Is the True Religion No Religion? Or all religions? Or just morality?

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by jaktober, May 22, 2014.

  1. jaktober

    jaktober Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    When the Dali Llama ruled Tibet he believed everyone would have to convert to Buddhism for the world to find Peace. Once he was forced out of his Buddhist bubble he realized it didn't matter what religion people were, what was important was how we treat each other (the "Golden Rule").

    Christ said that of all God's commandments, the one that connects them all is "to love your neighbor as yourself."

    While the Koran is brutal when it talks about Social Laws (as is the old testament), it shares the idea of non-revenge, (to paraphrase) - rid your enemy of your country, but do not follow him home - The bible talks much about not taking revenge, to let God judge (leave room for God's wrath as it says).

    The Tao Teh Ching states that the Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao. That the sage does his job right when no one knows he's done anything at all. And that "there will be peace when the kings know the Tao."

    Could the one true religion be "Don't get caught up with the religion, but treat each other with dignity and respect, take care of the poor, seek not revenge, love one another as you do yourself."

    Ironically, it is true whether you believe it or not. You want to know how someone treats themselves? See how the treat others.

    "If someone says they are in the light and hates their brother, then they are still in darkness."

    My question, if you are right about how Religions are wrong, why do you continue to immitate them?
     
  2. Swensson

    Swensson Devil's advocate

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2009
    Messages:
    7,983
    Likes Received:
    961
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Seems to me it depends on what you mean by religion. I consider myself to have a pretty decent morality, closely related to that of the golden rule, but I wouldn't call that my religion. Religion has appropriated a lot of good things, (mostly related to morality, but also social aspects and mental health) but there is nothing that says it needs the religion to exist.

    If we don't want religion, but still want these good things, I imagine it can look like "immitating" religion, but in practice, it's just chucking out the parts of religion we don't want and leaving anything good (although in practice, that would be seen as not being part of the religion in the first place, so if you ask most non-religious people, they use the word religion to mean those parts of what you call religion that has no good reason for existing, therefore excluding for instance morality).
     
  3. jaktober

    jaktober Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Religion is the study of morality and the celebration of said morality (ceremony). In my opinion it doesn't need to have a name or a "church." Christ refered to the church as his followers, not a building with a name. Philip K. Dick wrote "The church of my choice is the free, open, world."

    But, to put it in real world terms, Christianity is a study course on how to understand morality through the reading of the bible. Islam through the Study of the Koran.

    Could we have a religion that doesn't need a name, that is the study of morality through many source materials (Bible, Tao Teh Ching, Art of War, buddhist texts, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, music) and the direct practice of the principles (giving to those who ask, forgiving, naming of things [science], stewarding of the earth and the natural life upon it)?

    Any "temple" or "church" would be a community hall, with study sessions/discussions on life/morality/the golden rule, and group classes/activity of yoga, qi-gong, gardening, meditation, martial arts, music, art, etcetera.

    Does it even need to be refered to as a "religion"? Is it not just the best practices of life?

    Does it really matter one way or the other if we call that a religion? Or if we use the word God, Allah, Tao? Or Love. Or do we not need to reference "it" and simply discuss the best practices.

    Is that true worship?
     
  4. Swensson

    Swensson Devil's advocate

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2009
    Messages:
    7,983
    Likes Received:
    961
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This seems like a clusterlove of terms. You seem to have a nonstandard definition of religion. You yourself question whether it should be called a religion, so why do you keep referring to it as one? The definition you use is not the one in use by those you seem to be addressing. If you point at a tasty apple and say "that's a religion", I would have to say that that religion is pretty good, but that does not make it a religion in any general sense. There are plenty who consider themselves nonreligious who adhere to what they believe to be the "best practices of life" (for some definition thereof).

    Does it matter what we call it? Yes it does. On occasion, we have to talk about these practices, and if we at that point use words that mean something else to other people, then we are going to get confused and draw erroneous conclusions. You call religion a "study of morality", I call such a study ethics, because that's what the word ethics mean, and the concepts I call religion, while they may overlap with ethics, is not the same as ethics.
     
