There are literally thousands of religions, and just as many religious beliefs. The reason is because so many people have had a hand in "developing" the systems to which these beliefs are designated.

So here are my questions?

If religion is a matter of "choice" and "faith" is all that's required to develop a devotion to the idea of a Universal "Absolute" then why is it necessary to take the "personal" faith into the realm of the social?

Why is it necessary to provide description and written rules, stories, morals and even to create rituals if the faith one has is purely their own?

Why do you think so many people seek validation of their faith in groups?

Is not the purpose of faith to fill the gap between the known and the unknown? So what is left unfulfilled in "personal devotional faith" that makes it necessary for people seek validation of what they believe against what others believe?

Humans being social creatures tend to prefer solace in conformity with others that share their views.

Why is it Catholics tend to look down their noses at baptists?

Why is it Scientology can even be considered a religion and not a cult?

Everyone wants to belong somehow.

I agree,Andy - but does that mean that people created religion and therefore a concept of an 'Absolute' just to serve a social function?

Redy, I would say that in the beginning religion or spiritual ideals came from families or groups who took the elders word for gold. Later organization and more contact made religion into a power structure that certain people (who felt they were right) made the laws and rules for all others based on their personal ideals. Dangerous brainwashing has since insued.

My opinion of course.

let me pose a question for you...

with religion aside...

say there is no God...

Again this is purely Philosophical...

What if the Universe itself were god and that the god we know exists because man created him in his own image?

Now I know many on the three sides of the fence that when asked this question get really weird about it. As I put it to them how can you put a face on pure consciousness?

Now add this little tidbit.

You are familiar with the classic aliens called "visitors?" Short Gray guys? Big Black Eyes?
They come from another world, right?
Why is it they share our symmetry? They look to coin the English word for it "Humanoid." I personally think it is Parallel evolution and that life is endemic and part of the universe in ways we cannot fathom quite yet and that space fairing life would look similar to us even if they evolved from another type of genetic stock. That unto itself is another argument and possible post BUT for now say they came to Earth and finally made open contact with us. What if they say God made them in his image? What of our argument then?

Classically many main stream religions preach a gathering of all of God's faithful. Islam DEMANDS blind obedience much like the Catholic Church does. Christianity is compelled in all of the flavors to gather more members to the fold. The Catholic church used ignorance and fear and force and pain of death to force people to see things their way. Now Islamic extremists use the same methodology.

I call it "Mad Sheep Syndrome" when people become SO religiously fanatic they would harm others around them for not conforming. The Fervor of Hitler and the rise of Nazi Germany in the 1930s is a CLASSIC and more modern example of this.

Nationalism is a form of this phenomenon. A lot of times people with even a lot of education want to fit in somewhere but in other circumstances accepting a faith in a region is a matter of survival. There is no definitive and complete answer to the thought of religion being a social phenomenon or something else.

Some of the actual mechanism of religion is Social, some of it is personal psychology, and the rest is instinct. The whole thing is a survival tool that is multi-faceted. For as much as we try to pride ourselves that we are not animals the fact is we have instincts that will shape our behaviors.

Because we are technological also gives us a capacity to try to explain our environment in more mechanical terms like the concept of a Clockwork Orange.

Also people need order. The reason Government and Religion have such a hard time coexisting is that both try to perform the same function to maintain an order and peace for us allowing us to master the environment around us. Oddly the conflict between the two has not resulted in us annihilating ourselves because somewhere in all of the weirdness of it all we seem to find some kind of balance and when the balance is tipped to far one way or another we get animal and start killing each other again, like Chimpanzees, Dolphins, Lions, etc.

It serves more than a Social Function. It is a survival mechanism. It fills the voids in the lives of people who cannot answer certain questions in their lives or face uncertainty. In purely Psychological terms it is a coping mechanism but on a different side of the fence in the same area of study it is also a social binding phenomenon much like tribal living would be in a more primitive sense.

Also religion helps people face the unknown. There are questions that cannot be answered so people want answers to placate them even if the answers are wrong. Humans want something higher to look up to to guide them. Kind of like the whole thing where God gave us dominion over the earth. Imagine if we took that attitude with a superior space faring race? Can you say Bad Humans Get Spanked?

That in itself is why I have such a total issue with organized religion. When we do meed Non terrestrial life I hope we don't piss them off!

My religion is a personal experience and a very beautiful one at that. I would be glad to share it with anyone who is interested, but I have absolutely no desire to waste my time sharing it with people who don't understand it.



It's not necessary. Only arrogant egotistical pigs do that.



Because they're weak and genuinely have no faith in anything.



I have no clue why people are like that. Clearly they have no peace of mind.

