Religion and Ethics

[Halcyon]

What do you think about religions dictating how people should live their lives?

Most, if not all, religions, large and small include some form of ethical rules or guidelines.
A common one is the prohibition or guideline against its members drinking alcohol. Is this really the best thing a religion should be doing though?
If a person never touches alcohol, they'll never feel any of the negative effects, which while on the surface may seem like a good thing, it also means the person will never actually understand why, perhaps, they shouldn't drink. They never have the experience that would allow them to form their own judgement and create their own sense of what is good and bad for them.
The same goes for vegetarianism, if someone is encouraged (or even forced) into vegetarianism from a young age they'll probably never face the moral dilemma that comes with eating meat, which means their beliefs on that matter don't arise from within themselves, but come from others.

Obviously there are hundreds of ways in which the various world religions guide or form their followers sense of ethics, but do they do this at the expense of personal understanding and growth?

Would the sign of a truly great religion be that it's teachings instill a sense of ethics into its followers without the need to actually control their behaviour with rules and prohibitions?

 

[Scuba Pete]

It's amazing to me, that Jesus came to fulfill the law so that we would no longer be bound by it. Still, people are intent on creating rules for Christianity.

It is for Freedom you have been set free...

 

[ChristineES]

If a person joins a religion, then he or she is going to know what kind of guidelines that the religion will have beforehand. But all these guidelines can't be forced- even if you follow a certain religion, you may not follow all the guidelines of this said faith. Even Paul said as much in his epistles.
I don't drink myself, but I don't think drinking is wrong in moderation and can be beneficial health wise. Jesus Himself drank wine and was called a drunkard by the Pharisees.

 

[Kungfuzed]

Unfortunately, religion doesn't keep up with the times. Some of them are just plain stuck in ancient history because they don't allow for any new doctrine or revelation. So they cling to the old commandments, or learn to reinterperet the scriptures to mean something else, or just ignore some verses in favor of others. Of course, there are other religions that allow for free thought and use more than just ancient unchangable text to determine their morality.

 

[Valjean]

The Eastern religions are more like psychotherapeutic modalities than "religions" in the Western sense. They are not about "shalts" and "shalt nots."

 

[Halcyon]

If a person joins a religion, then he or she is going to know what kind of guidelines that the religion will have beforehand.

But what of people born into a faith?

But all these guidelines can't be forced- even if you follow a certain religion, you may not follow all the guidelines of this said faith. Even Paul said as much in his epistles.

In theory sure, but in practice there tends to be quite a lot of peer pressure to follow the rules. I remember when Djamila spoke about having the occasional glass of wine, and how she'd get looks from other Muslims and feel guilty.

 

[ChristineES]

But what of people born into a faith?

No one is actually born into a faith. Their parents choose the religion they follow until they decide which belief system (or non belief system) they want to follow.

In theory sure, but in practice there tends to be quite a lot of peer pressure to follow the rules. I remember when Djamila spoke about having the occasional glass of wine, and how she'd get looks from other Muslims and feel guilty.

I can't deny that. When I was younger, I felt guilty listening to Rock and Soul music because some pastors were saying that it was sinful. (I no longer feel that rock and soul music may be a sin).
Peer pressure is something we all have to deal with. It isn't easy, either, because even if one doesn't think it is wrong, someone else they know will and will judge that person. And sometimes quite harshly. There is really no easy answers for that.

 

[Halcyon]

The Eastern religions are more like psychotherapeutic modalities than "religions" in the Western sense. They are not about "shalts" and "shalt nots."

I don't know about that, look at some Theravadan Buddhist monastic precepts;

Do not eat after midday.
Do not engage in singing, dancing, music or any other kind of entertainment.
Do not use garlands, perfumes or other adornments.
Do not sit on a luxurious seat in sleep in a luxurious bed.
Do not accept or hold money.

 

[Dunemeister]

Parents teach their children ethics. Or at least they ought to. Religions also teach ethics, or at least they ought to. I don't understand how teaching ethics can be a bad thing unless the ethics are bad. For example, teaching people that they must kill people and eat their hearts in order to gain strength from the gods is bad to teach.

Teaching ethics does not hinder people's growth in any sense whatsoever. It fosters it. My wife, for example, was born into a Christian family. She hasn't had anything like a "born again" experience. She simply grew up assuming (and still assumes) the truth of the Christian religion and a certain code of ethics based on an evangelical understanding of the Christian religion. I, on the other hand, grew up without any sort of faith at all. I converted later in life, at around age 22. At that time, I started learning ethics as a way of life. Before that, I had "ethics" of a sort, but they were fairly self-serving, incoherent, and self-congratulatory. My wife an I met when I was 33, so by that time, I'd had 11 years to learn Christian ethics. But since the moment I've met her, my wife has demonstrated a deeper understanding of ethics than I could ever hope to have achieved. She not only knows what's right and what's wrong, she knows why. Her life is characterized by a depth and wisdom I continually admire. She has appropriated Christian virtues to an astounding degree. It may be possible for a religious upbringing to hinder a person's growth, but it's hard to see that in my wife's case.

In my own case, religious instruction started much later. I have noticed nothing but improvement since the day I converted. I don't follow Christian ethics because I fear judgment because Christian theology takes that option away for believers. I follow Christian ethics because they're beautiful and contribute to life's flourishing. I haven't asked her, but I'm confident my wife would say the same.

I get the feeling that some people believe that it's better not to be taught ethics at all. It's as if some people think that ethics that come "from within" are superior to those that are taught "from without." But I don't understand why one would think that. Don't we usually think that someone who makes up the rules for themselves a tyrant? or a miscreant? or a psychopath? or simply arrogant?

