The World's Newest Major Religion - No Religion

[2timothy316]

Article from NATGEO: https://news.nationalgeographic.com/201 ... -religion/

Article from the Pew Research Center: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... ous-nones/

They are called 'Nones' or people that are religiously unaffiliated. Perhaps you have asked someone their religion and they answered 'I'm spiritual but don't believe in religion'.

For debate: Is the 'None' dogma trend healthy or good for society? Is it scripturally supported to be a 'None'? Are all 'Nones' beliefs acceptable to God? What scriptures support or condemn the idea of 'many beliefs and teachings all serving one God'.

[tam]

May you all have peace!

Article from NATGEO: https://news.nationalgeographic.com/201 ... -religion/

Article from the Pew Research Center: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... ous-nones/

They are called 'Nones' or people that are religiously unaffiliated. Perhaps you have asked someone their religion and they answered 'I'm spiritual but don't believe in religion'.

For debate: Is the 'None' dogma trend healthy or good for society?

'None' is just a check in a box on a survey. There is no dogma involved.

'None' only states what a person is NOT (affiliated with religion). 'None' does not state what a person IS. Therefore 'None' describes nothing about a person and their beliefs.

Your individual questions and comments seem geared more toward a person like me, whose faith is in Christ and God, but who has no part in religion. Something you are calling 'spiritual but not religious'. So I will respond to the following question from that point of view:

Is it scripturally supported to be a 'None'?

Absolutely.

But a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth, for the Father is seeking such as these to worship Him. God is Spirit, and His worshipers must worship Him in spirit and in truth.�


The woman my Lord was responding to had said to Him,

Our forefathers worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews say that the place where one must worship is in Jerusalem.

My Lord responded,

“Believe Me, woman, [Jesus] replied, “a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews.


Neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. And in revelation:


Then the kings of the earth, the nobles, the commanders, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and free man, hid in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains. And they said to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of the One seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb.


They are looking toward their mountains and rocks (such as various religions and their leaders) to hide them.




In the exchange with this woman, my Lord also said that salvation is from the Jews - meaning Himself: Jaheshua, the Chosen One of JAH. The very name of the Son - Jaheshua - means Jah saves/salvation of Jah.



One need only come to Christ, love Him, keep His word and His commands, as He said:

"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."


He also called (and calls) people to HIMSELF.

Come to Me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.

“If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink."



Peace to you and to your households,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

(edited to fix quote box)

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 21 by tam]

Interesting. So I think we can agree that Jesus indicated that future worshippers would not have any stipulation (as was a part of the Mosaic Law) to gather for worship in Jerusalem or on any physical mountain; and that no specific location would be required to define their worship. I think also we can agree that worshippers would need Holy spirit and to base their faith on truth.

But can you explain what in scripture indicates they would not be an organized body of united people in communication and interaction with each other, working together to a common purpose?

[tam]

May you all have peace!

Do you know why the 'nones' can't see anything in the scriptures? The answer is found in the very book you quoted earlier. "‘You will hear again and again, But you will not understand; You will see again and again, But you will not get any knowledge.’ Make the heart of this people unreceptive, Make their ears unresponsive, And paste their eyes together, So that they may not see with their eyes And hear with their ears, So that their heart may not understand And they may not turn back and be healed.� - Isaiah 6:9, 10.

The hearts of the 'nones' are indeed unreceptive and their hearts hardened. It is going to be quite a show when these people hold more power. They claim they are tolerant of each other, that will wear off eventually. In fact it's already begun.

Does timothy not realize that when Christ said the following (referring to that very prophecy from Isaiah), that He was speaking to a people who were in a religion?

This is why I speak to them in parables: ‘Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.’ In them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled: ‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people’s heart has grown callous; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and turn, and I would heal them.’


Can people unaffiliated with religion be hard-hearted and unseeing/unhearing? Of course. Can people affiliated with religion be hard-hearted and unseeing/unhearing? Absolutely!


How does no affiliation with religion make ANY statement about what is IN a person; if that person has love upon their heart; if that person is merciful and forgiving, does not judge?

The irony of the OP is that it is a religious person making those unjust statements.



Peace again to you, and to your households,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[bluethread]

These nones that dabble also pick and choose what science they will accept and what they will reject. An example is climate change. Those that even though their city is under attack from the rising sea, they are ready to drown saying, 'I'm not drowning because of climate change. This is something else and I have the science to prove it.' A other example is the vaccine controversy. People hear something and say, 'that is closest to what I think is happening so I'll go with that.' Actual science is discarded. Every time I hear someone say, 'have the science to prove it' I can hardly stomach that saying. I have an uncontrollable urge to roll my eyes because I don't know if I can trust the data source. There was a guy that said smoking doesn't cause cancer and he had the science to prove it. I asked what his proof was. He said, "Ive been smoking all my life and I never got cancer."

I get your point, but to be fair there are "nones" on both sides of these issues. For example, there are those that say that global warming is going to end the world in ten years and so we have to introduce a carbon tax and hyper-regulate the economy. This also ignores that fact that our economy runs on oil and draconian legislation is only going to tank the economy. They then argue that government regulation and activity will expand the economy. This is nothing more than the broken window view of economics. Economies only grow when people with assets choose to employ those assets in areas that they value. If they do not value something, the wealth transfer reduces investment in the things that they do value and that results in resistance to regulation and a black market in what they actually want. That just undermines the economy and drives it underground. As with theology, if one truly believes the treat of man caused global warming, one must sell that in the market place of ideas, not force it through oppressive regulation.

