View Single Post
  #36  
Old 09-02-2017, 04:57 PM
Molearner
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Necromancer
I think of religion as 'organised spiritual society' with its own set of rules and regulations. Those who 'hate' usually disagree with them for whatever reason.

I'm not saying that atrocities haven't been committed in the name of religion, but that is fanaticism and to condemn a whole religion due to the rise of a fanatical element, does it no justice whatsoever.

One may even go as far as to say 'the dogma/scriptures/rules are fanatical in themselves' but this is why religions are thus secular and orthodox. They have intolerance because yes, religion is intolerant full stop. It is to protect the sanctity of its teachings against external influence and corruption and so the whole teachings are lost.

This is it, this is why and nothing more.

The Necromancer,

This is pretty much spot on......:) There is a huge Catch 22 element to any of these discussions in these forums. It is this: People are determined to be tempted to argue/discuss from the perspective of either/or......never acknowledging the overlap......that area that includes a large segment of the population that are both religious and spiritual. It is ridiculous to assert that the two(religion and spirituality) are mutually exclusive. There is a long tradition of Christian mystics, saints, Jesus, disciples, apostles, etc. that by any measure must be acknowledged as spiritual people. If people are determined to identify themselves solely as one or the other I would contend that it is more likely that religious people will come to embrace spirituality than spiritual people will come to embrace religion.

Thus from my perspective I might surmise that 'spiritual' people are more dogmatic. "He drew a circle that shut me out--heretic, rebel, a thing to flout. But love and I had the wit to win: We drew a circle and took him in!". In short, a religion is likely to embrace the stranger. Spiritual persons tend to embrace their individual freedom, preferring isolation to organization. This allows them to some extent to avoid being stereotyped but, on the other hand, seems to preclude them from making a visible contribution to society. There is no denying that religion has made a valuable contribution to society....witness the establishment of schools, hospitals, charities, outreach, etc. The trap of spirituality is that it can unwittingly can easily become focused on 'me'.......which speaks of egotism and, oddly enough, the very thing that is anathema to genuine spirituality. There is no need for me to document the pitfalls of religion......this is done quite well by these forums on a daily basis....:) And I would be the last to say that they are not warranted. This is simply because the standards of religion as defined by scripture are impossibly high(Love one another as I have loved you and love your neighbor as yourself.......judge not lest ye be judged, etc.) Every adherent of a religion will fall short of these standards and can, thus, be labeled as a hypocrite. But at least an informed religious person knows what the standard(the goal) is. Spirituality adherents, because they eschew organization, lack consensus of belief and therefore are in no danger of being viewed as hypocrites. They have chosen a safe position and makes it easier for them to maintain their ego and sense of self worth.
Reply With Quote