God and Religion are NOT Mutually Inclusive

Philosophy Forums Religion and Spirituality
1

Please read the initial post in this thread. Then answer the question: Are God and religion mutually inclusive?

  • No, one’s acknowledgment of God does not mean one is practicing a religion.
  • Yes, if you say "God", then you’ve said "religion".
0 voters

I have encountered in discussion the following opinion:

But I disagree with this opinion.

Though many religions have a tenet of God, there are many religions that don’t, even though all like to call themselves a religion and their practitioners don’t doubt in their mind that they are practicing a religion.

But, to me, logically, one cannot say “religion” merely by virtue of saying “God”.

There has to be more to it than “God” to be a religion.

Otherwise we would be in violation of the First Amendment for printing “In God We Trust” on our money, which we aren’t.

Or the President might be in violation of the First Amendment for saying “God Bless America” in his addressing of Congress, which he isn’t.

And indeed there is more to it.

According to The Encyclopedia of Religion over thirty years ago, to be a religion, a religion must have both of the following tenets: 1) a belief in “souls” (a zephyr-like part of us that could live before our present life and could live on after we die), and 2) a belief in before/after life. If any of these two are missing, the philosophy is simply not a religion.

Also according to The Encyclopedia of Religion, a philosophy may have a tenet of “God”, but a tenet of “God” does not qualify the philosophy to be a religion in any way.

Deluding that a belief in God, absent religion defining tenets, makes such a belief the practice of religion flies in the face of the reality that many acknowledge God, but they don’t believe in or practice a religion, being agnostically, pantheistically, or panentheistically open to here and now manifestations of God, even if they aren’t open to the two or four thousand year-old fantasies and future Hellacious fears of some religions.

God is simply not religion. And acknowledging of God’s, Higher Power’s, The Force’s (or whatever you prefer) existence does not make you a practitioner of religion … religion-phobic atheists irrelevantly notwithstanding.

2

Can you explain how any notion of what God is for your life, or who God is, is not a form of creating your own Religion?

3

Well, I think it depends on how one views religion (is a pantheistic view a religion? Is believing in the unseen religion? ect) but on the whole I tend to agree.

Especially since one can have religion without God.

4

Yes, one can have religion without God. I took with my first post as Jennys saying God and Religion can’t be inclusive, but they aren’t always mutual, religion can be anything.

Ignore my first post as I’m only saying how can one believe in God without having religion, which is impossible.

5

I do, though, tend to think that evoking the idea of God in an area outside of religion is merely a contamination of religion showing up in their thoughts.

In a Western setting, mention God and automatically the Judeo-Christian God pops comes to mind and the rest is built off of that.

So, while one can mention God and mean it in a non-religious way, you can clearly see were their thoughts regarding this issue were forged: either in reaction to or in agreement with.

6

I shall break it down here.

To say I believe in God, and he is this or would want this, is religion.

To acknowledge God as real, it’s religion.

If you’re not acknowledging God as real, you haven’t used religion in this sense, but you most likely worship something else, and have another form of Religion.

Religion can Exist without God, God can’t exist without Religion.

If you’ve said God, you’ve mentioned a notion of religion, whether you have it or not.

One’s Acknowledgment doesn’t mean someone’s practicing religion, it’s just acknowledging the notion of God, or is it in the sense you believe in God? If you believe in God, you’re practicing religion.

I’m sorry Jenny, but those options are horrible and faintly specified.

7

Technically, a person can believe in God without believing in a religion. However, a person’s notion of God is most likely going to be very informed by a religion, and as many atheists here would be happy to point out, outside of a religion, the concept of a God has very little work to do when it comes to explaining the nature of the universe. I have argued elsewhere that a purely philosophical theism with no ties to religious dogma is just about the easiest variety of theism for the atheist to defeat.

I completely disagree that a system needs to have a belief in the afterlife or souls to be a religion, Encyclopedia be damned.

8

That’s actually a question quite near-and-dear to my heart, since there have been scholar debate over whether Confucianism ought be considered a religion. After all, it doesn’t deal with a deity (though it was based off the shamanistic religion of the Zhou) and it doesn’t deal with the afterlife (aside from ancestor worship).

So . . . is it a religion or a philosophy?

9

Yes.

