'Religion' what is it?

[[Syl]]

I'm a little bit rusty, so maybe MsMary can back me up, but some amplifying info...

The word messiah derives from the Hebrew Mashiah (guttural h like in loch), translating directly to "annointed one" with the mem shin het (M S H) root meaning ointment, one who has had ointment smeared on them, which in Judaism is a way of blessing or making holy. Indeed, l'kadesh is another way to say "to anoint" and is synonymous with "to bless, purify, make holy, etc."

[Fist and Faith]

...this morning, (should never have peeked at the forum), but I just have to throw out a couple of responses.

Well, you did say you have questions on "many controversial topics," so I imagine you'll be looking in from time to time.

I find it sad that most people know so little about what they themselves believe, regardless of whether they claim to believe the teachings of Jesus or Gandhi or Buddhism or science. Instead of concentrating on what they personally believe and truly trying to live up to that standard, they turn on others and pick at them for faults in their belief systems.

This sounds like something from Conversations With God:

Now the supreme irony here is that you have all placed so much importance on the Word of God, and so little on the experience.
In fact, you place so little value on experience that when what you experience of God differs from what you've heard of God, you automatically discard the experience and own the words, when it should be just the other way around.
Your experience and your feelings about a thing represent what you factually and intuitively know about that thing. Words can only seek to symbolize what you know, and can often confuse what you know.

I would expect you to either disagree with this, or to say that if you truly experience God, it will not contradict the Bible.

I am going to include a rather lengthy quote from C.S. Lewis, because I would like to know how you (and anyone who wants to) would respond to it:

It's a good quote - if you're a Christian. What I mean is that it's not a convincing argument if you don't already believe that the Bible is an accurate record of what happened and what was said back then. It seems like a good argument if you believe the truth of the Bible in the first place. But then, if you believe it in the first place, you don't need Lewis' words.

[caamora]

I haven't read the other posts yet, but I wanted to reply to F&F.

Exactly!! Fist & Faith - you hit it on the head! The conclusions that these scientists came up with were weak at best! My memory of this show is very accurate however, because it was so startlling what these scientists were saying. They really did claim that the two skulls (by some sort of chemical test) were within 1,000 years apart. And the measuring of the skulls was just the cheekbones. Unbelieveable. Makes me

[Skyweir]

A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell.

lols .. hilariously astute and not to be outdone by the facetious assertion that Christs claim to be God is an expression of 'asinine fatuity' .. my god that man could write!!

the discussion seems to have desolved somewhat into the 2-camp system .. regrettably ..

you know .. the christian vs the rest of humanity clash of titans ..

I prefer discussions of religion to be more broadly based explorations .. that do not categorise the debate into christian vs non-christian camps. Like exploring universal truths .. [and no I do not mean universally accepted or voted on truths] .. quasi absolutisms I guess .. that can be discerned from the existence of humanity and from the universe we exist within .. as interconnected beings all part of a much larger universal socio-planetary/eco-system .. <I made that up but its close to what I think .. I think

A look at religion .. not being divided into the narrower sense of the word .. as in 'religions' .. but the broader sense .. as in the latin definition that HC first profferred .. A look at what fundamental concepts unite and a closer examination at that nexus. Not suitable for those who just want to rag the thoughts and belief systems of others .. but for those who truly want to discover previously unheld notions .. being genuinely open minded to all possible view points.

But whatever .. if this is not your preference then I will throw in my 2 cents with the rest of you regarding this lower level exploration .

Now the supreme irony here is that you have all placed so much importance on the Word of God, and so little on the experience.
In fact, you place so little value on experience that when what you experience of God differs from what you've heard of God, you automatically discard the experience and own the words, when it should be just the other way around.
Your experience and your feelings about a thing represent what you factually and intuitively know about that thing. Words can only seek to symbolize what you know, and can often confuse what you know.

I find this amazingly astute .. the harsh conflict between dogma and personal experience ..

