I've asked this a few times in the last few weeks. If you suppose there is a god, why would you turn to mortals to explain how to worship? If you have found god, did you make this discovery independently or did someone tell you about it and convince you to believe? I think that if you believe in god, the only true reason to believe is that the god you claim brought you to the wisdom himself. Why should we wade through the reasonings of mortals when reasoning how to worship gods? Shouldn't the words of gods be more important than the words of men? Now, I know some will tell me that the words of some men are more important, because the gods said so. But don't those beliefs come out of books written by the same people who told you of these gods who so conveniently told you that the men to trust are the ones who wrote the book that described this god in the first place? You may take a spiritual meaning from that, but the practical meaning is that you have a scripture written by men, which supposes there is a god, and then assigns that god a divine reasoning and then uses that reasoning to imbue the writers with divine reasoning. I challenge such reasoning. It is circular. I wrote a book which invents a god, which invents holiness, which implies it upon myself, and therefore becomes the word of god, just because I concieved all those ideas. I don't want anyone to misunderstand my reasoning. I do not declare there is no god or that there cannot be. I simply ask, for what reason would I look to you or any other mortals for an explanation of divinity, if I have already reasoned divinity to exist? If I believe in god, why would I ask mortals to guide my belief in god?
I suppose you could say it like that. If you have a relationship with a god, why would you turn to mortals to define that relationship? The religious pray. A lot of this prayer is traditional. In other words, using a tradition learned from other men. I wonder, why would they pray like they have been told? Why not pray asking god for guidance about how to serve, instead of just trusting the tradition?
there is no reason to turn to any organized religion in order to find or maintain a relationship with "god". in my opinion, the notion of god is one that has been childishly misunderstood and the idea reinforced in order to perpetuate a system of control under the guise of good worship. the point of some of the worlds major religions seems to be fear of the unknown and adherence to doctrine in order to quell that fear. i personally found a relationship with "god", a higher order, whatever you want to call it, without looking for it and without influence by any individual or piece of literature. i would think it's there for everyone to experience if you get to the right place and happen to notice. i don't know for sure. worship can take place anywhere but i feel that existence is most satisfied in a natural atmosphere enjoying the natural goodness earth affords. it doesn't get much better than smoking a nice joint with your loved ones and tuning into the tonal frequency of a waterfall. it's not about taking time out of your life to worship a god, it's about celebrating existence itself and your own life while it's still happening. there are awesome things here to experience. i feel like people get caught up in the religious aspect of "god" and "spirituality" just because the major religions are established institutions on earth, just the same way that people get caught up in figureheads of any area of thought. if it isn't obvious, institutions are little more than machines that manufacture a certain product.
though i don't agree with religion and god in general, i do agree with this. there is no reason for me to accept a religious organization (unless someone is about to change my mind!) While I beg you to understand my skepticism, I will tell you that this is just the sort of spirituality I can conceive of without immediately doubting. (doubt implied here comes from afterthought) if you are there, i can only tell you that i desire the same wisdom and i am jealous. but unfortunately, your experience alone cannot give me that. i note the same feelings but it is difficult to reasonably assign them to supernatural causes. while you haven't really answered the question i've asked, I appreciate your thoughts. We seem to be of similar thinking. I need to explore this last bit without pretense, though: If there is something supernatural, than there need not be a definition for interfacing with it. It's a personal thing. Wouldn't you agree?
i thought i answered your question pretty simply. there is no reason to ask mortals to guide your belief, unless you are not confident in your own conscious reasoning. i agree that spirituality is a personal relationship requiring no definition but i am of the opinion that the "supernatural" will become the "natural" as soon as humanity begins to focus on our relationship with reality rather than focusing on distracting ourselves from reality through nearly everything we do.
Most religions are rip off's anyways, they came from religions and myths previous to them. xianity came from the egyptians, the egyptians borrowed theirs from someone else, etc....all the way down to primitive sun and nature worship. Now I wholeheartedly agree with u that even hypothetically were I to believe in a God or Gods that I would not let man define it's practice to me. I'm pretty much an anarchist on that topic, "No Gods, No masters" type of dude. But I digress. Religion serves one of 2 purposes, either to fit in or to be different. I desire to be neither, and through these 2 types of people we have a myriad of philosophies, ideals, opinions, and embellishments. However, I would like to point out that most of the Old Testament in the bible are rules and regulations for that specific type, or culture of people. It was all control. That may be your fundamental answer for "what is religion for" On the other hand, another reason would perhaps be that religion is to give Hope and Faith to the destitute, broken, scared, and frightened people of the world. Religion for one reason or another is kind of a security blanket for weak minded people. Strength comes from within, it can't be found in any other base form. All this blabbering is IMO. I'm not trying to preach just explaining my POV. I meant no offense
my apologies, i must have been a little too focused in on smaller points to have reasoned that, but it appears that if that was the case, you have now made your answer clear. I think you've got nothing to worry about, you've done pretty well here. You have inspired me to ask what should religion be for. I think it should be for explaining to people whatever there is to know about gods, but I still don't think it should be for telling us how to serve them. In other words, if there are gods, it should serve to help us understand how that is so, and leave us to develop our relationship with any gods we discover on our own.
Religion results from a region in the brain that longs to give our lives meaning and security, and therefore peace of mind. Nothing more. Only humans have this trait, unlike all other mammals. It is a consequence of our higher intelligence and capacity for reason and knowledge. Nothing more.
Is that the same as saying that religion exists to counterbalance evil? That religion and even maybe the idea of god exist because evil is so easy to manifest?
evil was here ever since man could first think. Why we choose to think that some supreme being controls all would essentially be in the fear of this evil. But if there's evil isn't there good? it's fucking hard to make sense right now
When I think of these concepts, I consider good deeds far more difficult than evil deeds. Evil deeds often include rewards whereas good deeds often require sacrifices. psychology might tell us we are conditioned for evil. It's actually a pretty good reasoning for why religion exists. If evil is undesirable, an organized effort to educate the people about the merits of good deeds makes sense.
this is where religion start's getting twisted to me. I mean as stated by Postal " If evil is undesirable, an organized effort to educate the people about the merits of good deeds makes sense." This makes sense. But then does on religion see another as evil? Teaching the masses the wrong teachings? and the churches willing to fight claiming that they're teachings are the only right ones...