Why "practice" religion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PathDiagnosis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
meltzerboy said:
It sounds to me you believe in G-d, at least to some degree, and that you believe Jesus to be G-d, especially since you claim there is historical evidence for the resurrection. The rest, which you equate with religion, you’re not really sure about, perhaps because you think it is man-made.*** Is it that you believe you can’t be Catholic or, generally, Christian if you don’t accept all the doctrine, rituals, and so on which religion entails?*** As you probably know, dogma and doctrine are part of the package; however, certain rituals and customs are not required. Why can’t you stay with what you believe about Catholicism and continue to reflect upon those aspects of the religion you’re not sure about? Why does it have to be all or none? Further, many young people of your age question their beliefs–religious, political, social, aesthetic, whatever. You will likely go through some soul-searching for a while before arriving at more lasting conclusions, and there’s nothing wrong or unusual about that.
Click to expand...
Thank you. A response from a person faith that is not Christian. That itself bothers me because a fellow human being came to a conclusion about God that is not Catholic. Young people my age reflect on these things? True, but they come to different conclusions. I can never ever be 100% sure that Catholicism is correct no matter how much I want it to be** (which could in part be due to nostalgia)**

I think quote of yours I bold represents what I’m going through. So, I think evidence for the resurrection is credible (but still don’t believe) it. Even if later I accept it, I don’t know how I’ll*** accept everything else religion entails***.

Religion seems to be the only thing humans accept in this “domino effect”. In my professional work, if I see a pre-cancerous group of cells, I don’t immediately diagnose pre-cancerous. Instead, I correlate it with patient history and everything from general chemistry to math to physics to organic chemistry to biochemistry etc that I learned throughout school. This is how I accept things in life, in general. Relationships? OK, my parents love me so I trust what they tell me without “evidence” in this manner. I can bring myself to apply that to religion.
If you could, as a Jewish person, recommend what I do? Maybe I’m wrong, but according to Judaism, can I just be a Gentile and strive to follow the Seven Noahide Laws? What I also don’t understand about Judaism is this: if personal can attain salvation without any religion, why is it necessary to be Jewish (religious)? Isn’t it an “optional” covenant? So, if Judaism is true,*** isn’t God himself saying religion is optional,that it is, like anything else humans experience, a by product of being human?***

I am sorry if my understanding of Judaism is flawed. I did the best I could

Catholics and others, please reflect on my question regarding Judaism. Thanks​

Peace
 
Incomplete said:
You also didn’t respond to some very good answers as to why it is good to “practice” religion.
.
Click to expand...
It is good to practice religion (as long as no harm is done) because it “works” for whoever practices it. Examples of harm include hardcore Young Earth Creationists that are not open to other ideas or combinations thereof.

Basically, because it works for them. If so, religion might be a byproduct of human experience (as I mentioned). This is what I am worried about. We already have “by products” like friendships, love (romantic, non-romantic), finding satisfaction in intellectual stimulation (education, scientific discovery, etc), etc. These “by products” might be enough for meaning in my life, or at least should be since for now I see religion as something along the lies of “optional peacock feathers of human experience” (don’t mean that in a negative way). I’m afraid of “giving into religion” because it might be unnecessary .

Peace
 
Some of you expressed something along the lines of how practicing religion provides meaning to live, gives peace, etc. That works for you and I am sure most religious people do no harm to others.

The following from unifreethought.com/2011/10/meaning-of-life-without-religion.html
summarizes what I believe about a life without religion. Some asked earlier about “why help other people, they’ll be dead later anyways, and not exist since you don’t believe in eternal life” (not an exact quote). I hope this answers some questions.
It’s always bothered me that religion seems to have a monopoly on giving life meaning. That’s one of the most common justifications for believing in God - it attaches purpose to an otherwise pointless existence. Not only is this an incredibly bleak view of humanity, it’s a terrible way to even approach the question.

