organised religion

Ok, so the average hippie is against organised religion. But what do you think what are the positives and negatives of organised religion? When is something organised religion to you?

And why don't you like organised religion? Is it because of the negatives such as crusades violence and pedophile priests? Then has organised religion automatically these negatives and are the positives there IN SPITE of being organised religion? Or is organised religion positive IN SPITE OF all the negative stuff? What are your thoughts on this...

 

Why don't you try looking at the bright side, for once. Think about how much GOOD organized religion has done for human society, the billions of people they have helped. I am not a fundamental christian, or of any religion for that matter, but I recieved a letter from Billy Graham, and that man HAS COMPASSION. He was talking about how the tsunami destroyed India, and how "I wish I could go myself, if I had the strength". I got tears in my eyes thinking about that man's compassion, and I am not even one of his fundamentalist followers.

People who discuss negatively of religion for the most part are a bunch of bitter atheists, who cannot bear to hear anything relevant to a personal form of God. They have not yet learned ideas such as 'duty', 'surrender', 'devotion'. They are too caught up in their own false pride. Understanding God is a matter of humility, not pride.

I can understand their disgust towards the fundamentalism and fanatics that religion breeds, but they should understand taht there is a distinction between having no belief in God, and being a fanatic about God. It's up to the intelligent members of society to walk in that middle zone.

 

The obvious positives to organized religion is in the social aspects. You have a entire support system who believes just like you do and with whom you can share both the good and bad.


The negatives can be seen throughout history. There have been countless deaths associated with many organized religions in our past. Organized religion can be like a herd of locusts sweeping down and destroying everything in its wake. It can be extremely destructive and evil. When it is used as a political or governmental machine it can do considerable damage. It has been used as an excuse for racisim, sexism, torture, murder, war, terrorism, etc...

 

organized religion discourages free thought

 

When you organize spirituality, you turn it into an institution. Institutions end up working to continue to exist (social inertia) rather than really help people to find God (the original purpose of an organized religion). Rather than facilitate enlightenment, it gets tied up in beauracratic politics and loses it's relevance.

An analogous example: The War on Drugs does nothing to stop drug use and is clearly a failure, but it provides lots of jobs and is a huge source of spending. Because there's lots of money involved, it's hard to enact any change. This makes it just keep going, despite it's uselessness.

There are benefits to organized religion, like the common source of morals and the community aspect. It can help hold people together. But it can easilly become a source of conflict, a reason for disagreement and fighting. And though I said above organized religions lose their relevance, that's not entirely true. Though as a whole the organization is often adrift in the fog, individuals can use it as a framework for personal spirituality, something to build from. Example, the Catholic Church might be a beauracratic, strict and heirarchical organization that is out of touch, but individual priests and the people they teach can have a very real spirituality to them.

Religion/spirituality is supposed to be personal (that's all it could ever be), and to institutionalize it kills that vital aspect to it. The only way to maintain one's spirituality is to keep it personal, which means one is in the end left to their own innner knowledge; even if they base it in part on the official version, it will never adhere perfectly.

 

Simple facts, if your believing in a God who is all knowing and created everything, then any rules your put down are confining that. So unless a religion says that you cxan do anything and be anything i.e. not gay etc then its flawed from the basic principles that god created everything so its all got to be how he wants it. If he didn't want it that way then it wouldn't have happened., as he is in all time and space. My theory is theres gotta be something out there and my brain is too small to comprehend it and work out what, but im not going to confine that any more by believing in what another human tells me. I stick by science as proof. And as most scientists end up agreeing that some "god" had to have started it, ill believe that the world is full of science and that was created by something, and im gonna go enjoy life and be happy and hopefully do whatever is out there proud and if not then at least ive not wasted it on a humans teachings. This is not a rant against any particular religion just my thoughts.

 

One obvious drawback to organized religion is that it quashes free thinking, and insists on the same dogmatic rules for all, even though individuals are all different.


But a worse pitfall by far exists. If you accept that the founders of religions were enlightened, in touch with God, or even were God - still, their followers usually do a good job of obscuring the original message.
The spark of light - the spirit - is lost, and what proceeds then is dry formulation and so on, which tends to lead in turn to ever more complexity and fixity of beliefs which are allowed, and in some cases to an authoritarian type of heirarchy.
So you end up with a religion which is perhaps 10% based on the founders revelation, and 90% on the usually un-enlightened thinking of followers, councils etc.
In the past, and still to-day, these human invented divisions have led to much bloodshed.

 

indeed organised religion has many suffering in its wake. lets take christianity as example (I'm christian so I know more about it than other worldreligions). We've got crusades, wich burnings, systems that are so structurized that there's little room for love...

but did these things happen BECAUSE it's organised religion or IN SPITE OF? What I'm trying to say is, is organised religion good with bad extremes, or is it bad with good exceptions? opinions?

 

I think it is bad with good exceptions. The moral, social, and emotional support that comes to members of organized religions could come from other places with much less dogma.

