It's not religion, it's a relationship.

[Monster Machine]

It's not a question of one being top down and the other bottom up, it's about wrapping a bible in a pretty gift paper so it looks better. They're not giving you religion, they're giving you a relationship and that already looks much better. But there's no way to accept that wrapping without the book in it, pretty much.

I have always found the term relationship to be a very New Age-y sort of approach to getting people into christianity. Hans, you hit the nail on the head here, in that using the term relationship is merely window dressing.

I recall watching Survivor - China, and one of the castaways insisted she wasn't religious at all, that it was a "relationship" she had with Jesus. And yet, she offended the monks at a temple in the first episode because during a ceremony by the monks, she ran out of the temple crying because it "felt like church" to another god.

To me, she believed she was "breaking the rules" while at the same point claiming she wasn't religious. Odd that a relationship with a feel good god would cause this much grief.

IMO, the relationship aspect is Phase 1 when you first try it out. Religion is Phase 2. Again, this is only my opinion, but people who say "It's not a religion, it's a relationship" are on the bottom rung of their journey through their religion. If they still claim relationship status after a number of years, they are either using the relationship aspect for indoctrination, or they are just content to remain in the good feeling phase of christianity and are shunning the reality of what they're involved in.

Monster

 

[Fnord]

Fnord, I'm not sure I completely understand what you're saying. It looks like the argument is that "religion" is a top-down declaration of what God wants, whereas "relationship" is a bottom-up declaration of what God wants. In that sense, it would seem that protestantism is essentially a democratic version of Catholicism (which does explain why evangelicals/protestants have a problem with Catholics).

.
[opinion=subjective]

The "Relationship" aspect is how believers see their connection to God. It is emo-based and purely subjective and experiential. Think of it as the way a fan feels towards and about their favorite entertanment icon.

"Religion" is how believers mandate and dictate how that connectedness shall be expressed. Think of it as a bunch of hard-core fans setting up an "official" fan club, complete with regular meetings, news and gossip about their idol, singing songs about their idol, and collecting dues from the members.

Think of how Michael Jackson's fans describe him, how his music made them feel, discussion of the various myths versus "Canonical" biography, and how much a part of their lives he has become - that is the relationship aspect.

Now think of how you might exploit all that adulation and energy into an organization that would be profitable to you - that is the religion aspect.

[/opinion]

Keep in mind that the foregoing is only how I see it, and how it is not necessarily the most valid opinion going around.

I know, "Big cop-out Fnord" - but when you're dealing with faith-based beliefs and the religions surrounding them, you're dealing in the realm of conjecture or guesswork.

 

[maddog]

I used to have a relationship with Jesus, but he cheated on me. Had a relationship going with 14000 Baptists on the side, and acted all "but you knew it was an OPEN relationship". I was like, "sure, you can appear on somebody's toast or an underpass or something, but friggin' Baptists? It's not that kind of open relationship, bub. Hit the bricks!"

 

[Leftus]

It's an abusive relationship to be certain. This Jesus fellow dictates how you should live, who you should relate with (differently yoked) and will punish you in unimaginable ways should you stray.

 

[Fnord]

It's an abusive relationship to be certain. This Jesus fellow dictates how you should live, who you should relate with (differently yoked) and will punish you in unimaginable ways should you stray.

.
That's religion for you! Restrictions everywhere you turn. Sorta like being married...

 

[JetLeg]

It's an abusive relationship to be certain. This Jesus fellow dictates how you should live, who you should relate with (differently yoked) and will punish you in unimaginable ways should you stray.

Sounds nice.


"I am not religious. I am having an abusive relationship with Jesus".

 

[EventHorizon]

It's an abusive relationship to be certain. This Jesus fellow dictates how you should live, who you should relate with (differently yoked) and will punish you in unimaginable ways should you stray.

For people to put up with that crap it must mean that Jesus is great between the sheets.

 

[HansMustermann]

That or battered wife syndrome.

This is what happened in Europe when the Black Death outbreaks hit. It's not just the extreme lethality of it that made it scary as heck. (Some cities lost up to 80% of their population in one outbreak.) It was also a horribly painful way to die and it took a long time of that pain before you'd actually die.

So pretty much Europe faced the question: if God loves us, and we're his faithful people, why's he doing something that cruel to us? (Remember, these were the times before microbiology and microscopes.)

So in battered wife fashion huge chunks of Europe went, basically, "He only hits me because he loves me, and it's my fault for..."

1. "... not being devoted enough." => fanatical "acts of faith", including buring everyone alive who might have angered the Lord by being another religion, or an old single woman, or a cat lover, or whatever else the Lord supposedly hated.

2. "... not doing it right." => the hussites, protestantism, and all the other sects.

How good he was between sheets didn't even start to enter the equation there.

 

[pgwenthold]

It's an abusive relationship to be certain. This Jesus fellow dictates how you should live, who you should relate with (differently yoked) and will punish you in unimaginable ways should you stray.