There is no single unifying purpose for our existence. Your life’s meaning is not for me, or anyone else, to hand down to you. We give life meaning, and that’s true for everyone. Religious doctrine frequently teaches that meaning and purpose are a divine gift, handed down from on high. It’s a role for us to fulfill, not a choice that we make about our own lives. I find this insulting. As human beings we have well developed cognitive faculties that allow us to assign “meaning” to existence. We have complex emotions, relationships, wants, desires, and feelings. It’s absurd to think that the human experience, and what it means to us, can be boiled down into a single purpose that works for everyone. And we shouldn’t want that.

And even if we did want to have our live’s meaning handed to us, the religious prescription is a cynical mockery of the entire idea. The most common religious explanation says that our primary purpose is to worship, glorify, and praise God. Essentially it’s the view that we’re all creations of a serial narcissist, here for the sole purpose of catering to his whims, and feeding his ego. ***(I wouldn’t be this negative)***Is this sort of love deserved? I think the obvious answer is no. It’s based on fear, intimidation, and the prospect of eternal punishment. That’s not a particularly healthy relationship, and it’s not befitting of an intelligent and dignified species.

But without God, what is the purpose of my life? What meaning can it possibly have without religion? The answer is that it has the meaning that I assign to it. I choose to value knowledge and discussion. I would also be nothing without my friends and loved ones - and these are relationships based on mutual respect and affection, not intimidation and the threat of punishment. My love of life and the people in it is not expected - it’s earned. I’m here to pursue the things that I’m passionate about, to find intellectual stimulation, and to enjoy good company. And that is something worth living for. And this viewpoint, that life is worth living because of how we choose to live it, does not require the approval of any God or Gods.​

Maybe this is life? It is objectively meaningless and we give meaning it to outside or religion? I’m afraid of excepting religion as an unnecessary byproduct of human experience.

Peace
 
Going to Mass (Ordinary Form of the Latin Form) today with two good Catholic friends. I live just five blocks from a Basilica Cathedral. I occasionally go. Good social lunch afterwards, etc.

I still can’t get over things like this:

The previous picture of the child nearly eaten by the vulture (maybe). He didn’t get to go to Mass. He had no luxuries I do. I can’t say God blessed me and not him. This is just one of the reasons I still see religion as a byproduct of human experience. There are other byproducts: love, friendship, etc. One can accept the bad things in the world as a result of the the Fall or the first sin of Adam and Even (symbolic or literal) but I can’t prove or disprove that to be a coping mechanism or not.
 
Sufjon said:
This is a really interesting thread you’ve started PathDiagnosis. My sense is that the standard answer might be that you do it to “get saved.” But I have a sense that we mostly want to feel connected to something, because “connected” is our natural state. I would offer that this sense of separateness from God and from others that we have is an illusion caused by our minds and bodies, or to be specific - sentient experience. Using the mind and body in the process of realizing our connection is a great way to use our primary impediment as a vehicle to get ourselves back into proper alignment. This is a crucial element of what religious practice can do.

I have read the rest of the thread and it’s not really clear to me what you believe, but I am sure that you’ll find what you’re looking for. In my faith the Lord says that no effort in finding Him is ever wasted, and He promises that you will attain Him.* The path you take is up to you - whether as a Catholic, LDS, or whatever. You’ll find what you’re looking for. *

Your friend
Sufjon
Click to expand...
This bothers me. The path I take is up to me? Is this an admission that religion is like I’m saying again and again-a byproduct of human experience. We already have these “byproducts” like friendships, love(romantic, non-romantic), intellectual stimulation via education/scientific discovery, professional work, etc. Perhaps people become religious because they can’t be fulfilled by the aforementioned byproducts?

Even if I became a practicing Catholic (again) in the back of my head I might think something along the lines of “this is making me happy, keep doing it”. Well, other things could make me happy and give full meaning to life if I let them…I think…I hope…frankly I just don’t know.

