PDA

View Full Version : Is There A Neutral Religion Exist?



Bartmanhomer
15 Mar 2019, 15:32
Is there a neutral religion exist anywhere on this planet? You know a religion that balances good and evil.

Shahaku
15 Mar 2019, 16:34
Grey witchcraft may fall into this category. Shamanism and Buddhism may as well.

Sollomyn
15 Mar 2019, 17:54
Atheism and Agnosticism are pretty neutral.

Sean R. R.
15 Mar 2019, 20:20
Luciferianism tends to lean towards that.

Corvus
16 Mar 2019, 08:26
This very much depends on how you define good and evil. There's no real, popular, religion which would purposely do evil. However, there have been many with different ideas of what constitutes virtuous action. The question itself is eurocentric and cannot easily apply to non-western religious theory. Many faiths simply do not use the same moral code, either due to a different set of values, or that such a binary structure is antithetical to how morality is viewed in that group. Using the above example, Buddhism does little to concern itself with evil, it does however concern itself with compassion and the removal of vice. As a result Buddhists engage in what would be considered good activity even though their religious moral system isn't especially comparable to our system of western morality. The concept of karma underlies many of the dharmic religions and it is not a simple system of binary morality, moreso it is the universal application of cause and effect to morality which does not cast judgement, so much as compare something's degree of deviation from the point of cosmic order. It is entirely foreign to the western system. Does that make it neutral? I would caution against comparing apples to oranges, as it were. Cultural relativism is key.

There's certainly a number of religions that seek a balance of sorts, but this is not a question of morality. People and societies as a whole wish to be good and to do good. Evil in it's original meaning is abhorrence and harm, to both the doer and those receiving it. To use another example from above, Satanist based philosophies reject the Abrahamic system of morality believing it is an oppressive and self-sacrificing system which serves to empower and preserve the status quo and quash individualism. It is inherently countercultural, however this isn't to say that it has no moral system only that the use of it's moral imperative should be contextualized based on time and purpose. It's conception of what constitutes virtuous behavior is individual based instead of institutional. As a result, a Satanist may be morally justified in culture to engage in selfish actions which would be considered sinful in the more common Christian morality. In whatever case though, the general idea is not to be "balanced" or actively do evil but, to seek the appropriate personal good.

None of this is to say that evil has no place in these religions, or that evil cannot serve to underlay a system of religious moral principle. On the contrary, there are those who have noted evil must be contextualized in any faith. The conclusion many groups come to is that evil exists in the world, though on occasion many disagree on what exact forms it may take, and that people do sometimes do evil. It is necessary that a religion accommodate for this, to explain or place it within a point of cosmic order. In the case of some religions it is a point of "why do bad things happen?" in others it's a point of "bad things happen, but where and when is it societally or cosmically permissible?" in either case a person must also determine in what manner they interact with it. The most important subject is that no religion as a whole will advocate that people willingly engage in what it morally would consider evil. There are those which believe evil is inevitably perpetrated by humans and seek to produce an outlet for it in their system of order, however it is never the goal to simply do evil, rather it is a human element to overcome, or an inevitable human element to be restricted to a socially permissible state.

faye_cat
16 Mar 2019, 09:15
Honestly, any religion could be considered grey since the definition of good and evil are subjective and not definite.

iris
16 Mar 2019, 10:17
I think that depends entirely on what good and evil are to you. The way I see it, the world isn't black and white, or good and evil, so that's really difficult to do. The first thing that came to mind for me was satanism
though, but there are lots of religions that strive for some kind of healthy ballance. I don't think you'll find the neutral religion anywhere though. the concepts of good and evil are too subjective.



On a sidenote, does my text look green to anyone else or is my computer being weird? I didn't do anything different than usual.

monsno_leedra
16 Mar 2019, 12:14
I think that depends entirely on what good and evil are to you. The way I see it, the world isn't black and white, or good and evil, so that's really difficult to do. The first thing that came to mind for me was satanism

though, but there are lots of religions that strive for some kind of healthy ballance. I don't think you'll find the neutral religion anywhere though. the concepts of good and evil are too subjective.



On a sidenote, does my text look green to anyone else or is my computer being weird? I didn't do anything different than usual.



