What is a religion?

[Slytovhand]

I took this line of thought up with a very ardent Christian many years ago (and she was a good'un... believed and had faith because of personal experience, not just indoctrination...). Her thought on the matter was that God directed those who decided what went into the Bible, and what didn't.

Fair enough, I spose... it requires faith to believe that, but nothing too absurd!

As for 'evidence', that would require testing, Gerrinson. And as you've just brought up the subject of mushrooms, I hope you are aware that there are beliefs out there that incoroprate the use of psychoactive substances to aid in achieving experiences... to connect with 'divinity' and to find 'the truth'... I presume you're going to get back to us shortly with your conclusions

[Gerrinson]

Well, Slyt, I'll make this one brief: If you have to take hallucinogens to find your god/spirit/etc. then I have no reason to take you seriously. Sorry, but the fact that you have to be drugged partially or completely out of your mind says it all.

[Slytovhand]

Well, it's on topic, so I'll stay with it...

Sorry, but the fact that you have to be drugged partially or completely out of your mind says it all.

Says what?

No, seriously...

After all, I don't see too many humans seeing a divine being in the normal run of life (yeah, sure, I do get the whole 'the divine is in everything'... I'd be hypocritical not to).

But, what real rational reason is there to say that in order to free oneself of social constructs and actually be able to perceive alternate levels of reality, some sort of psychotropic isn't out of the question? (obviously, there are other means, but since this is following on...)

I'd say the presumption that the only way to contact god/spirit etc ist to be in a logical, rational frame of mind is biased.

[Evandril]

I'd say the presumption that the only way to contact god/spirit etc ist to be in a logical, rational frame of mind is biased.

Since it's been proven that even different people don't 'think' the same way, I'd find it reasonable to believe a diety or some other form of life/spirit/ect would think in ways different enough to need serious mind-bending of one form or another to communicate. From the stories I've heard of various drugs, they *do* alter your perceptions...'Tasting' color, 'hearing' texture, and the like...So it seems like a way to do it, in theory

[Gerrinson]

In my opinion, if you have to be drugged partially or completely out of your mind to interact with your god/spirit/etc. then you're a drugged out whacko. Go drink the 'special' Kool Aid and good riddance.

To provide an actual counterpoint: Any such being that cannot communicate with us in the normal day to day manner with which we perceive the universe obviously had no part in 'creating' us or that being would know the best way in which to communicate with our species. Thus, if you have to be drugged out of your mind, what you're seeing is not <insert deity/spirit/divine being of choice>.

Some of our ancestors based entire religions on the experience of getting high. That in no way suggests that I should believe they are true, given all of the evidence that hallucinations are not real and exist solely in mind of the person having said hallucination.

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

Oh, and having received a reminder that I haven't touched upon other primary sources from Biblical times - there were some primary sources mentioned, and thanks for pointing out my own ignorance on the issue. That being said, has anyone here been able to read any of those sources for themselves and in them found the teachings that convince you that your religion is absolutely true and the only and correct religion?

I haven't had access to any of those, so I can't speak for their content. And while I've often been told that the Bible/Koran/Torah is correct 'because the <insert book of your choice> says that it's true.' I fail to believe them. I can write "There is no God. This is true." on a cocktail napkin and prove just as much because the napkin says it's true. And don't forget that the high muckity mucks of each religion who tell they are right have a vested interest in making sure you believe them.

Spin it any way you want, I've reached the conclusion that all religions seem to be nothing more than the successful application of the Wizard's First Rule:

"People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it's true, or because they are afraid it might be true. People’s heads are full of knowledge, facts, and beliefs, and most of it is false, yet they think it all true. People are stupid; they can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so are all the easier to fool." —Chapter 36, p.397, U.S. hardcover edition, Wizard's First Rule

Props to Terry Goodkind for putting it so clearly and succintly.

[Flyndaran]

...
"People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it's true, or because they are afraid it might be true. People’s heads are full of knowledge, facts, and beliefs, and most of it is false, yet they think it all true. People are stupid; they can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so are all the easier to fool." —Chapter 36, p.397, U.S. hardcover edition, Wizard's First Rule

Props to Terry Goodkind for putting it so clearly and succintly.

Rude, but pretty darn true and kind of the basis for scienctific methods. I have no reason to believe X unless, and until, your experiments make sense and are rigorously reproduceable.

I would love to believe in afterlives, unicorns, souls, etc., but there are no rigorously reproduceable experiments that validate them. I can't just rely on my or anyone else's "common sense" as basis for belief.

[Slytovhand]

Out of curiosity , Gerrinson, have you actually tried to get involved with any of those religious activities getting discussed? Or have you rationaled it to the point that you aleady 'know'? (Flyn's already mentioned his background in that area...)

