doing all these he/she would have been sentenced to hundreds of times of life-imprisonment and be called a psychopath -- why am I calling this God all loving and just ?
I gradually realize the horrid distorted morals of Christianity and feel deeply disgusted about all of it.
Over the last 2 years of my "Christian" life, I found myself beginning to quarrel with Christians on the Internet, then being labelled as the apostate or the follower of the "Whore", little did I know that the contradicting evidence I accumulated over the years is now reaching a critical mass, waiting to tip over.
I watched the Christian answers failed one by one, then the tenets of Christianity collapsed slowly, then one night it became clear I can no longer call myself a believer.
The facts, knowledge and reality I learned via the authentic experience tell me that this belief system is not valid -- it cannot make sense of the world I am in.
I did not experience deep loss after I quited Christianity, for during the last 6 months before I quit, I did not attend church at all -- the Sunday service homilies are just pointless, talking about grace, submission and faith etc. and that in return God will reward the believer -- so self-absorbing and self-serving -- they say thanks and grace believing that a God will watch over them and make special provisions for them, just for them and ignore the rest of the world!!!! It is a kind of self-indulgence and somehow really offends -- it is as though God revolve round them and even can bend laws of nature so that a Summer camp can proceed, a children can recover from a cold to attend Summer Bible classes etc. when half the world away people are dying from natural disasters or horrible disease -- and they can shameless say that God take special care on them -- it sickens me.
When confronted with sufferings in the world, Christians further deceive themselves by saying that offered prayers for them -- in fact they did what is equivalent to nothing to make them believe they have helped others -- and derive so much "satisfaction" from these kind of self-deception.
Many asked me, why do I give up Christianity and the circle of friends for decades -- for me truth, reality and authentic experience are what makes me feel real and living -- the warmth, care and kindness of Christianity are genuine but is conditional, if I don't believe I am not one of them, and to become one of them I have to give up intellectual integrity, reasoning and freethinking -- and I must not speak out against these acts by Christians -- it is against my conscience -- and I decided to choose conscience, intellectual integrity, reasoning and free thinking.
Those who asked you to give up intellectual integrity, reasoning and free thinking are not friends, and I don't feel a bit pity to loose these kinds of friends.
Reference:
Theramin Tree videos on his road to atheism:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyE8wUteFA4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0WwZc-Vz7Y
Valeria Tarico's blog posts on "Christian Belief Through the Lens of Cognitive Science"
Christian belief through the lens of Cognitive Science Part 1 of 6
Christian belief through the lens of Cognitive Science Part 6 of 6 which contains links to the 6 part series of posts on her analysis of Christian belief
This is called "person structure" in cognitive psychology, but we can simply refer to it as our belief system or just beliefs.
We understand our world from our five senses (sight, hearing, touch, smell, taste), from emotional experiences, and finally from our upbringing.
For example we learn what is car, a pen, a chair, what is the color green, red, etc. they are all neutral. We register pain if we fell on the ground or hurt ourselves. These experiences are authentic, in a sense is it is something we experience first hand.
When we learn from school, and able to explore, to evaluate its logical consistence and soundness and evidence to support it, again these are authentic to us.
As we gain more and more life experience, our belief system expand based on authentic experience of the world as we see and perceives it
In general if we are open-minded, if we think with logic an reason, we allow the knowledge, facts etc we gain from our experiences to shape, refine and modify our beliefs so that the belief and the experience are correlated -- in cognitive psychology this kind of correspondence (or overlap of authentic experience and belief) is all congruence. Nobody's belief is in 100% congruence with his/her experience. Those that fall outside of congruence is called cognitive dissonance.
If our minds are open, rational and evidence based, the cognitive dissonance will be relative small.
In contrast, Christianity basically asked the believer to adhere to a set of "beliefs", and fight hard to preserve.
It is a virtue to "keep your faith" in terms of Christianity -- to put it in laymen terms, you are required not to alter believe, or not to alter it drastically that it no longer fits the Orthodoxy and thus damning you away from the "precious salvation". The motivation to preserve faith cause the process of shaping world view to be reversed, instead of allowing the the knowledge, facts etc we gain from our experiences to shape, refine and modify our beliefs so that the belief and the experience are correlated, the process of preserving our belief forces the believer to reject information and knowledge that contradicts the beliefs.
This process of rejecting information and knowledge that contradicts the beliefs arises from our own need of preservation. We know there are some experience, that is NOT from our own experience.
We learn say from a very young age that "sex" is dirty, or certain social taboos. These are not from our own experiences or senses, but from figure of authority, and most of all those who we depend upon for survival, and social connections. Our instinct of self-preservation caused us to accept those dogmas/absolute truth so that we gain approval, love and care.
If we do not accept those views as dogma and absolute truth, we will punished with rejection and disapproval, or risk being ostracized.
