Most notably the religion of atheism.

I didn't because I saw none that apply.


My own faith is very internal too. Also to the degree that few people know what I believe. But it's certainly not only dedicated to personal improvement. There's more to it than that alone.

Oh really?

1. Atheism is not a religion, oddly enough. Though, if you're going in that direction, I suggest making Dawkins the pope. We will hold mass on Wednesdays, and pray to a sacred vacuum jar.

2. Name 1 bigoted dogma that atheism promotes. As far as I am concerned, I can only really find one tenet of atheism: No Gods Allowed! Even this is hardly followed universally, as many atheists tend to fantasize about higher powers and are probably just deists in disguise.

Don't even try the 'omg Dictaterz!' card. It's really quite worthless.

Killer. Can we smoke crack during worship

Gotta smoke a fat rock while doing deep knee bends to the vacuum jar

Yeah, no godz allowed. That's the thing that makes atheism just another religion.

Just like all the others, they say all the others are wrong.

That's one of the basic unknown definitions of a religion. The one that's not spoken

Atheism is a religion in the same way that anarchy is a government.

Your definition for religion is also bogus-- try applying it to other things.

Also, I have yet to see a bigoted and dogmatic value come out of atheism that makes the world worse....

Yeah, heard it all before. If you haven't seen "bigoted and dogmatic values ome out of atheism that make the world worse" you either haven't been paying attention or you're an atheist. Those engaged in any particular religion will not tolerate or even examine any criticism.

Which leads me to beleive you're an atheist.

Carry on.

Yes, I am currently an atheist. Please continue by telling me a bigoted and dogmatic value promoted by atheism. One will suffice.

I see a distinction between religion (a social activity) and faith (which is private). I also didn't read any of the choices as being exclusive, since the poll is designed to allow multiple selections.

__________________
please click and help the eggs hatch!

"The only abnormality is the incapacity to love"
-Anias Nin

different sects formulate different truths, but it is almost impossible to nail down some point of dogma that all of Christianity or all of Islam, or all of Hinduism, etc... would agree upon. Evangelical American Christians would state that homosexuality is a sin, but i think that is a skewed reading of the Old Testament. Catholics believe birth control is wrong, but Protestants think thats crazy. Islam is even more varied in it's belief because it lacks the organized structure of Christianity. as for Judaism, Jewish doctrine states that the only being that knows absolute truth is God and man can never know absolute truth. For Christianity one could go through the Nicene Creed and probably every Christian would agree on that as truth and dogma, but that doesn't effect the world outside of Christianity. The things religious people are most dogmatic about are the belief in some higher power, but that is nature of religion.

As for religion and society, religion's primary focus is not toward being "useful" for society. Religion exists because the religious person believes that the "higher power" (from many gods in paganism to moksha in Hinduism) deserves worship and respect. Christians do not follow Christ because he teaches useful or positive values for society. Christ is no moral teacher, but the Savior. Moral values come with religion, but only as a small inconsistent side effect.

__________________
"A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent."
-John Calvin

Different sects of Christianity have varying dogmas, but that doesn't make the dogmas any less existent.

Btw, a skewed reading of the old testament? How can books like Leviticus be interpreted in any fashion but a literal one.

Dogmas are just the assertion of truth. Example: murder is wrong. That is a religious truth for me that I will assert to my grave without question (basically the definition of dogma). Another example: God exists. That is a truth I will assert to my grave and beyond. People only have problems with Dogma when they don't agree with it, not dogma in general. I have yet to encounter a person who has given me grief over the first assertion, but the second one I get called out on all the time.


Of course Leviticus was meant to be read in a literal fashion, but it was meant to be read literally by early Iron age shepherds living in a rather poor section of the Middle East. It was not meant to be taken literally by 21st century middle class Americans living in suburbia. That is where the problem comes from. Context and history are vitally important to Bible. To read the Bible without those is to read the Bible with blinders on thus giving you a skewed reading.

