The Bones

[The Hammer]

So, I happen to like this song, The Bones by Maren Morris. While it is a song about a strong relationship, it got me thinking, what are the bones of Religion/Spirituality? I think that the bones of religion almost always boils down to Faith in what one believes (regardless of religion, as faith is not Christian exclusive concept).

Faith as defined is:
1.complete trust or confidence in someone or something
and/or
2. strong belief in God*s or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof

Apprehension defined here as: 2. understanding; grasp (as opposed to anxiety/fear def. 1.)

So by having complete trust & confidence, and belief in ones Gods through an understanding and grasp of ones Doctrines, we have Faith. This Faith is the foundation (the Bones) of a relationship; our relationship with the ultimate in life: Uncertainty.

How strong is your relationship with uncertainty?

* That 's in the definition is mine.

 

[sun rise]

The bones for me is a belief that existence has a meaning and purpose and that which some call "God" is the source of that meaning and purpose.

How strong is your relationship with uncertainty?

I'm uncertain about many things. It's like picking up a book where I know there will be a happy ending but have great uncertainty about the plot details.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

So, I happen to like this song, The Bones by Maren Morris. While it is a song about a strong relationship, it got me thinking, what are the bones of Religion/Spirituality? I think that the bones of religion almost always boils down to Faith in what one believes (regardless of religion, as faith is not Christian exclusive concept).

Faith as defined is:
1.complete trust or confidence in someone or something
and/or
2. strong belief in God*s or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof

Apprehension defined here as: 2. understanding; grasp (as opposed to anxiety/fear def. 1.)

So by having complete trust & confidence, and belief in ones Gods through an understanding and grasp of ones Doctrines, we have Faith. This Faith is the foundation (the Bones) of a relationship; our relationship with the ultimate in life: Uncertainty.

How strong is your relationship with uncertainty?

* That 's in the definition is mine.

I have a love/hate relationship with uncertainty-one because I have epilepsy and TBIssues and two I'm pretty much indifferent to anything that doesn't keep me energized or have some form of stimulus. So, I don't ponder about uncertainty (god, cosmos, whatever) because it's a waste of energy that has no outlet. People paint uncertainty and others write about it. I like both but I haven't figured out a creative way to channel those energies into something tangible and worth molding. In other words, I'm pretty neutral to the term.

As for uncertainty without regards to religion, it's scary. I figure it's alright to be afraid just how one sees it determines if they are consumed by it. Last think I thought yesterday was how will I die. That's actually more important for me than the "thereafter." I'm pretty much less "spiritual" in those regards.

 

[King Phenomenon]

I don't have any uncertainties about the existence of God. I do have uncertainties about other questions in life though.

 

[February-Saturday]

I think there are a wide variety of naturalistic and mystical religions that don't really deal with faith at all. That's not to mention religions like Scientific Pantheism, LaVeyan Satanism, and Humanism that explicitly reject the concept of faith entirely.

There are no universal bones that define religion.

 

[The Hammer]

I think there are a wide variety of naturalistic and mystical religions that don't really deal with faith at all. That's not to mention religions like Scientific Pantheism, LaVeyan Satanism, and Humanism that explicitly reject the concept of faith entirely.

There are no universal bones that define religion.

I struggle to call humanism a religion or spirituality, but understand your point . And scientific pantheism would still require a sense of faith in the scientific process? LaVeyan Satanism requires a faith that there are no other Gods before Man, right? I'm not disagreeing completely, but I find faith to be a pretty broad and all encompassing term for an array of human behaviors.

 

[February-Saturday]

I struggle to call humanism a religion or spirituality, but understand your point . And scientific pantheism would still require a sense of faith in the scientific process? LaVeyan Satanism requires a faith that there are no other Gods before Man, right? I'm not disagreeing completely, but I find faith to be a pretty broad and all encompassing term for an array of human behaviors.