Our deprivation from emotional bonding and love may also cause yearning for love and approval, to be accepted socially, to bond/connect with a community, therefore as a kind of internalized reaction, people will accept those certain religious views as absolute truth/dogma in order to become part of a community -- as opposed to those knowledge / worldview we formed through authentic experiences, these dogmas/absolute truth are not from authentic experiences.
Christianity in particular appeals to our deep emotional yearnings -- to be able to join our loved ones in an afterlife and live happily ever after, to have a loving "Father" watching over you, to have somebody who loves you uncondidtionally, the emotional appeal magnifies the amount of emotional investments one puts into the belief.
Moreover, these dogmas/absolute truth (plus the assumptions around it) is not like the other authentic experience we gained ourselves, these dogmas/absolute truth involved a lot of our own emotional investment.
For new information we are able to reason through it and there is no opposing/resisting emotional or social pressure, we can easily change our minds, but for the dogmas/absolute truth we accepted (in order to avoid ostracization, rejection etc. and gain approval and love), the opposing/resisting emotional or social pressure is much greater.
Human is both resistant to change in their beliefs, but at the same time is a seeker of truth and fact -- the latter is actually crucial for our survival as much as the opposite (to gain love, approval from the ones who are our caregiver when we are vulnerable) for if we cannot tell what is truth and what is deception, it may become our own undoing.
However with the strong opposing/resisting emotional or social pressure, plus the high regard Christians place on "keeping the faith", Christians turn their experience and world view on its tip.
Instead of by the natural way of allowing what we perceive, we feel and we learn by experience/experimentation, the Christian faith required Christians to look at the world via the view of the dogmas.
Anything that conflicted with the established set of belief either fails to register (denial/ignore) in the believer's mind, or being distorted to fit in to the worldview of the believer.
A person cannot go on like that forever, for it is evident that the Christian world view is based a the very lack of understanding of human being, nature and the world, and a feudalistic society, and is outdated, and over the years, the overlapping of the belief and the reality diminishes -- when belief and reality matches there is congruence, and less cognitive dissonace.
However, for Christianity, the more we subscribed to the Orthodoxy or "Fundamentals" the sharper is the conflict and we have greater cognitive dissonance.
Christianity asked us NOT to base our belief on what we see, hear, feel or touch, but by "faith" -- we say we "know" by faith, but in reality, we simply have nothing solid to support the belief so we have to "accept" it with "faith" -- we did not KNOW the truth, we did not KNOW Jesus or God -- all of them are dogmas/absolute truth which are totally from unauthentic experience -- we have to accept to satisfy our many deep yearnings -- or else we faces the pain of reality.
I did not suddenly become an atheist in short time -- my first step, ironically is me trying to refute all kinds of challenges to Christianity hurled to me in the Internet -- books and materials in the church were soon proven inadequate, I researched on the Internet, acquire more and more Christian reference books, read more and more different kinds of theology. Today I have at least 4 boxes of books on Christianity and with the knowledge gained I can become a fake preacher if I want to.
Over the years of finding convincing answers to questions from non-believers, I clearly cannot ignore the many questions put forward to me by non-believers anymore. Others could have ignored them and hide behind "faith", but I cannot. If Christianity is such a body of truth, surely there will be answers available that don't require twisting of logic, fabrication of data or evasive answers -- I was wrong -- logic is often twisted, fabrication is widely practiced, and evasiveness is actually a tactics in apologetics (i.e. to bring the questioner of faith to the Bible).
I am no longer willing to distort the reality because it is against my conscience -- if it is not right, it doesn't make sense, I cannot say the opposite or deny what I see, feel or evaluate from logic -- but Christianity requires you to do the exact opposite -- so long as it is against the faith, you have to deny what you see, feel or reasoned. This is when many Christian scholars display dire anti-intellectual behavior. They can have PhD in Philosophy, eloquent in "logic", but the reality is they are intellectually dishonest, they do not respect truth, fact and logic -- they use knowledge, facts, logic to serve their religious agenda.
That conscience of me was what changed me -- I let reality in and follow wherever reality, evidence and reason leads, instead of using my faith to guard my mind or so called God's words, prayer -- I place reliance on reality, evidence and reason which are solid and can be objectively evaluated -- and as the increased reality I accumulated, it started to conflict with my belief more and more -- instead of trying to hang on, I follow the lead of evidence, reason and reality, even though it is not comforting -- and I departed further and further away from the Fundamentalist/Evangelical Christianity views.
I start noticing Bible passages, dogmas (Calvinism or Once Saved Always Saved) that are at odds with each other or unreasonable, or contradicting to historical accounts and scientific facts.
Then I was deeply troubled by many preachers lack of integrity greed and lust, believers narrow-mindedness, and hypocrisy (those who proclaim love of God but can hurl the most hideous abuse over the Internet at me).
