[Mustang1]

commanderkai commanderkai:

And I don't disagree that science will work with or without our belief or even our understanding of how it works. The universe still operates even though we have only scratched our understanding of it.

However. You keep using organized religion (as in, the various organized churches, mosques, temples, etc) against science as a concept (and not as particular studies be it geology, physics, or dead forms of sciences like alchemy), or even applications of science (like abortion, or hell, computer software and hardware).

Like I said before, many times: Organized religions rise and fall, but the reasons why religions exist (aka, our spiritual side) really won't cease to exist because, UNTIL science does answer the various questions about existence, people will gravitate to the answers that suit them best, be it through a Bible, or through whatever other inner truth people believe in. At least, that's what I believe, and that's why I don't see religion ever "losing", even if our scientific understanding of our universe is vastly greater than it is now.

The thread is about "religion" therefore i'll use "religion" in my assertions. Spirituality and religion aren't synonymous - this has been already been established - and while a psychological need for either may exist, there is absolutely no reason to assume it will continue. Again, science doesn't work off psychology, so it will continue to exist regardless.

$1:

Here's where you confuse "organized" religion, and religious belief. You don't need to attend a church, temple, mosque, or anything else to believe in God or to be religious. If you see going to church (or whatever other religious institution) as a requirement of religious faith, then there really isn't much I can say to change your mind.

Actually, i'm not "confusing" anything. In fact, religion is a belief system - again, perhaps instead of questioning my understanding, you should expand upon yours - and thus, it does require dogma, theology, ritual observances, etc. You can needle away with removing worship locations as membership requirements, but the system is still present, hence the the label, "religion".

And this still doesn't change the fact that religion's influence in the West has been in decline for the last 500 years.

[commanderkai]

Mustang1 Mustang1:

The thread is about "religion" therefore i'll use "religion" in my assertions. Spirituality and religion aren't synonymous - this has been already been established - and while a psychological need for either may exist, there is absolutely no reason to assume it will continue. Again, science doesn't work off psychology, so it will continue to exist regardless.

Yes, this thread is about religion. Never was it ever stated that it was only about organized religion. If you assert this is about organized religion, I can assert this is about any form of religion or even more abstract ideas like spirituality and faith.

Also, I never said being religious and being spiritual are exactly the same, but they do stem from the same basic psychological need. And because you "established" that they weren't synonymous, doesn't mean the discussion of spirituality is somehow moot. It can still be argued that being religious involves being spiritual (even if you don't have to be spiritual to be religious). Of course, if you really believe there is no reason to assume that said psychological need to continue, then what can I say? I haven't really seen proof that it'll stop either.

$1:

Actually, i'm not "confusing" anything. In fact, religion is a belief system - again, perhaps instead of questioning my understanding, you should expand upon yours - and thus, it does require dogma, theology, ritual observances, etc. You can needle away with removing worship locations as membership requirements, but the system is still present, hence the the label, "religion".

And this still doesn't change the fact that religion's influence in the West has been in decline for the last 500 years.

You keep making this point that because attendance in major organized churches, and generally their power has decreased in the last 500 years, somehow religion is in decline...when those who state that they have religious belief is still in the majority in most western countries. My understanding is fine. I see religion as beyond just attending church. If a majority of people, in the West or otherwise still state they're religious, how can you say they're wrong?

[Mustang1]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Mustang1 Mustang1:

The thread is about "religion" therefore i'll use "religion" in my assertions. Spirituality and religion aren't synonymous - this has been already been established - and while a psychological need for either may exist, there is absolutely no reason to assume it will continue. Again, science doesn't work off psychology, so it will continue to exist regardless.

Yes, this thread is about religion. Never was it ever stated that it was only about organized religion. If you assert this is about organized religion, I can assert this is about any form of religion or even more abstract ideas like spirituality and faith.

You're still not getting it - "religion", the thread's salient point, requires dogma, theology, ritual observances, liturgy, a faith system etc, and therefore "organized" is redundant when invoking the term.

$1:

Also, I never said being religious and being spiritual are exactly the same, but they do stem from the same basic psychological need. And because you "established" that they weren't synonymous, doesn't mean the discussion of spirituality is somehow moot. It can still be argued that being religious involves being spiritual (even if you don't have to be spiritual to be religious). Of course, if you really believe there is no reason to assume that said psychological need to continue, then what can I say? I haven't really seen proof that it'll stop either.

It's moot to me because i've repeatedly stated i'm looking at "religion" as it was the thread's central theme.

$1:

You keep making this point that because attendance in major organized churches, and generally their power has decreased in the last 500 years, somehow religion is in decline...when those who state that they have religious belief is still in the majority in most western countries. My understanding is fine. I see religion as beyond just attending church. If a majority of people, in the West or otherwise still state they're religious, how can you say they're wrong?

No...i've stated outright that the Church's power - political, spiritual, cultural - has been declined (you've wrongly assumed this is only manifested in declining church attendance). It's an ojbective fact. Religion is, perhaps, beyond attending a church, but by definition, it must possess, liturgy, ritual observances, dogma, theology, a belief system and in that respect it's been in decline for over 500 years.

People can state they're religions till they're blue in the face, but that in no way affects the fact that the Church's influence in the West has NEVER again approached its Medieval apex.