I'm not sure how you can have a belief without evidence in a process that's entirely about evidence. LaVeyan Satanism doesn't really require positive or Gnostic atheism, a lot of older LaVeyans were Deists, Pantheists, or even polytheists according to the Temple of Set detractors.

Now whether Humanism can be called a religion is an interesting question, but I don't think it's a very meaningful one until we can agree on what a religion is. Humanism is often considered a religion and categorized as one, so until we have a more rigorous definition for religion that definitely excludes it I think it's still necessary to think about when talking about the bones of religion.

I think the hard part is that religion is sort of a social construct, like gender or morality.

 

[The Hammer]

LaVeyan Satanism doesn't really require positive or Gnostic atheism, a lot of older LaVeyans were Deists, Pantheists, or even polytheists according to the Temple of Set detractors.

I think the hard part is that religion is sort of a social construct, like gender or morality.

The last time I read the Satanic Bible and Scriptures it seemed to me that there was a pretty diverse set of views contained within, even some of which are contradictory (Magic isn't real/doesn't work, unless it works for you, is one example I remember). So the fact that there were polytheists, deists, and atheists within it, originally, comes as no surprise.

Religion is certainly a social construct, and I agree that we need a better definition of religion (as there is no 100% agreed upon one as you noted.).

I like these two in particular:
" a unified set of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden, — beliefs and practices which unite [into] one single moral community, all those who adhere to them (Durkheim [1915] 1964: 37 cited in Morris 1987)."

And

"A set of beliefs and/or actions to regulate and approach reality, expressed in: (a) doctrine, (b) philosophy, (c) myth, (d) symbol (e) ethic, (f) ritual, (g) matter, (h) experience and (i) social organisation, in some way related to spiritual qualities, phenomena or entities."

Towards an anthropological definition of religion - Business Anthropologist

Edit: With the second definition being the one I see most often.

 

[February-Saturday]

The last time I read the Satanic Bible and Scriptures it seemed to me that there was a pretty diverse set of views contained within, even some of which are contradictory (Magic isn't real/doesn't work, unless it works for you, is one example I remember). So the fact that there were polytheists, deists, and atheists within it, originally, comes as no surprise.

Religion is certainly a social construct, and I agree that we need a better definition of religion (as there is no 100% agreed upon one as you noted.).

I like these two in particular:
" a unified set of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden, — beliefs and practices which unite [into] one single moral community, all those who adhere to them (Durkheim [1915] 1964: 37 cited in Morris 1987)."

And

"A set of beliefs and/or actions to regulate and approach reality, expressed in: (a) doctrine, (b) philosophy, (c) myth, (d) symbol (e) ethic, (f) ritual, (g) matter, (h) experience and (i) social organisation, in some way related to spiritual qualities, phenomena or entities."

Towards an anthropological definition of religion - Business Anthropologist

Edit: With the second definition being the one I see most often.

The former is the one that I tend to be the most fond of, since its simplicity can apply to anything from the solo Buddhist and the ancient paleopagan cults to Christianity and Hinduism. It focuses on the spirit of religion, which is reverence towards something, and fits neatly into a lot of idioms like "he worshiped her" and "the cult of personality." It also applies to Humanism and Scientific Pantheism, who regard humans and the natural universe as sacred, respectively. I think this is closer to what "spirituality" is all about in the colloquial sense.

The second definition is nice in that it has a fairly rigorous set of criteria, although I think it sort of pushes away the question by essentially just saying it deals with "spirituality." Then we have to define spirituality, which I think might actually be harder to define than religion, but luckily your previous definition seems to be what the author of the article you sent seems to suggest is what spirituality is all about; the sacred and the profane.

I think that's actually a really good definition of religion, I'll probably borrow it. It also allows religion to be divorced from philosophy, because philosophy might presuppose a specific sacredness or it might attempt to explain why something should be regarded as sacred, but isn't necessarily a religion in and of itself. It also helps create a difference between religion, magic, and spirituality. Yes, I think this is a wonderful way of looking at it. Maybe these are the bones you're looking for?