10 Reasons You Should Never Have a Religion (Blog)

[outdoorsnewzealand]

Steve must have noticed the forum usage getting low or something, this must be the most controversial article he's written so far.

As for religion causing incest ... Steve offers the suggestion "Try making friends with conscious, free-thinking people". Most religions in the world have larger communities than I could ever hope to find by looking for conscious free-thinking people.

[ericabiz]

Ouch! Heh. I think I've seen a new cycle in the life of a problogger:

1) Month 0: Decide you want to be a problogger.
2) Month 1: Start writing posts.
3) Month 3: Get some traction on Digg/StumbleUpon. Write more posts incorporating lists because you know they go over well on social media sites.
4) Month 5: Get discouraged when none of your posts for a few months hit a "home run."
5) Month 7: Assuming you decide to stick it out (many don't), continue to build an audience. Commit to posting on a regular basis indefinitely.
6) Somewhere between Month 12-36: You are probably making enough money to run the site and quit your job.

And, thanks to Steve Pavlina, I've now seen the next step...

7) Month 38+: Begin to polarize your audience and "test" them. You're no longer afraid of hate mail or losing readers...but you do want to push your audience into action, since you know that simple inaction is the #1 thing that holds people back. Besides, your loyal readers will stick with you and continue to buy products based on your recommendation no matter what.

I LOVE this.

I just have one question...what's step #8?

-Erica

[Love]

Originally Posted by Rachelle

I think Steve's decided to write this way because this writing style has the result of getting one's attention and stirring one up. It's active writing with a clear and committed standpoint vs. taking a more safe and non-offensive approach.

Yep, definitely an excitable article. First thing I was hit by was definitely the tone. Then, after I felt that, I was really just perplexed. I basically thought was Neutral wrote (or planned to write):

Originally Posted by Neutral

But why write in a satirical tone?
What does an anti-religious statement written in this style do?

Pretty much what I was thinking.

Originally Posted by Neutral

The people that already agree, will rah-rah but everyone else will just be pissed off.

I agree. I do know that any article can be this way, but this one just seemed polarizing to the extent that there'd be no point for any dialogue.

Originally Posted by Rachelle

I'd be very interested in reading a follow-up post to this one, that addresses exploring spirituality in such a way that DOES promote consciousness. You know... something that offers a concrete alternative (or alternative_S_).

That makes sense. I didn't really think about a follow-up post, but I'm sure that will help integrate things.

[John P]

I don't necessarily disagree with everything you said, Steve, but the tone of that article was incredibly insulting. Maybe you were playing that up to stir up some controversy and discussion, but you seem to have some real anger towards religion. Whatever happened to humor being the most effective way to get your point across?

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Rachelle

I'd be very interested in reading a follow-up post to this one, that addresses exploring spirituality in such a way that DOES promote consciousness. You know... something that offers a concrete alternative (or alternative_S_).

That would be... everything else he's ever written.

[cylon]

Originally Posted by John P

Whatever happened to humor being the most effective way to get your point across?

I was cracking up though.

[Neutral]

Originally Posted by Love

Yep, definitely an excitable article. First thing I was hit by was definitely the tone. Then, after I felt that, I was really just perplexed. I basically thought was Neutral wrote (or planned to write):

Are you double-dupping me or did you just fallen into Steve's comedic tarpit too?

Steve must be having a laugher!

[John P]

Originally Posted by cylon

I was cracking up though.

Yes, but that is, as they say, preaching to the choir. I don't think that many people who believe in a religion are going to catch the humor.

[Plato]

Now that I've actually read the article I have to say that's the kind of stuff I didn't have the guts to write in my RE classes at school but always wanted to. Though perhaps I was wise... my friend who DID express those views was told by the teacher that he was an idiot... to which he retorted that she wasn't fit to teach. He was suspended from school for a week.

[irtrogdor]

Steve (and anyone else who loved this article), please humor me by reading this book. Maybe even write a review. It was written specifically to combat people who have your opinion about religion, especially Christianity. Even if you don't agree with the author, I think that you will find it to be an interesting read.

