The Ferv Posted:

Before we go into “religion” as a whole, being that “religion” is an awfully broad term, would you (DHC, that is) mind clarifying a few things for us?

-What, exactly, are you referring to by the term “religion”?

-Are there any significant differences (in your mind) between “religion”, “organized religion”, “self delusion/mbum hypnosis”, “faith”, “belief”, “idealism”, “philosophy”, and/or “spirituality”?

-If so, what are they, and how do you arrive at the conclusion that they are there?

-If not, how do you arrive at the conclusion that all these terms refer to a single phenomenon?

-Does “religion” require belief in a deity?

-If so, why?

-If not, why not?

-From an observer’s point of view, your initial post (and subsequent posts as well) have all come off as quite hostile towards the idea of dualistic & monotheistic faith-based belief systems, but almost entirely ignored monistic, polytheistic, nontheistic, rational, and/or skeptical belief systems. Was this deliberate, or are you including all non-empirical belief systems in your generalizations?

-How do you personally self-identify in the realm of religion, and why?

-Do you feel that this self-identification fits comfortably within the scope of this thread?

-If so, why?

-If not, why not?

...And just for the record, in order to clear up any possible biases, I self-identify as a non-religious agnostic skeptic.

In addition, based on my beliefs and their external manifestations, an objective observer could reasonably make any of the following bumumptions:

-that I am an extremely liberal Christian with universalist leanings.

-that I subscribe to a westernized form of Buddhism with strong Taoist influences.

-that I am agnostic and/or apathetic.

-that I am a deist.

Strictly speaking, they’d be incorrect in making any of the above bumumptions, but they all hit close to the mark.

I would like to raise the point, however, that given a monistic & materialistic understanding of existence, one cannot actually empirically disprove the existence of an intelligence sufficiently advanced beyond humanity to qualify as “divine” by current standards at this point in time (and that likewise, one cannot actually empirically prove the existence of such a being, either).

I already said it in the OP. I’m not arguing GOD v. NO GOD. It’s been done elsewhere. Religion is not faith: Faith is a personal belief structure to which you, for whatever reason, prescribe. Religion is the dogmatic, often hierarchical secular construct which pbumes itself off as the gateway between you, the believer, and whatever heaven/paradise/virgins your faith promises you at death if you are true to yourself, your god, and your faith.

Basically, it’s the cult/brainwashing stuff that springs forth from literal readings of books, if you want my opinion. I don’t care about what god or how many you have, whether you have a spirit or not…these are irrelevant to the discussion at hand. The question is how a sane, rational person can buy into the normative ideals fostered by a given religious organization. Welcome to the thread.