BLOG PARTY INQUIRY QUESTION!!!!!!!

Have you ever wondered why religious text is considered to be so sacred? Why so many people follow what is written and never seem to question the words? I have wondered this for so many years. So my question is simply this: What is it about the religious text that automatically means that is is holy or sacred? Do people take this as an exact account for their specific deity? Does anyone stop to question any of the words written, or wonder why they were written in the first place? This interested me so much that I decided to look for some answers.

We can all think of many sacred texts like The Holy Bible, The Qur'an, Mahayana Sutras, and even The Torah. Each of the religions that worship these texts all have reasons for doing so. Many people believe that these texts were written through someone as a message from that deity. But does anyone ever stop and wonder if what was written is the truth, or has it gotten a little diluted throughout the years? We can see how many people will object entirely, and wonder why I would ever pose this question. Many people have unwavering faith and would never question that, and I'm not saying that they should; however I do find it so intriguing that these questions don't come up more often. In our text for this class I came across a poem by Alfred, Lord Tennyson called Flower in the Crannied Wall (Kennedy, Tennyson, 503). This is the poem:
Flower in the crannied wall,
I pluck you out of the crannies,
I hold you here, root and all, in my hand,
Little flower--but if I could understand
What you are, root and all, an all in all,
I should know what God and man is.
This poem poses the question about God, not the scripture or text, and I find that with the author wanting to know "what God and man is" shows that even with these sacred texts in hand there are still people who wonder. We begin to wonder who is God, or whomever your deity is, and that we want to know them personally, not just through text and lectures.

With all the hype about needing to read the scriptures and follow what the sacred texts say, what about God himself? Do people get so caught up in following their texts, that in turn they forget what it is that encourages their faith? I personally think that this happens all too often, and more so than people want to admit. It is easy to get caught up in written words, and forget the purpose behind them, or whom you really worship. An article I recently read proved this exact point. It was entitled "Biblicism: Protestantims's Distinctive Form of Idolatry" by Paul E. Capetz. Capetz shared his story as a Reverend in a Protestant church whom happened to also be a gay man. After his fellow ministers found out his sexual orientation they decided to take away his leadership and have a sort of vote on whether or not he should stay ordained. The people involved in the vote consisted of both women and men, and each of these people consistently said, "But the Bible says..." and "the clear teaching of scripture." Capetz tried to make his point that at one time women did not have a say, but yet they kept on fighting for their rights as equal individuals and now they are treated as such, so therefore being gay is no different a situation. As I read on, I realized just how easy it is to get caught up in the sacred text and forget the person who you truly worship. Capetz makes a great argument for this, "God alone is to be worshipped, not the Bible." This is why I wonder why people put so much stock into scripture and sacred text, wouldn't the protestant God still love Capetz regardless of his sexual orientation? This question may be up to your own personal views, but being as I am a former Christian, I don't think God would condemn him for that.

One thing I have found in my research is that many religious texts are regarded as teachings and ways to stick with traditions from long ago. Yes, I do agree that sacred texts are a way to teach people and to learn from. But sometimes, it can go too far...at least in my opinion. I found an article that gave some insight as to sacred texts as a teaching instrument and thought it was quite interesting. The article "What is Scripture" by Steven G. Smith, argues that sacred texts teach young children the ways of life in their culture and also the traditions that come along. Smith says, "A scripture is not merely a record to be consulted at need; a community maintains a scripture in force as a teaching, an obligatory touchstone for religious thinking, whether or not customs, decisions, or experiences enjoy this status in the community also." Here is where I feel that things tend to get taken too far, if it is not enjoyed to believe in the sacred text, would your deity truly want you to regard them so highly? I understand teaching people how to act, and how to maintain their faiths, but is the scripture becoming too much? Smith again, only proves my point of scripture being taken way too far, "acknowledging scripture as a supreme authority rules out ignoring it or flatly disagreeing with it." I am not saying that scriptures or sacred texts are wrong or even bad, but I do think that many people lose sight of what it is that they worship or truly believe.

As we can see there are many reasons that people put such stock into religious text, and there is nothing wrong with valuing those beliefs. I, however, must say that I think it gets to a point where people begin to forget what they believe or whom they do worship. I think that many people do question what is written, but cannot say that due to the fear of punishment or becoming an outcast. I am glad I was able to get some of my questions answered, but I realize that most of them are personal and many people do not want to share their beliefs or criticism towards other religious texts.