~Ian

[newmark]

You suggest 'making friends with conscious, free-thinking people who are willing to connect with you regardless of how silly your beliefs are'.
And where can you find such people? They are rare. I've met atheists who don't consider it worthwhile talking to any religious person. I once met a new in-law who asked me which football team I supported and when I told him I didn't he walked off and never spoke again. I was actually lucky. I've met socialists who won't speak to 'unbelievers' unless they wish to convert them. I once even met a Capricorn girl who on learning my star sign also stopped speaking; even though we had got on quite well before.
And I've met many more.
On the bible; if you read it as a religious work what you say might be true, but if you read it as literature, then it is a collection of stories and poetry. And some of them are good.

[Fullcrum]

I find it intriguing that just about no one in this thread is really speaking for themselves, adding anything new, or dissenting intelligently. Why? Most of us agree, some of us disagree, a couple found it insulting, but MOST of us just love that feeling of being socially conditioned by our new master.

hahaha.

The above post was meant only half in jest. Think for yourselves people. Personally I have to give this more thought before I say anything worthy, but I thought pointing out this apparent NEED to replace one form of conditioning with another was important.

[Alison]

Steve must know that the absolutes and generalizations he stated in this post are no more literally true than the book of Genesis. I expect that he was lumping every single religion and church together and insulting them in order to hammer home his point--religion has such a stranglehold on many people that a "bear bomb" such as this one is required to get them to question it.

It might work for people who are already unhappy in their religious communities, feeling shackled and oppressed, and looking for someone to smash up those bars for them.

I'm happy knowing that my church is nothing like the portrait Steve has painted in this article. We use consensus-decision making, the children dance with joy during the closing hymn, and the priest doesn't care what anyone else believes about homosexuality. When I worship with others, I feel connected to humanity in a way that doesn't happen when I'm alone. I don't force myself to believe anything that isn't useful for me, but I'm open to everything--Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Islam, New Age, you name it. I believe it's all the same mountain, just different paths. And as long as we're moving towards love, we'll arrive at the same destination. I stay in the faith I was born into for the same reason I still live in the country I was born into--it's as good a place as any to seek God from.

Hopefully if anyone was converted by this article, they'll speak up and let us know! For my part, I'll still be at my Anglican parish on Sunday. I happen to think it's possible to belong to a Christian community and still visit the church of Steve Pavlina

[cylon]

Originally Posted by John P

Yes, but that is, as they say, preaching to the choir. I don't think that many people who believe in a religion are going to catch the humor.

Not necessarily. Case in point (maybe not a good one, but the first that comes to mind) is when the Secret came out, and so many people were afraid that it challenged their religious beliefs. They didn't think they could do both. And many people frame personal development in a sort of "this is an addition to my religious beliefs" but what tends to happen, is once the free-thinking starts, some of those religious convictions fall away. Then you've got confusion.

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by Fullcrum

MOST of us just love that feeling of being socially conditioned by our new master.

I, for one, welcome our new tough love overlord.

[Ecce Homo]

Originally Posted by Dan.Linehan

I, for one, welcome our new tough love overlord.

My first reaction after reading Steve's post was thank you sir, may I have another? Now if you'll excuse me, it's lights out here in the compound and I must recite my Pavlinian Nightly Prayer before I lay me down to sleep.

[supertom]

what about say source or god in ACIM, i mean worship or giving thanks

[supertom]

It's about why religion isnt good for personal development, but just looking at some of the peoples responses and they have been shaken up

[jaydeschizo]

Steve, do you think this article will help anybody currently inside a mojor religious movement think about his actions and help him see the limitations he has put upon himself?

I do not think so, he would be too offended to even read your entire post. You are probably smart enough to realize that. Therefore I have to wonder what is the purpose of this post other than mere entertainment for those who already do not believe and you yourself who appears to have some 'issues' with established religions.

So Steve, is this post just for yourself to vent something, or to keep the unreligous populus coming to your blog?

To note, I have no religous affiliations, never have.

[munish]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

However, you’ll find that most of these points apply equally well to other major religions (yes, even Buddhism).

You forgot to mention Hinduism,with more that 1 billion followers.

The last time i went inside a temple to pray was 15 years ago.

Nice article.

[cmelinn]

This post was out of character for you, Steve.

I'm almost waiting for you to say that you've had a guest blogger today or that someone stole your password...