Many Christians are the most scrupulous, valiant soldiers of their holy faith, and I'm sure just as their zealous fanaticism drives them, they must recognize the gas behind their driving force: the feeling like the floor below them is only held up by the will of God--that they're close to damnation, and they're inherently damnable creatures, and they're only here because God wills them to be! I mean, isn't that "crazy", if you want to call what Jesus thought crazy? I'm bad at articulating this point, so just look at it as simply as I can stress it:

Jesus thought he was the son of God. A good person thinks he might go to hell. Do you see how it's possible for us to think something just as radical as Jesus did?

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here LF .. can you try and explain it again please?

so called self-labelled 'Christians' are no more valiant and scrupulous or resolute than zealous muslim soldiers for their faith .. infact I would hazard a guess that fanatic radical muslim zealots are more resolute in their faith .. but thats just a sweeping generalised guesstimate

I would be concerned by thinking that followers of religion are soley driven by their fear of damnation .. I think this is an unfairly narrow view .. and I think even in religion there is a system of reward that many aspire to ..

Thats interesting the claim that followers of religion believe that they only exist because God wants them to .. this makes god a whimsical creature .. who enacts his will on the basis of his personal whims.

I am of the arguable opinion that worlds exist because of a larger imperative that God is a part of .. that worlds are organised that the system of the Universe is perpetuated .. but I digress

Why would it the definition of a good person be .. one who thinks he might go to hell???

that sounds like a narrow vision indeed .. what is good in such thinking?

I am not aware of doctrine or dogma that supports this rationale? it may exist but it is reprehensible in the extreme .. to promote such a limiting and negative life-ethos

[Worm of Despite]

I don't support it, but others think that way--at least the freaking Puritans of old did. I'm sure there are still some diehards out there that preached like they did back then, all, "The floor below is only held up by the will of God." Read Sinners in the Hand of an Angry God or something like that. Not sure about the exact title, but the preacher made members of the audience cry out and scream and run from the church in fear of hell. That's what I was talking about, Sky.

I was just saying how folks go, "Oh, oh! How did Jesus think what he did, or do what he did?" When people do the same stuff all the time, in a sense. Anyway, maybe it is unfair, but I still believe there'd be a drastic change in the number of believers if there were no fear of hell. Hell, it seems to me, is the clincher--the buying point for a lot of Christians, and the selling point for many preachers.

I think even in religion there is a system of reward that many aspire to.

Well, if you think that, why not think there's a system of punishment they aspire to run from? Hell and other such eternal damnations are big factors in the success of religions. Got to give people a reason to believe, so what's better than getting people to bend the knee if you go, "This is the Word--all who deny it shall go to hell!" Don't call 'em "God-fearing" for nothing!

Look, what I'm saying is probably just as bigoted as Archie Bunker is. I’m the "Bunker" of atheists one might venture. I'm from the south, so having an open mind is sorta canceled out right there. Maybe I'm just a narrow-minded idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about, and, if that's the case, let it be a warning to you all that there are folks just as conservative and uptight on the "other" side of the religious field.

[[Syl]]

Just for S&G, there's a documented effect called the Jerusalem Syndrome (I know, sounds like a bad christian sci-fi film starring Casper van Dien). I guess every year in Jerusalem handfuls of tourists are overcome with the idea that they're Jesus or Mary or whatever. From what I hear, it happens to the non-religious as well. I guess it's like a hypnotist's trick; doesn't last too long and the people usually don't remember it.

See that's the thing that always got me about Jesus in the bible. All through the whole thing he answers questions about who he is or what his purpose is rather cryptically. It is only when he comes to Jerusalem for the last time does he seem to make a dramatic change. Not only does he change from "turn the other cheek" to "I come not with the olive branch but the sword" he finally says to Peter (I believe), "I am The Christ." Then Peter runs off, spreads the word... a few days later... well.