I saw good people who were ostracized, abused because of their sexual orientation, I saw Christians willing distort facts or fabricate "scientific studies" to justify their agenda
Initially the contradictions are trivial and I can find "standard answers" from Christian apologetic materials, but very soon I found that those materials are logically flawed, they side-stepped challenges, try to come up with lots of further arguments without evidences, and I found myself began looking at Chrsitian answers very critically -- I said to myself, the answers were just not good enough -- they are logically flawed, factually wrong and has no evidence -- I started to push harder to find answers, only to discover that my attempts to explain away these contradictions require me to give up intellectual integrity, reasoning or freethinking -- I cannot bring myself into doing this.
This is the turning point -- between the sweet, warm loving "salvation" /"heaven" and intellectual integrity, reasoning or freethinking I found myself choosing intellectual integrity, reasoning or freethinking -- I gradually experience deep alienation from my Christian friends.
My effort to try and reconcile faith and reality with good answers (logically robust, evidence based ones) leads me to find out more and more flaws about Christianity, and more and more flaws about the apologetic answers.
In reality if we saw inconsistent witness accounts about an event, say a crime, we immediately will say the witness accounts cannot be relied upon, but the Christian agenda to maintain faith will twist our sense of consistence -- instead Christians say "inconsistency" is proof of the trustworthiness of the accounts (e.g. the conflicting accounts of Jesus' resurrection in the Gospels) -- I find this silly and really disgusting -- but many Christians passionately say it makes sense!!!! I gradually found the worldviews of Christians greatly distorted and even turn morality upside down when it comes to God -- God can torture his children in the name of giving a test that His children can endure, God can drown men/women/children/babies alive, sanction genocides, justify slavery, justify hate crimes (killing of homosexuals) -- had it been a human doing all these he/she would have been sentenced to hundreds of times of life-imprisonment and be called a psychopath -- why am I calling this God all loving and just ?
I gradually realize the horrid distorted morals of Christianity and feel deeply disgusted about all of it.
Over the last 2 years of my "Christian" life, I found myself beginning to quarrel with Christians on the Internet, then being labelled as the apostate or the follower of the "Whore", little did I know that the contradicting evidence I accumulated over the years is now reaching a critical mass, waiting to tip over.
I watched the Christian answers failed one by one, then the tenets of Christianity collapsed slowly, then one night it became clear I can no longer call myself a believer.
The facts, knowledge and reality I learned via the authentic experience tell me that this belief system is not valid -- it cannot make sense of the world I am in.
I did not experience deep loss after I quited Christianity, for during the last 6 months before I quit, I did not attend church at all -- the Sunday service homilies are just pointless, talking about grace, submission and faith etc. and that in return God will reward the believer -- so self-absorbing and self-serving -- they say thanks and grace believing that a God will watch over them and make special provisions for them, just for them and ignore the rest of the world!!!! It is a kind of self-indulgence and somehow really offends -- it is as though God revolve round them and even can bend laws of nature so that a Summer camp can proceed, a children can recover from a cold to attend Summer Bible classes etc. when half the world away people are dying from natural disasters or horrible disease -- and they can shameless say that God take special care on them -- it sickens me.
When confronted with sufferings in the world, Christians further deceive themselves by saying that offered prayers for them -- in fact they did what is equivalent to nothing to make them believe they have helped others -- and derive so much "satisfaction" from these kind of self-deception.
Many asked me, why do I give up Christianity and the circle of friends for decades -- for me truth, reality and authentic experience are what makes me feel real and living -- the warmth, care and kindness of Christianity are genuine but is conditional, if I don't believe I am not one of them, and to become one of them I have to give up intellectual integrity, reasoning and freethinking -- and I must not speak out against these acts by Christians -- it is against my conscience -- and I decided to choose conscience, intellectual integrity, reasoning and free thinking.
Those who asked you to give up intellectual integrity, reasoning and free thinking are not friends, and I don't feel a bit pity to loose these kinds of friends.
Reference:
Theramin Tree videos on his road to atheism:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyE8wUteFA4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0WwZc-Vz7Y
Valeria Tarico's blog posts on "Christian Belief Through the Lens of Cognitive Science"
Christian belief through the lens of Cognitive Science Part 1 of 6
Christian belief through the lens of Cognitive Science Part 6 of 6 which contains links to the 6 part series of posts on her analysis of Christian belief
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Giovanni da Palestrina - Sicut cervus
Another version of Sicut Cervus by Giovanni da Palestrina﹐ but sung in the Medieval style, using all male voices, the sopranos and altos are male sopranos/altos singing in falsetto.
