Atheist in a God-based Religion

[GingerRose]

Is it possible, or has anyone tried it~ to be an atheist in a religion that was created on the basis of having a God?

I think about this because as i am studying syncretism of religion and finding my own spiritual path I find that though I have stopped believing in deities, I still connect to other celebrations, features, or morals of a religion, but without the God part. Example: connecting to Ramadan and meditation of art forms, but not believing in Allah within Islam or Sufism.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, GingerRose said:

I still connect to other celebrations, features, or morals of a religion, but without the God part. 

This explains me.

[GingerRose]

2 minutes ago, sallimae76 said:

This explains me.

What religion were you part of or you are part of?

[Sarah-Sylvia]

I think it's a contradiction by definition to be atheist in a religion.

Why not just say you're spiritual and ditch religion? Then you can be however you want

[eldritchsleep]

Judaism has something known as Secular Judaism which is all the Jewish culture (holidays, diets, language, etc.) but without the theistic beliefs or the idea that the Jewish people are chosen and it also doesn't recognize the Hebrew Bible as divine but instead as more of a historical or cultural background. Secular Jews will still celebrate the holidays, some even remain kosher, and they might even still wear Jewish garments still (like tzitzit/tassels) all as cultural identifiers instead of religious.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, GingerRose said:

What religion were you part of or you are part of?

Christianity. 

[eldritchsleep]

4 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

Why not just say you're spiritual and ditch religion?

Because for some religion is more than the beliefs themselves or the spirituality, it can be the culture and atmosphere too, especially in highly ritualistic or community based religions like Judaism, Islam, and Catholicism. I know people who don't believe in a god but still want to go to their religious houses of worship with family and participate in the holidays, rituals, and prayers they were raised in because it is habit. For example, a lot of people raised Christian will still celebrate Christmas and Easter even if they are atheist.

[LeChat]

Hi. Do you mean this thread or something different?

 

https://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/200787-spiritualreligious-atheists/

 

36 minutes ago, GingerRose said:

...I still connect to other celebrations, features, or morals of a religion, but without the God part. Example: connecting to Ramadan and meditation of art forms, but not believing in Allah within Islam or Sufism.

I don't know whether this is what you're looking for, but I've grown up celebrating holidays that are considered religious (e.g. Christmas, Easter), without practicing the religion or believing in it, myself, more about trying to enjoy celebrating with family, sharing and enjoying food, gifts, playing games together, etc.

 

I've tried meditation, since it was recommended by some therapists for things like anxiety, but I don't keep up with it; I prefer relaxing in other ways, doing different hobbies, like walking and listening to audiobooks.

[Sarah-Sylvia]

9 minutes ago, eldritchsleep said:

Because for some religion is more than the beliefs themselves or the spirituality, it can be the culture and atmosphere too, especially in highly ritualistic or community based religions like Judaism, Islam, and Catholicism. I know people who don't believe in a god but still want to go to their religious houses of worship with family and participate in the holidays, rituals, and prayers they were raised in because it is habit. For example, a lot of people raised Christian will still celebrate Christmas and Easter even if they are atheist.

Well yeah but then you're not part of the religion, you're just celebrating those events.
I guess you're saying someone might still 'identify' as those (let's say christian in example) to do those things, but then you're literally going against the most fundamental part of the religion, which is the belief in the deity. I don't see anything wrong with celebrating an event as someone who doesn't identify with the religion tho.

[eldritchsleep]

4 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

 but then you're literally going against the most fundamental part of the religion, which is the belief in the deity.

Perhaps but that would depend on the individuals belief. If you don't believe in the deity then the most fundamental part of the religion might be the moral guidance and communion. In fact, there are multiple secular and atheistic religions anyways so the idea that deities are fundamental to religion isn't necessarily true. Philosophical Taoism would be a good example, while other forms of Taoism do believe in deities the Philosophical Taoists do not and Taoism most definitely does not believe that the deities are fundamental to the religion, even the ones who do believe in them. It's probably going to be more of the Abrahamic religions that view god as being fundamental or central, honestly.

[GingerRose]

25 minutes ago, sallimae76 said:

Christianity. 

Are you still defining as a Christian? What aspects do you enjoy that are not related to God?