It's not even an "abusive" relationship! It's imaginery?

It's completely one-sided. We do all the work. What does Jesus put into it? Nothing. He never calls, visits, and even his supposed communication with you is second or third hand from 2000 years ago.

It's a dependency, not a relationship.

I think most of us have been through this, with friends who we always have to call and never call us. We go out of our way to visit them, but they never can find their way to visit us, etc. How long does this have to go on before you decide you just aren't worth the effort?

 

[JetLeg]

It's not even an "abusive" relationship! It's imaginery?

No problem here. An abusive relationship with an imaginary friend.

 

[Bri]

If it's THAT kind of relationship, then I guess that means there are thousands of lonely teenage girls in a 'relationship' with Nick Jonas.

Even so, I would wager that all of those lonely teenage girls believe that Nick Jonas exists.

-Bri

 

[maddog]

Even so, I would wager that all of those lonely teenage girls believe that Nick Jonas exists.

-Bri

Yeah, but all those "relationship" Christians believe that Jesus is alive now, too. Personally, I doubt that Nick Jonas exists -- he's really just the reincarnation of Andy Gibb, isn't he?

 

[Bri]

I was referring to the statement in the OP "no other relationship depends on belief in existence". It certainly seems to me that all relationships--including those with Jesus, God, and Nick Jonas--depend on belief in existence.

-Bri

 

[godless dave]

[opinion]

Christianity defines the believer's relationship with God. It has nothing to do with religion, but with personal faith in an immaterial and improvable being.

Religion is a form of politics that re-directs that relationship into glorifying man's attempts to know and understand God. Religion is also a means to project and expand personal and political authority, as well as exploit the masses, under the guise of "Holiness."

When religion dictates belief, all Hell breaks loose.

This may or may not be how anyone else sees it, but it is what works for me.

[/opinion]

Your results may vary.

You seem to be using religion to mean "organized religion". A "personal faith in an immaterial and improvable being" is a religious belief.

 

[dlorde]

I was referring to the statement in the OP "no other relationship depends on belief in existence". It certainly seems to me that all relationships--including those with Jesus, God, and Nick Jonas--depend on belief in existence.

I think the unspoken (but obvious) implication was 'without a scrap of evidence' - as in:

"no other relationship depends on belief in existence without a scrap of evidence".

 

[Leftus]

It's not even an "abusive" relationship! It's imaginery?

It's completely one-sided. We do all the work. What does Jesus put into it? Nothing. He never calls, visits, and even his supposed communication with you is second or third hand from 2000 years ago.

It's a dependency, not a relationship.

The abuse is as imaginary, and thus just as real, as the relationship. Claim one, claim the other.

 

[m_huber]

Look at ~6:12 to see the discussion on this question.

 

[Fnord]

You seem to be using religion to mean "organized religion". A "personal faith in an immaterial and improvable being" is a religious belief.

[opinion=whatever]

I agree with the first part, but the second ... faith is static. Alone, it does very little. Expressing that faith through action, worship, or proselytizing is religion, and can accomplish a lot.

It's the difference between believing that one specific girl is the right one for you to marry (faith), and actually going out to praise her, give her offerings, sing to her, and petition her to grant your wishes (religion).

Even then, a person can practice religion without having faith in anything. They can also have faith without ever acting on it.

Or, more simply, religion is the politics of faith. One may be derived from the other, but they are not the same thing.

[/opinion]

 

[godless dave]

[opinion=whatever]

I agree with the first part, but the second ... faith is static. Alone, it does very little. Expressing that faith through action, worship, or proselytizing is religion, and can accomplish a lot.

It's the difference between believing that one specific girl is the right one for you to marry (faith), and actually going out to praise her, give her offerings, sing to her, and petition her to grant your wishes (religion).

Even then, a person can practice religion without having faith in anything. They can also have faith without ever acting on it.

Or, more simply, religion is the politics of faith. One may be derived from the other, but they are not the same thing.

[/opinion]

We're all entitled to our opinion, but we're not entitled to define our own words. Religion includes belief. It's not just the practices.

If you're pointing out that the people using the phrase "Christianity is a relationship, not a religion" understand the word "religion" differently than I do, then I get your point. I already knew that, and that's why I find the practice interesting. It suggests either a society that deliberately sets itself apart from the mainstream, or a deliberate attempt to manipulate people by manipulating language, or both.

 

[Fnord]

If you're pointing out that the people using the phrase "Christianity is a relationship, not a religion" understand the word "religion" differently than I do, then I get your point. I already knew that, and that's why I find the practice interesting. It suggests either a society that deliberately sets itself apart from the mainstream, or a deliberate attempt to manipulate people by manipulating language, or both.

(... Eff One Eleven to High Poobah ... live one ... he knows about Operation Snowjob ... name of "Godless Dave" ... mostly harmless ... will continue to monitor situation ... out.)

Golly gee, I wonder where you got that idea?