離教者之家

UU 運動 (Unitarian Universalism)

1 [2] [3] >>
liberale 07/4/9 23:02
【火柴按:刪網址】

各位朋友:

容讓小弟冒昧在此介紹一個在香港比較少人認識的宗教運動。

可能每個人一生或多或少都會找尋人生意義、人從何來、為何而活、死後歸宿等問題。此類問題可歸類為宗教性的問題。現代世界是一個宗教多元化的世界,不同宗教在社會並存,為以上的人生大問題建議不同的答案。其中有一個宗教運動比較特別,她稱為 UU 運動 (Unitarian Universalism) 。她特別之處在於鼓勵人自由地探索信仰,無論是無神論或有神論,佛教或基督教,她不會要求您接受某一套既定的人生答案。適逢美國 UU 聯會 (Unitarian Universalist Association) 的網頁全面更新,為希望認識 UU 運動的朋友增添不少方便,所以在此向大家介紹,如有興趣了解 UU 運動,可以進入 ...,然後 click 入 "VISITORS" 便可瀏覽詳盡的入門資料。當中對一些常見的信仰觀念有簡明清晰的闡述,例如無神論 (atheism)、有神論 (theism)、佛教 (Buddhism)、及基督教 (Christianity) 等。

我本人的背景是基督教褔音派。後來由於遇到種種信仰上的困難,包括《聖經》(例如《創世記》、處女生子、復活) 與科學的矛盾、宗教多元化的現實 (慈悲的佛教徒怎可能下地獄)、教會對無辜同性戀者的打壓等,都促使我找尋更開明及更寬闊的信仰。我於十多年前接觸到 UU 運動,被她開明及包容的精神所吸引。她不強迫我接受不可信的教義,例如她不要求我相信神蹟,而且讓我自由探索無神論和佛教。更重要的是她不要求我放棄自己的基督信仰,甚至在她裡面有個基督徒團契 (Unitarian Universalist Christian Fellowship) (當然她也有佛教團契及人本主義小組)。雖然初步欣賞,但起初我也不敢對她太過信任,半信半疑,謹慎行事,只從則面作多角度的認識及長時間的觀察,尤其留意外界對該運動的客觀評價。後來漸漸了解到她是一個「正路」的大宗教運動,建基於自由、寬容、及理性,才放心投入。我目前認為她最適合我。我樂意向人介紹她,並非以為 UU 最好,不同的宗教適合不同的人,各適其式,我只是希望認同 UU 理念的人有機會與適合他的宗教運動相遇。

香港現在有第一個 UU 群體,稱為「尋道會」,網址是 ....。「尋道會」內的基督徒團契稱為「進思基督徒團契」(Progressive Christian Fellowship);無神論小組、人本主義小組、佛教小組等有待成立。

歡迎大家在這裡提出問題及意見,作進一步的討論與交流。多謝大家。

[ 本帖最後由 火柴 於 2007-4-10 14:57 編輯 ]
Step.King 07/4/9 23:13
這post 算是討論還是廣告???
匿名 07/4/10 01:21
兩樣皆是。希望大家多多提問,加強討論成份。多多包涵。
dye 07/4/10 09:43
My opinion is that it is not worth joining.  (I consider myself a secular humanist.)

<<我們這個充滿生命力的傳統源出於不同的源頭,包括:
1. 在不同的文化中,不約而同地都有著對超自然事物及終極實在的直接體認,這些經驗帶領我們的靈性得以更新及獲得存活的創造力及生命力;>>

Today science show us some are lies/fraud, some are fables, many are simply mistaken.

<<2. 先知及先賢的行為及格言鼓勵我們去以公義,憐憫及愛的力量抗衡邪惡的權力及制度;>>

Abraham tell us to kill his own child for God, Moses tell us to stone anyone who work on Saturday.  Joshua demonstrate to us what it meant to genocide.

<<3. 世界不同宗教的智慧啓導著我們去過道德及靈性的生活;>>

Inquisition?  Crusade?  Imprisoning scienist, opressing woman, slavery, etc...

Modern time, Israel -Palestine crisis?  The Ireland civil war?  Anti-science, etc...

<<4. 猶太教及基督教的教訓指導我們以愛人如己去回應神的愛;>>

Everyone with or without religion has that.  In fact, many has had that much earlier that Judaism and Christanity.

-----------------
Sorry to say, there are some like Grandhi (Hindu) that deserve respect, but there are other like Joshua (Christian) that deserve to be condemned.

Sometimes, it is only right to call a horse a horse.
Paul 07/4/10 09:56
各位請明鑑...

其實所謂的宗教包容, 說得清楚一點實為"妥協", 因為基督教若不是信耶穌從死裡復活及祂是獨一的真神的話, 那就不可算為"基督教"...

以討論基督教教義為主題的"團契", 卻以抽離的觀點去批判神, 根本不是基督教

引用:
我本人的背景是基督教褔音派。後來由於遇到種種信仰上的困難,包括《聖經》(例如《創世記》、處女生子、復活) 與科學的矛盾、宗教多元化的現實 (慈悲的佛教徒怎可能下地獄)、教會對無辜同性戀者的打壓等,都促使我找尋更開明及更寬闊的信仰

引用:
香港現在有第一個 UU 群體,稱為「尋道會」,網址是 http://ssshk.tripod.com 。「尋道會」內的基督徒團契稱為「進思基督徒團契」(Progressive Christian Fellowship);無神論小組、人本主義小組、佛教小組等有待成立。

那只是印度教的新紀元思潮所謂的合一~
dye 07/4/10 09:57
In a sense, when UU speak of "spiritual", it has an assumption of dualism.  Meanwhile, our neroscience has pointed a strong indication that we are monist.  That there is not "spirit" operating behind the "body".  Without a spirit, a person can't reallly grow spiritually.

