Search:

The Weedpatch Gazette

A blog about Personal Journals.
About samheath


Real Name:
Samuel Heath
Member Since:
February 03, 2007
Last Signed In:
October 05, 2008
Profile Views:
4730
Blog Views:
53772
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
The Weedpatch Gazette
The Weedpatch Gazette
The Weedpatch Gazette
The Weedpatch Gazette
The Weedpatch Gazette
The Weedpatch Gazette
The Weedpatch Gazette
The Weedpatch Gazette
The Weedpatch Gazette
The Weedpatch Gazette
Archives
February 07
March 07
April 07
May 07
June 07
July 07
August 07
September 07
October 07
November 07
December 07
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
October 08
Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL
samheath - > The Weedpatch Gazette -> What am I supposed to believe?
What am I supposed to believe?

It seems a fair question to ask of God, and in searching for an answer Clara Bow voiced the often further and companion question “Why can’t we know?” concerning an afterlife during a Liberty Magazine interview. In this interview and in many other ways she proved her deep mind and thoughts were far beyond her Hollywood celebrity status. Despite anecdotes and jokes to the contrary beauty and brains often go together, but there is no denying that celebrity is no guarantee of a profound mind like that of Clara Bow’s, and too often the media seizes on some celebrity’s comments as though they had the weight of oracular utterances.

This thing called “faith” is getting a lot of attention because of the present political contenders, but if I got any of these alone I would ask them what it is they think they are supposed to believe? However, unlike politicians celebrities are more prone to act like human beings and as such are subject to the same doubts and uncertainties as anyone, so it isn’t surprising when we hear of some of them getting involved with sects and cults, attending séances and looking for spiritual advice of one kind or another proving themselves to be normal human beings trying to find answers to questions we all have.

The question we don’t hear is “What am I supposed to believe?” No doubt the question is there, but somehow it remains unasked. One reason being some think it a sign of weakness as though being cast in the role of a supplicant. Some seem to have the confidence in someone having the answer to such a question that implies a great deal of trust in that person, while others are content to let some organization like a church handle their beliefs concerning the metaphysical. And some simply leave it in the silence of their own minds, turning it over and over without let.

As to Clara Bow’s question, the majority of people who have searched for answers to the ultimate questions of life and death confronting what they are supposed to believe have asked the same question since the beginning of human history. The religions and philosophies abounding are the human inventions attempting to find an answer to the question. But at what point in our lives does the question first enter our minds? Do you recall when the question first entered your own mind? Does the question have something to do with the formation of the soul? We don’t believe infants are capable of such questions concerning the soul and an afterlife, questions concerning the soul and immortality, but at what point in the child’s life do such questions begin to form? Is the seed of a soul only planted, and as with all seed may or may not germinate and come to full flower? Just how do expressions such as “food for the soul” gain credence? Why would the Scripture have it “The soul that sinneth shall die!” as though such a fate is possible?

When it comes to the metaphysical we have many questions, but Clara Bow’s preeminent one remains unanswered. However, once such questions begin to insinuate themselves upon our minds we begin to grapple with the question what am I supposed to believe? Unfortunately for our species this question seems to remain unasked by many of those born and raised to certain beliefs, and to question these beliefs is to invite punishment in one form or another and all too often very harsh punishment.

Clara Bow was fortunate to be living in America and at a time in our history when she had the freedom to even ask her question knowing it would be published in the media without fear of being punished for doing so. Sinclair Lewis and others were writing their books calling many things of religion and government into question, and taking full advantage of the safety America offered them, not fearing being burned at the stake as heretics or witches.

Freedom of speech and of the press are among our most important and cherished freedoms as Americans. When these are abused, especially to promote politicians, we find ourselves asking what we are supposed to believe? But in respect to the questions of God, of immortality, the soul and an afterlife it is only reasonable we ask ourselves and even God, most especially God just what are we supposed to believe? It’s as though the question is there and won’t go away, the search for an answer accounting for so many and diverse attempts to find some meaning for our lives.

Here in America we are very fortunate we can express our doubts and fears, even our opinions openly, but I am not qualified to tell anyone what they are supposed to believe when it comes to spiritual matters; nor do I think anyone else holds such a divinely ordained distinction. The really troubling thing is the great many people who seem to think they are qualified to answer the question for others. And whether it be celebrities drawn to Scientology or ordinary people sitting in conventional pews it is troubling to me so many seem willing to abdicate their personal responsibility for what they are supposed to believe to any other person or organization. In just this way religious hatreds are taught and spread as well as the ideologies of tyrants.

