10 Reasons You Should Never Have a Religion (Blog)

[Rustom]

A vigorous post Steve!

But I have a question. You admit it's slanted toward (against)
Christianity and you mention Hinduism, Islam and Buddhism.

But there are others which can certainly be classified under
'organized belief system'. I wonder what you say about these religions?

For example

Feminism
To assert any difference between men and women is a crime. To blithely deny it is correct because its...

Politically Correct
You called me 'Miss?' (which I am)? I'll fry your _________!
And Abortion: Is rightful, freedomful, blissful if the mother is a feminist, but a terrible crime if the child was aborted because it was a female.

Democracy
The world's oldest democracy has the God given (I mean Prez-given) right to bomb out all those who, not being with us are against us. Done sometimes with actual bombs but more often with something called

The Free Market
A very effective system in which the rich are (free to get) richer and the poor free to get poorer. And if they protest use the previous, they can use the next religion called....

Free Speech
Journalists are the great harbingers of 'facts'. And yet each of us would have confirmed that whenever we have known something independently of the journalists their version invariably distorts what we know. More generally we believe that...

Education
makes us 'better'. To quote Wendell Berry: Educated people are more valuable than other people because education is a value-adding industry. One of the pillars of which is that noble glorious grand edifice called...

Science
Have you noticed that if you disagree with a scientist you are -- of course -- unscientific. And they can overhaul their theories every decade because they are -- of course -- scientific. And all this goes because of the crown-jewel of science called...

Technology
Interesting isn't it that whenever we modern, non-religious folks are confronted with a problem we search for a technological solution. But that Technology as a whole is likely to destroy not just our whole civilization but our whole planet --- well thats not a technologist's problem!

Ecology/Environment
Admit I belong here so no snide comments!

Veganism
I almost belong here (am a vegetarian) (along with more exalted company :-) ) so dare not comment!

[puduman]

One of the worst mistakes you can make in life is to attach your identity to any particular religion or philosophy, such as by saying “I am a Christian” or “I am a Buddhist.” This forces your mind into a fixed perspective, robbing you of spiritual depth perception and savagely curtailing your ability to perceive reality accurately... Religious “truths” are inherently rooted in a fixed perspective, but real truth is perspective-independent...

True. But how do you come to experience this perspective-independent truth? Do you experience it by saying that 'you' isn't the real 'you'? By thinking, that 'you ' isn't the real 'you'? Or by feeling that 'you' isn't the real 'you'?

In my opinion you can only experience this perspective-independent truth by becoming it. That is and always was the goal of the great mystics. You have to develop the possibility to experience it by contemplative and/or meditation techniques (Like father Thomas said in the video I posted before, in some cases it may arise out of an intensive experience while being in nature or something else). But there is severe evidence that most of the time you have to walk one of these paths (meditation, contemplation...) to really become this truth in terms of a deep experience.

Today many people tend to pay lip service after watching spiritual movies, reading books or self-development blogs (no offense! Count me in!) and say: "I am not my opinion", "There is no one who can be holder of a point of view", "The observer is not the observed" and so on. But do they really live and feel it from the bottom of their heart? Ask yourself: when your house burns down, when you're diagnosed a deadly disease, when your partner dies in a car accident, when your kid is killed by some crazy rapist - would you still be able to keep that distance to what is or what holds your point of view? Steve maybe one of the few who would, I for my part frankly think I wouldn't (though it's my ideal).

I think lip services keep us more from ever experiencing this truth than any religion ever does, because those lip services are intellectual concepts disguised with a deep spiritual meaning. Of course same goes for many things going on in organized religion, but there is a tendency to return to the mystic source of religion. Much homework was done hundreds and thousands of years ago. As Wolfgang said: Why throwing the baby out with the bath water? Why condemning the bible or religion in it's whole when all we should do is putting it in our today's perspectives? There is so much worth in it!

Steve, I really appreciate your work and your article. There is a huge shift to be made. And maybe we have to become non-believers in the first place to believe again.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by puduman

You have to develop the possibility to experience it by contemplative and/or meditation techniques ..

Puduman, sometimes all it takes is someone reminding you with a line in a forum thread. I am speaking from very recent personal experience.