 

what do you think about comparing the church in NT times with the church now?

 

The church back then was a lot more pure, they actually lived a life fixed on nothing but God. Sadly, I think Jesus's message has fallen on deaf ears as of late. You see, I like Jesus, I just don't like his fan club.

"Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reactions. Do not fear." Lord Krishna (Bg. 18.66)

The Bhagavad Gita is the word of God, as it was spoken by God himself and not a self declared son of God or prophet. The Bhagavad Gita was spoken by Lord Krishna, 3100 years before Jesus and 3700 years before Muhammad. It is the only known scriptures spoken by God in person. Hinduism is the only religion based on following a God who has been actually seen by millions. All other religions are based on believing in a God who has never been seen. The Bhagavad Gita gives exact information regarding God, the soul, material nature, birth, death and life after death. No other religious scripture provides this information.

 

Really though, there was no technical "church" in the NT. Or am I wrong here?

 

"The church back then was a lot more pure, they actually lived a life fixed on nothing but God. Sadly, I think Jesus's message has fallen on deaf ears as of late. You see, I like Jesus, I just don't like his fan club."

I come to this conclusion when I read the Bible: there are many good things to be found in the church (though you don't always see it looking 'from the top' if you look from the bottom you'll meet awesome people, unsung heroes etc.) but the church has much dead parts which are unbiblical. So I say that the problem is not that it is organised religion, that wouldn't be a bad thing by itself, the problem is that the Bible needs to become living reality in the church of today again.

 

Yeah. If you read 1st Corinthians, you can just feel the hope and love that Paul is radiating. It is hard to find a more hope-filled gospel than 1st Corinthians.

Christianity needs to go back to its sources, its communual sources, and to preach far more the doctrine of not being attached to material possessions.

What has happened is that Christianity has become the very same institution that Christ spoke out again. It is time for the true Christians to return to the early Christian lifestyle. Modern society is obviously not very conductive towards a spiritual life, having to worry about money all the time. It is time for the true christians to give up their possessions, and travel from temple to temple, with their minds set solely on God.

The true christians should also be gathering in the streets, singing ecstatic praises to God. In that way, they will bring many back to God.

 

In the case of the medieval church, the problem was not only that they had their very efficient heirarchy, but also they were thoroughly politicized. Many of the abuses took place as a way of the church proclaiming its power. This was not done wholly for 'religious' ends. The pope's at that time, were little different from any other ruler of a state, and the papal states became quite extensive. But the issues are very complex.
Overall, it has to be said that none of the abuses really worked out - heresy and division flourished, and led to the reformation, the Holy Land was briefly conquered, and completely lost again after less than 200 years. And now, Witchcraft is as politically correct as Christianity!
But its obvious that without a powerful organization, none of the abuses could have taken place.

 

"In the case of the medieval church, the problem was not only that they had their very efficient heirarchy, but also they were thoroughly politicized. Many of the abuses took place as a way of the church proclaiming its power. This was not done wholly for 'religious' ends. The pope's at that time, were little different from any other ruler of a state, and the papal states became quite extensive. But the issues are very complex."

I agree, I don't like it that the church was dependant on the state in medieval times. Also I don't like how worldly the church was - and often it still is. I absolutely dispise the hypocracy in the church of today, most of all the hypocracy in myself. That's the key: it's in me too, and even though I don't rape little boys, I am not perfect too and there's a fight inside me against hypocracy. So the disease I so deeply ahte is in me too. That gives me a bit of perspective on the matter.

 

I feel the same struggle against hypocrisy, and have since I was a boy. When I was a boy, and Jesus was the only religious figure I was familiar with, I always had this feeling that if I was to follow him, I would have to give up all of my possessions. Being a materialistic American back then, this thought was uncomfortable. But to do so would be to follow God's path, not man's. Christianity as an organization today has changed their doctrines to fit to the comforts of the common man.

 

with me it was somewhat different, I was raised non-christian and as a child I had many religious/spiritual questions and interests that remained unanswered. When I was almost 13, I became christian and was baptised (yes, even in secular holland there are new christians ). In the years after, I was on a dark path, being a christian on the outside, at home, in church, school etc but secretly I did some very stupid things in those years and my faith as dead, my heart secretly rotten and there was always this guilt, growing and growing......so I know about hypocrisy for I was really hypocrite in those years (between 13 and 16) but now al shit between me and Jesus has been cleaned up and I live honest, the inside’s the same as the outside now and I am His Jesus freak!

And yes, the church has compromised. And the way of the disciple should be one of no compromise. Ever heard of Keith Green? He truly had a prophetic message trying to wake up the church in america.

 

Remember, Jesus is God's incarnation. Please put the highest importance on the Supreme Lord.

 

do you really think that keith green or any other church leader, evangelist, missionary or christian, be it desmond tutu, or mother theresa or who-ever, is my god?

ofcourse there are some things about keith green's teaching that I have doubts about, but he is not my god. Its just that Jesus' light shines through him.