Science, Spirituality, and Religion

[lemondiesel]

I am discussing this with many atheists on another forum because they tend to pair spirituality with religion as one form and that is it, which i completely disagree with. Thought I would share with this forum though Some of you probably agree, some might disagree, but this is more towards the people who just do not know haha

Now, I will present you the definitions to show the differences between these three, and then I will attempt to show you why we need all of them (a different type of religion though)

Science is a systematic enterprise of gathering knowledge about the world and organizing and condensing that knowledge into testable laws and theories.

First, science requires no belief in anything. You believe in nothing supernatural or anything of the sort, nothing. Science is based on laws and theories, which are reoccuring events in nature. If something has only happened once, it is hard for science to prove that something law, but it does not throw out the results, because it did happen. (at least observed once) Science is the key, it is the first step in todays era. It goes past the ******** religion teaches and explains the universe and how it works. Many laws are universal throughout universe (i.e. Evolution, Physics of the universe, just a few) There is absolutely no need for science to disprove religion, because religion already is false when it started believing in a supernatural being outside the universe watching us. Now there are people who use science to disprove the religion (traditional God), which is a very big mistake. (Remember, the concept of God has changed) “God” is the cause of the universe, so in a weird way, religion and science are both searching for “God,” although science will never say they are searching for “God.” However, science is also looking for the cause and a way to explain it, and if somehow they explain what happened, then their will be no need for the traditional “God” that religions teach now.

Science is. It will begin to show you the harmony of the universe and the relationship with many things. Science shows the complexity of the universe, and that complexity will lead to spirituality. We see religious people disagreeing with science but that is only due to lack of knowledge not yet achieved. We are limited to the things we can know in the universe (as of right now) so science can not explain the “big picture” yet, but it might only be a matter of time.

Religion is skipping all the knowledge, going straight to the point in time that science can not explain yet. This is why we still see religion around and many believe in the end of days.

Spirituality can refer to an ultimate reality or transcendent dimension of the world; an inner path enabling a person to discover the essence of his or her being, or the “deepest values and meanings by which people live.”

Spirituality requires no religion or science (although science can lead you to the start of spirituality). It is the “in between” for Religion and Science. True spirituality is the recognition of ones true present. “I AM.” Belief in a God or not, you are present at this exact moment, and it goes much deeper than that. Under all the emotions, feelings, likes, dislikes, etc, we are left with “Me.” You experience the pride of existence, and you begin to understand the connection between everything in the universe. Many people have put spirituality with religion as one, which in a sense is true, but religion requires a universal agreement, not a bunch of different types all disagreeing with one another. I will keep this one short.

Religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a supernatural agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

Now, the majority of us can agree that religion is corrupt (lol sorry, its just what many of us agree upon on this other forum) in society and it is created by man. Why was it created by man? To help explain the unknowables around. Religion believes in a creator and that we all have a purpose, it allows people to strive for unity. Now religion is much different than its original form and this is due to a few things. First, religion created the battle of good and evil. This is a huge concept in monotheistic religions because it requires belief in a judging deity of some sort. Second, religion went from nature gods to a one god concept. This means religions have focused their attention to an ultimate creator, and creating the idea of faith. Now what is true faith? It is the belief or trust in truth. Beyond the corruptness of religion, this is where it is different from science. Religion skips all of the evidence in the universe and just goes simply to the ultimate cause, the beginning of the universe. (religion chooses to use belief rather than trust, but there are theists who follow science) Religion does not have to have science, because it is ultimately describing the cause. Concepts of a judging God, a human figure in the sky, and God interacting with mankind are concepts that were developed much much later in human existence, so these ideas are far from the truth.

In short, true religion is the unity of everyone. The ultimate form of religion is everyone acknowledging their connection with everything (the “oneness”) and we are no different from anything. There is no traditional god or anything the words of ancient “religious” texts describes.

Comments are more than welcome

 

[reggieM]

In short, true religion is the unity of everyone. The ultimate form of religion is everyone acknowledging their connection with everything (the “oneness”) and we are no different from anything. There is no traditional god or anything the words of ancient “religious” texts describes.

Your views are open to human spirituality so that is very good and far better than materialistic-atheism (of the kind you quoted from).

Do you believe it is possible for one person to have better, truer, or more accurate spiritual insights than another does?

 

[lemondiesel]

Your views are open to human spirituality so that is very good and far better than materialistic-atheism (of the kind you quoted from).

Do you believe it is possible for one person to have better, truer, or more accurate spiritual insights than another does?

