What makes a religion a religion?

There's a great religious debate program on uk tv, called "The Big Questions". This was on recently:

What makes a religion a religion? Daniel Jones, who is the founder of the Jedi faith, was ordered to leave Tesco's (the largest retailer and supermarket chain tin the UK) for wearing his Jedi hood. He said on TV that he was standing next to Islamic women wearing full face and head veils at the time. He states that his religion has over 500,000 followers and does follow a written doctrine.

He also went on to say that the UK Racial Discrimination bill (2003?) specifically had Jedis excluded as a religion protected by the act.

Tesco said: "He hasn't been banned. Jedis are very welcome to shop in our stores although we would ask them to remove their hoods.Obi-Wan Kenobi, Yoda and Luke Skywalker all appeared hoodless without ever going over to the Dark Side and we are only aware of the Emperor as one who never removed his hood. 

If Jedi walk around our stores with their hoods on, they'll miss lots of special offers." 

Another chap, representing Raliens was there too, along with a Moonie. The Ralien seemed quite nice! Establishment faiths that were well represented on the show, tended to the view that their religion was true and these others were not actual religions. Are these people religious, should they be re-branded as cultists, or are all major religions the result of successful cults? Should new religions/cults be banned?

Should these philosophies be accorded the same status and taken as seriously as serious religions? Should they be taught in schools as alternative beliefs alongside the old favourites?

(EDIT links fixed!) 

To make something a religion, it has to be a way of life that has a set number of do's and don'ts. The resistance that the Jedi's will face is part of what comes with your religion taking off its training wheels. I imagine most religions have had events in which persecution took place.

The religions shouldn't be banned because that's a violation of a follower's freedom to believe. Unless they provide revolutionary concepts that can be verified, the dogmas should stay out of the schools. Schools should stick with just the facts.

In general, I term a religion:

1) A set of beliefs that espouses a dogma (moral laws and guidelines) that is/are usually 2) held within a written or orally transmitted "textual" tradition. 3) It is also usually a set of rituals that are preformed by the followers within either a singular or community setting and may or may not be officiated by religious "leaders" (i.e. monks, nuns, priests, etc.). It is also usually a set of beliefs shared by a group of adherents that meet regularly or on occasion to discuss either the religious tenants or community events (whether religious related or not) and celebrate their religion together and revere, worship or in any way celebrate their religiosity.

I am of the school of thought that any group that falls into one, any or all of these above categories, is to be termed a "religion" and afforded as much freedom as all the "serious" ones (if there could ever be such a thing). And to the chagrin many theists and evangelicals, atheism is not a religion.foxhound_fox

That pretty much covers it, which is why I always role my eyes when people call atheism a religion.

I'm assuming that what Jedis, Raliens, Flying Spaghetti Monsterists etc lack is sincerity. I haven't personally met any Jedis but I have a hard time accepting that they would sincerely believe in the tenets of their faith. I can easily accept that they would revere the Star Wars movies in a way that resembles religiosity but I don't think they would believe in the way that religion requires.domatron23

I watched the programme TC was referring to and the Jedi dude was deadly serious, he definitely wasn't joking around or anything.

I watched the programme TC was referring to and the Jedi dude was deadly serious, he definitely wasn't joking around or anything.

MetalGear_Ninty

He seemed deadly serious, but also rather ill-looking. Did you see the Monk on that show? He had a much better looking hood. The Jedi's looked more like a hoodie!

Scince the Jedi faith (and the Raelians) are not listed as religions in the UK:

1. Tesco can make comments like that about Jedi. Imagine the uproar if similar comments had been aimed at Muslims.

2. They don't get religious UK charitable tax-exempt status. Considering the CofE turned over GBP 1.1 Billion last year, what makes them eligable as a tax haven, while Jedi knights have to pay tax? 

[QUOTE="domatron23"]I'm assuming that what Jedis, Raliens, Flying Spaghetti Monsterists etc lack is sincerity. I haven't personally met any Jedis but I have a hard time accepting that they would sincerely believe in the tenets of their faith. I can easily accept that they would revere the Star Wars movies in a way that resembles religiosity but I don't think they would believe in the way that religion requires.MetalGear_Ninty

I watched the programme TC was referring to and the Jedi dude was deadly serious, he definitely wasn't joking around or anything.

*retracts statement*

In my mind, it is any set of beliefs that hinge on faith in something that is not perceived to be "of this world".  

One of you can probably word that better. 

"The only difference between a and a religion is the amount of real estate they own" - Frank Zappa

In my mind, it is any set of beliefs that hinge on faith in something that is not perceived to be "of this world".