  5. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    125,781
    Likes Received:
    48,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    a great book, 2150 AD tries to address this, great book, have read it a few times over the years...

    http://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/0988659328/ref=wms_ohs_product?ie=UTF8&psc=1
     
  6. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,876
    Likes Received:
    11,451
    Trophy Points:
    113
    the above statement requires no deity, no worship, and no dogma so it can't be called a religion in any sense of the world.

    OTOH, its a better code to live by than most.
     
  7. TheBlackPearl

    TheBlackPearl New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,690
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If by "true religion" you mean what is the TRUTH about the creation of the universe then the answer is SCIENCE. Which is why science can lay legitimate claim to actual ACCOMPLISHMENTS over the past few centuries. Religion, in any form, has accomplished NOTHING WHATSOEVER, in its thousands of years of history, except in the arts. If religion had made a single one-thousandth of the accomplishments that science has made we would be able to charter a flight to Heaven to speak face to face with "god". And, no, drugs don't count.
     
  8. Imnotreallyhere

    Imnotreallyhere Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,053
    Likes Received:
    621
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Just a minor point. Science has accomplished nothing. It merely describes what is already there. Had science never described orbital mechanics, for instance, the Earth would still orbit the Sun. In a way, science can be described as a kind of art.

    Also, there are people who claim to have spoken with God. They are said to have had epiphanies. It is not as uncommon as one might think.
     
  9. cupid dave

    cupid dave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    Messages:
    17,005
    Likes Received:
    80
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Assuming that we did not today have statistical evidence, that sexual promiscuity destroys countries (as the bastards on Welfare grows to great heights),... religion seem the only way a person could be sexually prudent simply because of his belief in scripture.
    True?
     
  10. Swensson

    Swensson Devil's advocate

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2009
    Messages:
    7,983
    Likes Received:
    961
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This is like the third time you've made a reply about sexual promiscuity quoting a post of mine that had nothing to do with that subject. With your views on the subject in mind, it seems to be popping up a lot. I've asked you before that if you're interested in having that kind of discussion, make a thread in which that would be on topic, but since that doesn't seem to happen, I'll make a few short comments.

    Firstly, what is this statistical evidence of sexual promiscuity causing the destruction of countries? Pay particular attention to the causation part. I would not be particularly surprised at correlation, since both the soundness of a state and whatever measure you use for promiscuity are complicated and operate in the same kind of area (people tend to have more sex and more casual sex in a crisis, maybe countries on the brink of destruction are less likely to be able to censor material and so on).

    Secondly, religion does not need to be the only way a person could be sexually prudent. I know several people who are nonreligious, and yet prudent (depending on your definition of prudent, I might even count myself to that crowd but don't lay too much weight on that statement). With this data in mind, your statement about only scripture seems undeniably false.

    And thirdly, it seems to me you're assuming some underlying value judgement which you don't write out properly. What if we say that promiscuity is weighed against the strength of the countries whose destruction you mention and it turns out that the freedoms sexual liberation provides (as freedom, as sexual gratification and as personal fulfilment) outweigh the benefits of the current governance? Now, it could be that you're just interested in the finer details about hypothetical philosophy and segmented ethics, but knowing your previous posts, I would not bet on it.
     
  11. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,431
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Where exactly did He say that?

    What, precisely, is the point of "studying morality"? And if I fail to do so, am I therefore irreligious?
     
  12. jaktober

    jaktober Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    "The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no commandment greater than these." - Mark 12:31

    (he was just done responding to someone who asked what the most important commandment was, he said first, to love god, and second...)

    Christ also refers to this concept as "the Law":

    "Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets" -Matthew 7:12

    And Paul writes:

    Owe no one anything except to love one another, for he who loves another has fulfilled the law. For the commandments, "You shall not commit adultery," "You shall not murder," "You shall not steal," "You shall not bear false witness," "You shall not covet," and if there is any other commandment, are all summed up in this saying, namely, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law (Rom. 13:8-10).

    So, to follow the canon, Christ's opinion is that the one most fundemental law in following God is to love your neighbor as yourself. That the two are one in the same.

    Do you have to go to University to study? Yet, wouldn't you say a University is a place where you study various subjects?

    Or is it simply that the word Religion bothers you? Much as the term "the State" bothers some people. Or "Government."