__________________
"A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent."
-John Calvin

That's because certain dogmas tend to help people and others tend to hurt people.
So, in the past 3000 years God has changed his mind? I mean when something is a sin, it is a sin....

I'm of a similar opinion.

__________________
Remember the Turkey Genocide.

Dogma's in and of themselves don't hurt a thing. as I said, they are just the assertion of a religious truth. People are the ones who make dogmas extreme. for 2 billion Christians the belief in God is a dogma, but only a handful are extreme about it.


Since when is sin so black and white? Sin is not choosing the wrong option when the correct option could have been choosen, but it is an pervasive force that impacts all people. Even Christ does not see Sin that way. He heals people and the sabbath all the time, but it isn't sin for him to do so. He tells his disciples to gather grain on the sabbath and it still isn't a sin. Sin depends on the circumstances that we are in. Thus God hasn't changed his mind, but circumstances for people have changed quite a bit in the last 3000 years. Salvation no longer comes from following the law, but through Jesus Christ. That is the major change.

__________________
"A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent."
-John Calvin

I believe it is of prime importance to be specific when using terms. Regarding the word "religion" it means many things to many people and often that meaning is assumed and unstated. This causes great confusion between believers and between those who study religion either through theology, psychology, or sociology. Just think what it does for us laypersons?

As of right now with a total of 14 voters we have:

85.71% believe Religion is a nonrational engagement.
42.86% believe Religion is a meaningful integrative engagement.
78.57% believe Religion is wishful, defensive compensatory belief created to assuage fears and anxiety.
28.57% believe Religion is a process of increasing self-realization.
35.71% believe Religion is fixation/regression.
50.00% believe Religion is an exoteric engagement that serves a cultural/social function.
21.43% believe Religion is an esoteric engagement that culminates in a higher mystical experience or awareness.
42.86% believe Religion is a legitimizing practice that helps a person to integrate a certain worldview.
28.57% believe Religion is a authenticating practice that helps a person to transform into higher levels of being.

These definitions were taken from Ken Wilber's A Sociable God (I paraphrased, rather than use some of his terminology which would require further explanation). He presented them as the most common definitions (unfortunately most often unspoken) used in sociology and psychology to define religion. I also used them because for many reasons I agree with all of them. When I set up this poll I also voted, voting for all of them.

I believe that the mature human being is a compounded entity. Through evolution and through natural individual growth we develop through several stages of ever expanding awareness and ever diminishing narcissism (unless, of course, something wrong happens). In a sense, the same occurs collectively within cultures. Many psychologists and sociologists have recognized these stages of development through their own research. Jean Piaget's stages of cognitive development; Jane Loevinger's ego stages; the value stages of Don Beck and Christopher Cowan; Robert Kegan's self-related stages, Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral judgement; Carol Gilligan's female hierarchy of moral stages; Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs; Jurgen Habermas' epochs; Jean Gebser stages of socialcultural evolution; and Wilber's stages of ontogeny and phylogeny. Several have also noticed the developmental unfolding/enfolding of spiritual development (at least those who accept spirituality as a valid knowledge base and depending on how they define spirituality or religion). While each of these different researchers have their own unique approach and focus, all of them agree with the basic premise of development as an unfolding of ever expanding capacity and complexity. When we add, as Wilber and some others have, the developmental schemes of the many great religious traditions of the world we get a very complete map of the development of human consciousness.