Evidence for the Christ rising from the dead? There is plenty of it. It could be a coincidence. The amount of evidence is proportional to how much the Christian faith/community spread in the first few centuries.Such a spread can be the result of coincidence/circumstances or Divine intervention. We will never ever know!.
 
PathDiagnosis said:
Thank you. A response from a person faith that is not Christian. That itself bothers me because a fellow human being came to a conclusion about God that is not Catholic. Young people my age reflect on these things? True, but they come to different conclusions. I can never ever be 100% sure that Catholicism is correct no matter how much I want it to be** (which could in part be due to nostalgia)**

I think quote of yours I bold represents what I’m going through. So, I think evidence for the resurrection is credible (but still don’t believe) it. Even if later I accept it, I don’t know how I’ll*** accept everything else religion entails***.

Religion seems to be the only thing humans accept in this “domino effect”. In my professional work, if I see a pre-cancerous group of cells, I don’t immediately diagnose pre-cancerous. Instead, I correlate it with patient history and everything from general chemistry to math to physics to organic chemistry to biochemistry etc that I learned throughout school. This is how I accept things in life, in general. Relationships? OK, my parents love me so I trust what they tell me without “evidence” in this manner. I can bring myself to apply that to religion.
If you could, as a Jewish person, recommend what I do? Maybe I’m wrong, but according to Judaism, can I just be a Gentile and strive to follow the Seven Noahide Laws? What I also don’t understand about Judaism is this: if personal can attain salvation without any religion, why is it necessary to be Jewish (religious)? Isn’t it an “optional” covenant? So, if Judaism is true,*** isn’t God himself saying religion is optional,that it is, like anything else humans experience, a by product of being human?***

I am sorry if my understanding of Judaism is flawed. I did the best I could

Catholics and others, please reflect on my question regarding Judaism. Thanks​

Peace
Click to expand...
I mean I CAN’T not CAN
 
PathDiagnosis said:
I wouldn’t say I believe in the Resurrection. What I mean is concluding that the resurrection happened is reasonable due to historical evidence (which I will not detail here, see early church history, Polycarp, etc). Still, the evidence is not enough for me.

Saints with doubt? Interesting.
Click to expand...
Yes, saints with doubt.

You see that the resurrection is reasonable, but insist on a certainty you can’t have because you aren’t at the resurrection. Yet you make countless decisions each day based on reason, not certainty. Medicine is most definitely not an exact science. Ask anyone who has gone to doctor after doctor after doctor, receiving different answers for a health problem before finally getting it resolved (and sometimes dying.)

Why do you practice medicine, with all it’s uncertainties, and insist that religion be something you can touch like you can touch your computer keyboard? Why do you accept the other histories that you read, even though you weren’t there?
 
Incomplete said:
Yes, saints with doubt.

You see that the resurrection is reasonable, but insist on a certainty you can’t have because you aren’t at the resurrection. Yet you make countless decisions each day based on reason, not certainty. Medicine is most definitely not an exact science. Ask anyone who has gone to doctor after doctor after doctor, receiving different answers for a health problem before finally getting it resolved (and sometimes dying.)

Why do you practice medicine, with all it’s uncertainties, and insist that religion be something you can touch like you can touch your computer keyboard? Why do you accept the other histories that you read, even though you weren’t there?
Click to expand...
Excellent points. We accept things through reason and not proof everyday. One could argue if “proof” for anything exist. I suppose I can’t apply such reason to religion simply because it is religion.

If I became religious (at this point, only Catholic) I would constantly wonder about suffering. I have seen the worst cancers and other diseases at the level of single cells under a microscope. Am I to accept that God blessed some with healing and others not? I prayed a novena to St. Jude to get accepted into a particular Ivy League program. I got in. When I was Catholic I saw my work as a means to bring glory to God.

But, all those suffering people, what glory in it? Some where young children (google vaginal adenosis, sarcoma botryoides, etc, etc, etc).God blessed me and not them? All this horrible biology is the result of some possibly symbolic first sin/original sin/“the Fall”? I eventually came to the conclusion that nature is cruel, and reality is sometimes harsh, no matter how much comfort religion provides.
 