[puduman]

One thing I forgot to mention is, that there seems to be a strong misconception about the deep experience of the 'truth', i.e. enlightment: People think it's something you once have and keep for life. A one time experience may shift your perspective but it doesn't mean you stay enlightened. Furthermore research shows there are various levels of this experience (see the Ten Bulls). The last stage is often described as a kind of re-integration into society after you forgot your experience and felt deep emptiness (not in a negative way I think). In most cases this seems to be hard to be achieved in a lifetime. The Joe Public's experience may be a sweet touch of this truth - in rare cases it may be true enlightenment -, but I think it's far from really living it.

[rdshelmerdine]

holy hell, I wasn't expecting that! You tell em Steve, just hope it doesn't get blocked by the powers that be or something. Your article was hilarious start to finish.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by puduman

One thing I forgot to mention is, that there seems to be a strong misconception about the deep experience of the 'truth', i.e. enlightment:
A one time experience may shift your perspective but it doesn't mean you stay enlightened. Furthermore there are various levels of this experience. The last stage is deep experiencing, integrating and then forgetting it (also see the Ten Bulls).

Oh, I see. That sounds a lot like religion! Various levels, you have to do certain things before you can be enlightened, misconceptions about 'truth' (which implies a personal knowledge of an objective and inarguable 'truth'), etc.

The Ten Bulls, a Buddhist concept, has it that you progress along a progression to enlightenment, at the end of which you achieve a "perfection of wisdom."

My philosophy is: Why wait?

[kenakari]

First impressions:

I'm a little confused here. This does not sound like you. The tone is different from your other 10 reasons articles. Is this a social experiment?

I've met both lightworkers and darkworkers who just happen to follow a religion - not just Christians by the way.

I've met sheep/sleepers (those who are not conscious) who don't. My perception was that any formalized set of beliefs was faith, and faith=religion, even if it's just a congregation of one.

You do make some good points if one gets past the way the article is written.

[puduman]

Originally Posted by Angela

Oh, I see. That sounds a lot like religion! Various levels, you have to do certain things before you can be enlightened, misconceptions about 'truth' (which implies a personal knowledge of an objective and inarguable 'truth'), etc.

The Ten Bulls, a Buddhist concept, has it that you progress along a progression to enlightenment, at the end of which you achieve a "perfection of wisdom."

My philosophy is: Why wait?

In some way I agree: You are already enlightened. So why wait?

But what is referred to as enlightenment in mystic traditions and religions is something at the end of a process - a kind of remembering that you are and always were in fact enlightened and one. I don't say you can't experience this oneness without religion, but religion - at least their mystic traditions - seem to be a good map for your path. Yes, think of mystic originated religion as a map on which you can see one of the many paths which some men and women walked. Their goal was all the same, at least that's what many of them say and said. When they came back they drew this map for others to follow. Of course there are other ways, of course you can walk your own. But many followers experienced the same things. This qualifies mystic traditions - and therefore religions as they were meant - as a reliable technique to have this experience. It's a technique! You can scrap it after you became aware of your oneness! Or find your own path, that's ok too, but it may be a tough challenge.

What's wrong with organized religion is that it took those maps and confused them with reality (creationism; the belief that the bible has to be proved for the religion to be "true"). That's what this whole debate is all about, I think. People condemn religion, but in fact they condemn the interpretation of religion they were suggested. Which I think is perfectly fine as long as it is not extreme or daunting and as long as they are aware of what they are in fact condemning.

Buddha said: “Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.”

That's far from organized religion and it's far from lip services.

[Ninja]

Originally Posted by ARationalMind

Dropped to the level of muck-raking to pad the AdSense coffers, eh? When you want to post a factual, rational, intelligent discussion about this I'm sure your credibility will return. Until then many of us will be keeping the proverbial "grain of salt" handy.

I'm saving all my salt for rabid fundies trying to scare me into accepting their 'savior'. It's a poor substitute for pepperspray though...

[jamestl2]

Originally Posted by Trezker

Maybe you should put a disclaimer on your provocative posts Steve. Not that I think it'd do much good. It's like those idiotic warning labels you Americans put on everything.

"A popular scooter for children warns: "This product moves when used." " http://www.wackywarnings.com/

You should check out his legal notice :
Steve Pavlina - Disclaimer

[irtrogdor]

Originally Posted by Dave Kaminski

That book is about Jesus, who possibly existed ~2000 years ago.

Not to say he didn't exist (I think he may have, and the pagan beliefs propagated around him were probably the falsified part. Christians are essentially sun worshipers, as the research I've seen suggests) but if I spent a year researching his time I imagine I could write a book about someone's life back then and make it fairly believable too!