Sunday, December 06, 2009
有什麼因素可以令一個信主非常深的人最終會離開基督教﹖
討論這個問題的時候﹐我們必須認識基督教的一些特性。
基督信仰的自我保護系統 (immune system)是一套保護系統﹐目的就是防止人離開信仰。
基督教信仰是一個系統的自圓其說的教義 -- 它層層保護﹑一環一環的緊扣﹑循環的論證﹐和不斷自我催眠。
首先它作出非常專斷的聲稱 (exclusive claims)
(a) 神創造一切﹑是獨一全能﹐是真理﹑道德的來源
(b) 聖經是無誤﹐句句真理
(c) 只有基督教是真理
然後它就踐踏人﹐利用人的弱點﹐令人相信
(a) 人有罪﹐ 要悔改
(b) 只有基督教有救恩
加以威脅 -- 唔信的話﹐就是地獄可怕的懲罰﹐不順服的神就不保護你
利誘 -- 天堂﹑神的大量實際祝福 (工作﹑婚姻﹑學業順利)﹑心靈安慰
優越的身份 -- 你分別為聖﹑你做的一切是為了真理﹑是至高無上的光榮﹐是君尊的祭司﹑光明的子女﹑聖徒。。。。
感情的牽制 -- 基督教團體內溫馨的關係﹐令人相信基督教是最好的﹐ 就算是非信徒的朋友也比信徒差一截
建構了以上的“基礎”﹐就需要用保護系統 -- 基督教所有的說法看來是可以自圓其說﹐但有一樣東西基督教是不可以面對的 -- 就是現實 (reality)
以上的“基礎”是給信徒建構一個 altered reality﹐ 他們版本的 mental reality。
這個所謂的心理裡面的“現實”﹐ 其實是按照基督教教導營造的“虛擬現實” -- 用他們的有色眼鏡去看現實。人真正的成長來自對現實生活的體驗﹑去如是觀之﹑感受之﹐ 見花看得花﹐見樹看到樹﹐見人就是人。
但基督教強調要用“基督價值”去看 -- 換句話說就是要用 biased 的價值扭曲直觀的體驗務求去 fit 他們的信仰系統
因此﹐信徒體驗真實的社會﹑現實其實就是可以打破基督教的信仰系統﹐為了這個目的﹐基督教就有好多的方法預防信徒去接觸現實
(1) 他們貶低世俗的學術﹐基督教以外的學術都是服務基督教﹐而不是基督教去跟隨他們
-- 於是科學要根基督教的觀點
-- 邏輯是基督教的工具﹐不可以反過來批判基督教是否邏輯
-- 心理學等要麼服務基督教﹐要麼就是魔鬼的工具
(2) 不惜一切持守真道是聖經高舉的德行﹐ 信徒是被教導﹐ 他們的信仰是寶貴的﹐他們的救恩是不可以放棄的﹐福音不可以失去的﹐堅持就是最高的道德
(3) 懷疑﹑發問﹐代表信仰有問題﹐是與(2) 矛盾
(4) 事先說﹐必定有人反對他們的信仰﹑有好多假教師﹐仿彿有先見之明﹐其實就是隱藏了一個假設 ﹕ 反對的一定是假﹑是敵對真理﹑他們基督教就是真理
(5) 信與不信不可同負一軛 -- 目的就是減少信徒和非信徒的交往
(6) 非信徒因為沒有神﹐所以一定沒有道德基礎﹐所以他們都不可以信任
(7) 如果信徒的行為壞﹐是信徒自己的問題﹐不是基督教的問題 (其實﹐為何不可以說﹐如果信徒的行為好﹐也其實是信徒自己好﹐與基督教無關)
明白以上基督教的防禦系統 (immune system)﹐ 就知道﹐整個基督教維繫信仰的基本方法就是﹐ 不讓信徒去體驗﹑從現實獲取自己的 authentic experience
信徒會被教導不要相信自己所看見﹑所聽見﹑所思考的﹐ 一切都是世俗要令他離開神﹐
當信徒被教導 (1) 要不惜一切保護自己寶貴的救恩 (2) 自己所看見﹑所聽見﹑所思考的如果令自己懷疑信仰就一定是世俗要令他離開神 (3) 他們要用“基督”﹑“聖經”﹑“神”的眼光看世界﹐ 那麼他們自然而然就會扭曲對現實的解讀﹐明明是簡單的事情﹐他們可以看見神的作為﹑魔鬼的陰謀﹑什麼萬事互相效力等等
你翻開 Theramin Trees 的 YouTube 片﹐裡面利用認知學 Person Centered Theory 就會看得人和現實脫離的情況﹐就是用信仰扭曲現實。