PathDiagnosis said:
Some of you expressed something along the lines of how practicing religion provides meaning to live, gives peace, etc. That works for you and I am sure most religious people do no harm to others.

The following from unifreethought.com/2011/10/meaning-of-life-without-religion.html
summarizes what I believe about a life without religion. Some asked earlier about “why help other people, they’ll be dead later anyways, and not exist since you don’t believe in eternal life” (not an exact quote). I hope this answers some questions.
It’s always bothered me that religion seems to have a monopoly on giving life meaning. That’s one of the most common justifications for believing in God - it attaches purpose to an otherwise pointless existence. Not only is this an incredibly bleak view of humanity, it’s a terrible way to even approach the question.

There is no single unifying purpose for our existence. Your life’s meaning is not for me, or anyone else, to hand down to you. We give life meaning, and that’s true for everyone. Religious doctrine frequently teaches that meaning and purpose are a divine gift, handed down from on high. It’s a role for us to fulfill, not a choice that we make about our own lives. I find this insulting. As human beings we have well developed cognitive faculties that allow us to assign “meaning” to existence. We have complex emotions, relationships, wants, desires, and feelings. It’s absurd to think that the human experience, and what it means to us, can be boiled down into a single purpose that works for everyone. And we shouldn’t want that.

And even if we did want to have our live’s meaning handed to us, the religious prescription is a cynical mockery of the entire idea. The most common religious explanation says that our primary purpose is to worship, glorify, and praise God. Essentially it’s the view that we’re all creations of a serial narcissist, here for the sole purpose of catering to his whims, and feeding his ego. ***(I wouldn’t be this negative)***Is this sort of love deserved? I think the obvious answer is no. It’s based on fear, intimidation, and the prospect of eternal punishment. That’s not a particularly healthy relationship, and it’s not befitting of an intelligent and dignified species.

But without God, what is the purpose of my life? What meaning can it possibly have without religion? The answer is that it has the meaning that I assign to it. I choose to value knowledge and discussion. I would also be nothing without my friends and loved ones - and these are relationships based on mutual respect and affection, not intimidation and the threat of punishment. My love of life and the people in it is not expected - it’s earned. I’m here to pursue the things that I’m passionate about, to find intellectual stimulation, and to enjoy good company. And that is something worth living for. And this viewpoint, that life is worth living because of how we choose to live it, does not require the approval of any God or Gods.​

Maybe this is life? It is objectively meaningless and we give meaning it to outside or religion? I’m afraid of excepting religion as an unnecessary byproduct of human experience.

Peace
Click to expand...
I wonder if you’ve studied Sartre’s existentialist philosophy, because what you are describing here is exactly in keeping with existentialism. I don’t mean that as a negative, for this is one way of thinking about the meaning of life and you present a powerful argument in its favor. I’m not one of those people who believe that if G-d does not exist, then nothing we do in life has any value. Even if it were proven beyond doubt that there is no G-d, I would still want to lead a moral and productive life, based on several of the pleasures you mention: friendship, intellectual stimulation, work, as well as charity toward others.

You ask about Judaism and whether you might follow the Noahide Law of morality as a Gentile. Jews believe this is exactly what righteous Gentiles do, whether or not they are aware of doing so; while Jews, bearing greater responsibility, are held to the commandments of the Torah, not that they are ever perfect in following them. Despite this, my initial advice holds that you remain a Catholic who continues doubting and searching. You say that my advice as a non-Christian bothers you since it means that religion (in my case, Judaism) doesn’t matter. I can’t speak for all Jews–and certainly not for any Catholics–but, to me, you’re right: it doesn’t matter, in the sense that the core moral principles of Catholicism and Judaism have similarities, as they have to other religions as well. The main issue, as I see it, is for you to understand and embrace the moral teachings of your own faith. To do this, however, you must have some measure of faith in your religion; otherwise, your inquiry becomes a mere intellectual exercise. The key is to combine faith and reason. While religion by its very nature is different from science, the latter is not devoid of faith either: faith in the human mind, the power of logic, the belief in cause-effect relationships; faith in the validity of the scientific method and in hypotheses based on informed opinion and observation. If you wish to lead a good and moral life without believing in G-d, that’s your free choice. I don’t think G-d will punish you for not believing in Him and using reason to arrive at your decision. But based on the sincerity of the doubts you express on this thread, I also don’t think you have made that choice.
 
