Too Much Religion?

[Grandliseur]

Is there such a thing as too much religion, and if so what would that be?

As a serious Christian, it may surprise some that I say, "Yes!"

The problem with religion, as taught by churches and done by their flocks, is that it has in many cases become a lot to-do about festivals and meaningless customs and less about simply being a moral Christian person do the Christian thing for needy people, whether need be because of age, or poverty. So, there is a lack of substance and mostly glitter being practiced.

The other problem is found when we study the Bible and first century Christians. These people didn't build magnificent buildings and have an ornate priesthood. They focused on the message, on understanding the teachings, on putting them into action. In most churches today, beginning with the Catholics, including the Protestant movements, the JW, the LSD, all are building and owning huge estates, buildings, which need funding, most operate an expensive priesthood, even the JW (though they do not call theirs - priesthood) demanding a lot from their constituents. That is not what Christ's teachings focused on. Of course, a large congregation may need a place to assemble making it worth their while to build a church. However, it seems to me that the balance has been lost.

I advocate a simpler kind of worship with a focus on Christ teachings as given by the apostles and doing these where the needs of the flock, a place to assemble is a matter of need, not of ostentation. Also, clean up the things not part of Christ teachings - pagan holidays. I think Christians also need to give attention to family, gathering for birthdays, and a few times during the year to build the family bond. This should include all family whether Christian or not.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

And right away, I begin to see the signs of division You have just divided the world into a "them and us" paradigm, in which "they" are negative and "us" are positive. Surprised you don't see it.

But on the contrary, there are many quite "spiritual" people (the Dalai Lama or Mohandas Gandhi, perhaps) who while not ostentatiously religious, are quite accepting of other views.

Oddly, as an atheist, I've met very, very many religious people -- even on this site -- who have called me quite negative things, because I have not god-beliefs. And those who I have seen as "spiritual" in their own way (there are names, though I won't mention many - @metis and @RabbiO and @arthra and others on other forums) who have been nothing but just and caring in their comments. Have you not met them?

Why does it take religion to express spirituality? What ever happened to beauty? To knowing that you don't know and can't know everything, but that you can seek? Of seeing the poignancy of living a finite life in an infinite universe? Of acknowledging your connectedness to all the things that you know about? Those are deeply spiritual thoughts, in my view. Thinking "I get to be with God some day" is not so much spiritual but wishful thinking.

It comes from the Latin religare, that to which "I bind myself." Once bound, sorry, but you do indeed have a bias.

Pure judgement. Yes, there are adults who are sinners. But being adult does not automagically make one a sinner. Even playing with yourself doesn't make you a sinner. (And by the way, babies play with themselves and GASP!

I rather be a happy naive person than rant about how my ex religion does this or that religion does that. Youre not judging people.

If your spirituality doesnt respect peoppe, of course you dont have a religion.

Im not that negative to see that. Im hoping we just misunderstand each other instead.

[/QUOTE]

I'll have to address all this later. I'm not a theist and no where near such. The way you are addressing is as if you are debating with a god-is-the-truth believer or some nonesense.

Instead, I'm saying "religion is an expression of one's faith." One can express their faith by meditating or going dancing on a friday night. I express it through art. Christians express it through Christ. You have your expressions.

You do not need to call it "religion".

Get the concept and move on.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Can you conversate without negative bias. That will help with the conversation better.

And right away, I begin to see the signs of division You have just divided the world into a "them and us" paradigm, in which "they" are negative and "us" are positive. Surprised you don't see it.

That's a theist statement. I'm an atheist and yes, you are being negative in your accusations. I don't know why you put me into someone else's boat. People take advantage of what I'm trying to say because I don't take sides.

But on the contrary, there are many quite "spiritual" people (the Dalai Lama or Mohandas Gandhi, perhaps) who while not ostentatiously religious, are quite accepting of other views.

They are religious. They practice religions. Do you understand?

You can't separate the two. Both of them would look at you funny if you tried.