根據 Person Centered Theory, 個人信念和現實吻合的部份叫 congruence﹐ 而如一個人用信仰看世界﹐congruence 越來越少﹐就只會扭曲 (distortion) 或者否定現實 (denial)
所以﹐如果要一個信徒離開基督教﹐不是和他在教義﹑邏輯﹑論據辯論﹐而是使用最有力的武器﹐ -- reality﹐ 一些基督教無法解釋﹑信徒無法逃避的現實﹑事實﹐要他們切實面對。
而信徒走向離開基督教的第一步﹐ 就是承認﹑接納現實。
這個步伐一走﹐當信徒真的睜大眼睛看現實世界﹐真的面對現實於基督教建構的世界觀的矛盾﹐認真的問﹑鼓起勇氣冒險(冒失去信仰的險)去看﹐就會帶領他們離開信仰。
要信徒面對現實﹐說是容易﹐但實行是好難的。因為信徒除了以上的“防禦”外﹐ 他們的生活也建構了防禦﹕
(1) 他們被教導要讀基督教書籍﹑讀聖經﹑禱告 ﹕ 這些除了耗費時間﹐其實是不斷的鞏固他們扭曲的世界觀
(2) 聚會 -- 密集的聚會﹐不斷的灌輸基督教的信息﹑觀點﹑資訊﹐ 加深他們對世俗抗拒﹑鞏固他們的信仰
(3) 生活圈子的狹窄化 -- 不論是教會﹑與其他人﹐都鼓勵他們和信徒交往﹐不和非信徒做朋友
基督教任何聚會的主題/目的都是堅固信徒﹐ 如果他們的信仰是真理﹑是那麼的真﹐根本就不需要長年累月﹑每週都“堅固” --這其實間接地承認他們的信仰是脆弱﹐需要不斷“打補針”
換句話說﹐ 他們要接觸現實﹐必須要打破(1)﹐ (2) 和 (3)這些防禦。
這些防禦令信徒潛意識的過濾一些資訊﹐有些他們選擇不接收﹐例如進化論和他們信仰衝突﹐要麼就說進化論不是事實﹐要麼否定進化論的科學地位﹐要麼就扭曲進化論﹐總之不可以接收真實的資訊﹐也就是說﹐他不在接受自己的 authentic experience﹐而選擇用信仰扭曲自己的經驗。
其實以上的防禦的存在﹐是基督教自己經驗累積而建構的
在教會裡面他們好清楚信徒在什麼階段會大批離開教會
(1) 昇大學﹑大專
一方面功課忙碌他們會少讀了聖經﹑基督教書籍﹐大學忙碌的生活也令他們聚會減少﹐此外他們會接觸好多其他不同的人﹐他們的思想﹑言論會影響了他們﹐衝擊他們的信仰
這些經驗是如此貼身﹑如此真實﹐他們不再可能當不是事實﹑不再可能漠視﹐當面對後和接收新知識﹐他們就會有很多人離開信仰
(2) 出來工作
同樣都會影響了他們讀聖經﹑聚會生活﹐工作場所接觸的人都影響他們的信仰
為此教會就演化﹐ 做好多野針對在職和大學的群體﹐不論聚會﹑材料﹑和人員都會貼近他們 -- 這是教會積極地留住信徒的做法。
所以﹐要信徒面對現實﹐ 要打破好多關﹐除了教會安排的節目﹑聚會﹐就是跨過他們心理上對世俗的猜忌態度﹐換言之﹐其實就是要他們真的願意開放﹑認真思考教會﹑基督教以外其他的資訊﹐而且理性的分析﹐容許理性分析的結論改變自己。同時要打破他們近乎牢不可破的防禦﹐ 有時候就是要非常的重藥。
從不同的基督教離教見證﹐ 信徒所以決心反思基督教的問題﹐就是遇到一個危機﹐他們發現自己所知道的基督教知識﹑週圍教會牧師﹑長執提供不了任何滿意的答案﹐ 禱告﹑讀經也是沒有出路﹐然後他也難以逃避這些問題﹐ 就會出現信仰危機 -- 信仰危機就是他真的開始懷疑所信的是否真實。
為何我要講“危機”﹖ 因為“危機”一刻就是一個人開始真的直觀現實﹐ 真的體驗現實是什麼﹐然後看見現實的世界和基督教的“現實” (biased / distorted view) 有矛盾。
例如﹐聖經教導信徒﹐ 不信基督的都是沒有道德基礎﹐他們動機都不純正。好了﹐ 當他看見一個非信徒﹐甚至是聖經裡面認為是罪大惡極的﹐例如同性戀者﹐ 做出非常高尚的德行行為﹐信徒就發現他們的世界觀受到動搖。