True Spirituality can not be taught, it can truly only be experienced. However, yes i do believe individuals can have more accurate insights on spirituality due to the more experiences you have with spirituality. True spirituality is the feeling, not the words.

We all have the potential to obtain this spirituality, but it takes many years to block the senses that distract us from truly feeling.

 

[reggieM]

True Spirituality can not be taught, it can truly only be experienced. However, yes i do believe individuals can have more accurate insights on spirituality due to the more experiences you have with spirituality. True spirituality is the feeling, not the words.

We all have the potential to obtain this spirituality, but it takes many years to block the senses that distract us from truly feeling.

Ok, but I see something here that might be worth considering.

I can observe your insights on spirituality. You explain that we all have the potential and it takes many years. Also, we have to block the senses which can distract us.

Let’s say you’re right about all of that. Wouldn’t it be a benefit to people to learn those concepts so that they could put them into practice? In other words, can we really say that spirituality cannot be taught?

 

[lemondiesel]

Ok, but I see something here that might be worth considering.

I can observe your insights on spirituality. You explain that we all have the potential and it takes many years. Also, we have to block the senses which can distract us.

Let’s say you’re right about all of that. Wouldn’t it be a benefit to people to learn those concepts so that they could put them into practice? In other words, can we really say that spirituality cannot be taught?

Without religion, would people still find God?

Teaching can speed up the process, but like I said, it takes personal commitment to achieve spirituality. There is no certain book to follow, although there are guide line books to help you. One could achieve spirituality by simply being calm. Listen to the noises around you, which ones are man made and which ones are nature (an example of a great first step)

I even view prayer as a way of meditation, because when one prays, are you not disconnecting from the outside world to “connect” with God, so he can “hear” your prayers?

 

[excubitor]

Your definition of religion assumes that all religions are man made. However what your dialogue fails to consider is that there is one true religion and a great many false ones.This is logically the only conclusion that we can reach if we concede that there is any such thing as objective truth.

The other aspect of a true religion is that it must be revealed by a single supreme being, because without this we have no criteria by which to judge that one set of beliefs held by religion is true and the other sets of belief held by other religions is false. This logic rules out all pantheistic religions because they all lack a single supreme God. Their pantheon of gods all have competing ideologies and motives for the world.

Therefore we have only the following religions to choose from which might possibly have the truth. Judaism, Islam, Christianity.

So the point of this post is to show that each individual who is seeking objective truth has the responsibility to seek this supreme God who can be known to some extent by some fairly elementary logic. I have narrowed the search down for some people who are embarking on this quest.

As you rightly pointed out, the notion of objective truth is denied by both spiritualism and science. Spiritualism helps each individual to make contact with the nebulous “divine” through experiences and meditations, crystals or other techniques. In this case “truth” has no shape because every individual will come to different conclusions through their experience

In science there is also no such thing as “truth” or “belief”. These are foreign concepts which are actively rejected as superfluous. Science works on probabilities. A theory is established on the basis of its probability of being correct. But science itself makes no insistence that in the future, the established understanding might be shown to be incorrect and might require completely changing for another set of scenarios. In fact the proper scientist has no embarrassment in such a case as his evaluation of the probability of a scenario based on the facts available at the time. So he would have no consternation if he had to change his probability assessment on the basis of new data.

Pure science is not opposed to religion because it does not claim that anything is “true”. It merely explores competing probability scenarios. However modern science can become a kind of pseudo religion in that its educators and students start to actually believe it as if it were 100 percent proven. They band together into a conventional viewpoint which becomes effectively their “article of religion”, the scientists become like priests of the new religion. Its believers have faith that one days the theories of the priests will be proven to be true. These ideologues persecute and harangue anybody who comes up with an alternative theory.

Most importantly this pseudo-religion of scientism supplants all religions. Its primary article of belief is that there is no supernatural cause for anything, not even the creation of the universe or the seeding of life into the universe. Therefore scientism is not really a religion, it is a kind of anti-religion. In a way it is a kind of Naturism which worships the natural things of the world as being the originators of themselves. Which is of course absurdly illogical.

 

[lemondiesel]

In a way it is a kind of Naturism which worships the natural things of the world as being the originators of themselves. Which is of course absurdly illogical.

But you have no way of proving that wrong. Even if we think its illogical, we have no idea what actually happened. It seems that you are letting your personal beliefs effect your judgment of other view points.

 

[excubitor]

But you have no way of proving that wrong. Even if we think its illogical, we have no idea what actually happened. It seems that you are letting your personal beliefs effect your judgment of other view points.