Religion (in my opinion) started as a way to explain things that people otherwise couldn't explain... The ground shook and everything crumbled because God was angry. Well no, it happened because there was an earthquake but back then, we had no way of knowing what an earthquake was. The best way to explain these things were blame it on the Gods.

People in general need explainations for the happenings around them. When they can't explain it, they create an explaination.

The more written rules you have, the more you can pass on the information and get others to join with you. Again, rules explain things.

And don't most people seek validation in most things in their daily lives anyway? Why would religion be any different? In alot of cases, a person's religion is one of the most important part of their lives. Some people feel they are on the right path, when more and more people agree with their side. People are always seeking validation and confirmation.

There is a problem with religion as a "social oraganization" because as the quote above suggests, it fills voids. It is a huge therapy group "in psychological terms". And as Andy suggests:



Both Humanist-Existential theory and the sociaocultural model of psychology believe that religion is a cultural influence and the beliefs of a person should, not only be recognized, but considered in designing tests and treatment.

I agree that one's beliefs do serve as a coping tool and in that manner I see it as a psychologically benign factor. However,as Andy stated:



In this sense, personal faith as a coping tool, can have some very harmful effects, both on individuals and within a society.

I believe we have grown in knowledge to the point that social religion as a coping mechanism is more harmful than the good some think it provides.

Also, I have witnessed a large volume of people stepping away from that social discord and once again creating a personal belief system. Indeed such a belief system may be a personal survival and coping strategy and many, like Abra, find a great peace in such a belief, without any adverse societal reactions.

I think "social organized religion" has outlived it's usefulness to the point of becoming a nuisance. It offers little in the way of psychological comfort when compared to the thought processes and growth it inhibits.

I have greatly enjoyed the company of those who have developed a "benign" set of personal beliefs. Most of them have quite original thought processes, are not judgmental, and are not hindered in any way by their beliefs. They can live life fully, experiencing all that life has to offer, including the views of others, considering new data when it's presented, and attempting to understand all that surrounds them, without having to fit anything into their predetermined, restrictive, social belief structures.

When a religion deteriorates (or has been founded on) the idea of supporting bigotry and judgment of others in the name of some jealous godhead it has lost any hope of ever becoming a medium for spirituality and love.

True spirtuality is love.

Pure and simple.

I agree abracadabra but also keep in mind that oppressed people have a bad habit of becoming the oppressors. The Romans oppressed the early Christians, then Rome became Christianity and oppressed EVERYONE around them. Now Islam is becoming the oppressor.

Yes, again I do agree with you that pure spirituality is above religion!

Too bad we can't fix the human heart!

I find the way the question asked in the thread title interesting Di...

to answer the thread title.... religion has become a social expectation... with all the relevant pressures.

However it is possibly supposed to be a personal thing, and I also suspect this is where all of the tension and friction arises from... when there is a set of social obligations coupled with an almost mandatory expectation and belief structure that suggests it is personal... conflict arises.

When one learns, or unlearns, as be the case, that EVERYTHING one believes experiences, understands, and sees IS personal....there really is no cause for tension, friction or contest.

Yes - exactly. sigh, someday I'm going speak that clearly.

I think one of the most harmful aspects of the 'social religion club' takes place on an individual level.

Abra is a good subject to use here. Abra was clearly experiencing cognative dissonance when he could no longer fit his current knowledge into the mold he was told it sprang from. He is far more fortunate than many others who have had to make concessions to close thier minds in order to preserve their links to their own self-perception. Those links can be directly tied to what and how one's 'social' affiliation thinks of the individual. Some have suffered mental anxiety coming to their decision to stay and accept or to pretend to accept or when they choose to leave it all.

When a person chooses to leave it all, they have to develop a whole new self-perception, often times, they do so with great ambiguity toward those who 'forced' them to their separation. They 'hate' anything to do with religion and form new over-generalized stereo-typical biases. This is neither healthy for the individual or for those being over-generalized.

Abra was differnt than many because he has an education, because he learned to question and he wasn't afraid to review and learn from any source. He also found a way to maintain, what Andy refers to as the 'coping stradegy', by developing his own personal belief system. Those who 'hate' all belief systems have lost on several fronts.

Religions as an 'organized social club' in my opinion are detrimental at this stage of our human development.

We would be better off, finding a way to make 'personal beliefs' more attractive by being more openly supportive of those making that switch.

Anyone else agree with me, or have another suggestion?

BOTH... starting with personal then by action social.

GEE! I find it humorous that some would question the integrity of safety in numbers since that's what makes or breaks nations. ???????

Oh well...I guess it's only for the seculars to benefit from...huh?

Wow this has been a fascinating discussion. ENjoyed it.