Religion is a deeply-rooted, unique phenomenon in human society. A concept that seemingly came from nowhere, the concept of faith has been used to justify anything from genocide to social gospel. However, religion has entered a state of decline and the world is becoming more and more secular.1 The goal of this paper is not to prove nor disprove any particular religion, but I’d rather like to put forth my own particular view on the factuality underlying religion and how I believe it can be logically understood in the context of a world with science and rationalism.
Before going into the breadth of the observations and opinions I have used to construct my religious understanding, I’d first like to explain my perspective and biases. I was raised in a Presbyterian home, and thus I spent the majority of my life as a devout Christian. However, naturally (considering I’m only seventeen at the time of this essay), my religious base has changed more recently in life. Around December 2016, I gave up faith and took to agnostic atheism or at best scientific deism. I simply had grown tired of trying to defend blind faith in the face of scientific findings that seemingly disproved the Bible. Since then, I’ve studied religion from the outside looking in. I have often found myself taking more interest in Eastern religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.) because they seem to be more abstract and less in conflict with the confines of scientific nature. Admittedly, this fascination probably has something to do with the bad taste in my mouth for Abrahamic religions left from Christianity. To combat my negative disposition and to open myself back up to a more Biblical God, I currently take part in a weekly Bible study group. The group helps me to feel closer to the existence of some God, but it would not be a lie to say that the group sometimes seems to be indulged deeply in delusion and a bad case of groupthink. Nevertheless, I try to keep my mind open on the concept of religion because it seems to be either the most or least important concept humanity has ever struggled to understand.
I should also note my lack of knowledge on this subject. I have no formal theological education, aside from Google searches and learning done inside church walls (which is often more propaganda than theology). Whoever this essay may end up in front of will more than likely have an unaddressed piece of insight on one of the issues I discuss. Before attacking my assertions, it’s important to remember three key understandings: (1) religion is very personal, so one person cannot be expected to understand every intricacy of every separate religion; (2) this paper will not cover every aspect of the theories I put forth, as this is an introductory paper to my line of thinking; and (3) a reader should try to read this with an open mind even if they personally disagree with my opinions, because challenging deeply-held beliefs is extremely important when looking to foster internal, and maybe even spiritual, growth.
At this point in time, I walk an odd, paradoxical line between omnism and atheism. Part I will outline the key tenants of my current, ever evolving belief system. Part II will cross-examine evidence used to propagate different religions, and how these should objectively be viewed side-by-side.
I. The Paradigms of Religion
The two following subsections are starkly different. The first (A) will give my current, direct understanding of religion. The second (B) will present a hypothesis I have been wondering about since I began to ponder upon a religious thought experiment. Regardless of personal agreement, I hope every reader will see an objective truth provided by both sections: religion is completely based upon the paradigm in which you approach the table with.
A. My Understanding
For a couple years now, I have considered faith in a god to be a cultural suicide, an easy way out. I have thought that nobody knows better than anyone else if God is the truth or not. Once rational thinkers began to question the priests of a long time ago, they pointed to the most convenient way to kick the question they could find: faith. Particularly with Abrahamic religions, faith was the easiest way to deter skepticism because there is no way to prove faith wrong. Skeptics could call faith ill-conceived, but no scientific discoveries can disprove the fact that the Torah, the Bible, and the Qur’an all say that one should be faithful in God.
This is where the frustration begins. It seems as though books like Genesis defy science (i.e. creation and the flood). It seems as though the existence of “mythical” religions such as that of the Greeks serve as evidence that religion is trying to explain why we exist, even though there is no way to logically give that explanation. It seems as though God is cruel for punishing those who don’t subscribe to the one true religion by sending them to hell for believing in another god or no god at all. These problems seem to all point towards anything but Abrahamic religion. If Allah loves his children, why would he send them to suffer eternally for believing in Jesus’s teachings rather than Muhammed’s? In further discussions, I’d be happy to point out other problems I have with Abrahamic religion or to expand upon ideas I’ve already given. As for Eastern religions (Hinduism, Taoism, Buddhism, etc.), I admittedly don’t have as well thought out of issues with the core concepts of them, but I also have felt no urgency to commit myself to their teachings. If they’re true, I’ll likely find out by or during the next time I’m reincarnated.
