Why Do People Embrace Religion Instead Of Only Spirituality?

Religion puts the person in a Spectator's seat.

Religion happens outside of ones self and requires little effort on the part of the participant.

Religion is the path of least resistance, this is why more choose Religion, it is easier.

Spirituality constantly requires action on the part of the participant.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by 547000


to believe in a God. It is peoples actions in the name of god that cause problems. And people following blindly.

More humans have been slaughtered on this planet by atheists and immoral dictators than any religion.
Stalin
Hitler heeded psychic readings
Pol Pot
Mao
...

I think its great you had an experience and get to expand on that in your belief.

Originally posted by IandEye
Reply to post by John_Q_Llama

 

because religion is being part of a cohesive group and spirituality is a personal experience that can be talked about but isnt occuring in a shared group experienece.

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

Ding ding ding. We have a winner. This is the exact reason.

There are three components, faith, religion and theology. Faith is your personal belief. Religion in the community aspect of that and theology is the intellectual aspect of it. They are, in my opinion, in decreasing order of importance. Your faith ("spirituality", if you like) is of the utmost importance, then religion, then theology.

However, it is important to recognize the value of all three, because they serve to support and validate each other. If you have a spiritual belief that has no religious or theological component, you've nothing that can be validated beyond yourself. If you have religion but no true faith (and this is far more common than Christians would like to admit,) you similarly have nothing.

More to the point of the OP, religion is important because it helps to establish your faith within the context of other people who share your faith. We tend to rally around the doctrine of religion, which is often nothing more than a needless complication that arises from the interpretation of some aspect of faith, but it serves to bridge the gap between your faith and mine (assuming that you're a Methodist as well, lol.)

Originally posted by FiatLux

Originally posted by IandEye
Reply to post by sticky

 

I disagree with you. 'spirituality' feeds the ego as it is a completely personalized thing.

Does it really? And I disagree with you. Let`s look at the words spiritual and spirituality and see how they are defined.

Main Entry: 1spir·i·tu·al
Pronunciation: \ˈspir-i-chə-wəl, -i-chəl, -ich-wəl\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French & Late Latin; Anglo-French espirital, spiritual, from Late Latin spiritualis, from Latin, of breathing, of wind, from spiritus
Date: 14th century
1 : of, relating to, consisting of, or affecting the spirit : incorporeal
2 a : of or relating to sacred matters b : ecclesiastical rather than lay or temporal
3 : concerned with religious values
4 : related or joined in spirit
5 a : of or relating to supernatural beings or phenomena b : of, relating to, or involving spiritualism : spiritualistic

Main Entry: spir·i·tu·al·i·ty
Pronunciation: \ˌspir-i-chə-ˈwa-lə-tē\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural spir·i·tu·al·i·ties
Date: 15th century
1 : something that in ecclesiastical law belongs to the church or to a cleric as such
2 : clergy
3 : sensitivity or attachment to religious values
4 : the quality or state of being spiritual

So, how does that feed the ego when the same spirit is within and without each of us? When one goes on that journey to find the spirit within, to balance the physical with the spirit, how does that feed the ego? It`s only bad, if you allow it to feed the ego, just like anything else in life.

emotionalism isn't really the truth and the best part about religion is that you have to trust that the wisest people in history have been working so that you can continue their work.

It`s the lack of trust we have in the spirit within us that keeps us tied to old religious practices of looking to "those wisest people" for all the answers.

I am sick and tired of the sense that 'freedom' means individuality.

So, in your terms, an individual can`t have freedom? Any individual can have freedom from the constraints that organized religion places on people. Though the spirit within us is the same, the physical body we walk around in, gives us the freedom to see reality differently as an "individual".

just like everything else there are good and bad fruits found in any religion but the truth can be found in any religion if you look hard enough too.

The question would be, why does religion obscure the truth? That in itself can be a good thing. It forces us to go looking for truth as an "individual", it`s where we go to find it is the main thing. Truth is within the spirit that is within each of us.