From Illusions - Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah by Richard Bach

Remember where you came from, where you are going, and why you created the mess you got yourself into in the first place. You're going to die a horrible death, remember. It's all good training, and you'll enjoy it more if you keep the facts in mind.
Take your dying with some serious, however. Laughing on the way to your execution is not generally understood by less-advanced life-forms, and they'll call you crazy."
- Richard Bach, Illusions

[Fist and Faith]

I prefer discussions of religion to be more broadly based explorations .. that do not categorise the debate into christian vs non-christian camps. Like exploring universal truths .. [and no I do not mean universally accepted or voted on truths] .. quasi absolutisms I guess .. that can be discerned from the existence of humanity and from the universe we exist within .. as interconnected beings all part of a much larger universal socio-planetary/eco-system .. <I made that up but its close to what I think .. I think

A look at religion .. not being divided into the narrower sense of the word .. as in 'religions' .. but the broader sense .. as in the latin definition that HC first profferred .. A look at what fundamental concepts unite and a closer examination at that nexus.

Have you ever seen my post on the first page of this thread? Richard Bach's Illusions also has some good ideas of the universality of religious thought.

I just gave one quote from Conversations with God, and here's another:

The great teachers of your Christian religion understood this. They know that Jesus was not perturbed by the crucifixion, but expected it. He could have walked away, but he did not. He could have stopped the process at any point. He had that power. Yet he did not. He allowed himself to be crucified in order that he might stand as man's eternal salvation. Look, he said, at what I can do. Look at what is true. And know that these things, and more, shall you also do. For have I not said ye are gods? Yet you do not believe. If you cannot, then, believe in yourself, believe in me.

As I've said, I don't actually believe any of these quotes. But this is the type of attitude that I wish everyone of religion had. Not so many reasons to kill each other.

[Fist and Faith]

*sigh* double post. Can I delete a post? Oh well, at least I edited out everything, so you're not reading the same thing twice

[Skyweir]

Look, what I'm saying is probably just as bigoted as Archie Bunker is. I’m the "Bunker" of atheists one might venture.

.

I dont hold with this view at all .. I do believe however that for this thread to be positive that curbing negative statements is advisable. I was not raggin' yer statments but actually genuinely wanting to get a handle on what you meant. Somethings like speaking of 'christians' generally as being soley motivated by a fear of hell/damnation is a limited conception imho .. and I agree with you .. for some punishment as an incentive, but not the only incentive .. just as many followers of religion are also motivated by love and the desire of bettering themselves that they can earn the highest of rewards .. a higher consciousness/an after-life with God.

I'm from the south, so having an open mind is sorta canceled out right there.

thats too easy .. as TC would say ..

When I speak of a narrow view or assessment .. I am not personally labelling you narrow minded .. I do not believe you are .. even though you feigned your inability to be anything else.

A view can be broad or narrow .. moderate or radical .. liberal .. conservative .. traditional .. imho a narrow view in any topic limits the scope of the topic by imposing confined parameters.

Now I understand that historically you were speaking of the oppressive measures imposed on citizens by the use and misuse of dogma .. and a total lack of understanding of elementary principles.

let it be a warning to you all that there are folks just as conservative and uptight on the "other" side of the religious field.

regrettably that is true .. on both sides of the equasion. There will always be some people who are over zealous .. arrogant and even bordering on evil .. in their pro/anti -religous views.

All through the whole thing he answers questions about who he is or what his purpose is rather cryptically

.

and he usually prefaced or post notated his cryptic usage with words like .. 'those who have ears will hear' .. and those who have eyes will see ..

Remembering that for Jesus he was a member of the jewish community .. born with a geneological line connecting him to the house of David a noble line but he, himself .. was intrinsically a nobody .. a carpenters son. He was at the lower end of the social heirarchy. At the inception of his socially vocal life .. he did not toe the party/religous line .. as was expected of him/all citizens .. he stood firmly in opposition.

His cryptic .. imho .. was a guarded way of expressing his revolutionary views much earlier on in his public life ..

In a time where a life for a life .. and stoning for offences .. punishment for walking more than the established allowable steps for the Sabbath .. etc .. He was acutely aware that no matter how openly he expressed himself .. there would be some who just would refuse to entertain liberal views on the basis of nothing more than principle and a desire to adhere to tradition and convention.

