Discussion:
Religion 1.0 is the authority of elders, Religion 2.0 is the
authority of scripture, and Religion 3.0 is based on evidence. I watched a
sermon spoken from Michael Dowd, “Religion 3.0: Inspiring Science, Realistic
Hope.” Religion 1.0 is based on what we hear from our parents, grandparents and
follow their beliefs even though we don’t fully understand. Religion 2.0 is
based on scripture like the Bible and stories we read. Both of those theories
are perfectly fine and structured but what proof do we have? That is where
Religion 3.0 comes in and above all religions, Dowd says there are 3 things
that are considered real and can’t be changed no matter what you believe in.
The 3 things are time, nature and mystery. When it comes to time, he talks
about how the past is real because certain things have happened to help shape
out the future. Dowd says, “If we act as if the future is not real, we will
condemn the future.” Nature is the second rule (inner nature, outer nature,
social nature and interpretive nature) that is real. We act in a particular way
that we believe in and we can connect with people accordingly and Dowd says our
interpretations matter. The last rule that is real is mystery which is
everything that we don’t know. If we’re basing our findings on evidence, no one
on Earth really knows if there is a God given that people have never physically
seen him. In the end, the final thing that matters is our legacy.
Position:
In my personal views and beliefs, I do believe in a self-righteous God who sacrificed his life in order for us to live out our purpose. When it comes to Religion 3.0 and putting my beliefs against evidence, I don’t have physical proof. My stance is more of a 2.0 perspective because I rely on scriptures, that is ultimately discover and base my truth from. Honestly, a part of me believes that there is a real human-like figure who is God and sent his son Jesus down to save all of us. On the other hand though, I believe that God shows his presence within other people. I’m not saying that a human on this Earth is God but I do think that he works in mysterious ways using people to get his message across. When Dowd talks about the 3 concepts that are unchangeable referring to time, nature and mystery, I agree which helps me believe even more because of the scriptures. Dowd mentioned that the past is a real thing and sets us up for the future and in the scriptures that I believe in, Jesus was in Jerusalem to lead the disciples and undoubtedly committed the greatest sacrifice known to man by dying on the cross for our sins and help us cleanse our body and mind. If time is real than I believe that it actually happened without seeing God for who is truly is. There is my evidence that I have and therefore I believe in Religion 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0.
Michael Dowd: "Religion 3.0: Inspiring Science, Realistic Hope"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr3ZnCRNO7Q
I watched the sermon too and found it interesting. I felt like he said that religion has evolved to a degree of evidence. Then, in the next breath he said that if someone didn't recognize that the beauty of the earth spoke of the divinity of higher power that they were missing something. I didn't understand his link to evidence and the Religion 3.0. Thanks for sharing, I liked your willingness to share your beliefs.
ReplyDeleteI also watched this sermon. It felt just slightly off to me... like he's trying to please everyone while subtly insulting believers. "It's okay if you believe in God, but realize that what you believe in is actually a fictional representation of something you don't quite understand. Don't worry, you'll evolve." I, too, believe in God and Jesus Christ. I believe in the Atonement and that I can be forgiven of all of my sins and live with God again. I don't think this makes me unintelligent, unevolved, or naive. I believe it makes me stronger and gives me a much healthier perspective on life, love, and hardships. While I definitely believe that Religion 3.0 is out there now, I think it goes beyond the mark.
ReplyDelete