美國“九一一”事件﹐其中航班 93 飛機﹐ 最後沒有撞向有人的大樓而墮機﹐ 原來參加這次捨己行為的有個同性戀者。我告訴一個信徒連同性戀者都會勇敢的捨己為人﹐ 他接受不了﹐結果為了保護自己的信仰﹐就說﹕ 這是魔鬼教導這些人去用高尚的行為來試探﹑矇騙人﹗
這是當事件比較離身﹑沒有那麼直接的時候﹐信徒還可以這樣﹐ 但如果是一個他認識的人﹐是同性戀者﹐而且係一等好人﹐ 他就難以逃避這個現實的衝擊。
舉個例子。教會有兩個信徒都有家人患了癌症。兩個信徒是要好的朋友﹐ 是自小認識﹐一起長大﹐一起侍奉﹐而且認識雙方的家人。我們叫他們阿明與阿金。
教會積極的為兩人家人禱告﹐但結果是阿明的家人痊癒﹐但阿金的家人死去。阿金十分痛苦﹐因為死去的是他的幼小的女兒。
這時候﹐ 問題就來了﹕ 阿明不可以說因為上帝預定了其中一個未夠時間回天家﹐ 因為如果預定﹐禱告是沒有意思的。好了﹐阿明可以說是阿金那個家人信心不夠﹖信仰有問題﹖ 阿明無法為自己家人痊癒感恩﹐因為他所愛的朋友﹐在他認識的信仰裡面﹐是找不到任何理由是不該獲得神的保守的。
當阿明要被迫接納神要點就點而不可以懷疑﹐ 他就一定難以平伏﹐ 因為他的意識裡面告訴他這是毫無道理﹐要用什麼神的旨意人不能夠明白﹐就更加難 -- 那豈不是說神玩弄人﹐要人猜他心意﹖ 為何不直接告訴人佢想點﹐ 免去人猜測的苦惱﹖ 是試煉﹖ 為何要阿金個女兒接受痛苦的癌症療程﹖ 這種痛苦有意義嗎﹖
越是企圖把發生的和信仰調和﹐ 一個人就會越發現其中的矛盾
為何我要用這個例子 -- 其他情況﹐如果發生事情的是比較離身﹐人容易點去不去想它﹐但如果是貼身的﹐ 就難以不去面對了 == 我自己的歷程﹐ 就是看見教會對同性戀的敵意﹐ 但對社會其他公義問題的漠視﹐同時看見教會為了傳福音可以說謊﹑可以捏造事實﹐而教會沒有人認為這是問題感到難以相信﹐結果我就開始走向自由派信仰﹐然後更加去看現實﹑知識﹐ 就發覺基督教不可信。
基督信仰的自我保護系統 (immune system)是一套保護系統﹐目的就是防止人離開信仰。
基督教信仰是一個系統的自圓其說的教義 -- 它層層保護﹑一環一環的緊扣﹑循環的論證﹐和不斷自我催眠。
首先它作出非常專斷的聲稱 (exclusive claims)
(a) 神創造一切﹑是獨一全能﹐是真理﹑道德的來源
(b) 聖經是無誤﹐句句真理
(c) 只有基督教是真理
然後它就踐踏人﹐利用人的弱點﹐令人相信
(a) 人有罪﹐ 要悔改
(b) 只有基督教有救恩
加以威脅 -- 唔信的話﹐就是地獄可怕的懲罰﹐不順服的神就不保護你
利誘 -- 天堂﹑神的大量實際祝福 (工作﹑婚姻﹑學業順利)﹑心靈安慰
優越的身份 -- 你分別為聖﹑你做的一切是為了真理﹑是至高無上的光榮﹐是君尊的祭司﹑光明的子女﹑聖徒。。。。
感情的牽制 -- 基督教團體內溫馨的關係﹐令人相信基督教是最好的﹐ 就算是非信徒的朋友也比信徒差一截
建構了以上的“基礎”﹐就需要用保護系統 -- 基督教所有的說法看來是可以自圓其說﹐但有一樣東西基督教是不可以面對的 -- 就是現實 (reality)
以上的“基礎”是給信徒建構一個 altered reality﹐ 他們版本的 mental reality。
這個所謂的心理裡面的“現實”﹐ 其實是按照基督教教導營造的“虛擬現實” -- 用他們的有色眼鏡去看現實。人真正的成長來自對現實生活的體驗﹑去如是觀之﹑感受之﹐ 見花看得花﹐見樹看到樹﹐見人就是人。
但基督教強調要用“基督價值”去看 -- 換句話說就是要用 biased 的價值扭曲直觀的體驗務求去 fit 他們的信仰系統
因此﹐信徒體驗真實的社會﹑現實其實就是可以打破基督教的信仰系統﹐為了這個目的﹐基督教就有好多的方法預防信徒去接觸現實
(1) 他們貶低世俗的學術﹐基督教以外的學術都是服務基督教﹐而不是基督教去跟隨他們