Your posts usually raise awareness. Create questions. Provoke thought.

You can do better.

[mikedrechsel]

I've been reading StevePavlina.com for a few years now. I've always been super-impressed with his take on the ideas he chooses to tackle. And I've lurked here in the forums for some time as well. I feel like I've grown quite a bit by reading about, and implementing, ideas that he has discussed via his blog, as well as ideas discussed in the forum.

I, too, want to echo the sentiment expressed by others in this thread. I don't understand the tone of this piece. The tone used here is mocking, condescending, and elitist. It is totally unexpected and contrary to my understanding of what this blog is all about -- so much so that I had to check twice to ensure that the article was actually authored by Mr. Pavlina. This post read as though an entirely different person wrote it.

Perhaps this will discredit my comment, but I am a religious person. I attend church every week. I pray with my family. I believe in God and Jesus and prophets and scriptures. I believe in faith and miracles. I don't believe that makes me an infantile idiot, a hypocrite, a time-waster, a subservient canine, or a fearful person. I'm surprised that so many readers of this blog are supportive of a message that is delivered in a way that appears to be less about growth and more about using words to reduce a person, like me, who has consciously chosen to espouse religion. And yes, I am using the word "consciously" consciously.

To be clear, I'm not offended by Mr. Pavlina's message, but I am confused by his approach, which I think many of you will agree is at the very least atypical of, if not a complete departure from, Mr. Pavlina's usual style.

[microsdad]

Talk about spewing B.S.!! I've never seen a post with so many dogmatic assertions from someone that condemns religious dogma. For someone so analytical, I would think you would actually have evidence to support some of your more ridiculous assertions, (i.e. Jesus was a mythical figure) rather than just spewing hyper vitriol!

The more religious a person becomes, the less compassionate s/he is. The illusion of compassion substitutes for the real thing. Religious people tend to be the most bigoted and non-accepting people on earth.

You must be one of the most religious people on earth judging from this post and your "non-acceptance" of people of faith. Speaking of faith, though you will deny it, you practice faith every single day. Every time you put your foot on the brake when your driving, you have faith your car will stop. Every day you wake up, you have faith that the laws you believe in will operate in the same fashion today as they did yesterday. Only a fool says in his heart, there is no God!

[Isaiah666]

10 reasons? I got 12 reasons why you are all blind.

The man Jesus quoted on hell is proven by physical evidence to be 100% correct.

12 for 12 Isaiah666.com - The Bible and Hell. Archaeology and Isaiah's Historical Accuracy

Game Over

[Pegasus]

Originally Posted by outdoorsnewzealand

Steve must have noticed the forum usage getting low or something, this must be the most controversial article he's written so far.

That's what I assumed. Compare the tone to the calmer tone of this earlier post of his: Ask Steve - What Religion Are You? .

Steve, this is by far your worst blog post. It sounds as if you are projecting your former Catholic boy issues onto your audience. Get a therapist! From what you wrote, it sounds like you have not had much exposure to other religions and denominations outside Catholicism. Have you ever attended services at mosques, temples, synagogues, or various Protestant denominations? You will sometimes find more energy collectively among a group (as expressed in Alison’s post) than through each individual praying/meditating alone. Churches call their members to action within their communities. I don’t see this as a bad thing.

Are you familiar with the Jesus Seminar (I hope this is the right site: Westar Seminars)? It brings us back to the historical Jesus. I learned of this research through my old church not school.

btw, I have not attended church in about 5 years (for social reasons) and I don’t believe in hell. My motivation is not to convert you. I write to point out that you are over-generalizing based on limited experience.

[munish]

Christ said, "Don't hate your enemy, love your enemy."

But we have not understood that.

We don't care.

We have been programmed, literally programmed like a computer, to worship Jesus, to worship the Buddha.

I think it is living consciously that can change us. Following religion is vast entertainment.

This is one of your best article.

[bugmenot]

If it was meant to deliberately provocative, it was.
If it wasn't, it was stupid and ignorant

[Pegasus]

Contrary to popular belief, religions are not set in stone. They transform and evolve along with society -- even the last Pope eventually acknowledged women's contribution to the work force! Choosing not to be a religious extremist doesn't make one a hypocrite.