Yes it is about Jesus. Christianity is also about Jesus. So you can't really have one without the other.
But the point is that the author only uses external sources and logic to support his ideas.

Honestly, the book is pretty inexpensive and it brings up most questions and misconceptions that non-Christians have about Christianity.

Oh yeah, I think a quick definition of Chrisitanity would help. Anyone who believes in his heart and mind that Jesus is God's son, came to earth 2000 years ago and saved anyone who believes in him from eternal damnation is in fact a Christian. All the denominations are just people who disagree about the "little things" and choose to worship with people that agree with them.

[mlc82]

Originally Posted by Ninja

I'm saving all my salt for rabid fundies trying to scare me into accepting their 'savior'. It's a poor substitute for pepperspray though...

I'm with you- I wouldn't mind them as much if they'd quit trying to force their beliefs into our laws (in the US) through political agendas (and then screech and howl "persecution!" when people won't cave into their demands).

[mlc82]

Originally Posted by irtrogdor

All the denominations are just people who disagree about the "little things" and choose to worship with people that agree with them.

Who up until very recently loved to kill each other and anyone else in their path over those little disagreements. Assuming he actually existed and wasn't a character made up for an allegorical teaching, as I figure he likely was, I don't think Jesus would be too thrilled over the things organized Christianity has put his name upon.

[A.K.Light]

If you don't understand this blog post, then you didn't actually read it. Nor did you think. Please try again!

[cylon]

Posted this somewhere else. Almost unanimous in the reaction that Steve is a hypocrite for having a donate link here.

[irtrogdor]

Originally Posted by mlc82

Who up until very recently loved to kill each other and anyone else in their path over those little disagreements. Assuming he actually existed and wasn't a character made up for an allegorical teaching, as I figure he likely was, I don't think Jesus would be too thrilled over the things organized Christianity has put his name upon.

And you are right. Jesus isn't all that happy with us. But if you hadn't noticed, Christians haven't been killing Muslims for quite awhile now...

There is no reason to point out every time humanity has screwed up. We've done it plenty and will continue to do so.

I refuse to try and have a drawn out debate with someone who is not familiar with (at the bare minimum) the book "More than a Carpenter". If you will not give us Christians the courtesy of treating the debate of whether or Christianity is valid as you would treat any secular debate, then why should we put up with you?
Isn't it illogical to try to argue with someone if you aren't familiar with their side of the argument?

If anyone has any real questions about what a true Christian believes, doesn't believe, or any other question that isn't condescending or bigoted, feel free to shoot me an email.

Irtrogdor@gmail.com

~Ian

[mlc82]

Originally Posted by irtrogdor

And you are right. Jesus isn't all that happy with us. But if you hadn't noticed, Christians haven't been killing Muslims for quite awhile now...

There is no reason to point out every time humanity has screwed up. We've done it plenty and will continue to do so.

I refuse to try and have a drawn out debate with someone who is not familiar with (at the bare minimum) the book "More than a Carpenter". If you will not give us Christians the courtesy of treating the debate of whether or Christianity is valid as you would treat any secular debate, then why should we put up with you?
Isn't it illogical to try to argue with someone if you aren't familiar with their side of the argument?

If anyone has any real questions about what a true Christian believes, doesn't believe, or any other question that isn't condescending or bigoted, feel free to shoot me an email.

Irtrogdor@gmail.com

~Ian

I suppose I get annoyed with organized Christianity's apparent "Get Out of All Atrocities Free!" pass.

I wasn't referring to Christians killing muslims, or jews, or anyone else besides other Christians who don't believe exactly as they do. On a timescale of Christian history, the period of peace between different (Christian) denominations is so far a small blip on the end of a nearly 2,000 yr timeline of violence.

[Didi]

Steve has consistently shown a distaste for organized religions throughout his articles and posts here on his site. That's fine. Everyone is entitled to their point of view (yes...THEIR point of view). But this jazz about this being only "a" point of view and not "their" point of view has left me feeling disappointed. The passion, bias, crudeness, venom, conviction, etc., that this article was composed with comes from Steve, not from some greater consciousness or whatever. The vast majority of people in the world take great comfort in their religion (although I am non-religious), so this would be the viewpoint of very few of them.