It was a dangerous agenda to challenge the establishment .. as it is at any time. The comment you quoted syl isnt at the end of the days of Jesus but formed part of his instruction to his apostles .. all of them .. before commissioning them to teach .. in this lengthy speech he explains that his views are revolutionary .. that they will divide from the masses the believers from the non-believers .. He is not literally speaking of slaying with the sword those who do not believe .. but regrettably i guess there may be some radical fundamentalist faction somewhere that could take that mal-interpretative view ..

imho .. reading the New Testament .. though .. is not at all difficult to comprehend.

Pure Christian ethos is as sound and inspired as any other ethos proferred by Buddism or Islam or any new age conception imho.

anything that imbues humankind with a desire to attain character refining goals, that promote the concept of neighbourly love .. having regard of the poor .. the needy .. the widow .. the dangers of materialism .. judgementalism .. and not neglecting the need for peace etc .. ..are all worthy pursuits imho ..

[Brinn]

Well said Sky! I'm enjoying this discussion immensely...It's rare that you find a discussion on religion that does not devolve into flames and rock throwing. All of the talking points that I've read on this post are intriguing. Kudos to all you contributors! Hopefully this will keep going...I'm just not ready to jump in quite yet.

P.S.
Just a question...Do the fundamental tenets of religions speak to universal human aspirations (e.g. charity, generousity, love of fellow human beings, eschewal of violence, tolerance etc...) or are they more specific? Are these aspirations universal at all?

[Guest]

soley motivated

No, Sky, I never said Christians are soley motivated by their fear of hell . . . or did I? I'm just saying it's a big factor, and hell's been in on the Christian scene for so long, we just don't know it. But, it's like a person who is dependent on the trappings of money and society--remove it and they're like babes in the woods. Without the threat of hell, seems to me that religion is kind of a babe in the woods. It needs to have a bad place in opposition to the good place. A little masochism just seems natural for religion.

This is Foul on a school comp, by the way.

And why's it too easy to admit I might be narrow-minded? There are folks in the world that are, you know, and Georgia's a bee hive of them! I'm a Republican, for jeeper's sake. Look, I'm no Saint, and nobody else is. People that really believe in something are like boulders--can't move their views!

[Skyweir]

lols Foul!!

hell's been in on the Christian scene for so long

i guess so. I personally do not ascribe to hell fire and damnation concepts. I think we make our own personal hell .. I dont envisage an actual place where coals and fires burn for eternity. I really dont understand where that comes from.

And I think .. the more loose concept of 'hell' is not only a christian one ..

religion is kind of a babe in the woods. It needs to have a bad place in opposition to the good place. A little masochism just seems natural for religion

.
I'm not sure what kind of religion we are talking here? religion in its broad sense?

The purest form of 'religion' is LOVE .. I think 'religion' ofcourse, can be interpreted at a lower level .. by lets say .. charletans .. who seek to harnass the concept of 'religion' and confine it within strict unyielding manacles.

This is your criticism .. and maybe your experience *shrug* which may have coloured your view of 'religion' .. but this is not truly 'religion' ..

Religion is a man-made concept .. based on a higher ideal .. leading to a higher consciousness .. a purer soul. Those who seek this end are those motivated by the true essence of 'religion' which is 'love' .. not fear or hate or self-righteous vindication for efforts made.

And why's it too easy to admit I might be narrow-minded?

because I dont believe you are *shrug* .. and I dont believe you believe you are ..

................ and I know you know I know you know I know this is not the case:|

For have I not said ye are gods? Yet you do not believe. If you cannot, then, believe in yourself, believe in me

I cant believe I missed this .. this really resonnates with me F&F .. there are so many pieces of the puzzle/the grand plan/the purpose of life .. and the universe .. here on this planet ..

No one has all the pieces .. but they can be gathered and gleaned from all the knowledge that exists .. and who knows we can even learn something.

Something wonderful!!

[Fist and Faith]

Just for S&G

I just got it!!