Oddly, as an atheist, I've met very, very many religious people -- even on this site -- who have called me quite negative things, because I have not god-beliefs. And those who I have seen as "spiritual" in their own way (there are names, though I won't mention many - @metis and @RabbiO and @arthra and others on other forums) who have been nothing but just and caring in their comments. Have you not met them?

I know @metis in the extent we share the same views of the Church and most likely religion in general. I don't speak with @RabbioO and @arthra hasn't got on my nerves yet None of them called me names or said anything bad about me on RF forums that I'm aware of. So, using them is a huge no. no. and I will cut it short there.​

On a lighter note. If you understand that religion is an expression of one's faith, then you can see how many spiritual people are religious. And for many religious people, they are spiritual.

What you think about religious people has nothing to do with one the definition of religion and what it refers to.

Why does it take religion to express spirituality? What ever happened to beauty? To knowing that you don't know and can't know everything, but that you can seek? Of seeing the poignancy of living a finite life in an infinite universe? Of acknowledging your connectedness to all the things that you know about? Those are deeply spiritual thoughts, in my view. Thinking "I get to be with God some day" is not so much spiritual but wishful thinking.

That is religion. It's how you express it for the good or for the bad is what counts. You can either do good things to bring spiritual living or religion a good name or you can down it as if everyone whose under "religion" has some type of ax to grind/complaint or something.

Take out the bias. The definition of religion does not take sides.

It comes from the Latin religare, that to which "I bind myself." Once bound, sorry, but you do indeed have a bias.

I bind myself to what? Spirituality? Living one's faith? Religion is a practice. It's a devotion. It's what "binds one" to their path whether it be meditative, worship, reverence, whatever. Read between the lines.

Yes, my bias is to see religion in a positive manner because I've seen and experience actual people express good hearted sentiment and I didn't need to ask them "are you spiritual or are you religious" because we understand it is one and the same. What they do is what they believe and what they believe is what they do.

So I have positive bias. Sorry, I can't change that. Too many good experiences to counter the bad ones.

Pure judgement. Yes, there are adults who are sinners. But being adult does not automagically make one a sinner. Even playing with yourself doesn't make you a sinner. (And by the way, babies play with themselves and GASP! get erections! Oh, my!)

You called me naive. Babies are innocent. Adults are sinners. (read between the lines) I rather be naive or a baby and keep positive bias then let my head be tormented in ex-christian c/mess because, like many ex-christians, they can't get out of the hole that they aren't sinners anymore. Be positive. If you're spiritual, show it in your words.

No, actually, I'm not. I'm describing the history of the world -- not as I "judged" it but as it has played out. The Catholics burned the Protestants, the Protestants burned the Catholics -- and everybody hated the Jews. That's just how it was.

Christian history does not define religion. That would be odd to go to Dali Lama and tell him he isn't religious because I'm associating spiritual devotion to one religion out of thousands of religions or spiritual devotions practiced in the world. He'd probably laugh at me.

Christianity doesn't own the word religion.

That is a pure nonsense line. If you don't recognize what the "Humanist" in my profile means, then I am not here to enlighten you on my respect for people. And I can do that without religion, thank you very much. (In fact, too often I've seen that religion is the great "preventer of respect for others."

I actually have conversations to get to know people. If you want me to judge you off a name, so be. I'm just not like that. I like to talk to people not at people.

I don't have cut off conversations. It's completely rude and completely "not spiritual" but very (if using your definition) religious.

 

[Thief]

How? How the blazes do you quantify "way of life" such that you could have too much or too little of it?

i breathe every breath and drink every drink
so it it is written.....so i do
(not that i do all that is written....heheheheh)

and if i breathe too much i might hyperventilate
and if i drink too much....ooooops
either way....i fall down

 

[Quintessence]

So now it is culture? Way of life didn't pan out so now you claim it is culture.

I'll agree that religion is part of culture, but so are many things like crack whores.