Saying that an opinion or viewpoint is not yours, and is only one of many many viewpoints and that you can adopt as many as you want simultaneously is dangerous. It opens the door to the justification of opinions and viewpoints that are harmful. Steve's analogies to justify this mindset of not owning a viewpoint are poor. A viewpoint is not the same thing as a telescope or microscope. It is a reflection of your intellect, character and experiences and should be taken seriously. The fact that Steve is not taking personal responsibility for this very caustic and offensive article I feel is cowardly. He's posted it on his site (which bears his name). He is listed as the author. Is he channeling some greater opinion that organized religions are brain-washing pedophiles? No, it's all him.

I suppose what I am most disappointed about is the composition of the article. It is filled with bias, false choices and poor logic. "When you subscribe to an established religion, you have only two choices. You can become an idiot, or you can become a hypocrite." Give me a break. I choose option C.

We waited 9 days for this blog entry since your last one (a very practical and useful approach to making accurate time estimates) in the hopes that we can further our personal development and maybe just become a little more enlightened to the world around us. This was a giant leap back and down into the realm of fear and cowardice. This reminds me of my high school religion classes and all the little rebellious suburban teenagers who were all just bored out of their skulls. You have taken a very literal and narrow-minded view of religion, and it is making me now doubt your other spiritual writings as well.

Despite the blemish that this article will leave on your site, I do look forward to your future posts, in the hopes that I can learn something from your experiences. Cheers.

[DivaLion]

I'm sad to see such a poor and disappointing article here, when I had come to expect so much better.

Part of the reason I read this site is, actually, because I feel like your writing is "201 level"; that, having pretty much gotten what I felt I was going to get out of gentle 101-level PD teachers, I was interested in the kind of vigorous challenge you present. I like when I read one of your articles and feel resistance to the ideas, or feel them get my back up. They're always well-reasoned and thoughtful enough that it's like stepping up a physical workout, and I know that after some processing, my mental/emotional/spiritual muscles are going to feel more limber for it whether I ultimately agree or disagree with you.

This, however, is just...disappointing. It sounds like the cynical rantings of every bitter ex-Catholic I've ever met, reactionary and as intellectually insubstantial as they're accusing the Catholic church of being.

Yes, some religious people are hypocrites. But to cry "j'accuse" while in the same article condemning *all* religious people as bigots...? Is that irony lost on you? Is the practice of hypocrisy bad for the religious but a consciousness-raising act if you do it in the name of personal development?

Why is it repugnant to pay a minister a fee for their time preparing and conducting a marriage ceremony, but acceptable to pay someone for her time conducting a spiritual reading? Is the value to the recipient of the latter measurably greater than that of the former?

How is "The Secret"/intention-manifestation measurably more sensible and profitable than prayer?

How is it consciousness-raising to view the world subjectively and believe that you are not separate from the entire universe, but idiotic and immature to subscribe to a religion that teaches the essential unity of all things?

Have you given every acknowledged world religion a 30-day trial to personally ensure that the opinions of them that you present here and the characteristics you describe hold to the same standard of integrity and personal accuracy you maintain for raw foods and polyphasic sleep? As has already been pointed out here, several of your points are grossly inaccurate when applied to specific religions with which you do not seem to be familiar.

Religion is a human construct, like any other-- family, business, community, government. Ultimately, it is neither good nor evil-- it just is, and more to the point, it is what people make of it. When you deconstructed work life in "10 Reasons You Should Never Get a Job", it and its related articles ultimately advocated a new approach to work life, with potential for new models of business as a result. *That* was thought-provoking, provocative, and insightful material; you didn't dismiss every place of business as evil, nor label everyone benighted and malicious and fearful who holds a job. Even though you weren't really speaking from personal experience, you seemed to have given real consideration to the circumstances of the "working man" and to have sought some deeper understanding from which to write. Had you written that way here, being provocative yet by doing so attempting to point a way towards new models of spiritual community, I'd be among those who applaud you for throwing down a bold challenge.

In those earlier articles, your work seemed to come from the lightworker's love of humanity and desire to help and enlighten others. This article, however, was such a letdown because it rings with a darkworker's fear of Other, a fear that manifests as malicious and shaming "humor", superiority, and smugness. It was distasteful, unproductive, off-putting, and wholly unlike everything I most enjoy about your writing.

When I logged in to write this comment I noticed this text: "Take just a few minutes to give and receive love with your fellow human beings. You'll be glad you did."