    You can have social organization without calling it "Government" but really, it's "Government." Just cause you don't have a flag doesn't mean you aren't a Government. But if the term is getting in the way, then we don't need to call it anything.

    The point of studying morality is to cultivate morality in order to have a better personal experience and create a better experience for others.

    Which is the point of this post.

    How do we make these concepts, even simply the fundemental principle your first question asked about, most accessible?
     
  13. Tram Law

    Tram Law Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2012
    Messages:
    9,582
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I do what I can to not immitate them.

    You see, I personally believe there is only one true way to take the high moral road.

    And that's to not do the behavior you find deplorable, and to not be like the person you have a lot of hostility to.

    So I don't really believe in the cycle of one side acts against the other doing a lot of harm, then the side that was harmed do the same exact thing just with either a different justification or to rename the action.

    It's still the same action, and if it's wrong to do then you shouldn't do it.

    Unfortunately, that's not how the world seems to work.

    Le sigh.
     
  14. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    125,781
    Likes Received:
    48,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    so even Jesus did not agree with all of Gods rules.... if one reads how evil God was, one could see why a new religion was created that invalidated the rules of the old...
     
  15. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,431
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So you misrepresented His words. Thanks for clearing that up.

    The answer is neither instructive nor responsive. Moreover, there is no point in taking a socratically pedagogical approach when you have no credibility.
     
  16. mutmekep

    mutmekep New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    6,223
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Morality is a set of norms that help a society function only if this set is widely accepted inside the society.
    Given that societies are fluid and constantly change those sets of norms have to either be updated or simply abandoned.
    "Divine" inspired morality is of course made up by people functioning inside a society at a given time, 200 or 2000 years into the future those norms are useless , pointless and abandoned; for example you don't kill your son if he talks back at you and you don't sell your daughters into slavery.

    Atheists do not have sets , holy books or divine inspirations and saying that we are imitating religions is rich .
     
  17. Willys

    Willys New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2013
    Messages:
    973
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Every person is on his/her own timeline. Their religion/beliefs are between them and their 'supreme effect' of that belief.
     
  18. NightSwimmer

    NightSwimmer New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    Messages:
    2,548
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0

    It's almost as if there are some religious folks out there who admire the honesty of the Atheist world-view and would like to join them, but are confused by their inability to find an Atheist Church in their neighborhood in which they could be baptized and formally accepted as part of the Atheist community. ;)
     
    mutmekep and (deleted member) like this.
  19. jaktober

    jaktober Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Obviously Christ meant to reform the concept of "unforgivable" sins that filled the old testament.

    But if you follow what Peter says (by which he learned from Christ) is that all of God's commandments have a common theme, and that is to treat each other as you would treat yourself (don't steal, don't kill, etc.)
     
  20. jaktober

    jaktober Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    How did I misrepresent His words? Did you only read that one quote and not the other words of Christ elaborating on what that means?

    To love God IS to love each other as yourself. That is how you love God. So when he says, "first" and "second" it is similar to saying "I am the begginning and the end." They are one in the same. Yin-Yang, if you will.

    I don't understand what you are meaning to say here.
     
  21. jaktober

    jaktober Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Exactly, that is why we don't judge others. I'm asking questions to create a deep conversation.
     
  22. jaktober

    jaktober Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I did not say that Athiests were imitating religion. I was asking a specific person; if a literal interpretation of the Bible is wrong, then why do they use a literal interpretation of the Bible to disprove the moral concept found within?

    And also, if the judgemental habits of religious folk are hypocritical, then why does one practice the same judgements back at said group? Why do you imitate what you know is wrong?
     
  23. jaktober

    jaktober Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Then you are at peace with that fact?

    How do we refine that concept in a way that is communicatable to the masses? Has the quote "an eye for an eye" become too cliche to hold any meaning?

    How to we elaborate in a way that isn't cliche, but also, isn't too preachy?
     
  24. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    125,781
    Likes Received:
    48,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    because God got it wrong, Jesus need to correct his mistakes?
     
  25. jaktober

    jaktober Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    People got it wrong. What do you think God is?

    Do you believe the Bible is the infallable word of God?
     

Share This Page