'religion' comes from the latin 'religare' which means 'to rejoin'.

The term religion (from Latin: religio meaning "bind, connect"). In todays world, it has many meanings.

you can not rejoin yourself you can only lose your self to rejoin reality.

To a degree, you are right. We all have a common individual reality. I can see you, you can see me, we can see each other. Only, what many don`t understand is, that is where individuality ends. Ego doesn`t like to believe, or even understand, that we are all just one spirit within different bodies, seeing reality from many different levels of spiritual growth.

which edition dictionary did you use? who edited it and what religion were they? you didn't cite a page.......

all im getting at is that after obtaining a BA in religious studies i have learned that- within that field of experts....you know, the people who have devoted their entire lives to codifying religion instead of business, snowboarding, or whatever- not only does religare mean to yoke, or rejoin (in sanskrit the very same word is "yoga") but "spiritual" refers to the personal experience while "religion" is the group's or society's accepted rules, steps, matrix or whatever regarding spiritual experience.. maybe it's just jargon, but it does belong to the realm of academia

it's important to remember that there have been religions for a long time. "religion" doesn't mean christianity, judaism, or any of that. its a broader term that covers thousands of beliefs from 10's of 1000's of years, maybe more. it's how order was established in early societies (some modern ones) and whether you believe it or not, all of western society is based upon it- good and bad makes the world go round, so to speak......

religion doesn't obscure the truth. people do that. religion is an inanimate idea- it's not "real"

just my opinions having studied this topic in depth

i do not intend to offend.

Originally posted by slugger9787
And you need to use caution that the SPIRIT behind and producing your spiritual experience is a good and HOLY ONE.

Spirit in the absence of reason and conscience is playing with fire, so to say.

Hi slugger,

We humans are really stuck on the experience of Duality aren't we?

I mean, many recognise, either religiously or "spiritually" that everything is part of One thing.. call it our universe, God, even George if we wish.

But we then try to add behaviours and attributes to this One thing, based on our limited human perspective, while forgetting that we really know nothing about it.

And so we limit ourself to Believing in Duality.

In doing so we had to create good and bad concepts to support this attachment to Duality. So we came up with God and Satan, and then Believed what we created.

What I'm trying to show you is that there is only One 'Spirit'.. for want of better words.. and that it exists as variations of experience available for itself to have.

My experience for well over 35 years shows me that there is nothing to Fear... even when faced with something un-human in appearance that acts negatively toward us.. all we need to do is Love it unconditionally, which begins it's healing back into a more "positive" choice.

For in the end, all Souls are equals, and some simply choose different experiences to what you and I chose as human beings. All are part of the One thing experiencing Itself.

reply to post by Tayesin


I have learned that the only people who should use we in conversation are Kings, Editors and people with tapeworms.

Thank you for your response. your input.

We is duality in speech, is is not?
speech is preceded by thought.

Hindu religion and karma in practice yielded the caste system which is dual duality (four levels of caste system). It is pantheism and polytheism and very pagan. Founded by a human.

animal spirit guides, soul mates point to "duality"

oooooohmmmmmmmmmmmmm
versus
Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name...



[edit on 14-8-2010 by slugger9787]

reply to post by John_Q_Llama

Well religion is an aspect of spirituality. My question is why not follow esotericism as opposed to exotericism. The esoteric lies behind the exoteric and leads to a greater understandstanding than flaunting of a book that is read uncritically.

Give me an esoteric Xtian everytime

Originally posted by slugger9787
I have learned that the only people who should use we in conversation are Kings, Editors and people with tapeworms.

Thank you for your response. your input.

We is duality in speech, is is not?
speech is preceded by thought.

Hindu religion and karma in practice yielded the caste system which is dual duality (four levels of caste system). It is pantheism and polytheism and very pagan. Founded by a human.

animal spirit guides, soul mates point to "duality"

oooooohmmmmmmmmmmmmm
versus
Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name...

Hi slugger,

Yes, in a very strict way "We" is dualistic, and yet it is also inclusive depending on it's context. Besides, for conversation sake it is handy to use.

