What is religion? BBC: " Religion can be explained as a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs." You cannot really have a "personal " religion " You can have personal beliefs - we all do - even atheists - they though obviously do not include a god. Religions differ considerably - although many overlap and you get good (Malala) and bad (last week's terrorists) people espousing their beliefs and justifying their actions. Greenpeace ( I used to be a member) Amnesty International and others may be positive organisations or not but their existence does not prove or disprove, involve or need a god. I am afraid I regard the quote "The core of spirituality implies 3 things: What is in your head - lose it. What is in your heart - open it. And what is in your hand - give it. as being simply wrong. If there was a god and he gave me a brain then presumably I should use it - my heart is there to keep me alive but my brain is there to help me make decisions. It sounds like a silly mantra of some group. Spirituality is a loose concept and in my personal definition simply means that I believe the universe is more complicated and interconnected than I can fully understand and that it is somehow connected with what is good or evil. Somewhere deep within us is a feeling of right and wrong. This often gets incorporated into religion but need not be. I have a "feeling" for what is good or bad and right or wrong but accept that the lines may be blurred between people
Leo - the minute a person begins to move into the sphere of 'comparative religion' ie. looking for parallels between them then they are moving in the direction of a personal religion (because the 'mix`is their own). The alternative would be to say that the one religion is the right one and all the others are wrong - which I cannot do. Regarding Greenpeace and Amnesty International - they were both started by Quakers (Who believe in God in all people) and so their faith would have had a large part in the impetus which established both organizations. Something which may not have happened had the founders been atheist. The expression 'what is in you head - lose it ' should not be taken literally. Of course I should not forget the fact that the World is round (or nearly). What is meant here is that I should not identify myself with my intellect - I should not build my ego up to believe that it is 'my knowledge`- and I should recognize that if the heart tells me something that I should follow it - regardless of the consequences.
You cannot have a "comparative" religion. Comparative religion is as the name tells us simply comparing. Most definitions of religion include the fact that it is a body of something shared by a group. If you are the only person who has a unique set of values it cannot be called a religion but simply a personal belief system or something like that. No problem with that but it is not a religion but a person's individual "trawl" of whatever they have read. I think everyone who believes something believes that is correct -or they would not believe it. The consequence of that is that they must think that others who disagree are not correct. They may be quite happy that others have formed a different view but two different things cannot both be correct. It does not mean you have to fight about it. It does not matter who started Greenpeace or any other such organisation. If they had not started it then sooner or later probably someone else would have started it. The expression "Lose what is in your head" may not be taken literally but it is still silly. It is anti-intellectual. If god gave you a brain it was for the purpose of using it to its full (parable of the talents) and if no god and it is simply there because it evolved as did everything else out of nothing then it evolved for a purpose of being useful. Ego is entirely separate. Knowledge is for you what you know so it is "my knowledge" - others have different knowledge. Why on earth is following your heart - by which I assume you mean emotions - something you should do regardless of consequences. I totally disagree - the hearts of those supposedly muslim killers (see how I got back on thread ) told them to kill -shame their heads did not override their hearts. Where you have knowledge you should use it. You should not ignore knowledge for some superstitious beleif or whatever.
With reference to 'comparative' religion Leo - the Koran does not contradict the Bible but rather is an extension of it. In that sense all Moslems are also Christians in as much as they recognize Jesus as one of their most important prophets and even accept the concept of a virgin birth. It is also not ruled out in the Koran that there could be further prophets after Mohammed. So, a spiritual person can easily accept that God has manifested himself to different people at different times in history - with none of those being complete in itself. This is what Baha i' faith is all about - the unity of all religions. Or would you say that Gandhi was not a religious person because he claimed to be Hindu, Moslem, Christian and Jew all at the same time ? The concept of losing what is in your head means only to recognize that, in most cases, the brain and intellect will only decide what your heart has already decided (perhaps only in your subconsciousness). To learn to trust your heart does not mean to destroy your intellect but rather to recognize it for what it is. As for the supposedly Moslem killers - at one time some of them were children growing up in multi cultural schools (In France ?) - and, at that time, it was not pre ordained that their lives would end in the way it has. Growing up in the cultural and moral void which the west has become - which offers nothing but a materialism from which they were mostly marginalized. They then met the men of false intellect - the preachers of hate who came in to fill this void. The men who said 'You can be hero for a day' and they fell for this brain washing, in the same way as the followers of Charles Manson etc. had done before them. Their problem was that they did not listen to their inner voice which could have whispered that something was wrong with these supposed teachers of theirs.
