What Is Religion?

[HydrogenBond]

Religion is the systematic belief in something that can not proven, conclusively to everyone. In that respect, religion requires faith, with that faith often supported with circumstantial evidence. This definition goes beyond religions based on God into religions in science, philosophy, etc., that can't be proven to everyone, but are accepted on faith.

 

The god based religious may prove to himself that God exists, due to his faith, but it is difficult to transfer this faith to another without the same level of faith, without solid proof. The physicist may believe in multiple universes because of mathematics and faith (still not seen), but he will not be able to transfer has faith to the layman, since his faith is based on a paper tigher, and not hard proof the layman can see.

 

The faith element is connected to the right or spatial side of the brain, with the circumstantial evidence and logic connected to the left side of the brain. The right side sees a deep intuitive image of something, which is hard to put into words and prove. The left side tries it best to expressed the fuzzy image. Religion is what keeps one heading toward this fuzzy holy grail, trying to prove it in reality, forever falling short, with faith connecting the potential between the two. It is a good mental exercise that uses the whole brain.

[InfiniteNow]

HB,

There is no evidence that faith is a unihemishperical contruct. I challenge you to prove me wrong.

[Racoon]

Simply put:

 

A religion is a way of convincing yourself that you mean something ,and that there is an afterlife.

[IDMclean]

I like a part of your formulation:

Religion is the systematic belief in something

 

This would once again indicate faith as a necessary element for your definition of religion that is common to other's definition of religion.

 

Here's my latest formulation:

Religion is the willful faith in, assent to, and embrace of, a self-transcendental purpose or purposes; subject to individual experience, and/or perception.

 

Comments, complaints, complements?

[IDMclean]

A religion is a way of convincing yourself that you mean something ,and that there is an afterlife.

 

Well, I do like the purpose statement in this one, but I don't like, nor do I agree with the afterlife portion. If I were to accept your definition, I would have to accept that I am not religious, nor do I follow a religion, in that I strictly rule out supernatural occurances basicly on principle, and don't personally believe in, nor count on an afterlife.

 

My religion is not the only one that does not have an afterlife.

[InfiniteNow]

Here's my latest formulation:

Religion is the willful faith in, assent to, and embrace of, a self-transcendental purpose or purposes; subject to individual experience, and/or perception.

 

Comments, complaints, complements?

 

You're doing a much better job of overlapping your perception with that of others. However, the above does apply to nearly everything in our awareness universe... not just faith.

[IDMclean]

Well as a friend pointed out to me, and then rather quickly withdrew, is that this definition implies a slave-master relationship.

 

He tried to apply the definition to the BDSM world, and got as far as willful before he ceded his case.

 

I will admit that this definition allows for many things to be considered religions, however such is a fact of religion.

 

I will note that the elements are necessary, they are not sufficient.

 

A scientist can declare themselves non-religious, in their practice of science. The reason for this is that they can assert that they do not use faith in their practice. Though it can be argued counter, it can not be forcefully imposed. Hence willful.

 

An Atheist can be considered religious or non-religious, depending on their will. A humanitarian can be considered religious or non-religious depending on their will.

 

However, all religions have the above elements. embraced: faith, assent/submission/subservience, and higher (than self-interested) purpose(s). What constitutes higher purpose is what is subject to individual experience and or perception.

 

Christianity has god and god's will, plan, and/or purpose. On is supposed to have faith in the will of god, and to submit to god's will. Not because one has to but because one wishes to. One must not merely worship the Christian god, one must embrace the Christian god, and god's will.

 

Buddhism is even subject to this of course. Buddhism is perhaps more formalized, and congruent than some other religions, but it none the less contains these essential traits.

 

I invite counter arguments, encourage experiments in what, why, and how will this definition break?

 

Cheers ;)

[InfiniteNow]

Religion: the concept around which a group of individuals finds comfort and strength in shared truths. Any better?

[Racoon]

Well, I do like the purpose statement in this one, but I don't like, nor do I agree with the afterlife portion. If I were to accept your definition, I would have to accept that I am not religious, nor do I follow a religion, in that I strictly rule out supernatural occurances basicly on principle, and don't personally believe in, nor count on an afterlife.

 

My religion is not the only one that does not have an afterlife.