How true.
In fact, this is my entire point, which is that science cannot prove anything, so if we want to know what is absolutely true 100% then we must learn what the divine being reveals to us about the nature of the universe and of mankind. We then must believe this special revelation and make it our own personal belief.

What you see as a negative judgment upon me, I see as an essential requirement in order to come to the light of truth.

This deliberate act of will to choose to believe and trust in the special revelation of the divine being is what the Christian church calls faith. The Christian scriptures teach that
“without faith it is impossible to please God”
“faith is the evidence of things unseen”

Without belief we are condemned to live eternity in darkness and ignorance.
“he that believeth not is condemned already”

The man who rejects divine revelation will spend the rest of his life learning, with books, instruments, debates. This condition is predicted for the last days of the world when men will go to and fro and knowledge will multiply upon the earth but the apostle Paul shows that for all their learning and knowledge they never come to a knowledge of the truth. They spend their entire lives weighing up the various merits of lies.
Dan 12:4 at the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased
2 Tim 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth

Another important point I would like to make is that “personal belief” just does not cut it. Spiritualists have personal beliefs which they derive from their experiences and their own thoughts. Therefore many “beliefs” flourish, but these competing “beliefs” cannot all be true. There must be one objective truth which evaluates and either falsifies of establishes these personal beliefs. Each person must subject their own personal beliefs to this higher authority and make it their new personal belief. Otherwise unity of truth is never found. So I call this “religious belief”. It is the conforming of one’s beliefs to a higher authority. In the Christian religion this is the church. Of course I don’t have to tell you that this subjection of personal belief to the higher authority of the church is despised among modern men who prefer the latitude provided them by modern science and spiritualism. It is even a notion despised among many Christians themselves who reject the authority and infallibility of the church in order to adopt their own personal beliefs in disobedience to the church. As soon as we go down this path though we are exalting our personal beliefs above the religious belief and have left the path of one united absolute truth which comes from special divine revelation, faith, and the rule of the church.

There is no shortage of people who will argue that the church should not be regarded as the arbiter of truth, they may point to their experiences, their logical thinking, their reading of the scripture, and greatest of all their opinion.

However the Christian scriptures make it clear that the divine wellspring of truth in the world is the Church.
1 Tim 3:15 behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

 

[lemondiesel]

Another important point I would like to make is that “personal belief” just does not cut it. Spiritualists have personal beliefs which they derive from their experiences and their own thoughts. Therefore many “beliefs” flourish, but these competing “beliefs” cannot all be true.

However the Christian scriptures make it clear that the divine wellspring of truth in the world is the Church.
1 Tim 3:15 behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

Quite the opposite actually. I am in contact with many people who are using meditation to find spirituality. Most of our experiences are very similar. This is why many of us find it easy to discuss our experiences, because we know how to relate, we have felt it. Just an example, many of us have experienced a “guiding spirit,” which we “talk” to, and it helps us through difficult moments.

I know this is a bit off track but that is a very interesting passage, and I immediately thought deeper about it. This is how I read that.
“Behave and live morally in this reality created, because it houses all, and it is reveals the truth nature of God in this physical world.”

 

[edwest2]

This is very dangerous. The ‘spirit guides’ are demonic forces. Pick up a copy of Dark Secrets of the New Age by Texe Marrs.

God bless,
Ed

 

[lemondiesel]

This is very dangerous. The ‘spirit guides’ are demonic forces. Pick up a copy of Dark Secrets of the New Age by Texe Marrs.

God bless,
Ed

Texe W. Marrs is an American author[1] and conspiracy theorist

…i think i will pass

 

[reggieM]

Teaching can speed up the process, but like I said, it takes personal commitment to achieve spirituality.

Ok, but you said that it “cannot be taught”. What “slows down the process” is error, ignorance, mistakes about spirituality and the nature of God. Religion preserves the revealed and developed teaching on spirituality to help people avoid those mistakes. This is what “speeds the process” and helps it be more successful.

There is no certain book to follow, although there are guide line books to help you. One could achieve spirituality by simply being calm. Listen to the noises around you, which ones are man made and which ones are nature (an example of a great first step)

As above, here you’re offering teaching from your own experience. There are people with more experience and wisdom about God than what you have. So, we look to them as teachers. They teach the necessity of religion, since religion is an expression of God’s desire for His creatures.

I even view prayer as a way of meditation, because when one prays, are you not disconnecting from the outside world to “connect” with God, so he can “hear” your prayers?

Yes, that is right. In the Catholic tradition, we call that “mental prayer”. We seek union with God through prayer and put aside wordly distractions to try to achieve that.