PathDiagnosis said:
It’s always bothered me that religion seems to have a monopoly on giving life meaning. That’s one of the most common justifications for believing in God - it attaches purpose to an otherwise pointless existence. Not only is this an incredibly bleak view of humanity, it’s a terrible way to even approach the question.

Peace
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone says religion provides the exclusive meaning for life! However, it has provided a deep meaning to countless people who were searching for a purpose that their sports, hobbies or family and friends had not provided.

Don’t mix up the two and their cause/effect.
You should not believe in God just so you can obtain a purpose (it doesn’t work that way)
But if you do believe in God, you will find purpose that you did not have before.

A desire for purpose can start the journey of exploring God but at some point faith and the desire to know God will take over as the motivator for the journey.
 
PathDiagnosis said:
Excellent points. We accept things through reason and not proof everyday. One could argue if “proof” for anything exist. I suppose I can’t apply such reason to religion simply because it is religion.

If I became religious (at this point, only Catholic) I would constantly wonder about suffering. I have seen the worst cancers and other diseases at the level of single cells under a microscope. Am I to accept that God blessed some with healing and others not? I prayed a novena to St. Jude to get accepted into a particular Ivy League program. I got in. When I was Catholic I saw my work as a means to bring glory to God.

But, all those suffering people, what glory in it? Some where young children (google vaginal adenosis, sarcoma botryoides, etc, etc, etc).God blessed me and not them? All this horrible biology is the result of some possibly symbolic first sin/original sin/“the Fall”? I eventually came to the conclusion that nature is cruel, and reality is sometimes harsh, no matter how much comfort religion provides.
Click to expand...
Suffering is a tough issue.

First, I would challenge you to understand the word “blessed” a bit better. There are many, many people who have lives of joy despite various kinds of suffering, and people who have wealth and leisure and even fame, and end up committing suicide. You feel you were blessed with going to a particular Ivy League program, but that program would not be a blessing to everybody.

Volumes have been written about suffering. It might be good for you to look to what others have said, or to read about scientists who have embraced Christianity (or at least embraced a deity), especially those who have been atheist. I could say a lot of stuff about suffering, even of some of the good that sometimes comes from it, but there’s just not space on a message board for this.

I also understand your part about suffering as regards to pain/illness. I also find this a very difficult issue, as do many people. I have seen a great deal of suffering in people I love, and have experienced a certain amount of suffering myself. Suffering is one of those things (not the only thing) that made me do a great deal of thinking and studying in these matters myself.

I would not agree that those who suffer were not blessed by God, while those who don’t were blessed. Those who are closest to God, who truly sense His presence and believe without doubts, those are the people who are blessed. Those people also tend to handle suffering better.

You said that nature is cruel. It is. But it is also glorious. It is both.

Overall, though, I think our biggest problem with suffering is we picture God as a bigger version of ourselves, and we know that if we had the power, we’d eliminate suffering. But we haven’t a clue what the end result would be if we did that, because we don’t have the mind of God. God’s ways are not our ways, He is so far above us.

So where to go from there? You go back to what makes sense. In my own searching, it finally, finally occurred to me…just because I don’t understand suffering, that really has nothing to do with the likelihood of God existing. My tiny brain doesn’t understand a lot. But the fact that suffering exists, and that I find it difficult to make sense of, has nothing to do with whether God actually exists or not.So that’s when I looked at other things, trying to make sense of what to believe.