-- 於是科學要根基督教的觀點
-- 邏輯是基督教的工具﹐不可以反過來批判基督教是否邏輯
-- 心理學等要麼服務基督教﹐要麼就是魔鬼的工具
(2) 不惜一切持守真道是聖經高舉的德行﹐ 信徒是被教導﹐ 他們的信仰是寶貴的﹐他們的救恩是不可以放棄的﹐福音不可以失去的﹐堅持就是最高的道德
(3) 懷疑﹑發問﹐代表信仰有問題﹐是與(2) 矛盾
(4) 事先說﹐必定有人反對他們的信仰﹑有好多假教師﹐仿彿有先見之明﹐其實就是隱藏了一個假設 ﹕ 反對的一定是假﹑是敵對真理﹑他們基督教就是真理
(5) 信與不信不可同負一軛 -- 目的就是減少信徒和非信徒的交往
(6) 非信徒因為沒有神﹐所以一定沒有道德基礎﹐所以他們都不可以信任
(7) 如果信徒的行為壞﹐是信徒自己的問題﹐不是基督教的問題 (其實﹐為何不可以說﹐如果信徒的行為好﹐也其實是信徒自己好﹐與基督教無關)
明白以上基督教的防禦系統 (immune system)﹐ 就知道﹐整個基督教維繫信仰的基本方法就是﹐ 不讓信徒去體驗﹑從現實獲取自己的 authentic experience
信徒會被教導不要相信自己所看見﹑所聽見﹑所思考的﹐ 一切都是世俗要令他離開神﹐
當信徒被教導 (1) 要不惜一切保護自己寶貴的救恩 (2) 自己所看見﹑所聽見﹑所思考的如果令自己懷疑信仰就一定是世俗要令他離開神 (3) 他們要用“基督”﹑“聖經”﹑“神”的眼光看世界﹐ 那麼他們自然而然就會扭曲對現實的解讀﹐明明是簡單的事情﹐他們可以看見神的作為﹑魔鬼的陰謀﹑什麼萬事互相效力等等
你翻開 Theramin Trees 的 YouTube 片﹐裡面利用認知學 Person Centered Theory 就會看得人和現實脫離的情況﹐就是用信仰扭曲現實。
根據 Person Centered Theory, 個人信念和現實吻合的部份叫 congruence﹐ 而如一個人用信仰看世界﹐congruence 越來越少﹐就只會扭曲 (distortion) 或者否定現實 (denial)
所以﹐如果要一個信徒離開基督教﹐不是和他在教義﹑邏輯﹑論據辯論﹐而是使用最有力的武器﹐ -- reality﹐ 一些基督教無法解釋﹑信徒無法逃避的現實﹑事實﹐要他們切實面對。
而信徒走向離開基督教的第一步﹐ 就是承認﹑接納現實。
這個步伐一走﹐當信徒真的睜大眼睛看現實世界﹐真的面對現實於基督教建構的世界觀的矛盾﹐認真的問﹑鼓起勇氣冒險(冒失去信仰的險)去看﹐就會帶領他們離開信仰。
要信徒面對現實﹐說是容易﹐但實行是好難的。因為信徒除了以上的“防禦”外﹐ 他們的生活也建構了防禦﹕
(1) 他們被教導要讀基督教書籍﹑讀聖經﹑禱告 ﹕ 這些除了耗費時間﹐其實是不斷的鞏固他們扭曲的世界觀
(2) 聚會 -- 密集的聚會﹐不斷的灌輸基督教的信息﹑觀點﹑資訊﹐ 加深他們對世俗抗拒﹑鞏固他們的信仰
(3) 生活圈子的狹窄化 -- 不論是教會﹑與其他人﹐都鼓勵他們和信徒交往﹐不和非信徒做朋友
基督教任何聚會的主題/目的都是堅固信徒﹐ 如果他們的信仰是真理﹑是那麼的真﹐根本就不需要長年累月﹑每週都“堅固” --這其實間接地承認他們的信仰是脆弱﹐需要不斷“打補針”
換句話說﹐ 他們要接觸現實﹐必須要打破(1)﹐ (2) 和 (3)這些防禦。
這些防禦令信徒潛意識的過濾一些資訊﹐有些他們選擇不接收﹐例如進化論和他們信仰衝突﹐要麼就說進化論不是事實﹐要麼否定進化論的科學地位﹐要麼就扭曲進化論﹐總之不可以接收真實的資訊﹐也就是說﹐他不在接受自己的 authentic experience﹐而選擇用信仰扭曲自己的經驗。
其實以上的防禦的存在﹐是基督教自己經驗累積而建構的
在教會裡面他們好清楚信徒在什麼階段會大批離開教會
(1) 昇大學﹑大專