[GingerRose]

26 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

atheist in a religion.

There are spiritual atheists, as not all religions have gods.

Yes, am to some extent ditching religion, I'm studying syncretism which is about combining aspects of different religions and spirtualities to make my own belief system.

[GingerRose]

29 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

Then you can be however you want

Right now, different than it was before, religion isn't limiting me, it's giving me new insights into what I want to add to my life from it.

[Sarah-Sylvia]

8 minutes ago, eldritchsleep said:

Perhaps but that would depend on the individuals belief. If you don't believe in the deity then the most fundamental part of the religion might be the moral guidance and communion. In fact, there are multiple secular and atheistic religions anyways so the idea that deities are fundamental to religion isn't necessarily true. Philosophical Taoism would be a good example, while other forms of Taoism do believe in deities the Philosophical Taoists do not and Taoism most definitely does not believe that the deities are fundamental to the religion, even the ones who do believe in them. It's probably going to be more of the Abrahamic religions that view god as being fundamental or central, honestly.

 

3 minutes ago, GingerRose said:

There are spiritual atheists, as not all religions have gods.

Yes, am to some extent ditching religion, I'm studying syncretism which is about combining aspects of different religions and spirtualities to make my own belief system.

That's fine, if that's how those religions have come to be. But I meant more for ones that exist already and are centered around the deity.

I think that syncretism makes more sense than being in one particular religion, since it's limited belief, though personally I think religion and rituals are limiting, because any belief is limiting. The truth can only be found in openness. Doesn't mean someone can't put different weight to different ideas though.

[GingerRose]

14 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

which is the belief in the deity.

Jainism doesn't  have a deity, neither does Buddhism, or some druids, or some Wiccans,

[aring91]

Some people consider buddhism to be a from of atheism so it's possible to belong to a faith and being an atheist, also some people still identify with the religion they grew up in while not believing aspects of the religion because they like the community. 

 

I'm still pantheist either way   

[GingerRose]

1 minute ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

limited belief

Agreed, a lot of the time people feel the need to shove themselves into boxes to fit into their religious creed or rules, even hurt or change themselves. While I am striving off that path of still finding importance in religion, but not limiting myself to one...quite like myself as a panromantic..lol

[GingerRose]

But let me return to my point.

I used to be a part of Islam, now I don't follow Allah, but there are parts of Islam~Sufism that are still meaningful to me that I want to practice. Is it possible to follow a religion without God when God was main idea?

[aring91]

Just now, GingerRose said:

But let me return to my point.

I used to be a part of Islam, now I don't follow Allah, but there are parts of Islam~Sufism that are still meaningful to me that I want to practice. Is it possible to follow a religion without God when God was main idea?

I mean anything is possible and you can follow whatever you want others in the religion may disagree with it but I don't think they are mutually exclusive. 

[Sarah-Sylvia]

5 minutes ago, GingerRose said:

Agreed, a lot of the time people feel the need to shove themselves into boxes to fit into their religious creed or rules, even hurt or change themselves. While I am striving off that path of still finding importance in religion, but not limiting myself to one...quite like myself as a panromantic..lol

That's a good way to put it, if you find importance in it or some parts of religion, I can't see that in a bad way When we find value, then that's worth something.

I'm biromantic so maybe I get what you mean I'm still a bit superficial so it does still matter if someone is a gender, it's just I'll try to appreciate it and them how they are XD
 

3 minutes ago, GingerRose said:

But let me return to my point.

I used to be a part of Islam, now I don't follow Allah, but there are parts of Islam~Sufism that are still meaningful to me that I want to practice. Is it possible to follow a religion without God when God was main idea?

If god is the mainstay of the religion, can you really say you follow it? But there's nothing wrong with considering yourself part of the rest of the religion, but I'm pretty sure the followers might have a problem if you admit you don't believe in their god. Maybe there's a way to phrase what it so that it makes sense? I dunno.

[eldritchsleep]

1 minute ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

 

That's fine, if that's how those religions have come to be. But I meant more for ones that exist already and are centered around the deity.

 

though personally I think religion and rituals are limiting, because any belief is limiting. The truth can only be found in openness. 