The problem with this "nones" thing is that it says nothing about why they are "nones". The truth is that, though some of those "nones" are just lazy, others are that way because they do wish to engage in intelligent conversaion and do not wish to be labeled. The better metric is to ook at people based on ideology and not just social affiliation.

[2timothy316]

I get your point, but to be fair there are "nones" on both sides of these issues.

Yes, I completely agree. The 'nones' are on all sides of the issues. Yet some don't want to stick their neck out for their course of action while others are shoving their course down everyone's throat. This is what I see. It ls like when playing a collaboration board game, there is a situation we call 'Inaction Man'. A play on 'Action Man' which one might think of as a hero. One of my favorite games is called Pandemic. Sometimes while playing the choices are unclear because of not knowing how to handle the next play then a person or even the whole team will turn into 'Inaction Man'. Frozen, unable to decide what to do next. Another way to invoke 'Inaction Man' is that no one can agree on what should happen on the current turn. This is resolved when everyone agrees to 'just do whatever'. The action is taken and normally the world fairs badly.

This what I see in the world only much more complex than a 4 person game. try a 40 million person game. With 40 million different goals...and not a game. Actual lives are lost do too 'Inaction Man'. So while I am hearing people explain its a good thing everyone has their own truth and only accepts certain facts, I can't help but think of the game Pandemic, where 'alternative facts', an 'I don't care really' attitude and not knowing the real facts equal in losing the game. Puerto Rico was a really good example of 'Inaction Man' in real life. So many opinions on what to do or even people that didn't really give a darn and people suffered for it.

There are enough 'nones' now that they are starting to make a difference in the world. I don't think it's going the way they thought it would go. The idea of 'you believe what you want and I believe what I want' isn't going to work. 'Inaction Man' is not born from a choice to do nothing, it's born from too many choices and yet still doing nothing.

[tam]

Peace to you.

[Replying to post 21 by tam]

Interesting. So I think we can agree that Jesus indicated that future worshippers would not have any stipulation (as was a part of the Mosaic Law) to gather for worship in Jerusalem or on any physical mountain; and that no specific location would be required to define their worship.

Not just in the future. He said that the time is coming and had NOW come, when true worshipers would worship in spirit and in truth.

I think also we can agree that worshippers would need Holy spirit and to base their faith on truth.

It is true that Christ would be pouring out holy spirit, the same holy spirit that He breathed upon the apostles.

“If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink. Whoever puts faith in me, just as the scripture has said: ‘From deep within him streams of living water will flow.’� However, he said this concerning the spirit, which those who put faith in him were about to receive; for as yet there was no spirit, because Jesus had not yet been glorified."


But He is also the Spirit (as well as the Truth).


We are to worship in and through Him. (no one comes to the Father except through me)

And yes, our faith is to be based upon Him (the Truth).

But can you explain what in scripture indicates they would not be an organized body of united people in communication and interaction with each other, working together to a common purpose?

Why would I try and do that?

They are members of a Body. They are members of the Body of Christ, with Christ as their head, speaking to them, teaching them, guiding them. He, Himself (my sheep hear my voice; I will not leave you as orphans, I will come to you, I will be with you until the very end of the age...). He sets each of them in His Body where and as He wants them to be, according to His and His Father's knowledge.

They do the work that He assigns them, and so it would follow that they are working toward His purpose (will). They are united in Him. Since they are members of His Body, then they are united with one another as well.


Peace again to you and to your household,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[JehovahsWitness]

But can you explain what in scripture indicates they would not be an organized body of united people in communication and interaction with each other, working together to a common purpose?

Why would I try and do that?

• So how is that not an organized religion?

What in you opinion did Jesus mean when he told Peter to feed his sheep? And why in your opinion was that same Peter to be found with a body of other men making spiritual decisions as to what would be the accepted Christian teachings sending letters to the various groups throughout Asia and Europe through appointed reprsentatives to be applied by said groups?

Why did those groups have regular meetings? Selected men to make decisions regarding worship and teaching? Know many in the same location by name? And engage in preaching together? Why were they told to have unity of belief? And how could that be maintained if they were not organised?

In short if Christianity of the first century meets all the criteria of an organized religion, what makes Christians today believe they should not be part of one?

JW

[tam]

But can you explain what in scripture indicates they would not be an organized body of united people in communication and interaction with each other, working together to a common purpose?

Why would I try and do that?

So how is that not an organized religion?

Religion does not require faith. Anyone can belong to a religion. Anyone can join a religion. Anyone can lead a religion. No faith is required to be in a religion or even to lead a religion.


Faith is required to come to Christ and to be a member of His Body. No one comes to Him unless the Father draws them; just as no one comes to the Father except through the Son.





Peace again to you, and to your household,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 28 by tam]

Thank you for your observations, will you be addressing any of the questions in my post?

Here is the LINK
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 226#905226]

[William]

[Replying to post 19 by bluethread]

Well, as long as people do not mistake ritual and organization for philosophy there is no problem.

Like I said - the problem is that people create alternatives to the philosophy through ritual and organization.

Your reply implies ritual and organisation are necessary, but clearly they are not and never have been.

Also you aligned scientific/scholarly practice with religious ritual and organization as if some how GOD is unable to 'teach' the individual without the individual attending group indoctrination and doing rituals. You equate religious dogma with scientific study and imply those not attending to such are uneducated 'fools' by comparison.

It is precisely that type of thinking which quagmired the churches ability to evolve, and drove the people who thought there was so much more to GOD than that out from under the churches control.