 

[reggieM]

“Behave and live morally in this reality created, because it houses all, and it is reveals the truth nature of God in this physical world.”

One thing I think you’ll discover though is that people who share the same meditation experiences can have completely different views on morality. It’s difficult for us to admit that our own decisions are actually sins, at times. Otherwise, we end up justifying our own decisions and never conforming to a rule.

Spirituality is about submission to God. Without that, we’ll have the ego fighting for dominance.

But we can’t be sublimated to the will of God if we think that God is the same thing as “my own opinions and desires”. God’s teaching and truth goes against our own natural desires at times.

That’s why we need a revealed religion. To give us a moral standard outside of our own opinion. That is why Jesus came to earth. To give us that standard.

 

[lemondiesel]

Ok, but you said that it “cannot be taught”. What “slows down the process” is error, ignorance, mistakes about spirituality and the nature of God. Religion preserves the revealed and developed teaching on spirituality to help people avoid those mistakes. This is what “speeds the process” and helps it be more successful.

As above, here you’re offering teaching from your own experience. There are people with more experience and wisdom about God than what you have. So, we look to them as teachers. They teach the necessity of religion, since religion is an expression of God’s desire for His creatures.

Yes, but error, ignorance, and mistakes are just objects in the way. When one tries looking for spirituality and feels like they never reach it and give up, then they are not worthy of spirituality. Spirituality takes personal discipline.

Religion is not a necessity, because they all teach moral codes. When you involve a God(s) with moral codes, you are implying that mankind can not live morally without God(s) solidifying those morals. If God said “Thou Shalt Kill,” I am pretty sure many people would say No, that is wrong.

Spirituality is about submission to God. Without that, we’ll have the ego fighting for dominance.

That’s why we need a revealed religion. To give us a moral standard outside of our own opinion. That is why Jesus came to earth. To give us that standard.

Spirituality is not submitting yourself to God, it is becoming “God.” You would be surprised at some of the experiences I have had with astral projection and my guiding spirit. You would probably even think I was crazy or on drugs.

We already had the Ten Commandments? Like I said above, are you saying that Jesus had to come here to reaffirm those moral codes because people can’t live morally? Once you realize the connection of this UNIverse, there is no need for an organized religion. People would see that their actions effect everything, not just other humans.

 

[reggieM]

We already had the Ten Commandments? Like I said above, are you saying that Jesus had to come here to reaffirm those moral codes because people can’t live morally?

Jesus reaffirmed and advanced the moral codes because humanity had reached “the fullness of time” – after a time of preparation, it was time for a fuller revelation. Even an interpretation of the Ten Commandments requires a religious authority. Otherwise, we just have subjective opinion.

Once you realize the connection of this UNIverse, there is no need for an organized religion. People would see that their actions effect everything, not just other humans.

There are two problems (at least) that I can see here.
You are a part of the universe and therefore are not able to fully see the connections in the universe.
But more importantly, you’re not able to see how your actions affect everything.
What you might not recognize as a sin, or you might dismiss as a small sin – could have huge impacts that you’re not aware of.
That’s what revealed religion gives us – the ability to repair the damage that we cause by sin.
God has given us religion for our own benefit.

 

[lemondiesel]

Even an interpretation of the Ten Commandments requires a religious authority. Otherwise, we just have subjective opinion.

You need religious authority to interpret; Do not steal, Do not Kill, Do not Covet my Neighbors wife? Obviously, I have a problem with that.

Got class now, will reply to the 2nd part of your reply

 

[reggieM]

You need religious authority to interpret; Do not steal,

We weigh the gravity of a crime and the extent of punishment on motive. Let’s try Matthew 12:1-2.

"At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick some heads of grain and eat them. But when the Pharisees saw this, they said to Him, “Look, Your disciples do what is not lawful to do on a Sabbath.”

So, no interpretation is needed here for the theft of wheat?

Do not Kill,

Are you opposed to abortion? Are your meditative friends equally opposed? Is abortion murder? Is any interpretation needed here?

Do not Covet my Neighbors wife?

What is the spiritual consequence in committing this sin? How do you know?

 

[lemondiesel]

"At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick some heads of grain and eat them. But when the Pharisees saw this, they said to Him, “Look, Your disciples do what is not lawful to do on a Sabbath.”

So, no interpretation is needed here for the theft of wheat?

Are you opposed to abortion? Are your meditative friends equally opposed? Is abortion murder? Is any interpretation needed here?