But....for those of you who would like to share, here is a question for you:
Do you think that religious or sacred texts end up being the object of worship, instead of the God or deity? Do you think people stop to ponder what is written, or do they take those words as truth without any question or unwavering faith?

Freestyle #5

A few months back I had the pleasure of reading, for the second time, New Moon. (I figured I hadn't written a blog yet about one of my favorites as of late, so it was due.) My favorite part of this book is when the main characters, Bella and Edward, break up. If you haven't read this(which would be terribly sad) then you would know that Bella is so in love with Edward that she would do absolutely anything for him, and that he is also just as crazy about her. However, Edward is a vampire and Bella is just a human, so you can see some of the tension there. The line that gets me most worked up is when Edward says, "You can go on with your life without any more interference from me. It will be as if I'd never existed" (pg. 71). First off, this is so sad! Why would he do this to her, he claims it's for the sake of her living a normal life, but he didn't need to be so cold. And then, do men really think that by saying "if I'd never existed" will make a break up any easier? NO! It just makes it that much harder to know that they don't want to remember you. This is the most important part of the book, it sets up the rest of the plot and also puts that dark foreshadowing on the following chapters. It may be morbid, but I find something truly fascinating about this scene. It's much more than just his line, and it brings me back to those moments when I had to deal with break ups...glad I'm married now! But I really think that this line does show how much Edward cares for Bella, even though he's leaving her. He wanted her to still be happy without him. Despite it being a break up, people don't just stop caring that fast, and it shows in this part of the book.

Scene Response--"Othello" Branaugh and Fishbourne

I viewed act 4, scene 1 on youtube.com from the movie Othello with Kenneth Branaugh and Lawrence Fishbourne. It was the scene where Othello slaps Desdemona across the face because he is upset with her. Everyone is appalled by his actions, but no one tells his he is wrong. I think that is strange, especially considering that she is a woman. It's also interesting that Othello doesn't believe her when she says she's confused as to why he is mad. After slapping her, he doesn't even seem to have any remorse for his actions. It's sad that as much as he claimed to love her, he could still her hurt her. I think the actors portrayed what Shakespeare was trying to get across in this scene, deceit and anger. This scene is particularly important because it shows how far Othello has come from the beginning of the play, that he is no longer the person Desdemona thought he was. Truly a sad scene...

Quote Response #9

Again while reading Othello, I found another interesting line. It's right after Othello stabs Iago. Othello:"I am not sorry neither. I'd have thee live; For in my sense, 'tis happiness to die" (5.2, 285-6). I think that it's odd and quite intriguing that Othello equates happiness with dying. Maybe it is because of all the terrible things that has happened to him? And that is probably the case, but it just seems so sad that he feels that there is no hope left for him. Could he not start fresh? Or would everything just follow him elsewhere? Throughout the course of the play I just want to tell Othello to not listen to the lies that Iago tells him. But this is why it's called a tragedy, there is nothing we can do and we just have to sit back and watch it all unfold.

Freestyle #4

I was reading my favorite magazine, Cosmopolitan, and came across and interesting article. It was entitled "I Tried a Juice-Only Detox. And Yes, I'm Starving," by Jake Hurwitz, it was about a man who didn't understand why his girlfriend did such crazy things in order to stay healthy and look good. There were two sentences I found interesting, and very funny. The first was "But that day at lunch, I wanted to punch him in the face and steal his sandwich." He was talking about how his friend was eating a Philly cheese steak sandwich for lunch and that all could think about was ripping it out of his hands because he was so hungry. The second was "And from now on, I won't just tell her she's pretty. I'll tell her she's damn hot, because she is, and the stuff she goes through to feel good and healthy is hard."I think its important that not only did he write about how hard it was for him to go through with the Detox, but he also made that distinct connection with his girlfriend. He acknowledged her, and I find that to be the most important part of the article. He gained new respect for his girlfriend and actually understood her better. If only all men could do this...a walk in our shoes for one day...ah yes.