Yes, thought precedes speech. It's hard not to employ this process and operate in any level of awareness.

I'm unsure of your point on Hindu pantheism. Just as easily you could find a flawed aspect of all religions and faiths.. all being man made too.

Ahh, I see something..."animal spirit guides, soul mates point to "duality"

Nope. It only illustrates some aspects of the One thing diversified into everything. In which case that is inclusive and not at all separatist and so cannot be dualistic.

Not sure of your last point either, sorry.

[edit on 14-8-2010 by Tayesin]

my point is you resurrected Hindu religion and dusted it off and put a new spin on it.

It is a man made belief system.

There is one religion Catholic that is God made, and before that it was Judaism.

Originally posted by slugger9787
my point is you resurrected Hindu religion and dusted it off and put a new spin on it.

It is a man made belief system.

There is one religion Catholic that is God made, and before that it was Judaism.

Oh man - - couldn't possibly pre-date Hinduism and all man made religions.

Energy thought couldn't possibly go back to the beginning of ??????

Originally posted by slugger9787
my point is you resurrected Hindu religion and dusted it off and put a new spin on it.

It is a man made belief system.

There is one religion Catholic that is God made, and before that it was Judaism.

Hi slugger,

I personally resurrected it and put a new spin on it?

Are you 100% sure about that mate?

Maybe this will help your perspective a little more....

I have never been attached to any Belief-System. From a very young age I was aware of things that everyone around me didn't seem to notice.. that was a little surprising to say the least.

When I was 17, I found a teacher who showed me how to reach the 'divinity within us'.. the real Teacher, and since then I have explored on my own, come to my own conclusions based only on direct experience of what is.

Now I'm 50 and have a wealth of experience and knowledge gained that is not static but evolving as I experience further afield from this limited human reality.

So, I exist outside of all Belief-Systems and hold no attachments to any.

About Catholicism...

Man made that one too. Sure the fledgling christian faith was on the rise at the time, and it's no wonder considering Paul's manipulations and additions that convinced people it was the only way.

Follow this up with the Nicea Council where it is claimed the "priests" could not decide which books were to be included in the "Book". Which then gave rise to Constantine becoming angry and making the decisions for himself... as was not unusual for an Emperor to do at any time.

Added to that is the many known mistranslations from various languages that alter the meaning of entire tracts in the Bible, and we start to see that what we have now is a very poor edition where human beings made decisions based on their Free-Will.. and they did it willingly.. and in some cases for their own benefit.

All religion is man made. What you call God is non-denominational, iut has no preferences and really doesn't care what we do.. just as we don't care what an atom in a skin cell on your arm is doing.

Lastly slugger, I mean no offence with my words to you brother.

[edit on 15-8-2010 by Tayesin]

reply to post by Tayesin


I just want to add. When you translate/scribe from a belief in a god - - you will find god.

I believe many translators/scribes of ancient texts were seminary students/novices. The slant was there before even putting pen to paper.

----------------------------------------

*** you are lucky you found someone at 17. Its not easy feeling like you got dropped off on the wrong planet.

Originally posted by Tayesin
Man made that one too. Sure the fledgling christian faith was on the rise at the time, and it's no wonder considering Paul's manipulations and additions that convinced people it was the only way.

What were those manipulations and additions? Paul was a pretty bright fellow, but I'm not sure that I'd peg Christianity's success on him.

Follow this up with the Nicea Council where it is claimed the "priests" could not decide which books were to be included in the "Book". Which then gave rise to Constantine becoming angry and making the decisions for himself... as was not unusual for an Emperor to do at any time.

You realize, of course, that the Council of Nicaea had absolutely nothing to do with the selection of what books were included in the Bible? Well, I guess not, since you've claimed exactly the opposite. Sorry, "slugger", you're wrong. Try studying history, rather than Dan Brown books, in the future if you would like to avoid such egregious mistakes.

All religion is man made.

Whoops, sorry. You're right here, "slugger." However, religion is not faith.