Right, I was just meaning that people adopting a secular form of the theistic religion they were raised in, although possibly sacrilegious to their fellow members, can still be just as fulfilling. How someone identifies their beliefs is ultimately up to them. If they want to recognize as a secular Christian, power to them. Maybe they use the Jefferson Bible lol

Yeah, I personally am an atheist who doesn't hold onto past religious models except for holidays with immediate family. I'm also more on the anti-theist side on top of it so I definitely would agree that religious dogma and rituals can be limiting although I suspect we might mean for different reasons.

[erichamion]

17 minutes ago, eldritchsleep said:

Perhaps but that would depend on the individuals belief.

It would really depend on the consensus belief within the specific religious community. Yes, there are some religions that don't have a god. Yes, there are even some sects of Christianity that don't believe in (or don't require a belief in) God. But try to practice as openly atheist in, say, a Southern Baptist church, and you'll very soon find that your individual beliefs as to what constitutes the fundamentals don't really matter. If you don't believe in God, you are not part of (their particular version of) their religion.

 

Of course, you can practice personally, outside of an organized group. Or you can attend services but not reveal what you actually believe (although I don't understand why a person would do that). Or you can find a different group that more closely matches your beliefs.

[Sarah-Sylvia]

1 minute ago, eldritchsleep said:

 I'm also more on the anti-theist side on top of it so I definitely would agree that religious dogma and rituals can be limiting although I suspect we might mean for different reasons.

You think? I don't know, it's possible. I am spiritual, it's just .. I dunno, it's easy to see how limiting religion can be XD. I don't abide by any model I've seen, and keep it open to the love and wisdom that makes sense for me for more.. divinity to exist in the world. I do give some weight to micheal newton's work through hypnotherapy though, that's like the only spiritual research that has made sense up to now for me.

[eldritchsleep]

1 minute ago, ER2742 said:

Of course, you can practice personally, outside of an organized group. Or you can find a group that more closely matches your beliefs.

People raised Southern Baptist who then become atheist probably aren't going to identify as that specific religion anymore and in general a secular (or even agnostic) Christian would probably just adopt the "Christian" title in general. I agree, they would probably not actively participate in the church.

That being said, 

 

7 minutes ago, GingerRose said:

Is it possible to follow a religion without God when God was main idea?

My best friend is Muslim and was raised in a Muslim household. Although he himself still "believes" in Allah,his sister most definitely does not yet they still all consider themselves Muslim and still participate in the religion as much as they can despite not believing in Allah. So it is possible and it completely depends on the Mosque, the Imam, and the family. If your family is accepting and those in your community are accepting and you still want to be Muslim, then I see no harm in it. But that is just my opinion. My short answer would be Yes. And many closet atheists do this regularly, including pastors and priests and so on.

[eldritchsleep]

4 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

You think? I don't know, it's possible. I am spiritual, it's just .. I dunno, it's easy to see how limiting religion can be XD. I don't abide by any model I've seen, and keep it open to the love and wisdom that makes sense for me for more.. divinity to exist in the world. I do give some weight to micheal newton's work through hypnotherapy though, that's like the only spiritual research that has made sense up to now for me.

I personally think I'm too analytical. I've actively wanted to believe there was something spiritual, supernatural, paranormal, or divine in the cosmos but I know I can't necessarily choose my beliefs on a cognitive level. I don't believe such things exist, I'm pretty evidence based and believe in natural processes. I don't rule out the possibility that such things might exist, but i definitely have no reason to believe they do and would argue the contrary. I believe gods are in our mind, a more Jungian interpretation of them.

[Sarah-Sylvia]

4 minutes ago, eldritchsleep said:

I personally think I'm too analytical. I've actively wanted to believe there was something spiritual, supernatural, paranormal, or divine in the cosmos but I know I can't necessarily choose my beliefs on a cognitive level. I don't believe such things exist, I'm pretty evidence based and believe in natural processes. I don't rule out the possibility that such things might exist, but i definitely have no reason to believe they do and would argue the contrary. I believe gods are in our mind, a more Jungian interpretation of them.

There is evidence through hypnotherapy. To me it's significant enough to believe in spirituality. That said, the absence of evidence is not evidence for the contrary. That's to say, it's more rational to keep open to what's possible than to believe divinity doesn't exist. (ideas in holy books are just ideas though)

[eldritchsleep]

Just now, Sarah-Sylvia said:

There is evidence through hypnotherapy. 