一方面功課忙碌他們會少讀了聖經﹑基督教書籍﹐大學忙碌的生活也令他們聚會減少﹐此外他們會接觸好多其他不同的人﹐他們的思想﹑言論會影響了他們﹐衝擊他們的信仰
這些經驗是如此貼身﹑如此真實﹐他們不再可能當不是事實﹑不再可能漠視﹐當面對後和接收新知識﹐他們就會有很多人離開信仰
(2) 出來工作
同樣都會影響了他們讀聖經﹑聚會生活﹐工作場所接觸的人都影響他們的信仰
為此教會就演化﹐ 做好多野針對在職和大學的群體﹐不論聚會﹑材料﹑和人員都會貼近他們 -- 這是教會積極地留住信徒的做法。
所以﹐要信徒面對現實﹐ 要打破好多關﹐除了教會安排的節目﹑聚會﹐就是跨過他們心理上對世俗的猜忌態度﹐換言之﹐其實就是要他們真的願意開放﹑認真思考教會﹑基督教以外其他的資訊﹐而且理性的分析﹐容許理性分析的結論改變自己。同時要打破他們近乎牢不可破的防禦﹐ 有時候就是要非常的重藥。
從不同的基督教離教見證﹐ 信徒所以決心反思基督教的問題﹐就是遇到一個危機﹐他們發現自己所知道的基督教知識﹑週圍教會牧師﹑長執提供不了任何滿意的答案﹐ 禱告﹑讀經也是沒有出路﹐然後他也難以逃避這些問題﹐ 就會出現信仰危機 -- 信仰危機就是他真的開始懷疑所信的是否真實。
為何我要講“危機”﹖ 因為“危機”一刻就是一個人開始真的直觀現實﹐ 真的體驗現實是什麼﹐然後看見現實的世界和基督教的“現實” (biased / distorted view) 有矛盾。
例如﹐聖經教導信徒﹐ 不信基督的都是沒有道德基礎﹐他們動機都不純正。好了﹐ 當他看見一個非信徒﹐甚至是聖經裡面認為是罪大惡極的﹐例如同性戀者﹐ 做出非常高尚的德行行為﹐信徒就發現他們的世界觀受到動搖。
美國“九一一”事件﹐其中航班 93 飛機﹐ 最後沒有撞向有人的大樓而墮機﹐ 原來參加這次捨己行為的有個同性戀者。我告訴一個信徒連同性戀者都會勇敢的捨己為人﹐ 他接受不了﹐結果為了保護自己的信仰﹐就說﹕ 這是魔鬼教導這些人去用高尚的行為來試探﹑矇騙人﹗
這是當事件比較離身﹑沒有那麼直接的時候﹐信徒還可以這樣﹐ 但如果是一個他認識的人﹐是同性戀者﹐而且係一等好人﹐ 他就難以逃避這個現實的衝擊。
舉個例子。教會有兩個信徒都有家人患了癌症。兩個信徒是要好的朋友﹐ 是自小認識﹐一起長大﹐一起侍奉﹐而且認識雙方的家人。我們叫他們阿明與阿金。
教會積極的為兩人家人禱告﹐但結果是阿明的家人痊癒﹐但阿金的家人死去。阿金十分痛苦﹐因為死去的是他的幼小的女兒。
這時候﹐ 問題就來了﹕ 阿明不可以說因為上帝預定了其中一個未夠時間回天家﹐ 因為如果預定﹐禱告是沒有意思的。好了﹐阿明可以說是阿金那個家人信心不夠﹖信仰有問題﹖ 阿明無法為自己家人痊癒感恩﹐因為他所愛的朋友﹐在他認識的信仰裡面﹐是找不到任何理由是不該獲得神的保守的。
當阿明要被迫接納神要點就點而不可以懷疑﹐ 他就一定難以平伏﹐ 因為他的意識裡面告訴他這是毫無道理﹐要用什麼神的旨意人不能夠明白﹐就更加難 -- 那豈不是說神玩弄人﹐要人猜他心意﹖ 為何不直接告訴人佢想點﹐ 免去人猜測的苦惱﹖ 是試煉﹖ 為何要阿金個女兒接受痛苦的癌症療程﹖ 這種痛苦有意義嗎﹖
越是企圖把發生的和信仰調和﹐ 一個人就會越發現其中的矛盾
為何我要用這個例子 -- 其他情況﹐如果發生事情的是比較離身﹐人容易點去不去想它﹐但如果是貼身的﹐ 就難以不去面對了 == 我自己的歷程﹐ 就是看見教會對同性戀的敵意﹐ 但對社會其他公義問題的漠視﹐同時看見教會為了傳福音可以說謊﹑可以捏造事實﹐而教會沒有人認為這是問題感到難以相信﹐結果我就開始走向自由派信仰﹐然後更加去看現實﹑知識﹐ 就發覺基督教不可信。
Thursday, December 03, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