 

I gave no definition of afterlife...

 

Maybe afterlife is merely biological decomposition in a pine box in a purchased burial plot.

perhaps its eternal bliss.

perhaps its reincarnation of the spirit..

 

Time still continues after your heart quits beating. Afterlife means after you die: and you will die and time will continue; so there is an afterlife...

 

;)

[InfiniteNow]

Afterlife means after you die

Well, actually... it means after life... but I'm just ribbing you as a brother might. :blahblahblah:

 

 

Your post death will still be right now for someone else. ;)

[infamous]

So, infy, it would seem explicit from your post that you hold faith as a necessary element for religion.

 

Is this correct?

I would certainly agree with that view KAC. Nevertheless, remember that the word faith is also defined on an individual bases. For some, faith only defines a belief that has no substance. A belief without evidence is blind by definition. I would characterize real faith as knowing without doubt. Let me give you an example:

 

Suppose you're a football fan and your team has just started it's season. They've only played 3 games so far and they've won all 3 by a hefty margain. You find yourself discussing these facts with a friend and make the statement, "My football team is looking pretty good this year, they may make the playoffs if they keep it up." At this point in your thinking, you have only reached hope, evidence hasn't risen to the point of faith. Somewhere around midseason, your team has won every game and is getting noticed by the press. Again, you're discussing these facts with a friend and you make the statement, "My football team is really doing well and I'm betting they will make the playoffs." Your thinking has now risen to a belief. The end of the regular season has arrived and your team is playing it's last game in the playoffs. They are two touchdowns ahead and there's only 30 seconds left on the clock. Even though, it ain't over till it's over, you make the statement to your friend sitting next to you in the stands, "My team is going to be World Champions." Now we're talking about faith. Even though the game isn't over, you KNOW your team is going to win. Faith is knowing.............Infy

[Vagabond -SC2-]

I think you may be referring to playing the odds.. I read you post with the football team and I did not read it to fit with working definitions of Faith. Your team up by 2 TDs with 30 seconds left is playing the odds. the odds are great that you team will win but faith I just dont make the connection it really has nothing to do with actually having evidence (knowing) something is true. That is why religious people speak of faith they have no hard evidence of the existence of their god, just faith the god does exist.

[infamous]

I think you may be referring to playing the odds.. I read you post with the football team and I did not read it to fit with working definitions of Faith. Your team up by 2 TDs with 30 seconds left is playing the odds. the odds are great that you team will win but faith I just dont make the connection it really has nothing to do with actually having evidence (knowing) something is true. That is why religious people speak of faith they have no hard evidence of the existence of their god, just faith the god does exist.

My faith is sufficient for me to know. I do not justify my knowing as evidence for anyone but myself. Those without faith won't know because they have no faith. Each has the right to define faith anyway they want and you certainly have the right to disagree. Nevertheless, my faith, and I stress the word my is sufficient to me for the knowing even if it means little to anyone else......................Infy

[Kriminal99]

I'm trying to see what your PRINCIPAL is here. I think you're principal is that if you live under a centre of rules with an authority, then it is a religion.

 

But surely this could mean that Saddam is a god, and Tony Blair, George Bush and every judge is a god and by observing their rules you are following a religion.

 

I'm not convinved your principal actually holds as it creates absurdities.

 

 

Reading this makes me think I correctly understood your principal. Now, according to you, your boss is a god :P .

 

 

 

Hmmm, I must have missed it. But I would say absolutely no. I've heard people, when confronted by truth, say that 'science is your god'. Bollocks. Science is observed fact.

 

I say that an absence of belief is fundamentally different to a belief of absence. Belief, is the key term. You have to have taken a completely irration leap of faith in my view.

 

Okay, so my attempt to answer what is a religion.

 

I agree with Hallenrm (so QP for him).

 

 

 

However, once that differential is made, one still needs to discribe what a 'religion' is.

 

A religion is any explanation for the workings of the Universe that requires a leap of faith rather than observation.

 

What makes a religion 'personal' rather than 'organised'?

 

Any religion that contains a written scripture or code that is believed to be of devine origin and is practiced by more than 1 person together is 'organised'.

 

'Devine' means caused by the part of the mechanics of the Universe that requires a leap of faith rather than observation.