In your case, you are fairly convinced of the resurrection. That’s enormous. How do you make sense of it without God?
 
PathDiagnosis said:
no matter how much comfort religion provides.
Click to expand...
Ah, but religion isn’t about providing comfort. If you truly “practice” religion, you will be called to change, and some of those changes can be pretty painful.

In fact, you might be called to give up some of your own comforts.
 
PathDiagnosis said:
I still can’t get over things like this:

The previous picture of the child nearly eaten by the vulture (maybe). He didn’t get to go to Mass. He had no luxuries I do. I can’t say God blessed me and not him. This is just one of the reasons I still see religion as a byproduct of human experience. There are other byproducts: love, friendship, etc. One can accept the bad things in the world as a result of the the Fall or the first sin of Adam and Even (symbolic or literal) but I can’t prove or disprove that to be a coping mechanism or not.
Click to expand...
I didn’t look at the picture, but I’m wondering how you can tell by a picture that the child didn’t get to go to Mass. And luxuries don’t necessarily make the difference between a good life and not. Jesus called us to give up our luxuries, probably because He knew that those aren’t what makes us happy.

A friend of mine works in a very, very poor area of the worlds and is struck by how much happier people are there.

And yes, the child died. If God IS, then we view death wrong. To grieve because we miss our loved ones is fine, but death is not an evil of we share a life with God after leaving this world.
 
meltzerboy said:
I wonder if you’ve studied Sartre’s existentialist philosophy, because what you are describing here is exactly in keeping with existentialism. I don’t mean that as a negative, for this is one way of thinking about the meaning of life and you present a powerful argument in its favor. I’m not one of those people who believe that if G-d does not exist, then nothing we do in life has any value. Even if it were proven beyond doubt that there is no G-d, I would still want to lead a moral and productive life, based on several of the pleasures you mention: friendship, intellectual stimulation, work, as well as charity toward others.

You ask about Judaism and whether you might follow the Noahide Law of morality as a Gentile. Jews believe this is exactly what righteous Gentiles do, whether or not they are aware of doing so; while Jews, bearing greater responsibility, are held to the commandments of the Torah, not that they are ever perfect in following them. Despite this, my initial advice holds that you remain a Catholic who continues doubting and searching. You say that my advice as a non-Christian bothers you since it means that religion (in my case, Judaism) doesn’t matter.* I can’t speak for all Jews–and certainly not for any Catholics–but, to me, you’re right: it doesn’t matter, in the sense that the core moral principles of Catholicism and Judaism have similarities, as they have to other religions as well. The main issue, as I see it, is for you to understand and embrace the moral teachings of your own faith. *To do this, however, you must have some measure of faith in your religion; otherwise, your inquiry becomes a mere intellectual exercise. The key is to combine faith and reason. While religion by its very nature is different from science, the latter is not devoid of faith either: faith in the human mind, the power of logic, the belief in cause-effect relationships; faith in the validity of the scientific method and in hypotheses based on informed opinion and observation. If you wish to lead a good and moral life without believing in G-d, that’s your free choice. I don’t think G-d will punish you for not believing in Him and using reason to arrive at your decision. But based on the sincerity of the doubts you express on this thread, I also don’t think you have made that choice.
Click to expand...
This is in response to what I highlighted in your response.

This is the kind of thinking that bothers me. I’m assuming you are a “religious Jew” (sorry if I’m using words wrong). So you are saying it** does not matter
** what religion I am if I come to embrace Theism***? If so, why be any religion at all? Are you admitting that religion is, like I’m saying, a byrproduct of human experience and not of Divine origin? If so, how do religious people live with this? That is what I want to understand. Accepting religion as true is not the same as accepting 1+1=2.
To the best of my knowledge I am fulfilled in life…I think. My ultimate goal is to be an M.D. and work as the type of doctor that I currently work for (Diagnostic Pathologist, no not dead people). So, that fills my need to intellectual stimulation.

