What are some other roles could God(s) have, in your opinion?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Religion Without God?
- Thread starter SalixIncendium
- Start date
What are some other roles could God(s) have, in your opinion?
Robert Winzeler (Anthropology and Religion, 2012) identifies and discusses six modern, western conceptions of religion that by and large do not apply, or only partially, to non-western religious belief systems. These are:
Winzeler’s Western Assumptions
1) Religion is primarily a matter of belief or faith
2) Adherents may be a member of only one religion at a time
3) Religion is a separate realm of life from all others
4) Religion is associated with a special building or similar space
5) Religion concerns transcendental rather than practical matters
6) Religion is the basis of morality
Based on the research I've done, there are a number of other variables that apply to religion, some of which sort of overlap the above 6. I've crafted them in pairs, and so a given 'religion' may score very high on either end of the spectrum (natural vs. supernatural, for example), or may be something in between. Few cultures have the either/or approach that Western intellectuals apply to most concepts.
1) Natural versus Supernatural
2) Sacred versus Mundane versus Profane
3) Good versus Bad/Evil
4) Real versus Ideal
5) Universal versus Local
6) Hierarchical versus Networked
7) Social/collective versus Personal
8) Objective versus Subjective
9) Perfect versus imperfect
10) Ultimate/maximum versus partial or derived
11) Truth versus falsehood
Winzeler’s Western Assumptions
1) Religion is primarily a matter of belief or faith
2) Adherents may be a member of only one religion at a time
3) Religion is a separate realm of life from all others
4) Religion is associated with a special building or similar space
5) Religion concerns transcendental rather than practical matters
6) Religion is the basis of morality
Based on the research I've done, there are a number of other variables that apply to religion, some of which sort of overlap the above 6. I've crafted them in pairs, and so a given 'religion' may score very high on either end of the spectrum (natural vs. supernatural, for example), or may be something in between. Few cultures have the either/or approach that Western intellectuals apply to most concepts.
1) Natural versus Supernatural
2) Sacred versus Mundane versus Profane
3) Good versus Bad/Evil
4) Real versus Ideal
5) Universal versus Local
6) Hierarchical versus Networked
7) Social/collective versus Personal
8) Objective versus Subjective
9) Perfect versus imperfect
10) Ultimate/maximum versus partial or derived
11) Truth versus falsehood
There was a mistake in my post that I have edited.
Merit in the sense of being worthy of being defined as a religion.
Ah... okay. In that case, yes: non-theistic religions are a thing.
Orbit
I'm a planet
Zen Buddhism isn't concerned with deities. I think it has merit because it is a spiritual endeavor.
Frater Sisyphus
Contradiction, irrationality and disorder
I see the word "God" as a metaphor for matter/energy/the universe and by extension - the unknown/unknowable.
I'm still not sure if I'm "religious" that's why I asked.
As far as I'm aware, if we take a look at all the god-concepts across different types of theism, you end up with everything. All the rules; all of the things. A couple examples:
- Pantheism - in this god-concept, god(s) have all of the roles because god(s) are all of the things in a very direct sense.
- Polytheism - in this god-concept, various gods have various roles, and there's a deity for any particular role a human might conceive of. That's part of the point, really - gods have various domains or spheres of influence, or are equated with certain aspects of reality but not others. Overlap is allowed and expected, but more importantly, you get some really interesting narratives pertaining to the interactions of various aspects/gods.
World wide
Christians are 31.5%
Muslims are 24%
HINDU 14%
Buhdsm 7%
Judaism 0.2%
this represents more than 75% of the world religion
if we have no divine revelation, definitely the factions and sects will be in millions and I don't think man would have survived so long on earth.
Christians are 31.5%
Muslims are 24%
HINDU 14%
Buhdsm 7%
Judaism 0.2%
this represents more than 75% of the world religion
if we have no divine revelation, definitely the factions and sects will be in millions and I don't think man would have survived so long on earth.
Yes, because science used properly gives the ultimate motivation to do what is right.
Buddhism exists. So yes.
I don't see any good reasons why nontheistic religions would be viewed as lacking in merit, from an objective standpoint.
The earliest evidence of what we'd now call religious activity was essentially animistic, the belief that everything possessed a spiritual essence - no gods yet.
Religion is essentially about metaphysical beliefs of some sort, pared with shared rituals, sacred narratives and symbols.
It doesn't require gods or God to be religious. That's just one possible variety of metaphysical belief and cultic focus.
"Drop in social benefit and influence?" I don't follow. Clarify?
So what 'basic definition are we talking about
That strikes me mere as Nature. God's are usually personifications.
Could you expand on that? I don't think I follow.
My initial thought is that revealed religions have been involved in two thousand years of war and strife. They seem to be an impediment to mankind's survival.
I'm talking about real-world benefits of belonging to a church. Things like:
- UU churches tend to be small and often have part-time ministers. Many are closed most of the time. OTOH, in the US, Christian churches are often large and have something happening every day: men's groups, women's groups, youth groups, Christian singles intramural volleyball leagues (a real thing at a church near here), etc.
- Also because of their smaller size, UU churches often (but not always) don't have the social services that many Christian churches have: addiction support groups, food banks, etc.
- Christian congregations often draw from a small geographic area (for small to moderate congregations) or make up for it by being absolutely massive (megachurches); in contrast, the small size and small number of UU congregations means that their membership is spread out at much lower density than a typical Christian congregation's membership is. Because of this, networking as a member of a Christian church is a lot more likely to result in a job, business deal, etc., than networking in a UU congregation.
- A Christian is often likely to have family and friend connections in a Christian church. Staying in that Christian church would help to maintain these important ties.
- Christian groups tend to be much larger voting blocs than UUs are and much more effective at lobbying than UU groups. As long as you can find a congregation that matches your political viewpoint, you'll have more political influence as a member of a specifically Christian congregation than as a member of a UU congregation.
These are the sorts of things I was thinking of.
Interesting, but this has not been my experience. Our local UU churches are socially active. They resemble social service and environmental organizations as much as churches.
And Christian churches are often socially active as well, but I was getting more at something else when I was talking about political influence. I'm not really talking about the passion of individual members.
Imagine that your organization urgently wants the ear of the mayor or a local MP/congressperson. Would a call from the leader of your organization be enough to get that person out of a meeting to take the call? I'd be that very few - if any - UUs could truthfully say "yes" to this, but many Christians could.
Maybe this is a regional thing, but my experience with the UUs is mainly in the Toronto area. The UU congregation that was closest to me doesn't have much programming outside of Sunday morning, doesn't have much in the way of social services, etc. Yes, Toronto has First Unitarian, which tends to have more other "stuff", but it's the one UU church in a metropolitan area of 6 million people that you could really say this about.
Say you were a Toronto Christian with UU-compatible beliefs who wanted an addiction recovery support group at a church. First Unitarian is one option, but regardless of the specifics of your beliefs, unless you live in the immediate neighbourhood of First Unitarian, on the way to First Unitarian you'd probably have to pass several churches with addiction groups that you'd find acceptable... so why make the longer trip?
Dharanad dharmamityaahuh
Dharma is called so because it bears and holds up the entire creation.
There are religions outside Abrahamic faiths that view a supreme creator and/or overseer deity, such as Sikhism and the concept of Ishvara in Hinduism. Those are off the top of my head. There may be more.