reply
- Feature
- Like
I think a distinction needs to be made between religion and what is said about spirituality, science, art etc. I think, especially science, there is enough room for all of them. I believe both science and religion are asking completely different questions - science = how? religion = why? Are there can coexist.
reply
I think we need to define the difference between religion and dogma. Dogma is the rules that religious people set up and hold as absolute truths, religion is the ideas behind faith.
- Feature
- Like
I think we need to define the difference between religion and dogma. Dogma is the rules that religious people set up and hold as absolute truths, religion is the ideas behind faith.
Even dogma has it's value (I'll put it in the best metaphor I can). Say spirituality is a building, religion is the foundation, dogma is the scaffolding (makes building easier but should be removed once the building is done). Or you could say that spirituality is a tree, religion is the seed and dogma is the shell that protects the seed (water, earth, air and sun light would be experience/life).
The sad part is, this is how it should be not how it is. People hold on to dogma far longer than they should, it restrains and even corrupts the beautiful spirituality that should be flowing out of there religion.
reply
- Feature
- Like
Maybe religious THOUGHT is what needs to be destroyed. The pattern that is usually related to religious thought is that of acceptance without thought and inflexibility. There are individuals that have transcended this behavior, but I am thinking that those aren't the people we are talking about. The thing is though that you find this sort of mentality in ANY field or arena in life. So you can remove religion, but those people that need something "external" to follow will find something. It's in the nature of that habit. Perhaps this question is best answered with the 'feather reshaping the diamond moutain' analogy. We don't see the change because it happens so slowly. So best to free one's self from one's bindings... perhaps that is part of that feather fluffing away at that big ol' mountain! :)
reply
Not necessarily. Do we accept the fact that there will always be human beings alive at various evolutionary stages as it pertains to self-actualization? I think so, which means that religion may be necessary for some (not judging it as lower on the evolutionary scale than spirituality but acknowledging that religion in some instances stifles self-responsibility for some people). Religion, at its best, is designed to help man remember that he is god. This is the ultimate in self-responsibility, which is why many men settle for the rites and rituals of religion instead.
- Feature
- Like
Not necessarily. Do we accept the fact that there will always be human beings alive at various evolutionary stages as it pertains to self-actualization? I think so, which means that religion may be necessary for some (not judging it as lower on the evolutionary scale than spirituality but acknowledging that religion in some instances stifles self-responsibility for some people). Religion, at its best, is designed to help man remember that he is god. This is the ultimate in self-responsibility, which is why many men settle for the rites and rituals of religion instead.
Spirituality is often more boundless, giving humans an opportunity to grasp the spirit of religion without the dogma that it sometimes brings with it. I was raised Baptist, but now follow an Eastern spiritual path. And my religious upbringing was instrumental in setting me on the path to want to know god more intimately so both religion and spirituality have done right by me. I realize that is not necessarily the same experience for others.
reply
- Feature
- Like
What I find interesting are those who speak out against 'religion' while having their own point of view, yet without even realizing it they themselves are just as 'religious' in their views as those they condemn. Man's ways versus God.
reply
- Feature
- Like
religions not a big deal with the new generation anymore. so it's fine to have with whomever still believes it but theres definitely a new trend acoming
reply
Ditto on the last response, short answer is yes. Sam Harris has a lot to say about this in The Moral Landscape. Was just reading a quote of his yesterday that answers this better than I can.
- Feature
- Like
Ditto on the last response, short answer is yes. Sam Harris has a lot to say about this in The Moral Landscape. Was just reading a quote of his yesterday that answers this better than I can.
"No myth needs to be embraced for us to commune with the profundity of our circumstance. No personal God need be worshipped for us to live in awe at the beauty and immensity of creation. No tribal fictions need be rehearsed for us to realize, one fine day, that we do, in fact, love our neighbors, that our happiness is inextricable from their own, and that our interdependence demands that people everywhere be given the opportunity to flourish. The days of our religious identities are clearly numbered. Whether the days of civilization itself are numbered would seem to depend, rather too much, on how soon we realize this.” ~ Sam Harris, The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason ~
reply
SHORT ANSWER: YES.
- Feature
- Like
SHORT ANSWER: YES.
Spirituality has existed since time immemorial. Hundreds of thousands of different religions tried and still don't get it. If you listen to religious zealots, it's above you.
If you listen to yourself you'd know it's in you, it's all around you.
reply
There are two types of people: Those who believe Dogma and admit it and those who believe Dogma and deny it.
- Feature
- Like
There are two types of people: Those who believe Dogma and admit it and those who believe Dogma and deny it.
