Is a non-literal theology/belief system possible? Would it be a good thing?

[Kavigant]

I've discussed here my religious torment in the past, and I recently had everything turned on its head when I realized that I did not believe in the personal, anthropomorphized deity of Christianity, Judaism, or any of the other faiths I had tried to live in the past.

Perhaps only someone who has had religious faith in the past can understand how deeply I feel this loss. But, simultaneously, I somehow realized that I had spent years knowing, on some deep and neglected level, that I did not actually believe it. How had I spent so many years wishing to believe something which I did not actually believe? I'm honestly gobsmacked at how cunningly I was able to lie to myself. I'm actually ashamed and disappointed in myself.

I thought that coming to peace with (what I have come to believe to be) the non-existence of the Biblical God would be the major hurdle, but I have since the loss of my faith been able to observe unfolding how many ancillary beliefs I had which were all enabled by the god-belief.

The universe seems immeasurable colder and lonelier than it was when I was able to deceive myself into believing in a personal deity. It seems inconceivably cruel for us tiny, weak humans to be shat out onto this hard, cold rock in space and left to fend for ourselves among our only barely civilized fellows. How cruel.

But I wish to pursue truth, as best as I can perceive it, not comforting stories.

Science, while being absolutely necessary to human well-being and progress, is also a poor substitute for the human stories we need to share in order to thrive and find meaning in our lives. I welcome and praise science and its contributions to our well-being, but it seems that many of the people I am encountering online seem to have taken to science as though it's something that I don't believe it to be. Another set of beliefs to which they cling and abuse others. Present company excluded, of course.

I think that one thing that messed me up, theologically, was my black-and-white thinking, my conceptual rigidity. Religion was either 100% literally true or it was useless drivel. In all things, I am trying to become more comfortable in "the messy middle," learning to be more at peace with ambiguity.

I have to believe that there is a way to hold on to some of the good stories, concepts, etc. which have been communicated to us via religion, but without the worst manifestations of literalist interpretations.

What do you think?

 

[Kavigant]

Perhaps I'm just feeling a massive bleeding hole where my greatly-desired but likely-imagined faith resided, and I don't know whether I'm supposed to patch the hole, transplant something else into the wound, or what.

One of the few things I think I know is that I don't want to turn into what I see on almost every atheist's YouTube channel.

I'm feeling lost. As though I'm captaining a ship without modern technology and the north star has just disappeared.

 

[All-Rounder]

Well since I switched to secularism, I have found a substitute for the meaning in life which happened to be nature and each other, a sense of unity and sharing life on Earth.

But besides that I never lost my interest in studying religion but it's not uncommon as atheists become higher scoring on religious knowledge than religious people themselves on tests. So if you like it keep studying it, keep talking about it, it's definitely not a sin. i have great respect for knowledge and interest following.

Also I think some of us atheists do need the religious aspect of it, and TST openly acknowledges this and that's why lots of followers choose to involve a lot of imagery, symbolism, meaning in their practical beliefs and ways of life, statues, holidays and merchandise which are means to actually feel it and experience it in a different way. Some people aren't like that, they just want the dogma.

I am very sense oriented so these experiences to me mean a lot and relieve stress and blow off the steam of the oppressive nature of rejecting faith in favor of truth.

 

[Kavigant]

Thanks for your response, All-Rounder.
When my Evangelical Christian beliefs began to unravel, I actually joined TST and donated a bunch of money to them. But I eventually began to feel that TST had a set of political beliefs that were the polar opposite of Evangelical Christianity but just as restrictive.

I don't fit neatly into any political party - I have major complaints about every political party in my country - just as my life beliefs don't fit neatly into any religion. It just seemed to me that if the literary/romantic Satan (as a rebel and freethinker) is your inspiration, you shouldn't be expected to fit neatly within one American political party's orthodoxy. But their website and imagery did help me in slaying some of my own sacred cows.