Okay, at this point it just feels like you're trolling. My mistake for thinking you were interested in having a substantive conversation. I'm done granting you the benefit of the doubt here. Have fun trolling someone else, pal.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Okay, at this point it just feels like you're trolling. My mistake for thinking you were interested in having a substantive conversation. I'm done granting you the benefit of the doubt here. Have fun trolling someone else, pal.

I apologize for having a more realistic view of the world than you do. I have watched your posts and you have a very narrow unrealistic view of religion. It is not all giggles and gumdrops and you are not really being open minded if you ignore the unsavory aspects.

 

[Quintessence]

I apologize for having a more realistic view of the world than you do. I have watched your posts and you have a very narrow unrealistic view of religion. It is not all giggles and gumdrops and you are not really being open minded if you ignore the unsavory aspects.

Oh, please. If you think that's what I believe, you are sorely mistaken. Were I as presumptuous about your beliefs are you are about mine, I would say you are projecting.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Oh, please. If you think that's what I believe, you are sorely mistaken. Were I as presumptuous about your beliefs are you are about mine, I would say you are projecting.

So what your saying is you can never have too many crack whores.

How about you actually addressing my point? Crack whores are part of the culture, slavery was part of our culture, gambling and drinking are lifestyle choices, crime is a way of life. All things you can have too much of.

You made some off the wall claim that because religion was a "way of life" you could not have too much of it; without ever justifying why "way of life" would omit it. All you did was act purposely obtuse and pretended like could not follow me. Then you proceeded to "culture" and played the same game. When that failed you jumped to ad hominem. You are not a very straight forward person, and it seems like you just want to play games instead of debate.

Don't take it out on me because your analogies were gimp and lame and you failed to justify your position.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Crack whores are part of the culture

Find me one culture, just one, that includes crack whores right up there with their national heroes, anthem, flag, history, costume, etc. Just one.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Find me one culture, just one, that includes crack whores right up there with their national heroes, anthem, flag, history, costume, etc. Just one.

I am sure you think that proves something.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Well, I see you making some off-the-wall claim about crack whores being a part of a culture. So find us one that does.

 

[Quintessence]

@Jeremiahcp - I did address your points. You chose to either ignore them, not listen to them, misinterpret them, or misconstrue them into things I did not say nor intend. Perhaps some of all of the above. Regardless, those things make communications unnavigable, especially in the absence of active listening.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

@Jeremiahcp - I did address your points. You chose to either ignore them, not listen to them, misinterpret them, or misconstrue them into things I did not say nor intend. Perhaps some of all of the above. Regardless, those things make communications unnavigable, especially in the absence of active listening.

"I did address your points."

Show me.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Well, I see you making some off-the-wall claim about crack whores being a part of a culture. So find us one that does.

"So find us one that does."

Ya, we are talking about culture, not national pride.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Ya, we are talking about culture, not national pride.

As am I. So which country has "Crack Whore Lane"? "Whore Mountain"? You do know that Anchorman was just a movie, and when Ron told Veronica to go back to "Whore Island" he wasn't talking about a real place, right?

 

[Jeremiahcp]

As am I. So which country has "Crack Whore Lane"? "Whore Mountain"? You do know that Anchorman was just a movie, and when Ron told Veronica to go back to "Whore Island" he wasn't talking about a real place, right?

I am starting to remember why I never bother to read or respond to your posts.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Not seeing a whole lot of examples as to how crack whores are a part of culture, jeremiah.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Not seeing a whole lot of examples as to how crack whores are a part of culture, jeremiah.

And I am sure you think that proves something.

 

[Quintessence]

"I did address your points."

Show me.

Too Much Religion?
Too Much Religion?
Too Much Religion?

A lot of it is me not understanding your question and asking for help understanding... and you not being particularly helpful.

 

[Quintessence]

Not seeing a whole lot of examples as to how crack whores are a part of culture, jeremiah.

Sssh! You'll ruin the red herring!