I'm sorry Cologne but try telling most Moslems that they are also Christians. Christ is the apex of Christianity - there is no room left for a prophet to follow. For a Moslem Christ is ONLY a prophet. Just because they build on the same foundations does not make them the same. The Koran certainly DOES contradict the bible on this fundamental point. The gods may be the same but the key figure is not. A spiritual person can believe whatever they want - it does not mean that they would be accepted as a member of a specific religion. Baha'i does believe in the unity of all religions; that is why it is Baha'i and not Christianity or Islam. They would not accept Baha'i as being part of Christianity or Islam. Gandhi was a religious person in the sense that he obviously believed in some form of god - but perhaps it is more accurate to describe him as spiritual as none of the religions you mention apart perhaps from Hindu would say he belonged to their faith. Religion is a generic term used for believers if you like - however it is subdivided into separate compartments. A few might like to sit in more than one compartment and may even be accepted but it would be the exception not the rule. "the brain and intellect will only decide what your heart has already decided (perhaps only in your subconsciousness)" Says who? That may be a belief of yours but to me it is nonsense. Maybe your heart will only accept what your brain has already decided. You have come to the conclusion it seems that mankind is heart-centric. That is your belief and you have the right to it but I am not sure many people would agree. I don't. I don't believe in pre-ordination. We have free will and of course our actions are influenced by what we have learnt. However in my book they are pychopaths whose brains did not function as they should. Most decent Moslems condemn them. To me they were mentally ill. I do not agree that the West has become a cultural or moral void. Most people I know are very moral and many highly appreciative of culture - you simply appear cynical about the West -fair enough - your opinion. Shifting the blame from the killers themselves one level to those that influenced them is a waste of time - it just adds to the number who are mentally deranged. If they had read or listened to their genuine religious leaders who taught them what the Koran truly says they would not have behaved as they did as Islam is a religion of peace. Never mind their "inner voice" - only a mentally deranged person does not know that killing unarmed people whose only "crime" is their ability to draw cartoons is wrong. Almost any three year old can tell you that you do not harm - certainly not kill -others.
Cologne - you tend to focus largely on religion itself - which essentially involves groups and rules etc. I am lessinterested in those as people can choose whichever club they want to support. For me the question of faith is more interesting. Some people find it necessary to invent or believe in a god. I don't. So everyone who thinks they see the hand of the supernatural in events around them are equally wrong. He ain't there and there is nobody who cares what you do or don't do save your fellow creatures on Earth. Some fall short ( bad term but you know what I am trying to say) of believing in an actual god who does things or cares about anything but still feel a spiritual quality to life. If they want to call that religion they can but it would not meet most definitions and even an atheist may well feel that mother nature is powerful and has a "spiritual" effect on them. They don't expect her to look out for them as individuals though
A few points here Leo. Regarding Islam. Most Moslems want nothing more for us than that we are good Christians. The kern of islam (ie. the Koran only schools of Islam as opposed to Sharia, Sunni, Hadith etc.) accept Christians as 'brothers of the book' - and most schools of Islam fully accept inter faith marriages for this reason - the same exists for marriage with Jews. True Islam sees Mohammed only as the messenger and all praises are reserved only for God (though Schools of Islam vary on this). You say that the Western religions would not accept Gandhi as one of their own, fair enough - only enlightened individuals like Tolstoy did this. However, the Yogic tradition of the Himalayas accepted Jesus as having been a Yogi, so the reverse acceptance may be true. Forget the question of 'heart' over intellect - it is a difficult context which would take an eternity to explain ! You say that I am shifting the blame from the killers onto those who influenced them. I am actually not doing this but rather sharing the blame around - which our history books also do in as much as we apportion more blame to Hitler (although he himself never killed !)anyone) than to individual members of the Wehrmacht. You say that any child of 3 knows that killing is wrong - yet the vast majority of men can be convinced that they should stay at the scene of a battle knowing that they must kill, and maybe must also die - when the logical thing would be to go away from the situation. If that were not the case there would never have been such a thing as war. The question of faith is something which is difficult for us to discuss because there will always come a point where I appear to be illogical or irrational to you because I have taken a blind leap in the dark to believe in something which, to you, is unbelievable. However, I do not wear my religion (and you're still not sure which one I have !) on my sleeve - in contrast to some of the atheist comments I have seen on here. I actually think that Jesus never wanted to establish a church - and for the first 200-300 years his was the religion of the common man (very left wing in fact). But then Rome took over the whole thing and it's been going downhill ever since.