Here is an example of Wilber's standard map of the stages of self-sense -- basic cognitive structure -- his stages of worldview -- and major epochs (these should not be viewed as a simplistic ladder, but as fluid waves that overlap. This is the least complex presentation of Wilber's stages of development, he usually presents 10 stages, but he has used several more. Celsius and Fahrenheit are different scales, but they both measure temperature):

pre-conventional/pre-rational
1. material self -- sensation/perception -- archaic -- foraging age
2. body-ego -- impulse/emotional -- magical -- horticultural age
conventional/rational (though the rational aspect only begins during the mature persona stage)
3. persona -- role-rule/concept -- mythic -- agrarian age
4. ego -- formal logic -- rational -- industrial age
post-conventional/post-rational or trans-rational (this phase actually begins during the mature ego stage)
5. centaur -- vision logic -- holistic/integration -- information age
6. soul -- archetypal -- psychic/subtle -- (there are no cultures currently at or above this level of development)
7. spirit -- formless -- causal/nondual -- (same as above)

Now, of course, many posters will not agree with this developmental scheme, but it is based on research from developmental psychology, hermeneutics, structural analysis, cultural anthropology, sociology and the great religious traditions (mystical).

The reason I present this very generalized (and incomplete) introduction to levels of development will become apparent as I proceed, I hope.

The Definitions. Rather than explain my reasons for presenting the poll questions in the order I presented them I am going to explain them in the order of, for the lack of a better word, their popularity.

1. 85.71% believe Religion is a nonrational engagement. The big winner, but because of how this definition is phrased and used it could also be considered the big loser. For those who religion is a positive affair it is considered nonrational because it is perceived as knowledge beyond rational logic. It is seen as standing above or a part from rational thought, yet presenting intuitions or insights that are valid and worthy on their own right. For those who consider religion a negative affair, rationality is believed to be of higher worth and "really" real. Science is above religion, which is full of superstitions and myths and silliness. Regardless, religion is seen as occurring only on certain nonrational levels. If you are pro-religion it is something you will grow into, if you are anti-religion it is something you will hopefully outgrow.

3. 78.57% believe Religion is wishful, defensive compensatory belief created to assuage fears and anxiety. Each level of development requires a certain kind of nourishment, for example physical food, emotional food, mental food, and spiritual food. Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs is in a sense a hierarchy of foods that are phase-specific for each level of development: physiological needs (material self), safety needs (magical body protection), belongingness needs (mythic-membership), self-esteem needs (rational-reflexive), self-actualization needs (centaur/psychic) and the self-transcendent needs (subtle/causal).* In this sense religion could be said to be the system of exchange that supports and supplies the needs of each level, while at the same time limits or alleviates the threats to that level's primary fears (phase-specific fears: for example hunger, violence, excommunication, and etc.) along with the Great Fear Death. In this case, even science can function as a religion, giving its believer food for thought and a belief system to "hang on to."

6. 50.00% believe Religion is an exoteric engagement that serves a cultural/social function. Many theorists have pointed out the functionality of religion. How, in spite of the stated meaning or purpose of a religious practice, it actually serves as the social glue that holds a culture together. The "rain dance" doesn't actually bring rain, it brings the community together. The use of the term exoteric has also been used to refer to the outer or open or public aspects of a religion which has a smaller group dedicated to contemplative practice such as contemplative prayer or meditation. This outer or public aspect is both preliminary practice for the higher teachings (techniques) if one chooses that life AND functions as the social glue that holds a community together within a shared belief system.

2. 42.86% believe Religion is a meaningful integrative engagement. With this definition, religion is something that is found on all levels of development, including the rational level. Here religion is a functional activity of seeking meaning. In a sense like definition 3, this definition is the drive or need for the food of each level, but it more specifically refers to a search for meaning, truth, stability and subject-object relationship/exchange at each level. Whether it appears religious or secular is unimportant; it is religious or meaning searching by definition.

8. 42.86% believe Religion is a legitimizing practice that helps a person to integrate a certain worldview. This one is similar to definition 2, but it is more cultural specific. Robert Bellah in The broken covenant pointed to American "civil religion" (a mixture of Protestant ethics and American nationalistic symbols) as a legitimizing force that held America together and in a fairly solid manner. That is until the 1960's. Chinese Maoism would be another example of a legitimizing force that held communist China together. The point is that these are horizontal in nature. It helps members gain meaning (supplying the needed food and alleviating the fears and anxieties considered most worthy within the culture) within a certain worldview (level) or culture and as long as everything remains undisturbed, everything will be just fine. In America the crisis of legitimacy was the Summer of Love, student protests, and the Vietnam War. If you use this definition, you will be making the value judgement of what religion is more or less legitimate for a given worldview or cultural level of development.