 

'Personal' is anything that is not organised.

 

Problem solved :P

 

It is a source of power not a source of authority. People can always just be shot, they are not the source of power. Not even in a animal system is the alpha wolf (or whatever animal) the true power. In that case rather the idea that might makes right is the true source of power.

 

Among intelligent beings, the golden rule becomes a subset of might makes right - because whenever you do something that benefits yourself at the expesne of other people those other people will stop you.

 

Then in a socially evolved society respect for truth becomes a subset of the golden rule. Because everyone wants to best know how to use their resources to benefit themselves, everyone must curb their ego in favor of finding truth. (Meaning learn to admit when they are wrong)

 

Science is observed fact, but I never said anything about science I was talking about truth. Truth is a god in that it is a supreme power that affects us in this lifetime although its effect is not always obvious. You might think your the quickest gun in the west and can get away with robbing anyone but the truth is someone is eventually going to hunt you down because people don't like being stolen from.

 

Religious people live their life according to certain rules and in the case of most religions those rules are completely arbitrary. They might claim certain thigns to be wrong that are not objectively wrong because they think the bible says not to do them, and they may claim other things to be ok when morally they are wrong. God is simply something that motivates them to follow the rules of a given religion, hes the person who watches whether or not we follow the rules.

 

I have known many religious people that thought certain behavior was selfish (like questioning the wisdom of an elder) when in fact it is necessary to arrive at an accurate understanding of things. I have known other religious people that thought it was ok to gossip and straw man people they didn't like to death because god didn't say there was anything wrong with it.

 

One way to look at it is that I follow the rules of a different god, which is truth. If you want a definition of religion, you could try the dictionary - it doesn't preclude me from calling my beleifs a religion. Or you could look at other meanings of the word which seem to indicate that it relates to strictly following a set of rules and/or routine.

[HappytheStripper]

What Is Religion?

 

Religion is a belief system.. an idea of what one person supposes to be true.. and given value.. this belief is then passed on to other people through a communication system we call language.. using words to explain to another person.. an idea one person gave value..

 

A religious person is a believer.. its very simple in its basic form..

 

Ashley

[HydrogenBond]

If you look at the concept of God, it is a highly inclusive concept in most formal religions. God is suppose to be more than the universe and therefore includes all that plus more, with science only touching the tip of the iceburg. In other words, God is a 3-D concept that goes beyond temporal reason. Reason can explain some elements but can never exhaustively define this concept. This is dual cerebral hemisphere activity.

 

The right side of the brain is spatial and the left more cerebral. In the case of God, the right hemisphere creates an intuitive perceptioon, which is a type of translation of this fast dense memory perception. This will always be more advanced than our abiltiy to reason it. This creates a potential, internally between the ideal and the limitation of temporal experience and reason. This is why faith is a charisma instead of a learned skill. In other words, if one tries to put into words a limited explanation for an open concept, the best one can do is give a limited explanation, which isn't enough to define the intutition. It may provide rational seed that can set up an internal tension that allows one to experience the 3-D, intuitively. if this happens even once, faith keeps the connection alive.

 

A good analogy is a student learning about an advance concept in physics. It can initially memorize the relationship enough to create the illusion of understanding. If he maintains interesting, he may sweat all the math and abstractions until he finally runderstands deeply why it is so. Just like the old saying, the more you know the less you realize you know, this real understanding suddenly creates a tension to all that one realizes they don't know. Yet the gist of true understanding gives one intutition that the final answer will someday be revealed. This tension to the future is maintained with faith.

[IDMclean]

I will point out that we are not discussing the formal definition of god, that comes later in my book. The reason for that is simple. The number of forms of god, gods, deity and divine entities are huge. I can give you a definition of god that is a who, not a a what, and in the same breath give you a second definition of god that is a what and not a who.

 

You assert a, in my view, false assumption. Attributing the term God to one set. From what I can see it is either specifically the christian God or a general variation. My definition of what constitutes a "god" is most assuredly, and significantly different than that of the unknowable, undefinable and therefore irrelevant god.

 

On that note, I use the term faith in the sense of I have "faith in x". Which can be juxtaposed with "trust in x", "confidence in x". Much in the sense of faith that Infy uses.