I think I continue to have a big issue with labels and definitions and that issue makes me feel profoundly uncomfortable being a "none of the above." In moments of clear thinking, I realize that I should do what most people likely do around the issues of religion: some from Column A and some from Column B, and take as needed.

 

[All-Rounder]

I don't have any problem with the "political" beliefs as they are scientifically proven so of course I would take that side, like what's wrong with accepting variety and fighting against discrimination.

 

[All-Rounder]

I have a problem with labels but there are ones which fit me quite well in the TST, so I find that like not being white or black in the sense of offending\taking offence is part of what I believe in because sometimes you have to speak your mind.

But I find community to be a strength, and I like the feeling of it. I'm an introvert who is socially oriented, if it makes sense. But in rl I'd have to do a lot of work and I'd need resources to fulfill that desire.

 

[Outdated]

Going back to your title question about non-literal beliefs. The oldest belief system on the planet that is still being praticed has been going for more than 60,000 years now, and up until 150 years ago these people were illiterate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Aboriginal_religion_and_mythology

 

[All-Rounder]

The explanation is that Satan loves us as we are, so he loves us regardless of gender, disability, disease, flaws and already accepts us better than some theistic communities and parents which would shun us.

And I love saying it, Satan loves me as I am.

 

[All-Rounder]

But I like how fun and creative The Church of the Spaghetti Monster is. You seem like you're into it as well.

 

[Kavigant]

The explanation is that Satan loves us as we are, so he loves us regardless of gender, disability, disease, flaws and already accepts us better than some theistic communities and parents which would shun us.

And I love saying it, Satan loves me as I am.

I am curious about this statement. I'm pretty sure that both the Satanic Temple and the Church of Satan (both of which I've been a member of in the past) are entirely atheistic and neither believes in an actual Satan, yet you say that Satan loves you. In what sense do you mean that Satan loves you?

 

[Kavigant]

Going back to your title question about non-literal beliefs. The oldest belief system on the planet that is still being praticed has been going for more than 60,000 years now, and up until 150 years ago these people were illiterate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Aboriginal_religion_and_mythology

I was a student of Chaos Magick for some time and am fascinated by the idea of animism as the basis of a sort of non-scripturally-based participatory metaphysics.

But I am concerned that I might just be trying to fill the void left by my losing my faith with a kind of woo instead.

 

[Outdated]

I never had any religious beliefs to start with so I can't really relate, but when I read the title question that answer jumped out at me as what you were specifically asking for. Maybe it will give you some things to ponder, traditional aboriginal people have very strong ties to the land and they believe that they are responsible for everything that happens to it. And they don't have a god that they can pray to, they have to find answers within themselves.

 

[Neonatal RRT]

Is a non-literal theology/belief system possible? Would it be a good thing?

One, I love this forum, for there are those on here who ask some rather deep questions. Hypothetically, I would embrace a belief system in which one of the primary tenants was something on the order of "Truth, above all else". In this case, I don't think it would involve any sort of god or gods, creator(s), nor idols. However, it would be something on the order of a way of living one's life, so there could be some parallels with religions, in this regard. Stoicism comes to mind as an example.

Is it possible? I think it could be. However, followers would have to be highly disciplined individuals. That limits the number of followers to a small percentage of the population, I presume. Most humans are not highly disciplined and tend to allow their emotions affect their behavior, rather than logic. Human nature, instincts, personality profiles, cognitive biases, are just some of the confounding variables to "success and failure" of the individual and/or the belief system. Understanding what makes up "truth", for example, is not as easy to define, as each person may be examining the same truth from different perspectives.