It has been said that Man is the only Religious (and Rational) animal on the planet. This is the entire purpose of the (rather new) field of Neurotheology - the study of the religious parts of the human brain.
It's built into us to be religious - hard wired. What would be the benefit of breaking away from that?
If you see religion as dogma disconnected from rational argument, then I would suggest that you dig deeper. Buddhism's 4 Noble Truths and Eightfold Path are a place to start. The Summa Theologica by Thomas Aquinas, or Confessions by Saint Augustine, or even the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
The goal is typically not to become more "spiritual" as we are inseparably body/spirit creatures. The goal of following any (sane) religion is to become more Holy.
Leaving the body to become "pure spirit" is not necessarily beneficial. Satan and Kali are pure spirits without material bodies. I don't hold them as role models.
reply
I think that religion has held an essential role in humanity up until this point in our development as a species. To begin with, religion has fostered the all-important social invention of the tribe by binding similarly-thinking people by their most essential beliefs. This not only has had obvious physical benefits, such as protection from danger and the sharing of resources, but it has helped us develop into the social beings that we are. As social beings, we benefit from sharing our deepest thoughts on life with others, and we have come to depend on close interpersonal relationships so much that it becomes a detriment to our mental health when we are isolated. Another reason that religion has held an important aspect in our development is that it confronts us with the deepest, most meaningful questions and stimulates our moral development. If only in a rudimentary way, religion has created a moral being.
- Feature
- Like
I think that religion has held an essential role in humanity up until this point in our development as a species. To begin with, religion has fostered the all-important social invention of the tribe by binding similarly-thinking people by their most essential beliefs. This not only has had obvious physical benefits, such as protection from danger and the sharing of resources, but it has helped us develop into the social beings that we are. As social beings, we benefit from sharing our deepest thoughts on life with others, and we have come to depend on close interpersonal relationships so much that it becomes a detriment to our mental health when we are isolated. Another reason that religion has held an important aspect in our development is that it confronts us with the deepest, most meaningful questions and stimulates our moral development. If only in a rudimentary way, religion has created a moral being.
That being said, I believe that we are far enough in our development to break away from a lot of the dogmatic principles of religion. Religion, like an authoritarian parent, models appropriate moral behavior, though (at least in my experience) offers little explanation as to the “whys” of those behaviors. Many religions will draw moral standards from their holy books, or the word of God, but will not breakdown the logic behind said morals. I think that we, as a species, are much like an adolescent and are ready to explore our own identities without being directed by an outside source and finally answer those questions.
I am not suggesting abandoning religion altogether, because it still certainly carries a great amount of meaning. Many people have identified that their religion legitimately does fit with their internal goals and motivation and enjoy the ritualistic and community aspects of it. However, I suggest that religion be viewed as a choice rather than an indoctrination, and that it not be passed down simply because “it’s tradition.” I would like to see an encouragement of developing one’s morals internally before depending on an institution to dictate morals and to question existing principles in religion (without being threatened by the institution). I would like to see people thinking critically about why they are involved in their religion, what is being asked of them, and why. I would like to see a shift from externally-controlled morals to internally-controlled morals.
reply
First, I think a distinction needs to be made between religion, as some exist with a hypocritical hierarchy preaching one thing to its followers and another to the world, and spirituality. Has spirituality really become such an icky word that we cannot even discuss its potential for having an evolved meaning outside of a religion? Does spirituality still have to house a meaning of the "supernatural?" What if your spirituality is not something tied to a faith, rigid or otherwise, but more a belief in the power of the human potential for greatness? (Novelist65 said this in another thread) Does religion need to be destroyed? Maybe, but the spirituality (as understood by the statement above) of any religion should be carefully considered. We are told Jesus (I was born and raised Catholic, though no longer practicing) taught that when struck to turn the other cheek, an obvious message of peace in the face of all things. Somehow the Catholic faith and many others, be they any of the sects of Christianity, Islam or Judaism have been hijacked in a sense to teach peace amongst the followers toward each other who think the exact same way, but to prepare for war, spiritual and otherwise with those of differing opinions. Somehow I do not think the original intentions of the writers of the Gospels were that Christians should love Christians, but hate Jews and Muslims.