One of you can probably word that better.

SimpJee

Not necessarily. Satanism has nothing to do with other wordly things and it certainly requires faith. A satanist needs faith in self-indulgence being the best thing for him/her. Self-indulgence is percievable by one's actions.

Religion is the formal carrying out of a shared worldview.  Sometimes a religion is only followed for social/cultural reasons but other times it is followed genuinely.

Anything that has to do with liberalism is a religion. Liberalism itself, global warming, evolutionism, socialism, atheism, secularism, the homosexual agenda, and traditional religions like Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism, except for Christianity, because it is not a religion, but a rejection of liberal values, and it is a personal relationship with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.Genetic_Code

Are you being serious here? I can't tell.:?

Are you being serious here? I can't tell.:?MetalGear_Ninty

I'm dead serious.

[spoiler] As in, my seriousness is dead, but my humor is well alive. I can't stand how some Christians get their egos from atheists, as though everything they oppose is a religion. It's a near complete reversal of definitions. [/spoiler]

Genetic_Code

NB: Darn HTML errors means I couldn't quote your post directly :x

[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"]

 

MetalGear_Ninty

NB: Darn HTML errors means I couldn't quote your post directly :x

Too late for me... Both eardrums burst before I read the spoiler. :( 

[QUOTE="SimpJee"]

In my mind, it is any set of beliefs that hinge on faith in something that is not perceived to be "of this world".

One of you can probably word that better.

dracula_16

Not necessarily. Satanism has nothing to do with other wordly things and it certainly requires faith. A satanist needs faith in self-indulgence being the best thing for him/her. Self-indulgence is percievable by one's actions.

Then why name themselves "satanists" exactly if there is no belief in at least Satan?  Seems a bit attention starved to me, if they do in fact have nothing to do with the Satan of the bible.

Then why name themselves "satanists" exactly if there is no belief in at least Satan?  Seems a bit attention starved to me, if they do in fact have nothing to do with the Satan of the bible.

SimpJee

[QUOTE="dracula_16"][QUOTE="SimpJee"]

In my mind, it is any set of beliefs that hinge on faith in something that is not perceived to be "of this world".

One of you can probably word that better.

SimpJee

Not necessarily. Satanism has nothing to do with other wordly things and it certainly requires faith. A satanist needs faith in self-indulgence being the best thing for him/her. Self-indulgence is percievable by one's actions.

Then why name themselves "satanists" exactly if there is no belief in at least Satan?  Seems a bit attention starved to me, if they do in fact have nothing to do with the Satan of the bible.

Satanism is generally taken to be the belief that Satan's rebellion against God, as described in the standard Christian story, was correct and something to be praised.  It's the belief in the ideal Satan represents, not in the literal existence of Satan.

I don't think anyone would be surprised to find Satanists in a religious jamboree, but what about Scientologists? Is that a faith, or a psychological philosophy (with added ufo interest), a swindle, a religion or a cult?

If Satanists started wearing horns as part of their religious identity, would they get motorbike crash helmet exemption, like Sikhs do in the UK?

hmm i think ill adopt this religion

Satanism is generally taken to be the belief that Satan's rebellion against God, as described in the standard Christian story, was correct and something to be praised.  It's the belief in the ideal Satan represents, not in the literal existence of Satan.

GabuEx

Then without believing in those two figures in some capacity, that religion would have no legs to stand on and would be more of a philosophy.  So, my statement still stands, Satanism is a religion because it does rely on faith in the other worldly.   

Then without believing in those two figures in some capacity, that religion would have no legs to stand on and would be more of a philosophy.  So, my statement still stands, Satanism is a religion because it does rely on faith in the other worldly.   

SimpJee

How does it rely on faith in the other worldly?  Satanism, or at least the majority Satanism, doesn't assert that God and Satan actually exist; it merely identifies with what it sees as a character in a fictional story.

How does it rely on faith in the other worldly?  Satanism, or at least the majority Satanism, doesn't assert that God and Satan actually exist; it merely identifies with what it sees as a character in a fictional story.

GabuEx

Do you have any figures about how many more atheistic satanists there are than theistic satanists?

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

How does it rely on faith in the other worldly?  Satanism, or at least the majority Satanism, doesn't assert that God and Satan actually exist; it merely identifies with what it sees as a character in a fictional story.

RationalAtheist

Do you have any figures about how many more atheistic satanists there are than theistic satanists?

 I think he is referring to LeVeyan satanism. In which case, the nonexistence of god and the devil is stated doctrine.