I wish I could say I felt even a flicker of love in this article, but it was about as loving as the ravings of a political pundit.

You may not be the quality of your work, but I hope that quality decides to put in an appearance again next time. It is sorely missed.

[Sindre]

I agree that this article was a bit unexpected and controversial even for Steve, but I at least got a big laugh out of it. I agree with what Steve writes here, and I liked the "tone" of it. I often use a similar tone in some of my own articles, and some people already hate me for it... Other people love it.

That's just the way it is, people will never agree. I think that writing an article in a tone like this actually helps more people than if it was written in a "kinder" way... The point is to make people think for themselves and make up their own mind about where they stand.

[Dave McNamee]

This article seems aimed at tickling the prejudices in both groups - both adherents to religions and non-adherents. I don't think the net result of this content being in the world will be an increase in tolerance, spirituality or reason.

I agree that a majority of religious people are very immature from a spiritual standpoint. But truly spiritual people would not react positively to this article because they recognize the narrow judgmental perspective that it represents. If you want to increase spirituality and logical thinking try reducing the number of logical fallacies in your own writing.

Truth would be better served by helping those enslaved by religion to understand the freedom and personal strength that can be attained through learning how to be truly spiritually awake and take responsibility for their own lives. Then if they are enslaved they will be able to free themselves. Attacking religion itself is not the way to free the slaves. Teach them true principles and they will free themselves.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Didi

We waited 9 days for this blog entry since your last one (a very practical and useful approach to making accurate time estimates) in the hopes that we can further our personal development and maybe just become a little more enlightened to the world around us. This was a giant leap back and down into the realm of fear and cowardice.

Who are you calling "we", Kimosabe? Nobody makes you take a giant leap back and down into fear and cowardice. Nobody makes you more enlightened, either. It's your choice!

But of course, that's just a point of view.

[Ninja]

I guess the truth hurts for some people, and most of them don't get it, referring to 'pro-steve' posters here as Atheists. Atheism means 'without a god'. But you do not have to be religious to believe in a god. Maybe you discovered your own god through spirituality? And made up a really funny name for him/her while you were at it? I know I would...

People who scream Atheist (and even worse: claim they are blind somehow, blahblahblah) obviously have just skimmed the article and should learn to read before they rage.

Grow up.

[Intrawebs]

1. Noone "subscribes" to Buddhism.
And for starters it's a Philosophy not a Religion. Buddhism attempts to get to the "root" and start from there vs. the surface layer that you speak of. And Buddha himself never "told you what to believe" as you say Religion does, but rather he said "this is the path I took, use parts of it if you like, it worked for me, you can walk your own path".

2. A Buddhist wouldn't actually call themselves Buddhist as that would be labeling and or attachment, It's hard to understand at first and I won't go in depth here on that. Where you say "real truth is perspective-independent" blows my mind as that what's Buddhism is all about, proving you know very little if anything about Buddhism.

3. "Religions are authoritarian hierarchies designed to dominate your free will",
yes many are, not Buddhism, once again...who taught you Buddhism?

4. No comment on that one other than what side of the bed did you wake up on today? Was it, "lets sensationalize religion for some good re-occurring referral traffic to my blog" day?

5. Yes, many religions have a very bad history here. I challenge the ranks of all the world's religions to live like Buddhist monks and nuns....100% funded by the PEOPLE of the church and spend ZERO on material items for themselves or others (and I use "material" broadly).

6. "Try making friends with conscious, free-thinking people for a change"
exactly! Surround yourself with likeminded individuals, those with an open mind...a good practice of any human!

8. "Inherited falsehood",
exactly what Siddhattha Gotama (Buddha) thought when he sought the middle way. He bucked the trends of Hinduism and showed people that with an open mind there is much more to learn.

9. "Those who preach nonviolence as a rule or law tend to be the most violent of all.",
this is where I really take offense. How many Buddhist do you encounter in your life or the news that are violent people, start or partake in wars, and support violent measures of any kind as a solution to a problem? You don't solve violence with violence just as much as you don't solve a weight problem with a bigger belt or a traffic problem with bigger freeways!

10. "Religion will teach you to fear being different, to fear standing up for yourself, and to fear being an independent thinker"
HOLY COW DUDE! You know nothing about Buddhism as it teaches the polar opposite....please educate yourself. I have found Tibetan Buddhism to be the most accessible in the USA, if you are in a Rural area it might be tough, but do some online research first.


