I was searching for something else, but found this:
"……The problem of this definition is that it eliminates several “systems” which do not have a God, as such. One example is Buddhism - the Buddha being just a very exemplary, wise and good human. Another example might be Native American ethnic religions - they always gave me the impression that they were not too concerned with the concept of a Deity. [or was that just my impression?] Are these not religions? "
I don’t have a clear question that will makes sense, just wondering how one can have a religion without any concept of one or more Gods? What is the status of whatever or whoever replaces the entity of erm ‘God’ in these ‘religions’?
Look at the end at why we need religion and work backwards. Spirituality need not have a focal point of worship, it could be how you deal with others based on prior learnings or composite history and philosophies of mankind and bettering yourself from those aspects. Sometimes I do feel that god is within each one of us, call it "sense ofbeing", "aatma" whatever...to understand ourselves better might be the reason for being therefore distancing the spiritual from the physical might mean that deity driven religions are wrong.
Yeah Matsui, that makes sense. Why we need a religion is another good discussion topic. God surely is within us and everywhere around us, hence the comforting feeling of being protected, loved and watched at no matter where you are.
One religion doesn't have to be proven wrong to justify another, at least while you're still in the process of learning and getting to know your own self.
So you're saying that religions that don't have a focal point, such as one or more Gods, are purely based on spirituality? Which is good, but isn't that a little too 'open' term? Matlab phir what is the difference between all these 'systems' or religions?
Our species evolved the concept of religion in order to stop us from tearing each other apart like animals and eating each other's babies. In order to convince human beings to go from me first to my group first, they had to invent a super-power that dictated this. Super-power was granted some super-natural powers in order to convince the hoi polloi. All this is not to denigrate any religion. Even though it was only a ruse, it worked fairly well at keeping the societies at peace as long as the such adhering groups were ethnically alike that is to say looked alike, talked alike and lived close by.
The problem with the idea began when the adherents of one such belief system (BS) began believing that their BS was better than someone elses BS and must be focerd down other's throats even if in the process you had to cut others' throats. Hence the rise of all religious fundamentalism and accompanying violence.
having a religion without a "god" is of no good at all....
and to know why, we first have to ask ourselves why do we need a religion....
perhaps the simplest answer wud be that a religion is needed to keep a check on our moral values....
in the absence of which, the society wud run into a havoc and crime rates will shoot up to infinity....
but then again, as someone put it, to have a check on us, God has to play the part of the Big Brother, watching us all the time....
we wud not feel reluctant to commit crimes unless fear of being caught stops us, or we know that we r being watched....
and only God can fit the role of a watcher....
hence a religion without god, is like having a prison without a guard....
buddhism isnt a god-less religion....
where did u get that from????
Isn't concept of God really about how you view afterlife?
In other words, if you are to recycle back to this world in different forms (main concept of eastern religions) you can probably take God out of the equation, replaced by a judge. You are judged in this world and after based on your actions. Other times you just get lucky ... i.e. the times when good things happen to you - the concept of karma.
In western religions (Islam, Christianity & Judaism) the concept is different. God intervenes in all your actions & while your reap what you sow, he can forgive you (cos he can) .. but you don't come back to this world. While living, if good things happen to you it is because God is companionate & is looking after you … if bad things happen to you it’s because there is always a test. God is active & can be seeked for help ... in eastern religion; it's all what you do!!!
ahmadjee, the cncept of god should be how to view this life not afterlife. Where abrahamic faiths fail is their insistence on the after life being good or bad vis-a-vis this life. SO this life takes a back seat to something that is less tanglible and therefore nebulous. What results is not a faith that encompasses all humanity but a faith that is exclusive to the core. The acts of the individuals are driven by fear of what might happen in the after life not how to treat people out of love.
This is the biggest failing of abrahamic faiths.
Three or four years ago we had a thread in Religion on whether the genesis of moral values is divinely inspired or not. I am of the belief that socail darwinism can help lay the moral framework better than any God ever made up.
All religions, if they survive long enough have deities.
certain mainstream branches of buddhism, did go on to deify buddha.
the so-called spirituality doctrines these days are neither old enuff nor have the right kind of prophetic leadership, that abrahamic faiths enjoyed, so they cannot have true human or non-human deities in the relgion that poeple can look up to.
To claim divine support like that Abrahamic prohpets did, you need to be a real prophet, and not any altoo faltoo philosopher neem hakeeming over modern-day existence.
"god is within us"?
so whats the difference between the non-god you and the god part then?
Matty, I sort of agree with u on ur last point that Abrahamic religions focus more on the afterlife then this life.. however, i think this is not he fault of the religion, not was it the message... its the people who interpret and teach that have forgotten that religion also teaches us how to be good in this life and we will be rewarded here as well..
if some people have distorted the message, it doesnt mean the message was itself wrong
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
Where abrahamic faiths fail is their insistence on the after life being good or bad vis-a-vis this life.
[/QUOTE]
and how did u jump to the conclusion that Abrahamic faiths have failed????
Arvind that is like nullifying the entire concept of religion, which is not really what we're talking about here :)
"only God can fit the role of a watcher" yeah but if we put this up against "Spirituality need not have a focal point of worship" - So if spirituality teaches us to know our selves better and lead a peaceful life there wouldn't be any need for a 'watcher' no?
And I copied that quote about Buddhism from some website, I've not pasted that as a fact, as you can see.
Matsui, I understand your point, but the love versus fear that you've talked about in the other thread as well, has more to do with what ppl of our times have chosen to focus on. Otherwise there's a strong concept of 'haqooq-ul-aibaad' which teaches you how to deal with human beings.
To claim divine support like that Abrahamic prohpets did, you need to be a real prophet, and not any altoo faltoo philosopher neem hakeeming over modern-day existence.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ghuLail: *
its called gift of the gab, jaahil "Aadmea"!
[/QUOTE]
Ok ghuLail. Here's some English 101 for you. Gift of gab means a gift of talking, speech, not of writing. Gift of word means gift of being able to write in an original way. You certainly have the latter, the former, I have no way of knowing. You may however look up a dictionary from time to time and not call people jaahil unthinkingly.