A person can, however, be more mature, having more critical thinking skills, gather more information, cherish memories...etc

---------------------
Pick, for example  <找尋人生意義, 為何而活> can be a philosophical problem.  Many solution to the problem drew no reference to religion.  

<人從何來> Is a SCIENTIFIC problem.  We know evolution is the path (hence no defining line between human and other creatures, any 'scientific' religion will have to account for the human-ish ape and the ape-ish human.).  We suspect about abiogensis.  We can approximate the age of this universe.  We postulated the BIg Bang.  We are currently working on multiverse hypothesis...etc  

<死後歸宿> assume a dualist position.  If we are a monist, we vanish with our body, much like the software of a computer 'vanish' with the computer.

Rather, if you have your brain split in 2, and one side believe in one religion while the other believe in another, where will 'you' be going after death?  (A neroscientist once joke about it from a real case in his expereiment)

[ 本帖最後由 dye 於 2007-4-10 10:04 編輯 ]
Paul 07/4/10 10:06
Dye兄真是徹頭徹尾的反宗教主義?

<<3. 世界不同宗教的智慧啓導著我們去過道德及靈性的生活;>>

Inquisition?  Crusade?  Imprisoning scienist, opressing woman, slavery, etc...

Modern time, Israel -Palestine crisis?  The Ireland civil war?  Anti-science, etc...


我想這裡是有點偏激了一點兒, 始終宗教有影響道德, 道德規範導人向善是不可爭的事實... 雖然由宗教引起分爭在歷史也是鐵一般的事實
dye 07/4/10 10:15
According to study with Israel students, the reading of bible will lower their sense of morality towards genocide.

On the other hand, we have other study on mroality showing that religion has no effect on moral in adult.  

On the thrid, we have US study that religion (namely Christanity) is positively related to crime, both in frequency, and severity.

The data is inconclusive.

----
So, <<道德規範導人向善是不可爭的事實>> is simply not compatible with objective scientific study.

-----------
I am against non-sense and bullshit. (No offense to Shitshit)

If there is a religion that has less non sense and bullshit, I tend to be more "friendly" to it (like Budhism).

[ 本帖最後由 dye 於 2007-4-10 10:17 編輯 ]
匿名 07/4/10 10:37
數據是其中一樣可考慮的因素, 但不是事實的全部...

收集數據的方法, 揀的族群(你無可能全球人一齊統計掛?), 條件在環境的變異等, 都影響著數據對比真理反映的真確性~

我不信<<道德規範導人向善是不可爭的事實>>是錯的...  好簡單的是, 你睇下阿婆拜神時驚得罪神而唔犯罪及燒香, 偷野令良心受責備等, 唔需要數據, 你都知呢件事係活活出現在生活的事實
dye 07/4/10 10:46
<<我不信<<道德規範導人向善是不可爭的事實>>是錯的...  好簡單的是, 你睇下阿婆拜神時驚得罪神而唔犯罪及燒香, 偷野令良心受責備等, 唔需要數據, 你都知呢件事係活活出現在生活的事實>>

This is a poor statistical reasoning.  

What you need is a double blind study.  When the old lady do nor 拜神, you will probably find that she will behave the same.  (Something the US moral study is showing)

On the other hand, we need a statistic pool to allow for error.  We DID see old lady who worship some kind of God get into crime...

---
<<數據是其中一樣可考慮的因素, 但不是事實的全部...
收集數據的方法, 揀的族群(你無可能全球人一齊統計掛?), 條件在環境的變異等, 都影響著數據對比真理反映的真確性~ >>

We can have a meta study.  (Such as the one with religion negatively correlated with IQ/Education)  

That is why I would say it is inconclusive that religion did bad.  But it certainly against objective data that it did good.

If you truely believe it is a <<是不可爭的事實>>, please provide your data (should be simple if it is that obvious).  You even have The Templeton Fund Foundation (more money than Nobel Prize) as your financial backup.

-------------

Statistic (done correctly), is just detail recorded observation with some critical thinking.

[ 本帖最後由 dye 於 2007-4-10 11:04 編輯 ]
dye 07/4/10 10:55
Here is a bit of intereting thought.

Suppose to pick Chinese male over 30yr  in HK with income over HKD10k/yr for study.  You take your sample within only within this group and compare the non-theist with the theist in the group.

It is a small pool with selected features.

But if the effect is universal, it should not matter.  It will only matter only if
a) It has a different effect on male over female
b) It has a different effect in HK over other region
c) etc...

-----
Think of it this way, you are measuring the weight of a set of balls  in HK and comparing their weight with respect to each other.  take your sample within only within this group and compare the non-theist with the theist in the group.

If someone said "but you are only measuring it in HK and hence not accurate!"  He is implying that the gavitational force operating differntly in differnt region of the world!

(Note: Even if the person measure it on Mars, the COMPARATIVE weight will be the same because the example here happen to be univeral in the universe.)

------
Times Article, for your reading pleasure

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article571206.ece

[ 本帖最後由 dye 於 2007-4-10 11:14 編輯 ]
1 [2] [3] >>

返回首頁 | 登錄 | 註冊