It seems you honed in and the weakness's of Christianity, which is fine, just don't lump Buddhism in there as well because while they do share many of the same benefits one may get from them, the downsides you highlighted are not synonymous between the two.

And, with your January Raw Food diet and now this I've unsubscribe from your RSS, I was duped into thinking you were a bit more educated/read than I thought. Good Luck, you don't need it thought as you seem to be successful already.

[Ninja]

Originally Posted by Intrawebs

1. Noone "subscribes" to Buddhism.
And for starters it's a Philosophy not a Religion. Buddhism attempts to get to the "root" and start from there vs. the surface layer that you speak of. And Buddha himself never "told you what to believe" as you say Religion does, but rather he said "this is the path I took, use parts of it if you like, it worked for me, you can walk your own path".

2. A Buddhist wouldn't actually call themselves Buddhist as that would be labeling and or attachment, It's hard to understand at first and I won't go in depth here on that. Where you say "real truth is perspective-independent" blows my mind as that what's Buddhism is all about, proving you know very little if anything about Buddhism.

3. "Religions are authoritarian hierarchies designed to dominate your free will",
yes many are, not Buddhism, once again...who taught you Buddhism?

4. No comment on that one other than what side of the bed did you wake up on today? Was it, "lets sensationalize religion for some good re-occurring referral traffic to my blog" day?

5. Yes, many religions have a very bad history here. I challenge the ranks of all the world's religions to live like Buddhist monks and nuns....100% funded by the PEOPLE of the church and spend ZERO on material items for themselves or others (and I use "material" broadly).

6. "Try making friends with conscious, free-thinking people for a change"
exactly! Surround yourself with likeminded individuals, those with an open mind...a good practice of any human!

8. "Inherited falsehood",
exactly what Siddhattha Gotama (Buddha) thought when he sought the middle way. He bucked the trends of Hinduism and showed people that with an open mind there is much more to learn.

9. "Those who preach nonviolence as a rule or law tend to be the most violent of all.",
this is where I really take offense. How many Buddhist do you encounter in your life or the news that are violent people, start or partake in wars, and support violent measures of any kind as a solution to a problem? You don't solve violence with violence just as much as you don't solve a weight problem with a bigger belt or a traffic problem with bigger freeways!

10. "Religion will teach you to fear being different, to fear standing up for yourself, and to fear being an independent thinker"
HOLY COW DUDE! You know nothing about Buddhism as it teaches the polar opposite....please educate yourself. I have found Tibetan Buddhism to be the most accessible in the USA, if you are in a Rural area it might be tough, but do some online research first.


It seems you honed in and the weakness's of Christianity, which is fine, just don't lump Buddhism in there as well because while they do share many of the same benefits one may get from them, the downsides you highlighted are not synonymous between the two.

And, with your January Raw Food diet and now this I've unsubscribe from your RSS, I was duped into thinking you were a bit more educated/read than I thought. Good Luck, you don't need it thought as you seem to be successful already.

Hear, hear! I think it was a good article, but labeling Buddhism as a religion? No, No, No! Talk about a spiritual faux pas! Buddhism is no more a religion than beef is a vegetable. Steve, are you sure your diet is really vegan?

[Sam988]

Now this is a GREAT article steve. I agree with everything you said (which is not very common). Religion is a disease, and people who are born and constantly brainwashed by their parents in a religion is something SAD and i hope when our society becomes more advanced culturally and technologically, such things won't be allowed anymore. It's like abusive parents or the father who practices incest with his daughter; it damages the children for life and it is very hard to free themselves from the deep brainwash that took place since their very early years.

[Mr.Mustache]

On the one hand Steve always talks about having beliefs that accurately describe reality. On the other hand Steve vaguely explains his new view about have multiple lenses of reality. Which is it Steve? Should we seek truth or should we make up truth as we go along? I believe in being open to other viewpoints but thats not what Steve is talking about is he?

I don't believe the critical mind can fully comprehend (spiritual) truth, conditioned thinking and logical deductions only create more sectarian views. The belief in perceiving reality with multiple lenses is just another perspective, possibly more sophisticated or more deluded. In the end it is necessarily incomplete.

[Sindre]

I think people who actually get upset by this article and claiming to unsubscribe from Steve's RSS-feed really is shooting themselves in their own foot.. Obviously you got some more personal development to do. I think it's a childish approach to get mad over one simple article, that really was written this way only to challenge the way you think.