No because if you are hungry you eat. Is it not lawful to steal just on the Sabbath, or to “work” to get food on the Sabbath? I am kind of confused by the meaning “Not lawful to do on a Sabbath”

We are mammals. One characteristic of mammals is that the mother nurses the young, teaches them how to survive for themselves, where to go to mate, find food, etc. Now, when a newly born baby is born, it is a blank state. There is no “I am” because they do not even know words yet. They are just mammals, just like a baby monkey or a baby tiger, they need nursing. Now, Many people believe just because we have advanced consciousness, we are “special” in the universe. So when we kill unborn children we are killing “special” in the eyes of God, which is not true at all. Abortion is not murder, because we are just animals, and we obviously kill animals all the time.

Why is it not murder when you eat an unborn chicken egg? Surely this is life as well? Oh! is it because a chicken can’t miss that unborn egg that justifies our cause of eating them?

That may have seemed off topic but I think it was related. But to answer your question if I am opposed to abortion, I am opposed to the unlawful killing of any animal, because I do not view humans as “special,” I just see us evolved higher. This is why I eat growable foods like rice, vegies, etc and take supplements to satisfy proteins and other nutrients/minerals needed

What is the spiritual consequence in committing this sin? How do you know?

This only leads for the desire of more things/persons, which will eventually lead to Greed, one of the greatest “evils” on this planet

 

[reggieM]

No because if you are hungry you eat. Is it not lawful to steal just on the Sabbath, or to “work” to get food on the Sabbath? I am kind of confused by the meaning “Not lawful to do on a Sabbath”

Ok, in your morality: “if you are hungry you eat”. So, there’s no theft. You have interpreted the Ten Commandments this way.

I get hungry every day. Therefore … ???

Won’t that moral code lead to anarchy and eventually violence as people are now justified to grab whatever food they want?

As for the Sabbath, we need religion to explain how God wants to be worshipped. We cannot tell God how He should be worshipped, or decide for ourselves what God should want. God reveals what He wants – and the Third Commandment explains that: “Keep Holy the Lord’s Day”. So, yes, we do need religion to interpret what that Commandment means and how to live a moral life by following the Commandments.

So when we kill unborn children we are killing “special” in the eyes of God, which is not true at all. Abortion is not murder, because we are just animals, and we obviously kill animals all the time.

Yes, the point here is that some interpretation is needed. What if you’re wrong? What if God thinks that abortion really is murder? Then, I think it would be a major problem to go on a public website and claim that it is not. You’d be arguing against God.
This is the problem when you create your own moral laws. How do you know that your beliefs agree with what God really wants?

In the Catholic Faith, we have the Revelation of Christ and His Church to guide us. So, we hear the voice of God teaching us through the Church and we don’t have to make up our own morality that way. We obey what God wants – and that is an essential element of spirituality. Those who rebell against God cannot fully grow in the spiritual life.

Why is it not murder when you eat an unborn chicken egg? Surely this is life as well? Oh! is it because a chicken can’t miss that unborn egg that justifies our cause of eating them?

That is another good question requiring some interpretation. We not only eat an unborn chicken but the fully grown chicken.

But to answer your question if I am opposed to abortion, I am opposed to the unlawful killing of any animal, because I do not view humans as “special,”

Again, this is your opinion and I can’t see how you can determine that humans are not special and unique in the eyes of God.

I think its enough to say that your moral rules are wildly different than what one will find from other people who meditate and are interested in spirituality.

That is why revealed religion is necessary. We can know what God teaches us.

 

[lemondiesel]

Ok, in your morality: “if you are hungry you eat”. So, there’s no theft. You have interpreted the Ten Commandments this way.

I get hungry every day. Therefore … ???

Won’t that moral code lead to anarchy and eventually violence as people are now justified to grab whatever food they want?

Now this is HYPOTHETICAL, but it will help debate my side. Now first, When I say “if you are hungry you eat,” that means there is no theft, because you are fighting for survival. Stealing for personal advancement is much different than stealing for survival. Many government laws now are in place to stop you from stealing, but if you were a judge, would you punish someone if they HAD to steal just to survive?

(I would set him free immediately)

Yes, the point here is that some interpretation is needed. What if you’re wrong? What if God thinks that abortion really is murder? Then, I think it would be a major problem to go on a public website and claim that it is not. You’d be arguing against God.
This is the problem when you create your own moral laws. How do you know that your beliefs agree with what God really wants?

What if God doesn’t even care about abortion and it is only mention in the Bible because the men who wrote it had a problem with abortion?

I think its enough to say that your moral rules are wildly different than what one will find from other people who meditate and are interested in spirituality.

You are always more than welcome to join the forum and discuss with us. Present arguments for the side of Christianity! even though we have a few, mostly atheists and spiritual people though