[Gerrinson]

I've been part of many religious services in my life, the ones I've been exposed to in any sort of quantity are: Christian (Episcopalian, Baptist, Catholic, Pentacostal, Methodist, and Congregationalist), Jewish, Muslim, and Native American. I've found them all lacking in any real value beyond playing along and being 'accepted' and praised by others for playing along. Empty praise, really, since it was merely play acting sans stage.

I hope you aren't suggesting that I should be purposely ingesting toxic substances in an effort to 'find' religion. Given that all hallucinogens are, in fact, illegal and could cause permanent lasting harm up to and including death, I believe it would be foolish to do so. And that's not even mentioning the kind of idiotic behavior that occurs while under the influence of hallucinogens. Not for me, thanks.

[Slytovhand]

Not specifically - just wondering about your background, and if it incorporated such things. No, I'm not one to go advocating such things.

A discussion on such things just came up on another forum I'm on, and I was reminded that the use of psychotropics were used in rituals and ceremonies for at least a few thousand years. Also in the discussion, most were inclined to say that meditation and the like are just as likely to get you in contact with 'alternate realities' - and safer and more controlled.

But, in looking at your answer, I do need to ask... when you went to those services, were you open minded, or had you already made up your mind? Or, were you seeking 'proof'? (it's the sort of question I'd ask anyone in that situation... you just happen to be here )

(nitpick - no, not all are illegal! Though, given the way humans come into this world, pretty much anything can cause permanent lasting harm.. and death. Even air!)

[Gerrinson]

But, in looking at your answer, I do need to ask... when you went to those services, were you open minded, or had you already made up your mind? Or, were you seeking 'proof'?

Most of those were as a kid, when I was open minded about it and trying to 'believe' as I was told that was the only right choice. Unfortunately for most of the ardent believers, I kept questioning inconsistencies in the 'factual' stories as presented. Mostly in Christianity, as mentioned before I don't speak Hebrew or Arabic, so most of those services were really lost on me. A friend of mine liked the synagogue so much he studied Hebrew and converted.

Native American stories just seem to anthropomorphize the world, which makes sense given their hunter/gatherer culture, but didn't really jive well with my upbringing outside the tribe.

By the time I was in my teens, I really had more questions than anyone was willing to answer with non-circular argument (i.e. the Bible is true because the Bible says so. ) so I gave up and walked away. Ironically, the two people who have never forced the issue are my dad and stepmom, both of whom are ordained Methodist ministers.

In the end, I'm atheist because that is who I have always been. I've long since stopped questioning why I don't believe and now question the fact that so many people do believe.

[Slytovhand]

Oh, Ok...

Yeah, I've never had it ok with 'organised' religion either. Same sort of reason - logical questions That, and those same inconsistencies...

I spose that's why some religions/beliefs say you've got to let go of the rational mind to be able to experience.

I also have the take that - science says we can only detect about 5% of what's going on around us in the universe with our 5 sense. With technological advancement, that pushes it to max of 18-20%.

So, the universe is 80% unknown to us... leaves a hell of a lot of places for 'divine beings' to put their nose in

[Rapscallion]

Bit of a 'leap of faith' there. Science saying it can only detect 5% of what goes on with our current senses - I'd like to see some sort of citation there. However, you go from saying you think that we could get that to 20% or so with technology, resulting in - from what you think - that we don't know of 80% of what's going on, so it's fine to assume that there's room for gods.

Not sure if it's your wording, but you're effectively saying you suspect = certainty that there could be gods.

Mind clarifying?

Rapscallion

[Slytovhand]

Well, yes, I would mind actually

No - not a leap of faith as such... I heard it on the radio some time back. And thus, there's room for the 'possibility' of some thing that may be defined as 'god' (for any given definition... Including, I suppose, some scientist in a lab who manages to create an artificial Black Hole, which in turn, creates a new universe...).

But my idea is more that there's a stack of things we don't know about this place, that some form of deity type being/entity (perhaps stars are actually the bodies of some lifeform??) is within the realms of possibility.

FTR - I don't believe in a Christo-Judaic 'God'.

[Flyndaran]

God is still a nonsense idea. Nothing in human discovery suggests that any type of infinity exists. Every time someone suggests one it has been proven to be just really really big.
I just can't believe in an impossibility such as a prime mover, infinite in thought and action.
It's just nonsense.
It will always freak me out till the day I die and sadly cease to exist that so many of my supposed sapient species actually believe in one.

[PepperElf]

I'm curious to read others' definition of religion.

I always felt that the difference between a religion and a cult was simply the numbers.

A faith with several thousands of believers = religion
A faith with just a few = cult.
(also a cult, if your entire religion kills itself off)


I remember having an argument with a guy in high school... He kept trying to call other religions "Cults" to emphasize that they weren't worthy of being called religions. Basically everything non-christian was a cult. (I can't remember if he called the Jewish faith a cult or not tho, but everyone else was a cult).

He didn't like talking to me after I corrected him on that.

I mean I'm all for discussion on religion. But not for bashing.