[Trezker]

Heh, I expected a storm of Christians bashing the post. Boy was I wrong, the internet must be growing up.

Still, that bashing still may come. They're probably just being slow, or maybe they're building up for a really massive attack.

Is there no "church" that raises consciousness? Maybe it would be easier to break out from the bad religious organizations if there's a better alternative to go to. I've been thinking that school is pretty bad at teaching critical thinking and personal development. Maybe an organization that focuses on raising peoples consciousness would be a good idea...

[moonlite]

I'm not an English speaker, so please forgive me my mistakes like strange syntax and the like

I'm very grateful for many insights I found on Steve's site. This site has inspired me a lot and has given me many new perspectives and food for thought. It was so funny for me to read this morning his new blog entry as I am religious person and my life and observations contradict almost everything he wrote about religion. But maybe it's because Judaism is not a religion, certainly not in a sense in which Steve describes it. He made some remarks about rabbis so I assume that he has included Judaism in his diatribe. I feel sorry for his terrible experiences with Christianity, I'm lucky that church didn't have such a big impact on my life. So here are my answers for his points:

1. Spirituality for dummies

What kind of spirituality you find in any possible environment depends only on you. There are mediocre priest and rabbis, and there are brilliant and enlightened too. There are also mediocre personal development guru's feeding their ego by number of sheep and there are brilliant ones who can open minds of people and show them that there is something more they can have from life.
As one of rabbis said: "who is wise? Who can learn something from anyone". In my faith I'm obliged to learn and to train my intellect, it's my moral duty

2. Loss of spiritual depth perception.

In my religion number of possible perspectives is so vast that it's really hard to stick to one. I don't want to be boastful about my religion - certainly others also offer a variety of different perspectives. And these perspectives are often accompanied by interesting spiritual practices similar to what Steve presents here - putting your body to some limits of endurance to be able to cross it. What is more important - the number of personal experiences described by people of the certain path. It's simply bigger when religion is old.

3. Engineered obedience training.

Any spiritual quest demands certain level of discipline. And I think that Steve would be the last to say that to live consciously is to do whatever you want without any goal, any purpose or polarization. In this sense you can say that recommending any possible course of action is an obedience training, also an advice to dump religion In fact religious person can be more independent than non-religious one because the only thing he/she depends on is G-d and nobody else. Trust in G-d can make you invincible rebel of any authority and our history shows exactly that. In my religion relation with G-d is direct one. Of course there is also impact of your environment, but it is YOU who choose where and with whom to live.

4. Toilet-bowl time management.

Religious practice for me is the greatest opportunity to learn proper time management. Because I keep Shabbat there is a lot of activities I have to plan and do before, also complicated festivals like Pesach and prayer in itself structures my days and acts like a powerful motivator not to waste time.
The morning prayer for instance is for me a great starter for a day - sets my mind in proper attitude and I noticed that the more I concentrate on it the more focused I remain for the rest of day.

5. Support your local pedophile.

Well, I will be merciful on this point and will say nothing, because we Jews certainly know how to deal with our money

6. Incest is best.

When there is a possibility of conversion the whole point is absurd. According to research the most important factor of relationship strength is similarity of world views. Nothing surprising, ha? As someone wrote in this thread before - the possibility of finding sincere Stevepavlinism follower is even smaller

7. Idiocy or hypocrisy - pick one.

There is also another possibility, the world is full of possibilities...
This third possibility is Growth. We are humans and we are not perfect but this is also our potential for change and development. There is no true faith without doubts, stepping back, returning and so on. It is sometimes painful but always spiritually rewarding process and in the result you can reach a higher level of integrity.

8. Inherited falsehood.

There are people who are changing religion, changing continents and themselves. I know many of them. Yes, I think that only really conscious choice can be the base of true faith. But it's also possible for people believing in religion of their parents. When they grow-up then can reject it and then return to it or search for something different, but even for them there is possibility of choosing consciously.

9. Compassion in chains.

As far as I know far more victims were killed by followers of non-religious ideologies as communism, Nazism and so on.

10. Faith is fear.

No, there is no real faith without love. My tradition put it simply - faith based on fear is of the lower kind. The real faith is based on love of Creator and gratitude.

I could write more, but I'm in a hurry now, maybe I'll add something later...