I feel bad Cologne - you and I are having a good discussion but we are probably boring everyone else to death. I have no doubt that different religions can accept each other. However, they simply believe different things. I do not consider that especially creditable - if they believe in a god who is supposed to be a force for good - I assume only Satanism is not - the least they can do is say we think we are right but "allow" you to believe other things. Not really a great feat. Jesus may "qualify" as a yogi - who knows but no yogi qualifies as a Chrisitan unless they profess themselves a follower of Christ. I am sure lots of Christians practice yoga and so are yogis. All beef is meat but not all meat is beef - oh dear back to Venn diagrams. Heart v Head - just a belief so happy to move on. OK so the killers were mentally ill and probably psychopaths and so maybe were some of those who radicalised them. Hitler was the leader - if he commanded murder - murder they did - or suffered the consequences. Who do you propose to excuse? Do not get me started on the subject of war. There is very little justification for it other than as the result of evil and human greed. If a country makes its young men go to war they often have no choice. Imprisonment or firing squad for cowardice faced many. Countries love their wars so glorify and make ceremonies of their war dead. It is the only way to dupe often the less well educated into enlisting and fighting. Oh - and those countries are often the ones with huge armaments industries. Most religions conveniently ignore their commandment not to kill in these circumstances and sects such as the Jehovah's Witnesses who remain true to their holy book are again liable to imprisonment or worse. I think the 5th commandment was "Thou Shalt not Kill unless it suits the state to tell you to" Jesus would never have killed anyone - for war or any other cause. You are not correct - I understand faith and that it does not involve logic or rationality. For many years I had faith too. I took that blind leap in the dark and believed. Nothing wrong with that -billions do - by far the majority in the world and includes some of the most intelligent people. I just happen to have ceased to believe. God may exist - I just don't think so anymore. I dislike the hypocrisy of such as the church of Rome with it billions in the Vatican, its worship of idols and so on - but that is due to the practitioners rather than the religion itself. I still respect many religions and sects within them - however they no longer hold any conviction for me. Not that it matters but the lack of god does not seem to have any negative effect on anything. He/ she is clearly not active in the universe and plays no part in anybody's life except through the fact they believe in him/her. Atheists can get on very well without.
I agree that we may be blocking the thread a little here. Also, I am not criticizing atheism in any way, a long as we respect each other it doesn't matter. My reactions here have in some way been in response to the tendency of some to see all religion or all faith as being the source of what happened in Paris. We have millions of peace loving Moslems living here in Europe - and they are part of the solution, not part of the problem. In addition, whilst deploring the actions of extremists, I do not feel comfortable about championing the cause of Charlie Hebdo in the name of free speech, in the way others do. This magazine may have started its life as a left of centre version of private eye which punches above, making fun of objectionable politicians - but it has become a magazine which spends most of its time now punching down ie. at those who are already the most marginalized in French society. Satire needs to have a sense of humour and irreverence, but theirs no longer qualifies as such. Their cartoons (if you can call them that) build on the most negative racial stereotypes, and not just towards Moslems. The French can talk about free speech for as long as they like - but it is all very one sided. There has been resentment in many quarters of their society against the publications of this magazine - and there have been many attempts to organize protest marches and demonstrations against them - not one of these protests has been allowed.
Just reflecting on lives lost... and how easy it is to lose site of..... so quickly after the event......
Agree with you Cologne. I do not believe in god but am very happy that billions do - of all faiths. Religion for me is both a positive force and a negative one. A tremendous amount of good is done in the world by people of faith, sometimes inspired BY their faith. Yet it is also hijacked by some who fight wars and so forth in its name - yet are really just acting tribally. I also do not like Charlie Hebdo and regards it as a tawdry little noxious rag - I would no sooner have it in my house than the Sun or Mail. However I do feel for all the victims and their friends and family - they did not deserve it. I believe in the old quote of Voltaire "I do not agree with what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it"
At the risk of starting an argument - I believe that that old quote was not Voltaire's, rather it was made by Evelyn Beatrice Hall about Voltaire in her biography of him entitled The Friends of Voltaire - written around 130 years after his death. Just sayin'....
Yes - I had a feeling it was not actually Voltaire but looked it up and it was ascribed to him - I suspect though that you are right.