- Feature
- Like
First, I think a distinction needs to be made between religion, as some exist with a hypocritical hierarchy preaching one thing to its followers and another to the world, and spirituality. Has spirituality really become such an icky word that we cannot even discuss its potential for having an evolved meaning outside of a religion? Does spirituality still have to house a meaning of the "supernatural?" What if your spirituality is not something tied to a faith, rigid or otherwise, but more a belief in the power of the human potential for greatness? (Novelist65 said this in another thread) Does religion need to be destroyed? Maybe, but the spirituality (as understood by the statement above) of any religion should be carefully considered. We are told Jesus (I was born and raised Catholic, though no longer practicing) taught that when struck to turn the other cheek, an obvious message of peace in the face of all things. Somehow the Catholic faith and many others, be they any of the sects of Christianity, Islam or Judaism have been hijacked in a sense to teach peace amongst the followers toward each other who think the exact same way, but to prepare for war, spiritual and otherwise with those of differing opinions. Somehow I do not think the original intentions of the writers of the Gospels were that Christians should love Christians, but hate Jews and Muslims.
And what is a belief in the power of human greatness, but a constant search to unlock every aspect of knowledge possible in the universe; science and math. Can that be spirituality? From the "religious" people that I know, their moments of "connecting with [a higher power]" whether it be through prayer/meditation or a group ritual of coming together with a common purpose sounds, to me anyway, oddly similar to a scientist breaking through a barrier they came upon in research, be it their own or reading the results of others, or a mathematician finally figuring out the abstract proof to connect point A to point B. You may not read the Bible, written by humans (who's hands were supposedly guided by "God"), but you do read the latest publications on math, or science, also written by humans, maybe writing from a higher sense of unveiling the next step in human understanding. If we broaden our understanding of the word “spirituality” to this or maybe abandon it totally, and replace it with something less “spooky,” I think we’d be better off.
Religion(s) in the context of being a significant part (in some instances the whole) of our history should not be entirely abandoned for every idea contained therein. Griz and ArtOfLife said it very well; religion is not something that we can just toss out, it was a part of our past and its foundation is part of our future, but which part? Can we not take some the better ideals of religion and maybe leave out the bad? Freud set the foundation for modern psychology, though the scientific community now laughs at most of his theories. Maybe the whole purpose of religion is to get us thinking and lead us on a path to being better people by just focusing on and finding solutions for the problem of the human experience as a whole, not by adhering to strict religious policies.
Should religion be abandoned? Maybe, but if it is, the dedication or sacredness felt in connecting with those ideas and rituals should not be lost, merely redirected to a new form of "spirituality" that can benefit the whole of humankind and not just other people that find important the same ancient texts as you.
reply
There is a very American notion that "religion is bad" and "spirituality is good". I used to hold this notion until I poked at it. Once I questioned it, I found that this often comes from many people who grew up in a religious household, but never made a personal connection with that religion.
- Feature
- Like
There is a very American notion that "religion is bad" and "spirituality is good". I used to hold this notion until I poked at it. Once I questioned it, I found that this often comes from many people who grew up in a religious household, but never made a personal connection with that religion.
"Being Spiritual but not Religious" also tends to mean, "I get to say 'I believe in God' but have no accountability to Him whatsoever."
There are serious believers who will say "I'm spiritual but not religious." Anyone who undertakes any sort of conscious, committed spiritual practice will eventually exhibit 3 fundamental elements:
1.) Certain beliefs about that God/higher power/spirit
(God is Personal or an Impersonal Force, God is knowable through Reason or Revelation, God is like "this" but not like "that", etc.)
2.) There is a way of relating with that God or Force - a way of worship or expressing that relationship with God in some form of ritual. (Ritual can include music, burning incense, meditation, or getting together with others who are also going to express that belief in some form.)
3.) Some moral code
(this is what is right to do, this is what is wrong to do, and any possible exceptions)
To recap:
Conscious and committed spirituality includes beliefs, a way of connection/worship, and a moral code.
Guess what? That's the definition of religion. Or at least it used to be until the mid 1960s in America when Zen and Pagan "spirituality" began to become the popular alternative to "organized religion".
There is no being "spiritual" in any sort of serious way without being "religious". The more seriously one pursues spirituality, the more religious one becomes. Try to imagine being "spiritual" in any *serious way* without those 3 elements listed above. It doesn't work.
reply
If religion was more personal and less of an Industry that would be a different story, but just like other people mentioned, religion has become too much of a social distorted way of manipulating people.
- Feature
- Like
If religion was more personal and less of an Industry that would be a different story, but just like other people mentioned, religion has become too much of a social distorted way of manipulating people.
So just by being connected to ourselves through science, art and helping and loving each other, we can get to pure spirituality.
reply
- Feature
- Like
This attitude that the two can be separated is absurd. This question reminds me of that youtube video titled something to the tune of "I hate religion but love jesus." It seems to me to be an attempt by the religious to seperate themselves from all of the nonsense that makes their beliefs look insanely stupid. So to answer the question. No. Religion is required for such a useless and stupid idea to survive.
reply
- Feature
- Like