I’ve take an interest in the phenomenon known as “religion” and am just wondering if I should “do it” also. I would only do it is absolutely necessary and I can’t conclude it is. The best way to learn about it is dialogue with the religious.
 
PathDiagnosis said:
"

I think I am seeking God. I occasionally pray “God if you are there, etc” while learning about religion. Did God just make me “overly” objective and evidence/proof driven? By the time I die I might not have concluded to any single religion- there are and were too many.
Maybe my efforts count according to Lumen Gentium 16?

Peace
Click to expand...
I’d like to add the following:

No one should judge another in the form of passing judgement. Judging someone is only a way to discern truth from false, right from wrong, etc. We judge one another in the scriptural sense. Living without knowing is quite the anxiety provoker, leading one to make many mistakes. Sometimes we just have to leave our fate to God, and by making a careful decision to simply accept the the most favorable [truthful, no most convenient] faith so that we can at least begin to show a trust in the guiding power of the Holy One we suspect may be true. Just a thought.
 
PathDiagnosis said:
This is in response to what I highlighted in your response.

This is the kind of thinking that bothers me. I’m assuming you are a “religious Jew” (sorry if I’m using words wrong). So you are saying it** does not matter
** what religion I am if I come to embrace Theism***? If so, why be any religion at all? Are you admitting that religion is, like I’m saying, a byrproduct of human experience and not of Divine origin? If so, how do religious people live with this? That is what I want to understand. Accepting religion as true is not the same as accepting 1+1=2.
To the best of my knowledge I am fulfilled in life…I think. My ultimate goal is to be an M.D. and work as the type of doctor that I currently work for (Diagnostic Pathologist, no not dead people). So, that fills my need to intellectual stimulation.

I’ve take an interest in the phenomenon known as “religion” and am just wondering if I should “do it” also. I would only do it is absolutely necessary and I can’t conclude it is. The best way to learn about it is dialogue with the religious.
Click to expand...
I’m not what one might call a religious or Orthodox Jew, that is, one who abides by most of the Torah commandments. Neither am I what one calls a secular, agnostic, or atheist Jew. I do believe in Judaism’s basic dogma about G-d, the Messiah, sin, and the afterlife, and observe most of the major holidays to a certain extent, but certainly not in the way an Orthodox Jew does. However, I have a deep faith in the moral teachings and wisdom of Judaism and attempt to put that faith into action in my everyday life. In Judaism (and no doubt in Catholicism as well), one does not “do it,” as though religion were a separate part of one’s life, as distinct from work and leisure activities. On the contrary, religion informs all the behavior in one’s life, not for the purpose of restriction but as a means to enlightenment.

I am not encouraging you to embrace theism; I am encouraging you to embrace the religion of your choice, which seems to be Catholicism. This requires knowledge of its teachings, which you say you have already, and beyond that, faith in its teachings. As I stated previously, this faith does not necessarily mean embracing every ritual without reasoning, doubting, and searching. I believe you can combine your faith and reason if you choose to do so. Like any other enterprise, and perhaps more so, it requires effort on your part. If you are content in your life without the possibility of growth by means of experiencing religion, so be it; however, I get the feeling you are not, or else you would not be questioning as you are. You also appear to be afraid of taking the plunge because it is risky in your view and perhaps a waste of your time. Again, as in other aspects of life, you will never find out what the potential rewards are if you are held back by fear.
 
PathDiagnosis said:
I’ve take an interest in the phenomenon known as “religion” and am just wondering if I should “do it” also. I would only do it is absolutely necessary and I can’t conclude it is. The best way to learn about it is dialogue with the religious.
Click to expand...
No, you don’t need to do it. Not unless you want a relationship with God, and want to live with Him one day. And if you’re absolutely certain there’s no God, then there’s no need.

It is not absolutely necessary for you to do what you do for a living, either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top