While I mostly agree, it’s really “organized” religion that is the problem. Not religion itself. And of course organized religion is just humans fucking each other over. It’s like the land was taken, so they needed another dimension to form thier group around so they could have power and influence. So they went with religion. It’s much more profitable.
Christianity post-Jesus but pre-Constantine. They met in small groups in a person’s home. It was a book club for how to be a better person because (setting atheist skepticism aside) that was Jesus’ original teaching.
Once it became a state religion, it was all about the power. After the fall of Rome, the Catholic Church was effectively a nation state - controlling territory, collecting taxes, etc.
You can believe in whatever you want, and that would be religion. Lots of people have their own flavor of religion. Even people who go to services often have their own flavor that doesn’t line up with any specific religion. I think there is like a whole religion around simply believing in some form of god. Unitarian I think they call. Not sure if it is actually organized or not. But once you have a human leader and a body that tells all others of a religion what to do, then you are organized. And that leader and body that makes descisions for the rest is the problem.
When it gets down to the personal, singular level I tend to refer to it as spirituality rather than religion. When you scale it up to an organizational nature and have leadership and such that’s when I call it religion. So at least, in my brain, the word religion itself implies organization.
Am I working with incorrect definitions of the words spirituality and religion? And if so, then what is the difference between the two?
Words don’t mean the same thing to everyone. And there is no real authority. Websters dictionary company or whatever is sometimes seen as one, but they are just a company trying to sell a product.
So I don’t think there is a rule on this. Since organized religion is a phrase used in various places, it implies the existance of unorganized religion. This would probably be a group of people who all believe the same thing, but there is no leadership and such. That would be tough to fit under spirituality. But neither interpretation is really wrong.
Imagine being so fucking delusional that you wear a religious head piece at the same time you wear a glorified icon of a murder tool. How can anyone take this seriously.
religion really is a scourge on humanity.
This is ethno-nationalism.
While I mostly agree, it’s really “organized” religion that is the problem. Not religion itself. And of course organized religion is just humans fucking each other over. It’s like the land was taken, so they needed another dimension to form thier group around so they could have power and influence. So they went with religion. It’s much more profitable.
Organized religion, at any scale of organization, is about only one thing: power.
If a religion isn’t organized, then how is it a religion at all?
Christianity post-Jesus but pre-Constantine. They met in small groups in a person’s home. It was a book club for how to be a better person because (setting atheist skepticism aside) that was Jesus’ original teaching.
Once it became a state religion, it was all about the power. After the fall of Rome, the Catholic Church was effectively a nation state - controlling territory, collecting taxes, etc.
You can believe in whatever you want, and that would be religion. Lots of people have their own flavor of religion. Even people who go to services often have their own flavor that doesn’t line up with any specific religion. I think there is like a whole religion around simply believing in some form of god. Unitarian I think they call. Not sure if it is actually organized or not. But once you have a human leader and a body that tells all others of a religion what to do, then you are organized. And that leader and body that makes descisions for the rest is the problem.
When it gets down to the personal, singular level I tend to refer to it as spirituality rather than religion. When you scale it up to an organizational nature and have leadership and such that’s when I call it religion. So at least, in my brain, the word religion itself implies organization.
Am I working with incorrect definitions of the words spirituality and religion? And if so, then what is the difference between the two?
Words don’t mean the same thing to everyone. And there is no real authority. Websters dictionary company or whatever is sometimes seen as one, but they are just a company trying to sell a product. So I don’t think there is a rule on this. Since organized religion is a phrase used in various places, it implies the existance of unorganized religion. This would probably be a group of people who all believe the same thing, but there is no leadership and such. That would be tough to fit under spirituality. But neither interpretation is really wrong.
Imagine being so fucking delusional that you wear a religious head piece at the same time you wear a glorified icon of a murder tool. How can anyone take this seriously.