Would it be a good thing? It depends upon the individual, as I don't believe it would be a universal experience. We find this phenomenon with individuals today, folks seeking something that "fits" with their personality profile and cognitive biases, and why there are many religions and belief systems to choose from. Humans tend to be intellectually lazy in the sense that they are rarely interested in changing their behaviors, but rather would search for a religion that allows them to be who they are without having to change or challenge their current belief system and cognitive biases. This is why, personally, I don't practice any religion, nor do I condemn any religion that promotes its followers to be peaceful and altruistic. Sometimes religious beliefs literally keep an individual's mind intact during the most challenging periods of their lives. There are times when there might not be anything left to "hang onto" but their faith, hope, and optimism that perhaps "This too, shall pass and I will be stronger for it.", but also that death is a transition from one state to another and in those final moments perhaps there is some acceptance. It is from this perspective, the transition to death, that religions tend to have advantages over a "belief system". One might oversimplify and say that the belief system is for the living and the religion component is for the dead.

I have some other thoughts on this topic, but I will have some others to chime in here.

 

[RemyZee]

Back in the day religion was, still is, a thing for me--as someone raised in the Bible belt, who questioned my religious culture and was expected to absorb the theology instinctively. My family and friends, neighbors, pretty much everyone where I grew up was bound to their religion even when it was obviously ridiculous, or made no sense. But I do have to say, what I miss about religion is the rituals and this sense that by doing a ritual you are kind of like engaging history and engaging all these people who have done the rituals before. I go to a unitarian church now, and don't really have such a strong sense of connection with the rituals there like I did in the Christian church. In terms of Aboriginal spirituality, I first heard about the dreamtime and the songlines and paintings in my 20's, and since then I have always felt this weird compulsion about that description of and fixation on it. In terms of non literal theology, I don't know where you'd really find something like that, maybe Buddhism, but it seems like the nature of theology in itself it literalism.

 

[All-Rounder]

I am curious about this statement. I'm pretty sure that both the Satanic Temple and the Church of Satan (both of which I've been a member of in the past) are entirely atheistic and neither believes in an actual Satan, yet you say that Satan loves you. In what sense do you mean that Satan loves you?

You're correct, about everything. There are exceptions I guess, like some devil worshippers or people who believe in mythical stuff, paranormal but that's practically against TST tenet about being the closest to one's ability for scientific understanding.

Saying it is like more a religious thing, and it fulfills and breeds acceptance. When I say it it's like I am in the right place where people are loving and do not say that "you're a sinner and that's why you have disease" or "god is punishing\satan is tormenting people" or that it's deserved or that gods are entitled to harm and kill and it would be a good thing since they created us. It's more of a statement that we are fine as we are, with our instincts and within the material body we have.

 

[FoxLovinPat]

I'll start off by saying that currently I identify as an agnostic atheist, though I was raised as Catholic. I don't really believe in the Christian God anymore as he comes off as rather cruel now that I've had time away from the religion to examine it and do some research on it.
I haven't completely gotten rid of the belief in a god though, as I now think there could maybe be a god or even gods that created the universe but that they don't have an active role in it anymore for one reason or another.

I guess the reason I haven't gone full athiest yet and still believe there could maybe be a higher power of done kind of because I'm not yet willing to let go of my belief of an afterlife of some kind. It's hard for me to let go of that hope and allows myself to believe that death is truly the end and that there's nothing after it. It's just sad to think about, and at the very least I'd like to be able to see my biological parents again so I can maybe get a chance to meet them and to learn if they're proud of who I became and if they're supportive and accepting of who I am since as it is rn I can't really know anymore.
And well if there's an afterlife then maybe there's still some sort of higher power too, and I choose to believe said being/s wouldn't necessarily have all these arbitrary rules that we need to live by in order to reach said afterlife, or if there were such rules then it'd simply be the golden rule essentially.

Long story short (though I can go into more details if anyone is interested) the reason I left my faith behind is because I realized that my moral beliefs were different from the moral beliefs of the faith I was raised in, namely they I didn't believe that certain things were wrong and "sinful" and couldn't bring myself to find fault in them. Definitely didn't help my want to stay in the faith that I hated a certain aspect of myself and put myself down due to the religion I was raised in.

I dunno what else I can add to this conversation right now though, but perhaps I'll think of something.

 

[WhitewaterWoman]

You might want to read up on Unitarian Universalists.