Questions like this certainly have troubled me for a long time. I have spent years feeling that the world is cruel, ugly, and unexplainable, but it is also concrete and believable. While it certainly could be true that this is all a simulation or a divine test, the odds seem to point towards there being no meaning in life except for that which we give it. After reading a lot of Friedrich Nietzsche, I’ve come to understand that God is dead and society killed Him. Not unlike Nietzsche’s own life, I’ve become understandably depressed after this realization. I have felt alone in the universe and largely inconsequential. Sometimes I feel like heat death would be a good thing because it would prevent the suffering of the future, secular generations that will inevitably accept this philosophy more and more.
This is where my solid basis of religion stops. I have recently started becoming more religious to help deal with my existential depression I’ve felt for the past few years. I have felt that there might be the slight chance that God is using my tendency for depressive thoughts to urge me back into His love. It could be desperation, but I have over the past year attempted to be more open minded to the Bible, since it’s the most convenient religion to follow. If I believed the Bible again, maybe I wouldn’t feel like an outsider in society, and I would have found something to keep me content until death. I should note that I definitely don’t think religion will fix all of my problems, but it could help me to find a silver lining.
Because of this, I’ve become more and more Catholic with my views lately. Out of all Christian denominations, I personally believe Catholicism makes the most sense when being believed by itself. With the loose construction of the Bible and the use of the church for the same purpose in the Bible, it seems logical that Catholicism was the most immediate form of Christianity.
B. My Hypothesis
Now is where the more controversial part of this essay will come. First, I’d like to define omnism, which I’m becoming more and more convinced by. Omnism is the belief that every religion has merit and truth in them, but not 100% objective truth. They all serve to maintain the same core principles but to move society forward in particular social settings and climate. Humanity is imperfect, so the recordings about prophets are understandably different in some teachings, but the broad strokes remain the same.
To justify this, I’d like to point towards a few key beliefs held amongst all major religions:
• Panentheism, or belief in a single, all-pervading entity from which the entire universe emerged
• Love of the universe. This includes God, your family, the poor, and everyone who is a part of the river of life (a Taoist term).
• Reverence for truth and tradition, in balance.
Panentheism is taught in every religion, but in different ways. Judaism and Islam believe God is the only entity of sovereignty and needs direct praise. Christian teachings tell us that God is in three persons, all of the same entity. Hinduism believes in the Divine Absolute, Brahman. He is the God One who has no second, is ineffable, and is the one of whom nothing can be said because everything is in him and everything is him. Buddhism generally has a similar belief, but ultimately has no focus upon the interaction between God and humanity. Taoism beliefs teach that Pan Ku organized Yin and Yang to create the universe we have today. Native American tribes usually had a focus upon Panentheism, but there are far too many religions amongst them to say anything holistically. Generally, however, religion has a supreme god.
The second two bullet points also show how each of the religions mentioned above teach that life is sacred, and that love is essential. They all teach that we have common ancestry and heritage, making us all brothers and sisters in God or the universe.
After these and other readings, religion can be considered an essential element in the evolution of humanity, and it can be considered as one religion. Impartial study of religious texts reveals their unity of vision with regard to ethics and the promise of peace and unity expected by all humanity.
The arrival of new Messengers is an important moment in history. Each one triggers a new spiritual impulse, stimulates personal questioning and social progress. Among them are the founders of the world's great religions: Moses, Krishna, Zoroaster, Buddha, Christ and Mohammed.
The environmental and social contexts contained in these texts are relative to the time of their revelation and therefore subject to change like any social law, but their common spiritual message transcends the ages.
The images used to mark minds appeal to our collective unconscious and are only parables intended to warn us, we must not make them "idols". Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza explained that “the God of the Old Testament adapted his discourse to the poor understanding of the Hebrew people to whom he was speaking.” Basically, however, the spiritual message of these messengers is the same. Everyone stressed the importance of the love of God, obedience to his will and love of neighbor. Words have varied, but the essential teaching revolves around the basic principle that "everyone should treat others as they would like to be treated themselves".
The founders of the great religions have always recognized their predecessors and authenticated their writings, but unfortunately their followers, often out of ignorance and prejudice (because it did not correspond to the images they had forged in their imaginations), have rejected the messengers who have followed and impoverished their spiritual message, leaving room for rituals and superstitions.
The religious message is one of unity that connects us, reminding us that we all come from the same origin, the same planet and the same creator, only social laws and customs have differed in time, but the law of love is eternal.