5. 35.71% believe Religion is fixation/regression. This definition is never invoked by someone who is pro-religion. It is the standard position of Freud and in sociology has been called primitivization theory. Religion is only a childish affair, that humanity will eventually outgrow once it drops its need for a mythic parental figure to compensate for its fears and anxieties, which of course means our mortality. Religion is something you will outgrow, unless there is something wrong with you (fixation). It has its place in childhood or in early cultural development, but once an individual has matured or a culture has advanced enough it is left behind (unless it regresses). Unfortunately this view tends to confuse and collapse all religious insight downward to desires of wish fulfillment. No child mentality could ever formulate the concept of the Bodhisattva Vow or the selflessness of Christ. The flip side is that many Jungians and New Agers tend to elevate all pre-rational oceanic feelings of oneness upward. Both I believe are wrong when they generalize religion or religious insight in such a manner. Yet, there are situations or cases when Freud is correct -- religion "can be" a fixation/regression, as in the case of a cult.

4. 28.57% believe Religion is a process of increasing self-realization. This was the view of Hegel, that all of history and evolution was an evolutionary process of increasing self-realization and the overcoming of alienation via the return of spirit to spirit as spirit. This is religion as the transformative drive or impulse, dying to each level of being to find increasingly higher structures of truth and being until one becomes God-Realized Adaptation itself.

9. 28.57% believe Religion is a authenticating practice that helps a person to transform into higher levels of being. Similar to definition 4, here religion has the core purpose of transformation into a higher levels of being (i.e., the psychic, subtle, causal, and nondual levels) through specific practices followed by an elite order of practitioners (monks, nuns, yogis, yoginis, masters, and sages). One can determine the "degree of authenticity" by determining the relative degree of actual transformation delivered by a given religion or worldview. This requires the taking up of a specific spiritual practice or discipline, usually within a community of practitioners that help support each other and help create an environment where transformation is more likely to occur. Unlike definition 8 (legitimizing or legitimate) authenticate religion is about vertical transformation rather than horizontal translation.

7. 21.43% believe Religion is an esoteric engagement that culminates in a higher mystical experience or awareness. This refers to the higher or advanced aspects of religious practice, with the understand that this practice culminates in mystical experience and has the goal of structural adaptation to that mystical level of awareness (the psychic, subtle, causal, and nondual levels). Different practices tend to open one up to experiencing specific levels, but with continued practice or with some traditions a slight change to the practice (once one has had a peek) continuing will lead to structural adaptation to that level of being as a permanent trait. I believe that this is the core purpose of authentic religion and also the birth place of all religions. Notice that the history of nearly all of the great religious traditions begins with either a revelation or an enlightenment of one or a few individuals -- Christ and the twelve, Buddha and the four. In almost every case I can think of, a single or a core group gained or had an experience that they believed important enough to share, and those they shared with agreed with the value and importance of either holding or have that same experience. From those, often simple, beginnings religions were born and eventually, after being passed down through the generation became great.

I hope this is helpful.

Ken Wilber: Welcome
A different sort of introduction to Ken Wilber's theories and ideas: Ken Wilber Online: A Summary of Integral Psychology
*Maslow, A. The farther reaches of human nature. New York: Viking, 1971.

tashi deleks,

M

__________________
"They haven't got Brains, any of them, only grey fluff that's blown into their heads by mistake, and they don't Think." -- Eeyore, The House At Pooh Corner

Sit like a mountain,
Breathe like the wind,
Mind like the Sky.

When all the Gods are crazy, who do you pray to?