From Wikipedia:

Unitarian Universalism(otherwise referred to as UUism[1] or UU)[7][8][9] is a liberal religious movement[1]characterized by a "free and responsible search for truth and meaning".[10][11] Unitarian Universalists assert no creed,[2]but instead are unified by their shared search for spiritual growth.[1][3][12] Unitarian Universalists do not have an official, unified corpus of sacred texts[2]. Unitarian Universalist congregations include many atheists, agnostics, deists, and theists; there are churches, fellowships, congregations, and societies around the world.[1][12

 

[Kavigant]

Although I find the concept of a Deity who behaves and reasons much like a super-powered human being to be either absurd or terrifying at this point, I want to emphasize that I have no bad feelings toward people who are believers in such a Deity. I have met some truly amazing, generous, accepting, and genuinely loving people amongst the religiously observant of various types.

At present, I am still open to certain ideas/concepts that are not fully aligned with a purely scientific/atheistic worldview:

* I am open to the possibility that human consciousness is non-local, ie - the possibility that our brains are not purely generators of our consciousness so much as receivers of consciousness. (you can Google "non-local consciousness" if you are curious, or find some excellent YouTube videos by folks like Bernardo Kastrup)

* I am open to the possibility that some form or portion of what we consider our individual consciousness may survive/transcend the process of the death of our bodies.

* I am open to the possibility that human consciousness may have some (probably tiny) effect on what we perceive to be reality. IOW the possibility that reality is in some way "shaped" by being filtered through our consciousness.

* I am open to the possibility of other intelligences which are not bound to corporeal bodies. If such intelligences exist, they may explain the almost omnipresent human belief in non-physical entities with which some subset of humanity may have the ability to interact.

* I am open to the possibility that none of these bulleted possibilities are true, and that we live in a purely mechanistic universe and that our only afterlife is as tiny elemental particles which will someday comprise a bug, a squirrel, or a pile of dung.

I have hesitated to share some of these possibilities because it seems to me that all of the online atheists I've found ruthlessly mock any but the most materialist conceptions of reality. As usual, I seem to be stuck in an "in-between" space; not fitting neatly into any existing categories, leaving me profoundly uncomfortable.

As an aside, I'm a bisexual male and while I was willing to deny my same-sex attraction during the time that I believed that it was against Yahweh's will, one of the things that caused me to reject my old religious beliefs is the fact that I would be unwilling to cause pain to any of my children over their sexuality if any of them had turned out to be gay.

 

[Kavigant]

You might want to read up on Unitarian Universalists.

From Wikipedia:

Unitarian Universalism(otherwise referred to as UUism[1] or UU)[7][8][9] is a liberal religious movement[1]characterized by a "free and responsible search for truth and meaning".[10][11] Unitarian Universalists assert no creed,[2]but instead are unified by their shared search for spiritual growth.[1][3][12] Unitarian Universalists do not have an official, unified corpus of sacred texts[2]. Unitarian Universalist congregations include many atheists, agnostics, deists, and theists; there are churches, fellowships, congregations, and societies around the world.[1][12

I shall investigate the reasoning behind UU. I find myself wondering whether the work I truly need to do is to become more at peace with not fitting into any existent groups. Maybe being truly myself will result in a certain amount of isolation which is inevitable. My wife and my kids "get me" and love me, for which I am immeasurably grateful, but I don't think I can ever be a part of any larger community unless I just never share my beliefs and opinions, because I simply cannot seem to be an "orthodox" member of any group while also being true to myself.

Every group I've ever met that claims to welcome misfits and oddballs of all sorts has its own set of inviolable orthodoxies, its own creed (even if only unspoken) the breaking of which results in various degrees of shunning. Every group.

 

[Cryptid]

[1] In the Beginning, there was Nothing.
[2] Then it exploded, and there was Light.
[3] There was still Nothing, but you could see it a whole lot better.

-- Terry Pratchett (paraphrased)