Religion is Man-Made

Post Reply New Topic

I have always believed in God since I was a child. I didn't believe because I was forced to; I believed because my heart said so. I never truly believed in a wrathful God, even though the "Bible" said so. I also believe in things like spirits coming back to comfort the bereaved, (I don't know why some Christians think that it's occultic or Satanic; when I sense spirits they are extremely kind to me), and a literal heaven and hell, but I don't identify as Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu or any religious denomination. I don't want to get caught up in the rituals and anything. I just want to have a relationship with God, in a way I feel most comfortable in, not what the churches preach. I have read the Bible, some parts of the Quran, Swedenborgianism, and Greek and Nordic mythology. Even though there are some beliefs I don't agree with, like reincarnation/karma, I have respect for other people's beliefs as long as they don't shove them down my throat. Religion is man-made. A relationship with God and your fellow man is all that matters. Does anyone else feel like this? http://www.truthforallpeople.com/index. ... &Itemid=58 Here is a group that I'm in that supports these ideas, if you're interested that is.

If you haven't already, I would suggest reading Thirty Years Among The Dead by Carl Wickland. It's available in pdf format online. It's completely based on his own interactions with spirits through his wife who was a medium. It helped me to make sense of a lot of things that nothing else could make sense of for me. I promise you won't regret it.

In other news: Water is Wet

Just in case my signature changes soon, here it is in full:

RELIGION (n):
1. The socio-political expression of faith
2. A means of explaining the unknownable to the gullible
3. A means of justifying arson, murder, rape, and theft
4. A means of coercing funds from peasants

I would add at this point:

5. A means to assure conformity and obedience
6. A means to suppress creativity, curiosity, free will, and scientific investigation
7. An opiate for the masses

"I'm an atheist. No, don't boo! A lot of people have imaginary friends... I've just grown out of mine." -Jimmy Carr

As for the Bible...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RV46fsmx6E[/youtube]

"We need more atheists, and nothing will get you there quicker than reading the damn Bible."

I told my son last week that my church could use a few Atheists like him on it's Board of Elders - he can cut through BS better that I can!

@Fnord and Asp-Z,
I understand that you're both atheists, and I respect your beliefs. I also understand that in the name of religion, it made horrible mistakes. However, not all religious people are bad, and the Bible has been misinterpreted over the centuries. I wasn't saying religion was man-made in an atheistic standpoint, but that Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Jainism, etc. cannot fit God into a box. But don't bash someone for having different beliefs than you. I don't force my beliefs on you, so don't expect me to become atheist for you. You say religion is a means to assure conformity, but some atheists have an extreme intolerance toward theists/believers, and want them to be atheist as well. I guess being an atheist, in some standards, is a requirement for being a true Aspie.

you make a thread with the title religion is man made and expect atheists to do anything but post their agreement in various forms?

only to throw what to me looks like a tantrum when you dont like the answer?

It's true, man also made God in his own image.

What I'd recommend is going to be slightly shocking, but you should read up on Orthodox Christian theology. I did and it's really quite fascinating stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christus_Victor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ransom_theory_of_atonement

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o[/youtube]

7 Rules of Religion:

1. Distant Ideals - The promise of personal salvation through personal perfection. This is the Great Lottery, because you may never know where that smidgen of imperfection may lie within your soul, so you go back each week to keep buying the spiritual "Lottery Ticket" in the hope that you will win the Grand Prize - eternity in paradise, reincarnation, or ascent to a higher plane of being.

2. Canonical Texts - The unaltered Holy Scriptures of any given religion. These writings were penned either by the founder of the religion, or the families, friends and associates of the founder. It is usually the latter, because the founder would be too pure and honest to say some of the things about himself (or herself), that his or her friend will exaggerate and embellish on to the point that a simple meal shared with a dozen or so followers becomes a feast for thousands.

3. Elite Interpreters of the Word - No mere lay-person is wise enough to interpret the Holy Scriptures. This requires a special in-bred clique of mutually-educated interpreters who can take a simple phrase like "Love Your Neighbor" and turn it into a thousand-page commentary on the ethics and morality of social living, complete with commands, rules, bylaws, and exceptions. To the lay-person, the chameleon-like nature of these interpretations seems to always be interpreted to the advantage and benefit of the people interpreting them, even though the Holy Scriptures themselves never seem to change at all.

4. Sin & Salvation - The interpretations of the Holy Scriptures produce rules that either condemn or praise - there is no in-between. Rewards are deferred to the Afterlife and punishments are both swift and extreme. All judgments are final, and there is no appeal.

5. Rituals of Commitment & Transformation - Symbolic enactments that create powerful psychological barriers against "backsliding" and temptation, and that mandate and facilitate the release of the past lifestyle and the acceptance of the new. A common enactment is the ritual of confession, where sins are released and rituals of absolution used to cleanse the person of their former sinful ways.