 

[rheff78]

What do you think about religions dictating how people should live their lives?

A common one is the prohibition or guideline against its members drinking alcohol. Is this really the best thing a religion should be doing though?
If a person never touches alcohol, they'll never feel any of the negative effects, which while on the surface may seem like a good thing, it also means the person will never actually understand why, perhaps, they shouldn't drink. They never have the experience that would allow them to form their own judgement and create their own sense of what is good and bad for them.

Hey, you should become Catholic, we definately don't have those guidelines.

 

[Dunemeister]

Hey, you should become Catholic, we definately don't have those guidelines.

Nope. Anglican all the way. We even let you drink wine during communion!

 

[rheff78]

Nope. Anglican all the way. We even let you drink wine during communion!

Hey, so do we. Ya'll stole that from us.

 

[.lava]

What do you think about religions dictating how people should live their lives?

Most, if not all, religions, large and small include some form of ethical rules or guidelines.
A common one is the prohibition or guideline against its members drinking alcohol. Is this really the best thing a religion should be doing though?
If a person never touches alcohol, they'll never feel any of the negative effects, which while on the surface may seem like a good thing, it also means the person will never actually understand why, perhaps, they shouldn't drink. They never have the experience that would allow them to form their own judgement and create their own sense of what is good and bad for them.
The same goes for vegetarianism, if someone is encouraged (or even forced) into vegetarianism from a young age they'll probably never face the moral dilemma that comes with eating meat, which means their beliefs on that matter don't arise from within themselves, but come from others.

Obviously there are hundreds of ways in which the various world religions guide or form their followers sense of ethics, but do they do this at the expense of personal understanding and growth?

Would the sign of a truly great religion be that it's teachings instill a sense of ethics into its followers without the need to actually control their behaviour with rules and prohibitions?

hi

i think one experience is usually more effective than hundred advices. i also think if your religion tells you you'd get burn if you touched fire, that is a warning. after that warning if you touch fire to see if it is true or not, that would be considered as your faith is not completed. because you do not trust it. imagine one dies cos of it. what's his gain? last act of his would be a sin.

there are many people who spent years away from religion like myself. they committed many sins. there are people i know who are exactly opposite. i think both sides earns. who commits sin has experience so when he gives advices, he knows what's he talking about, he is the example. the other kind who did not commit that sin, he is also lucky because he did not have to lose time on something which is already introduced as a sin. so he kept going further.


imo

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings.

What do you think about religions dictating how people should live their lives?

Given that religion's purpose is to provide people guidance, it's eminently sensible!

And while YMMV, I see nothing unexpected or unusual in this.

Peace,

Bruce

 

[.lava]

What do you think about religions dictating how people should live their lives?

religion is a friendly invitation. it is not religion that dictates people, it is only some greedy religious people who wants to rule the world.


.

 

[Dunemeister]

Hey, so do we. Ya'll stole that from us.

Ahem! Borrowed, I'd say. Interesting. I thought y'all only let the priest drink the wine. Do the laity drink wine at the Eucharist now?

 

[tigrers99]

I used to think that the role of Religion was to bring people close to God in worship, not to dictate morality to people. Of course I expected the Saturday/Sunday church goers to be able to keep from stumbling in holding to the morality that was taught in the part of the country where I grew up. If they ever did stumble in this then my family thought they were just hypocrites.

When I grew up and went out into the world, I found out that the world's morality is not as good at meeting the needs of people or a Nation as the New Testament's does. Maybe non-believers fear that if they agree that this ethical system is best, that they would then be obligated to have to worship the being that gave it to us.

 

[Charity]

I agree in the most part of what Christine said in an earlier post. Unless the person is born into a certain church, which by that I mean that their parents and most of their family have been in a certain church for years....The children receive instruction and classes and grow up in that church, then they know the doctrine of the church and when they get older they have the right to stay there or leave the church. I would personally respect whatever decision they make....

If you are looking for a church then you should know everything there is to know about it....the doctrine, the articles of faith, what they believe about alcohol, tobacco and etc.
If you agree with it then it may be the church for you. If you have any question or doubts as to the fact that you disagree with the doctrine, then I think you should wait or look somewhere else.....If you feel that you can't abide by all the doctrine of the church, why become a member?

It may be like buying a bag of apples, there could be good and bad both in the bag. You won't know unless you examine them closely...
Check out each one, and you will find the apple that is meant just for you.

I don't think any church would hold a gun to your head if you change your mind about how you view that particular religion.....

 

[Valjean]

I don't know about that, look at some Theravadan Buddhist monastic precepts;

Do not eat after midday.
Do not engage in singing, dancing, music or any other kind of entertainment.
Do not use garlands, perfumes or other adornments.
Do not sit on a luxurious seat in sleep in a luxurious bed.
Do not accept or hold money.

Are those Buddhist principles or monastic regulations?

 

[yearningknight]

I totally agree with this all religions bind you to living your life how they want you too and even if you don't you can repent for it even then if you believe you're saved which I totally disagree with. I think the only religion that doesn't bind you is Atheist, Agnostic, and Satanism. Religions were created to give hope to mankind and to give them a purpose for living, and to control and dictate a country or state. I say you should live life by your own rules not being bound by your religion or parents or society or whatever have you. I think that if religion was forced upon you and you still believe in whatever it is that you were brought up to believe in that you should know why it is that you believe and not answer with because it is or that is what my priest, rabbi, parents taught me.