That's where the Jungian interpretation of divinity would come in for me, that is a shared archetype of the subconscious that we have developed over time either through evolution or as a socially shared concept.

 

Although it is true that the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence, I hold the position that the time to believe is when sufficient evidence of the belief is present. To me, gods are on the same level of mythology as dragons, fairies, leprechauns, unicorns, centaurs, and so on. Sure such things could potentially exist (or did), but I won't believe it until I see one. Same with deities and other such things for me. However, I did not mean to necessarily go down this road since I feel it is getting off topic.

 

But that could also be why I hold the position I do on anyone can practice any religion whether they believe in the god or not. Many people select what they do and don't believe from their holy books to begin with (for example, many Christians don't believe in the literal creation story, a literal flood, or even the existence of Leviathan and Behemoth who are mentioned in the bible) so what's the difference in that and taking a step further in also not believing in the deity itself? You can respect the teachings of Jesus without believe he 1) Was divine and even 2) Existed.

[Sarah-Sylvia]

9 minutes ago, eldritchsleep said:

That's where the Jungian interpretation of divinity would come in for me, that is a shared archetype of the subconscious that we have developed over time either through evolution or as a socially shared concept.

 

Although it is true that the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence, I hold the position that the time to believe is when sufficient evidence of the belief is present. To me, gods are on the same level of mythology as dragons, fairies, leprechauns, unicorns, centaurs, and so on. Sure such things could potentially exist (or did), but I won't believe it until I see one. Same with deities and other such things for me. However, I did not mean to necessarily go down this road since I feel it is getting off topic.

 

But that could also be why I hold the position I do on anyone can practice any religion whether they believe in the god or not. Many people select what they do and don't believe from their holy books to begin with (for example, many Christians don't believe in the literal creation story, a literal flood, or even the existence of Leviathan and Behemoth who are mentioned in the bible) so what's the difference in that and taking a step further in also not believing in the deity itself? You can respect the teachings of Jesus without believe he 1) Was divine and even 2) Existed.

Well sure, to me gods are lore, and probably personified by humans, since they tend to do that. Doesn't mean I'm going to believe that divinity doesn't exist, since I think a purely materialist belief doesn't explain how life and consciousness can happen, and we only have lore for that too, like the primordial soup idea.
In any case, I think that some parts of a religion are just too fundamental to go as far as you're talking about (at least for some of them, that center around the deity)

If you would read into micheal newton's work, which i think is one of the best for hypnotherapy that goes into spirituality, what was found through people's forgotten memories actually doesn't follow  anything that's been developed as shared concepts, and overall I think is enough evidence to believe that spirituality exists, that is to say we are souls that live beyond human bodies, and that there is a spiritual realm.

[eldritchsleep]

1 minute ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

If you would read into micheal newton's work, which i think is one of the best for hypnotherapy that goes into spirituality, what was found through people's forgotten memories actually doesn't follow  anything that's been developed as shared concepts or whatever, and overall I think is enough evidence to believe that spirituality exists, that is to say we are souls that live beyond human bodies, and that there is a spiritual realm.

That is definitely interesting, I will have to look into it. I would also suggest you look into Jung's works (such as the Red Book and Aions) and see how it compares if you have not already. (As a side note, even if spirits exist, it still goes a long way for me to say that deities exist or even the possibility of them. I'll see what Micheal Newton's works say, however).

[Sarah-Sylvia]

Just now, eldritchsleep said:

That is definitely interesting, I will have to look into it. I would also suggest you look into Jung's works (such as the Red Book and Aions) and see how it compares if you have not already. (As a side note, even if spirits exist, it still goes a long way for me to say that deities exist or even the possibility of them. I'll see what Micheal Newton's works say, however).

Cool. Sure you got me curious, I do find things around the subconcious to be interesting.
And yeah I don't know what to think about deities either. When I talk about divinity, I'm fully aware that I'm using ideas for it, centered around what I think is 'good', towards a greater level, if that makes sense. I always try to think of things like love, wisdom, harmony, acceptance, excellence, etc.