religion in TSAR

Voltaire said of religion, “ce système sublime à l'homme est nécessaire. C'est le sacré lien de la société, le premier fondement de la sainte équité, le frein du scélérat, l'espérance du juste…si dieu n’existait pas, il faudrait l’inventer,” (Trois Imposteurs, epigraph). 

(This sublime order is necessary to man. It is the sacred thread of society, the cornerstone of holy equity, the criminal’s impediment, the hope of the just…if God did not exist, he would be invented.)

This may be bullshit to the atheist/existentialist. In this modern, secularist society Doris A. Helbig  speaks of, nothing is scared. This can be taken figuratively and literally. 

The Godless are a proud, dogmatic people. They reject systems of oppression and mindless deification, and when they are tired at the end of the day, they turn to their vices, which in turn, turn them. Brett’s god is tragedy — she creates these lovers wherein she can reaffirm her pain. To feel the pain of misfortune is to be a victim, which is to martyr one’s self in the face of a disillusioned reality. 

Atheism is a religion, godlessness being its god — science, which is intended to disprove god has become in itself a religion. 

Spinoza said, “God is the indwelling and not the transient cause of all things,” meaning he, or the idea of god, exists inherently in everything, and is the mystery in its existence. 

John Lennon said, “I believe in God, but not as one thing, not as an old man in the sky. I believe that what people call God is something in all of us. I believe that what Jesus and Mohammed and Buddha and all the rest said was right. It's just that the translations have gone wrong.”

“God” is a figment of life — necessary for the well being of man and for the resolution of life. Which religion this god belongs to is null, but the idea exists outside of religion, in all facets of life. 

—

I feel like there is a big misconception when it comes to the idea of religion. Many people use religion as an excuse to disregard human decency, or to shirk the responsibilities of living in a society where responsibilities are currency, however these paradigms are exceptional and rarely seen in godly people. In fact, I think this kind of behavior is significant of a lack of god, in the form of a a lack of appreciation, and a lack of humility.

There is little to be said for those people who do not care about the nature of our world, but instead care only about the nature of their god. They pry into each others’ lives, act victim and play out roles which they believe to have been granted to them by social or communal expectation. The “church society” lives in a bubble, unawares of their self-inflicted damage and ignorance, happily carrying on the routines and rituals of their proxy religion. 

This is neither to condemn those religious people, whose idea of god is treated almost ironically as a being more elevated than themselves, but to suggest that there are differences in the types of religiousness that exist, not just in religion itself. In fact, I would argue to say that all religions are nearly the same in one way or another, being that they all stem from the same universal truths which guide us in our humanity and in our morality.

Michel Foucault and Noam Chomsky were held in a debate in an auditorium, whereabouts and when I forget, but it’s on youtube somewhere lost in the internet-web-sea, where they were essentially arguing two separate points which led to the same conclusion: there exists a sense of universal truth which is reached either through external influence or inherent knowledge. 

This idea of god is the one that I am speaking of — a collective consciousness, or a self-less-ness, meaning not that the self does not exist, but that the self is not alone, nor is it ever alone, because even in its moments of complete and utter solitude, it still has itself with whom it can speak. This is all very confusing, I am sure I do not completely understand that which I am trying to convey, but I am grasping at the straws of an idea which will be fully formed with more research and experience. 

I do not wish to ascribe myself a religion, either, because in doing so, I will have lost whatever mystery existed in my own unlabeled religious affiliation. I do not preclude the possibility of god, though I do not think god and God are one in the same. I think organized religion is a crime against free will and liberty. I think religion and faith is a necessary evil. I have not decided if these opinions are firm, and I will further update with any changes.