6. Rules for Living - Right-living leads to right-thinking. Nothing less than total conformance is required if you are to attain a higher state of being. Religions control all parts of your life, including (and especially) the private parts. Such social control is both ruthless in its execution and primarily beneficial to the religious leaders - who, once recognized as pious, are free to indulge in the same vices and "pleasures of the flesh" that they direct their followers to avoid. After all, how dare anyone accuse such a pious person of adultery, theft, or abuse and exploitation of children? Only those sent by Evil Influences...

7. Insiders Versus Outsiders - Religious institutions set themselves up as exclusive clubs, with sharp separations between members and non-members in an "Us Versus Them" adversarial context. Separating believers from non-believers helps keep members socially isolated, as well as holding contrary evidence, reasoning, and testimony at bay. Non-members are often held away by demonizing them as bad, wicked and attackers of the faith. This provides reason for righteous defense and holy war, which serves to only sharpen the divide as others are provoked into battle. The division is accentuated in many ways, from language to dress to ways of behaving. Thus insiders can recognize one another even in a crowd.

I am not 100% behind this summary. I think it applies strongly to prostelysing faiths (Islam and Christianity chief among them), but it breaks down in any attempt at broader application.



This is difficult to apply to Judaism. While there is certainly talmudic reference to "the world to come," that phrase does not appear in Tanakh. Beliefs related to the Messianic Age are tied to the earthly world. Even where Jewish though does encompass a spiritual afterlife, it is not one that is restricted to the faithful (Gentiles are just as eligible for admission) or those free from sin (we only say the mourner's kaddish for eleven months, since that is the longest extent that one would be in Gehenna.

While "salvation," "nirvanna," or any of the other myriad terms are common to almost all religious tradition, it is consistent with the understanding that while moral conduct may be desirable as an end in itself, it is not always in our interest to pursue moral conduct. The notion of salvation gives us an overriding stake in moral conduct. (We'll get to what constitutes moral conduct in a later point).



Well, this certainly applies to the, "People of the Book." And certainly any common cultural practice needs to have some reference point in order to survive over multiple generations in multiple communities. But many religious tradtions are quite happy to view their scriptures as metaphorical, rather than literal and to admit of alteration.



Here, again, I think you are tarring all with the same brush. There are many religions which emphasize the personal relationship with the divine and a personal understanding of scripture. That being said, as with scripture, a common cultural practice will need some degree of organization. But not all traditions hold that these are exclusive or oligarchic. Many religious traditions have no priestly class of any kind--Quakers and Sikhs being two key examples. While Quakers certainly have recorded ministers and Sikhs have granthis, neither of these offices is predicated on any particular exclusivity. Other religions involve periods of clerical service for all believers.



I am not even sure that I agree that your classification even applies to most Christian denominations. While Roman Catholicism attempts to create rules of universal application, there is a clear understanding that perfect compliance is impossible, and that confession and absolution are part and parcel fo the sin and salvation package. There is no need for an "in-between" because there is an inter-relationship.

Among Jews, there are certainly strong laws governing conduct--but the matter of restitution for wrongdoing is very much an earthly matter. For example, G-d will not forgive wrongs committed against another person, and foregiveness must be sought directly from the person wronged. Divine Judgement is an annual event, and there is a clear 10 day window of opportunity to clean up one's act.

But any institutional practice is that is interested in encouraging moral conduct is likely to involve some degree of guidance on what is moral and what is not; and on the consequences for adherence or failure. But there exist hundreds of degrees of difference in the rigidity of both.



Ritual is part and parcel of relious practice, certainly. Like scripture and clericism, it is what keeps cultural practice ongoing through generations and across communities.

But the concept of confession and absolution is, I suggest, a uniquely Christian perspective. I am aware of nothing comparable in other traditions.



Again, how can an insitution promote ideals of moral conduct without seeking to provide guidance on all aspects of daily life. I don't stop being a moral person at my front doorstep. My conduct towards my family might be different than my conduct towards my neighbour--but I am not at all sure that my conduct towards my family is exempt from scrutiny.

While examples of ruthless and self-interested control are plainly evident, I see nothing to suggest that they are the norm. These should, I suggest, be distinguished from the issue of hypocrisy. Hypocrisy should, of course, be exposed and censured. But even in the Roman Catholic Church the epidemic of abuse is one that touches on a small percentage of priests. It is by no means a universal hallmark of priesthood.



Judaism is certainly exclusive--but with a clear belief that Gentiles are part of creation, that G-d expects them to abide by seven laws, and that there is a place in the world to come for them. Sikhism recognizes the validity of all other religious traditions. Even Roman Catholicism has acknoledged that Judaism is a, "valid route to divine grace." Meanwhile, tribalism continues unabated.

I firmly support any attempt to hold religions, religious leaders and uncritical followers responsible for the sins committed in the name of their religion. But I think it is intellectually shallow to uncritically connect all religions and religious observance with the errors committed by only some of them.