Religion is a philosophy that incorporates both of the following two tenets: 1) the tenet of “souls”, and 2) the tenet of before/after life.

If the philosophy does not incorporate both of those tenets, it isn’t a religion.

That was a unanimous decision by representatives from all of the world’s religions (as well as some that turned out to be philosophies!).

That matches my own experience as well. My relationship with God is solid, but I don’t believe in souls or before/afterlife.

Because I don’t have those two religion-defining tenets, I don’t have a religion.

Long ago people thought that a person began to live at birth. But over the years people began to realize otherwise … until DNA and life science utilizied the scientific method to present that a person began to live at conception.

That’s what progress is all about – we learn that our old thoughts were wrong and that here is what is really right.

The same happened with regard to the flat-earth belief – eventually we learned the truth, that the world is round.

Likewise, long ago, people thought that if God was involved, it must be a religion. But over the years people began to realize otherwise … until finally all of the representatives of all of the world’s religions got together with that very task in mind: to define what makes a religion … and these modern-day evolved people presented that the inclusion of God is not necessary for a philosophy to be a religion, only the aforementioned two tenets of “souls” and before/after life is required and mandatory for a philosophy to be a religion.

That’s what progress is all about – we learn that our old thoughts were wrong and here is what is really right.

Indeed, the fact that “In God We Trust” is printed on money in a country that separates religion and state, and that the President can use the phrase “God bless America” in his official capacity duties of state, further substantiates that the presence of God does not mean the presence of religion.

10

Given the contamination of Christianity in American culture, I’d argue that both of those cases do indeed show evidence of religious thought.

11

Which only means that you ODD-rebellishly don’t work and play well with those who value the truth of what’s right, placing you, of course, in a very tiny minority. :wink:

12

Though I agree with you about said contamination, unless The President spouts tenets of a specific religion(s), there is no violation of the separation of church and state in the merely invoking a request of God, as well as there is no violation of such on the money.

That being said, I do find that the presence of the Ten Commandments sculpture in the federal courthouse and swearing the President in on The Bible to be violations of the separation of church and state.

13

The difference in those cases is merely on of degree.

When you say, “In God we Trust” or “God bless America” it could be any god . . . right? I mean, as long as it is the kinda god that gets capitalized. The Ten Commandments is the exact same thing, just slightly more overt in its endorsement of the Judeo-Christian tradition.

Same idea really, since any religion that would capitalize God also pretty much has the ten commandments (I suppose Atman could be rendered God without too much difficulty, but otherwise it would pretty much be small-g god).

As for the definitional problem wrt religion, check our Fingarette’s “Secular as Sacred” as well as Max Weber . . . oh bother, I’ve forgotten the work, the one where he talks about the 5 main religions. Not Protestant Work ethic, but he touched on it there . . . bother.

14

Oh, I thought we were discussing Religion from Webster, not something that contains 2 fundalmental tenets that are used to classify.

If this is true, there are many religions considered religions, that I guess, really aren’t religions.

I took religion as someone ascribing supreme importance on something, or a particular system of Faith and Worship, this is websters version though, who cares right.

You cannot believe in God without positing some religion, this is only based on common knowledge and the definition of religion.

You can have religion while not having God.

Any futher questions?

15

Jenny

I yam what I yam, and my words speak for themselves. Someday, when you’re bored, you may try answering my points. Consider this a response to your words in the other thread, as well.

16

I tend to agree with Club’s definition of religion.

Faith based, ascribing supreme importance to something. Works pretty well with the data we have on hand in the form of world philosophies that are (normatively) considered religions.

17

Spiritual belief in a “God” or any “Gods” or many “Gods” does not by definition require religion.

Religion is a socio-cultural construct to sway belief in a particular deity, by way of specialised rituals, readings, and membership.

The two are inherently separate. Man constructs the bridge between.

Burn the bridge.

18

I disagree, and so does the Supreme Court of the United States. Not only can our President utter the word ‘God’ if he so chooses, any legislative body can open its session with a prayer.
Marsh v. Chambers 463 U.S. 783 (1983).

19

Well, Popeye, you bore me now with your rebel without a cause attitude against society, reality, and the truths we hold dear … so one day when you blow me down with some topically valid points, I may answer them.

20

Antony Flew believes in God (he’s a deist). Yet he’s clearly not religious.

Conversely, one can be religious without believing in God.