[Worm of Despite]

................ and I know you know I know you know I know this is not the case:|

So religion's "love", perhaps, but that's not the whole cigar. I mean, is racism just "hate", or can it also be "misunderstanding", or "how one was raised", or "character flaw", or "frustration over your own life taken out on 'the others' ", or "location, location, location [the South]"? Or is it a melting pot of historical indifferences and ignorance and misconceptions boiled down? Or instead of boiled down it's fleshed out to comic proportions? Geez, I need to slow my roll . . .

All I’m saying is that I’m pretty sure everything’s broad and nothing’s pure.

If religion were pure love, there'd be no problems in it, no corruption within it, or hypocrisy around it. Just like everything else!

Heh, maybe religion is love, or maybe it's just a really big, varied puzzle piece in the conundrum that is the human experience? Like I once said, humanity is everything, and religion is the human race's collective attempt to make the best of everything, of it all.

[Skyweir]

If religion were pure love, there'd be no problems in it, no corruption within it, or hypocrisy around it. Just like everything else!

wouldnt that be just dandy?? .. but you see .. when you factor the human element into the interpretive equation .. well any mix .. you get all sorts of takes on 'religion'.

But 'religion' to me is a study involving the consciousness .. for want of a better word .. the pursuit of humanity in its purest form .. not a pursuit to be human .. we already are human .. what does it benefit for us to perpetuate and refine .. 'natural human instinct or tendencies' like self-interest .. the drive to satiate physical need .. we already do this - instinctively .. without commencing a journey of universal/self-discovery or what have you

religion surely must offer more than the base functions we already access .. it surely is derived of something substantive that enables us to develop those areas we dont necessarily exercise freely .. like self-sacrifice .. meditation and deliberation .. being aware of and responsible for our actions and emotions .. the consideration of consequences .. truly being in control of who we are .. and not being dictated to by physical needs or desires ..

Institutions and individuals may take a route where the focus is as that of the pharisees and the sadducees .. where rule and dogma confines and controls and contorts any real pursuit of 'religion' .. but it ultimately has to be an individual pursuit.

No one can achieve these higher character traits that lead to wisdom, intelligence and life .. without change and no doubt effort ..

If you simply look around and say .. look at all those hypocrits .. attending church every sunday just so they look good .. or their piosity intended just to enable them to look down their noses at everyone else ..

then both you and they .. miss the point entirely .. and neither pursues the essence of 'religion' .. or more accurately .. neither achieves enlightenment ..

its not about lovy dovey nonsense .. pretentious forms of love .. or anything akin to these concepts that is sought ..

there is no change .. or reward in hypocrisy or vanity .. in relation to the kind of pursuit I am interested in ..

YOu are right .. no one is perfect .. no one! Those who make the genuine attempt to attain a more enlightened state .. even if it is within a pursuit to be more like God .. or gods .. then this pursuit is a thing of substance ..

If we just want to christian bash - bible bash - muslim bash - buddist bash - there will be no end to the criticism's we can raise .. if you look for fault - you will never be disappointed ..

wherever people are .. there will always be those who disappoint.

But there will always also be those who dont .. Nevertheless .. no one is perfect .. but that doesnt mean that no one can try to better themselves either.

Hence a broader view of 'religion' can teach arguably more about its true essence than a critical overview of how poorly individuals adhere to their adopted dogma.

ok i'm not making much sense now .. got to go and get some sleep

[duchess of malfi]

Just wanted to bump this, as it might be one of the finest discussions we've ever had on religion here at the Watch. An oldie and goodie.

[Worm of Despite]

Ah, a portrait of myself in my more cynical days.

[Revan]

heh, and you have not changed one bit

[Worm of Despite]

So Sky, up for some religious discussion?

Let's find something to disagree on. Gimme a list of your beliefs and I'll pick the top three.

[theDespiser]

its an easy way for people to explain things that they dont understand
and amid those explanations there are set rules/guidelines that tell people how to act and what will happen if they dont act a certain way


i dont find all religions to be bad...buddhism is a respectable religion,and it doesnt insist on making people worship a god or anything...

Odinism is another respectable religion...it has its own set of gods, but theyre more examples and more akin to humans than gods...