Hi adjensen,

Originally posted by adjensen
What were those manipulations and additions? Paul was a pretty bright fellow, but I'm not sure that I'd peg Christianity's success on him.

From what I understand it was Saul.. who became Paul.. who usurped James (the older brother of Jesus) as head of that fledgling movement. And it was he who first brought up the additions of Jesus having died for our sins, and the resurrection fable. Prior to that those anecdotes didn't exist.

And such additions would easily sway the uneducated plebs to Follow.

You realize, of course, that the Council of Nicaea had absolutely nothing to do with the selection of what books were included in the Bible? Well, I guess not, since you've claimed exactly the opposite. Sorry, "slugger", you're wrong. Try studying history, rather than Dan Brown books, in the future if you would like to avoid such egregious mistakes.

Sorry, I haven't read any Dan Brown books, ever. But I've read "Jesus the Man" and a few others but people who have done good research and understnad the culture of the times and the Pesher System of meanings within meanings. Will that suffice then?

Whoops, sorry. You're right here, "slugger." However, religion is not faith.

Faith is based in the Indoctrination.. the teaching of doctrine... in religion, yes? Faith is not knowing from direct experience, so it is a limited perspective too.

Psst.. I'm not "slugger".. I was only replying to him.

[edit on 15-8-2010 by Tayesin]

reply to post by Tayesin


I visited you wesite.

I am impressed that is not more than old resurrected ideas with a new spin on it, a niche market in the "altered state of consciousness" driven Emotion based belief system.

Old ideas dusted off to appeal to the New Age mentality that presupposed, since they are not at the end of selves, that they are right.

Originally posted by slugger9787
reply to post by Tayesin

 

I visited you wesite.

I am impressed that is not more than old resurrected ideas with a new spin on it, a niche market in the "altered state of consciousness" driven Emotion based belief system.

Old ideas dusted off to appeal to the New Age mentality that presupposed, since they are not at the end of selves, that they are right.

Hi slugger,

I'm having some difficulty understanding what you are saying. I read the words okay, but am lost in the connections made or not made.

Sorry mate. But thanks for looking anyway.

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
Spirituality without religion is meaningless.

I laugh at all you people going around thinking you are so spiritual when without religion you have no true guidance. You cannot even understand what being spiritual is really about without the guidance of religion.

You have spirituality because of what religion (or the bible) teaches you. This idea that you can truly be spiritual without this teaching is made up by non believers to claim you can be spiritual without really having to have God in your life and actually learn and do the things religion (or the bible) teaches you.

People that do not follow a good honest religion won't ever see the difference because to them, it's all the same. Many religions or factions of them (churches) have twisted and misrepresented the teachings of the bible so that people can not find the true guidance to a correct spiritual path. This is sad and casts a bad light on religion.

Even non christian religions all base their spirituality on what their religion teaches. Without religion there can be no true spirituality.

ummmm.....religion without spirituality, much less truth, is perhaps more meaningless. The "church" fails everyday when questions, inquiries, and ideas are shut down by the men and women who proclaim their religion.........

most believe that at the most basic level we are all spirits....bodies to the grave, spirits to the beyond....and its kinda sucks that the church pays so little attention to the development of one's spirit...

eh??

reply to post by John_Q_Llama


Humans seem to need structure which is not all bad. "spirituality" is abstract and cumbersome for most outside of some sort of structure. Besides this there are many ideas about "spirituality" and its hardly a matter of changing form for substance.

reply to post by Tayesin


Our universe is huge and complex, so what we do to know our place in it has to be Simple

Sorry, I will strive to make my answers less complex.

I think that people in general are weak and do not have enough strength to have absolute belief in ones self. Shame.


I am amazed that religion caught on so well. And without a catchy tune.

I can not get my head around why religion is still popular in the 2010. We have technology, nice food and alcohol that actually tastes great and yet its still there right beside people.

I need to start myself my own religion. take ten percent of the membership price and buy me a ticket to the moon!