Quote Response #8

While reading Shakespeare's play Othello there was one monologue that really caught my attention. Desdemona is speaking: "My noble father, I do perceive here a divided duty. To you I am bound for life and education; My life and education both do learn me How to respect you. You are the lord of duty, I am hitherto your daughter. But here's my husband, And so much duty as my mother showed To you, preferring you before her father, So much I challenge that I may profess Due to the Moor my lord" (1.3, 179-187). I found that saying this to her father carried a heavy weight. I also think that it was important that Desdemona did say this because everyone needs to know that Othello is not just the Moor, he is her husband. I think this was also her way of asking people to respect their marriage and to accept that it won't change. It interesting to me that even in Shakespeare's time these things were happening. That so much hatred went to the "underdogs." I also think that this shows just how important women were then, that Desdemona had the courage to say something shows the audience that women too have things to say and that they should be respected as equal individuals.

Quote Response #7--Trifles

For my lit class I needed to read a short play by Susan Glaspell called Trifles. I enjoyed the play and also found it very intriguing. I liked that the women were on their own little mission and ended up finding more than the men did. One part I particularly found interesting was when the women found the bird. Mrs. Hale: "But, Mrs. Peters--look at it! It's neck! Look at its neck! Its all--other side too." Mrs. Peters: "Somebody--wrung--its--neck." I still have figured out what "other side too" means and I'm a little lost as to why John Wright would have killed the bird. Was it to make his wife upset? Did he not want her to be happy, so that is why Minnie Foster killed her husband? I just feel like there are many questions that haven't been answered. And then another quote I found interesting was (when they are explaining the events in the play): "Suddenly Mrs. Peters throws back quilt pieces and tried to put the box in the bag she is wearing. It is too big. She opens the box, starts to take the bird out, cannot touch it, goes to pieces, stands there helpless. Sound of a knob turning in the other room. Mrs. Hale snatches the box and puts it in the pocket of her big coat." Why did the women feel that it was necessary to take the dead bird? Are they going to bury it or take it to Minne Foster in jail? I'm not quite sure what the significance of the bird is, but I find it very interesting that the women would not let it go.

Scene Response--"O"

First of all, I enjoyed this movie and this take on Shakespeare's Othello, it was modern and a little more interesting than the play. One scene that really jumped out at me was the scene when Hugo was asked to go to the Duke's office (his father) and have dinner with him. You could see that Hugo was excited and thought maybe his dad was interested in him and wanted to have a bonding moment, but then the Duke consistently spoke about Odin, and kept asking Hugo what was going on with him. Then after a few moments the Duke left Hugo to eat alone. This is precisely why Hugo did what he did. He only wanted his dad to regard him with that much respect, and he knew that if he got the "fame" from killing people, he would get the attention he deeply wanted. I find it sad, that the Duke didn't see all this. I think that if he had, Hugo would probably have gotten over his jealousy and then dealt with everything much better. I think this scene is important because it gives a good look into the relationship that Hugo and his father have, and also it shows the audience what causes Hugo to feel the way he does. Hugo only wants to be just as important as Odin, especially to his father.

Freestyle #3

In Marjane Satrapi's Persepolis there were many parts I found extraordinary. I found it extremely interesting that a 10 year old wanted to be a part of the revolution even though she didn't understand exactly what was going on. I think that it shows how strong of a person that Marji was, she seemed to be the one who pulled her family together when things weren't going well. I just liked how much Marji wanted to be a par of everything, it proves to me that children understand when things aren't going well, even if they don't understand the reason behind it. I think her writing of Persepolis opened my eyes to a lot of the issues in Iran, and also the fact that children are aware of what's going on on around them.

Quote Response #6

When I read Marjane Satrapi's Persepolis there w ere a few lines that really popped out to me. One in particular was "I didn't know what the justice was. Now that the revolution was finally over once and for all...The only place I felt safe was in the arms of my friend [God]." I think this quote is important because it shows how much everything effects children. Even though they don't understand entirely, children still have a sense of all of the events around them. I also find it significant that the "friend" Marji talks about is God, I this plays an important role in her experience and then later we find that she decides to not want him in her life. It's these experiences for children that cause them to have everlasting feelings toward certain people. I also think that her calling God a friend is important, maybe if her whole family had thought of him that way, they could have gotten through the revolution a little easier. I just find that many of the thoughts she had as a child were very far from immature, it's interesting to me how this can be so different in another country. Ours often isn't like that.