Do you have any figures about how many more atheistic satanists there are than theistic satanists?

Frattracide

Why should I have?

that was glitchspot misplacing the quote tags. I fixed it.Frattracide

So are you saying that LaVeyan satanists are the majority? 

Of organized satanic groups, they are most likely the largest.Frattracide

Source? Gabu seemed to be denying the minority of satanists who believe in otherworldly entities, while I believe that the many different satanist views are all equally valid. I was just trying to point out what I thought was an appeal to the majority, rather than saying anything statistical about theistic satanists.

Source? Gabu seemed to be denying the minority of satanists who believe in otherworldly entities, while I believe that the many different satanist views are all equally valid. I was just trying to point out what I thought was an appeal to the majority, rather than saying anything statistical about theistic satanists.

RationalAtheist

Well, the question is whether or not Satanism includes theistic beliefs.   The largest of the Satanist traditions is LaVeyan Satanism, which is expressly non-theist.  Of course this is an appeal to the majority, but considering that we're talking about the statistical makeup of a group of people, I don't exactly see the problem with this.

I never denied that there is a minority of Satanism who are actually theist in nature; I was only saying that most Satanists are not, and therefore that it is not correct to call Satanism theistic in its teachings.

(I'll reserve my personal comments on Satanism. :P)

Well, the question is whether or not Satanism includes theistic beliefs.   The largest of the Satanist traditions is LaVeyan Satanism, which is expressly non-theist.  Of course this is an appeal to the majority, but considering that we're talking about the statistical makeup of a group of people, I don't exactly see the problem with this.

I never denied that there is a minority of Satanism who are actually theist in nature; I was only saying that most Satanists are not, and therefore that it is not correct to call Satanism theistic in its teachings.

(I'll reserve my personal comments on Satanism. :P)

GabuEx

If you're talking statistics, I'd think LaVeyan satanists would be in a relative minority, since Laveyan satanism has only been around since 1966. But then again, I wouldn't really know either.

*edit* Personally, I would think LaVeyan satanism is more philosophy than religion. Conversely, I think "traditional" satanism is more religion than philosophy.

If you're talking statistics, I'd think LaVeyan satanists would be in a relative minority, since Laveyan satanism has only been around since 1966. But then again, I wouldn't really know either.

RationalAtheist

Satanism as a movement has not been around for very long.  There have been certain accusations in history of group X or group Y worshiping Satan (the literal entity in the Bible), but I don't know of any actual historical evidence of that being the case.  LaVeyan Satanism was basically the beginning of organized Satanism as it exists today.

*edit* Personally, I would think LaVeyan satanism is more philosophy than religion. Conversely, I think "traditional" satanism is more religion than philosophy.

RationalAtheist

"Traditional" Satanism was more or less an invention of the Catholic Church some centuries ago.  There is no evidence that I am aware of that there existed anyone, or at least any coherent group, who literally worshipped the Satan of the Christian religion and performed human sacrifice to this entity.

Satanism as a movement has not been around for very long.  There have been certain accusations in history of group X or group Y worshiping Satan (the literal entity in the Bible), but I don't know of any actual historical evidence of that being the case.  LaVeyan Satanism was basically the beginning of organized Satanism as it exists today.

GabuEx

I do - I've been actually down the deep chalk cave dug into West Wickham hill, built specifically for Hellfire club to meet in the 18th century (fascinating - I live fairly near and I've been twice!"). I also note the many UK laws passed against Witchcraft by successive monarchs, after the Protestant reformation. Also, the book "Grimoire of Honoris" was written in the 15th century:

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sworn_Book_of_Honorius)

]

"Traditional" Satanism was more or less an invention of the Catholic Church some centuries ago.  There is no evidence that I am aware of that there existed anyone, or at least any coherent group, who literally worshipped the Satan of the Christian religion and performed human sacrifice to this entity.

GabuEx

I'm not sure that human sacrifice is a requirement of all satanist groups, but there is plenty of evidence to show that people calling themselves satanists have committed satanic acts - not least in oppressed rebellion against the authority that was the Christian church in those days.

[QUOTE="SimpJee"]

Then without believing in those two figures in some capacity, that religion would have no legs to stand on and would be more of a philosophy.  So, my statement still stands, Satanism is a religion because it does rely on faith in the other worldly.   

GabuEx

How does it rely on faith in the other worldly?  Satanism, or at least the majority Satanism, doesn't assert that God and Satan actually exist; it merely identifies with what it sees as a character in a fictional story.

So it's essentially a philosophy then, ok.