[songwriter]

Originally Posted by puduman

If you think it is, well, it is. I like the way Willigis Jäger puts it according to a zen saying: Religion is the finger that points to the moon, not the moon itself.

Dear Steve, I think at some point you have to give up religion (to 'kill the buddha_ so to say). But until you are ready to do that, religion may be a good fingerpost for your direction. If you see it that way, there's no point in asking: Did Jesus actually live? Did he actually do what the bible says? -
These questions actually don't matter if all religion is the attempt of the dualistic mind to describe and lead back to oneness/god/dao/whatever (yes, even Christianity may have arised out of this attempt).

In my point of view the whole creationist debate mixed up organized religion and mysticism (or rather: isn't even aware of a mystic tradition in all religions at all), of which the latter might be the real precious source of religion. I think most of your readers have not yet come so far to kill buddha. So please don't make the same mistake and mix those two up.

Finally I see things here I always liked to be discussed... if religion is the finger that points to the Moon, I want to look to more places too...

For instance, I'm not gonna think Jesus never existed. I'm gonna read what he said, and I'm gonna try to learn from what I think he's right. Steve would call it "empowering beliefs". That can come from any religion, from science, from tradition, from your own creativity, from songs...

If I stick myself to... I'm "Whatever", not only a religion, but "feminist", democratic, political correct, like someone says... I only gonna stick to a "security blanket" of beliefs maybe in fear of doubting. You get yourself your own 10 commandments and close your mind to all the rest of concepts.
That's like saying "All you need is love" and don't saying anything more.

There is good and bad in everything (another song, haha...), and often the same religion or the same science contradicts itself... lucky. If not is like a dogma dictated by a single person.

In music, the perfect style (and in art) is the lack of style, just combine them all at your will, but often people get related easily promoting themselves as... rock band, republican, feminist, christian or whatever... but you're not just that, you're much more. You can adopt or not any believe or habit, and it doesn't matter where it comes from, the Bible, the Beatles, a muslim man, a black man, even a blogger... lol... you know.

When Paul McCartney wrote Yesterday, the producer wanted to add violins but Paul said "No, we are A ROCK AND ROLL BAND". "Just let me try, if you don't like we can take them away", said the producer. Paul tried, and since then, strings are part of rock and roll music. And 2 years later Paul wanted a symphony orchestra for a recordings. We can't learn if we don't open our minds to other points of views.

[Syr]

Originally Posted by kenakari

I've met sheep/sleepers (those who are not conscious) who don't. My perception was that any formalized set of beliefs was faith, and faith=religion, even if it's just a congregation of one.

I disagree with you: you can have faith in yourself, your friends, prophets/gods or goals. In my opinion "faith" is the relation of trust/hope you have in whatever you believe in. Religion is the unnecessarry bullshit who tries meddling with said relation(s).

If one has faith in, for example, Yeshua (Jesus), one can decide to belief in him outside of the church and bible. The first gospels were written quite some decennia after his death anyway, so probably more fiction/propaganda than fact. This guy died as an insurgent/traitor (if he'd been executed for blaspheming against the clergy/religion, like christianity likes to tell, he'd been stoned to death), so it requires some good propaganda to keep faith in such a criminal.

I think most of us have grown up in countries where certain religions dominated the history of that particular country and laid claim to (and twisted) pre-religious social traditions ("marriage" for example). The whole gay marriage thing wouldn't be such a problem if the goddamn bible (pun intended) was written by ancient greeks instead of ancient jews (unfortunatly this would not better the situation of women in said fairy tale collection) or religion kept it's filthy paws of marriage at all. No, I wouldn't mind the total destruction of religions.

Besides my above rant, I find the article sub-par as well compared to other articless. The header "Support your local pedophile" was especially poor. In fact (and I'm going off-topic here), I wish child-abusers were only pedophiles, it's pedosexuals I have a problem with. While the first is a sexual preferrence and doesn't have to be practised, the second is the actual activity which tends to destroy lifes (same applies to incest, most childrapes are in fact done by family-members). Religious tradition (based on shame and fear) hatches cultures in which sexual predators can work easier than in secular cultures, but religion doesn't necessarily create the predators.

On another note, I'm impressed this discussion is so mature, politics and religion are the subjects to start a flamewar.