infinite dreams
Serene Doge
- MBTI
- INTP
- Enneagram
- 5w4
Dude you are like a well-written parody of the ultimate Te-dom.
I find it interesting that you point out the utility of religion above all else (tradition as social glue, structure/discipline, aligning with a system for social status). I understand your reasoning, but I can't imagine thinking the same for the same reasons. Religion to me is a very personal thing; without actual belief, religious practice (going through the motions) is utterly meaningless.
But then I'm a Ti-dom so that probably explains it!
This was my major issue with religion, starting with childhood. I always had questions and I noticed that some of these made the adults uncomfortable. It's like they were accustomed to kids just accepting everything they were told about Jesus, the Bible etc. If something didn't make sense to me, I was naturally skeptical (Noah's Ark was a great example - even as a small child I considered it pure make believe).
What I learned as I grew older was that religion requires the individual to set skepticism aside and surrender to faith. That's when I knew unequivocally that it wasn't for me.
Ren
Seeker at heart
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 146
I view religion in the same way that Hegel viewed it.
I think religion captures the human attempt to explore and answer genuine metaphysical questions in pictorial and symbolic form. I think these questions exist and matter for humans, and that probably not all of them can be answered by science. Ritual, liturgy, myth, etc. represent a certain way, a primitive way perhaps (in a non-pejorative sense) of attempting to grapple with these questions. The questions are universal, but different peoples endowed with their own distinct cultural backgrounds develop different symbolic traditions to approach them, leading to different forms of established religion. "What is the meaning of existence?" "Why are we here?" - Religions all identify the same questions. Each provide its own set of answers but the universal questions tend to remain the same across all religions.
Humans were born with the innate ability to question their own existence and I think religions offer to embody a search for the answer. And the fact there is probably no definite answer likely explains the variety of answers that exist throughout the different religions. From this perspective all religions are valid in their own way, that is, in attempting to provide answers and developing their own theology to back them up. To my mind their value is in the asking, not in the giving a final answer.
I personally prefer the way of philosophy to ask such questions, but I respect religion all the same. Let's not forget that religion and philosophy were practically undifferentiated in ancient times. I side with philosophy because it is undogmatic, and also because it dispenses with the notion of an established church altogether. I think the institution behind a religion often defaces the religion it purports to represent, and is more concerned with power than with faith.
I think religion captures the human attempt to explore and answer genuine metaphysical questions in pictorial and symbolic form. I think these questions exist and matter for humans, and that probably not all of them can be answered by science. Ritual, liturgy, myth, etc. represent a certain way, a primitive way perhaps (in a non-pejorative sense) of attempting to grapple with these questions. The questions are universal, but different peoples endowed with their own distinct cultural backgrounds develop different symbolic traditions to approach them, leading to different forms of established religion. "What is the meaning of existence?" "Why are we here?" - Religions all identify the same questions. Each provide its own set of answers but the universal questions tend to remain the same across all religions.
Humans were born with the innate ability to question their own existence and I think religions offer to embody a search for the answer. And the fact there is probably no definite answer likely explains the variety of answers that exist throughout the different religions. From this perspective all religions are valid in their own way, that is, in attempting to provide answers and developing their own theology to back them up. To my mind their value is in the asking, not in the giving a final answer.
I personally prefer the way of philosophy to ask such questions, but I respect religion all the same. Let's not forget that religion and philosophy were practically undifferentiated in ancient times. I side with philosophy because it is undogmatic, and also because it dispenses with the notion of an established church altogether. I think the institution behind a religion often defaces the religion it purports to represent, and is more concerned with power than with faith.
Last edited:
infinite dreams
Serene Doge
- MBTI
- INTP
- Enneagram
- 5w4
Unquestionably true. Religious institutions manifest as power structures just like anything else. It's not a far stretch from telling people what they should believe, to telling people what they should think, to telling them how they should spend their money, etc. The structure and the people in charge of it eventually become self-serving. It's a phenomenon as old as time.
WonkyOracle
Permanent Fixture
- MBTI
- .
- Enneagram
- ,
Roses In The Vineyard
Well-known member
- MBTI
- INFJ
Had my time with it briefly as one dances with the fire the moves on to do other things but what brought me to it in the first place was having a real spiritual hunger that will never be met in the lame stream church that is as dust and dry bones thanks to dry traditions. Aside from what little of the new age that is good I found it to be spiritual junk food as is most things are in general with very little being of any real quality as it is with all things these days. It really pissed me off at one point just how much things of this nature has been watered down over the last two or three generations, I got a book collection going back well into the 19th century on this stuff. What some of the new age teaches on used to be in the churches not too long ago and further back enough the two would have been harder to tell apart until the Catholic church stripped out about a third of the Bible if not more.
Barnabas
Time Lord
- MBTI
- wiblywobly
- Enneagram
- timeywimey
Not me in particular.
Resemble? Yes, but all temptations will resemble that from a Judaeo-christian perspective. The garden was the first temptation from which all others were born. If the question is "Does Satan use New Age beliefs to tempt people?" I'd probably just give a shrug. The thing about temptation is that at the end of the day you can't know whether it's self inflicted, being pushed on you by somebody else or literally Satan in your ear. Luckily the source doesn't matter much because the response is the same independent of the source. You persevere, seek guidance and eliminate harmful aspects of your life. And while I think God plays a huge role in this process, it's the same process for anybody independent of their world views.
If your a Christian, you fact check your thoughts against the Bible. It reminds me of a story from (christian)college, A student came to one of the professors telling him that God wanted the student to divorce his wife. The professor asked how he knew this, and the student replied, "I can just feel him urging me." Of course the professors response was equal parts sarcasm and sincere, when he showed him a dozen different bible verses that countered the students feelings.
The student later got divorced anyways, but that's not the relevant part of the story. The student was a kid who most likely was feeling trapped in decision he made and was beginning to regret. Whether there we're actual demons in his head or he was just scared really doesn't matter, because like I said earlier, the response doesn't change. Seek guidance, persevere eliminate harmful things.
ZcM4xzkjgzCjytBc
Well-known member
- MBTI
- .
I have nothing to contribute