It may be the ancient prophets and Jesus had some insights to the mind of God. And during my Biblical studies I have found much to which I can relate. But when it comes to what I am supposed to believe, ah, that seems to be my personal quest for answers and I won’t, and perhaps can’t, abdicate this to any other human being, though sharing my thoughts with others like-minded brings me much comfort in the search for answers. However, this like-mindedness is established on the basis of the sharing of thoughts rather than any telling others what they are supposed to believe.

 

Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by samheath on Sunday, March 30, 2008 at 04:39 PM
Report a Violation
Viewed 97 times
4 comments from 3 users

1

posted by Terryeo on Mar 30, 2008 at 10:25 PM

 What you are SUPPOSED to believe is what your senses and your experience tell you.  That will keep you trucking better than anything else and people have been doing it for a long time, so that's the safest bet.  However, should you choose to explore it, the Scientology philosophy applies these very principles to the mind.  That is, to thoughts, to thoughts that you, yourself and no one else, have, have had, and are able to create.  People find this helpful.  Other people (critics), refuse to recognize they can examine and understand their own thoughts.  But everyone has their own opinion, hey?

 

posted by samheath on Mar 31, 2008 at 06:12 AM

People have nothing but their senses and experiences to rely on and don't have to be told what they are supposed to believe in this respect, as though telling anyone such a thing had any real significance. The distinction is the one Clara Bow voiced when it comes to how each person processes the information of their own personal senses and experiences, something that apart from the gross commonalities is unique to every human being.

posted by Wanderer on Mar 31, 2008 at 07:15 AM

 People aren't "supposed" to believe anything in particular. Almost every religion, as part of its creed, dismisses others, or at minimum claims to be a "new and improved" version of another, as a means to establishing itself as the "one true religion" or one "correct "belief system. These ubiquitous and conflicting appropriations of "truth" cancel each other out, and leave us all searching for what jibes most closely with our own experience.

Were there a clear and universal answer to the question Clara Bow posed, "What are we supposed to believe?", all would be united in faith. We are not, and I argue that is a good thing. I propose that we are "supposed to" believe what gets us, as individuals, through our days and nights, what works to keep us in harmony with society, ourselves, and other individuals. The wide range of backgrounds, experiences, and even genetic inclinations within the whole of man creates a diversity of beliefs. That diversity of belief, much like the wider world of nature, produces a balance, a "survival of the fittest" process of selection leads to some mainstream faiths, and some fringe faiths that meet the needs of only a relative few men.

Our individual spiritual and internal beliefs are one thing, and our actions are another. The validity of that belief stops at each of our fingertips, and we have no right to impose it, or legal constraints based on our belief, on others. We all are obliged to follow a universal standard of tolerance with regard to thought, but not to action. Legal systems are in place (although constantly shifting) to ensure that we show appropriate respect for the rights of others. The only religions of which societies are generally intolerant are those that abridge the freedoms of others, or those that consistently put the individual in conflict with society.

(It's interesting that Terryeo is posting here, advocating for Scientology. Please note that Terryeo works on behalf of the Church of Scientology, searching for internet postings that mention the word "Scientology" and adding comments whenever possible. This side note is in no personal attack, but context and background verifiable with a simple Google search of the username.)

It's an academic argument, but the current conflicts between society and some religions are interesting studies in the conflict between belief systems that abridge freedom, and society at large. The conflict seems to be based on how any given religion treats infidels, non-believers, and those who reject it. The more hostile the religion, the more opposition it faces. No belief system can long survive conflict with all other belief systems as well as civil authorities. Islam is under some pressure to define the way its beliefs are to be translated into action so that others can decide whether or not to be tolerant of it. Aggression in a religion is frowned upon, and can cause it to be targeted for exclusion from general tolerance strictures.

Scientology is also coming under pressure because of its extremely aggressive nature. The conflict has begun in earnest only recently with Scientology, as society has become increasingly aware of the foundational writings that underlie it, and which are threatening and aggressive toward society and other religions. Its belief system is under pressure from all directions. Within it lies a fundamental destructive us/them ideology that has caused all other belief systems to reject it as predatory, and not playing by the rules, and terroristic. It seems the "kings of the jungle" of the natural system of diverse beliefs -- Christian, Jew, Muslim, atheist, agnostic, and many, many more --  is uniting to oppose the one predator.

Thank you for this thoughtful essay, and for entertaining my musings in response to it!

posted by Terryeo on Mar 31, 2008 at 08:31 AM

 Wanderer states: "... Within it (Scientology) lies a fundamental destructive us/them ideology".  False.  You're simply mistaken about that datum.  Have a nice day.


1

Leave a Comment
Ground Rules for posting comments:
  • No profanity or personal attacks.
  • Please comment on the subject of the post itself.
If you do not follow these rules we will remove your comment. Please keep it civil.

To protect users from spam, please enter the text from the image on the left.