Off topic but your text is looking green to me

- - - Updated - - -

I think you also have to separate the idea of religion and dogma within a religion or spiritual system. If you look at the religion or spiritual system the idea's of good or evil often tend to be balanced it's the dogma put in place to address those idea's where I see the balance goes out of whack myself.

MaskedOne
16 Mar 2019, 12:36
I think that depends entirely on what good and evil are to you. The way I see it, the world isn't black and white, or good and evil, so that's really difficult to do. The first thing that came to mind for me was satanism
though, but there are lots of religions that strive for some kind of healthy ballance. I don't think you'll find the neutral religion anywhere though. the concepts of good and evil are too subjective.



On a sidenote, does my text look green to anyone else or is my computer being weird? I didn't do anything different than usual.


You managed to acquire a variety of odd formmatting tags and color tags around half your text. I've negated most of them.

ThorsSon
17 Mar 2019, 10:08
Atheism and Agnosticism are pretty neutral.I get where you come from, but neither one is actually a religion, but descriptors regarding the devine, in the context of a faith (or non-faith).

I am an agnostic atheist (meaning that I do not believe, but do not believe that it can be proven)
most Christians that I know are agnostic theists (meaning that they believe, but do not believe it can be proven)
some are gnostic theist (not just talking about the Gnostics), and some are gnostic athiests.

additionally, many Buddhists are atheists.

atheism and agnosticism aren't religions.

Sollomyn
17 Mar 2019, 16:31
I get where you come from, but neither one is actually a religion, but descriptors regarding the devine, in the context of a faith (or non-faith).

I am an agnostic atheist (meaning that I do not believe, but do not believe that it can be proven)
most Christians that I know are agnostic theists (meaning that they believe, but do not believe it can be proven)
some are gnostic theist (not just talking about the Gnostics), and some are gnostic athiests.

additionally, many Buddhists are atheists.

atheism and agnosticism aren't religions.

Good point. I just can't think of any religions that are neutral in terms of good and evil. Mostly, because the very nature of religion is anything but neutral, and often used by others to learn the difference between good and evil, thus most religions lean towards the side of whatever they think "good" is, which in our culture, could be "evil."

The second reason is because I just plain don't believe in good and evil, so it's just about impossible for me to give an example of neutrality on the subject, especially in regards to religion haha. The closest thing I could come up with would be atheism or agnosticism; anything else is going to try to push an agenda of some kind; if the OP wants neutrality, they shouldn't want a religion haha.

Ula
18 Mar 2019, 06:24
The Norse/Germanic pre-Christians viewed life in terms of chaos and order. Not really good/ evil.

ThorsSon
18 Mar 2019, 11:35
Good point. I just can't think of any religions that are neutral in terms of good and evil. Mostly, because the very nature of religion is anything but neutral, and often used by others to learn the difference between good and evil, thus most religions lean towards the side of whatever they think "good" is, which in our culture, could be "evil."

The second reason is because I just plain don't believe in good and evil, so it's just about impossible for me to give an example of neutrality on the subject, especially in regards to religion haha. The closest thing I could come up with would be atheism or agnosticism; anything else is going to try to push an agenda of some kind; if the OP wants neutrality, they shouldn't want a religion haha.

Buddhism is remarkably neutral, from what I understand. It is about enlightenment, not about good/evil.
Satanism is remarkably similar in goal to Buddhism, although with a much heavier Libertarian bent (being a Libertarian atheist... maybe this is why I get along with Satanists so well).

Corvus
18 Mar 2019, 17:52
The Norse/Germanic pre-Christians viewed life in terms of chaos and order. Not really good/ evil.

There is a school of thought which concludes all religion exists in the context of order and chaos. The modern, western, conception of moral dichotomy is not what was followed in most places through history, though even these modern ideas of "goodness" can be seen as expressions upholding social and divine order.

Sollomyn
18 Mar 2019, 21:37
Buddhism is remarkably neutral, from what I understand. It is about enlightenment, not about good/evil.
Satanism is remarkably similar in goal to Buddhism, although with a much heavier Libertarian bent (being a Libertarian atheist... maybe this is why I get along with Satanists so well).

From what I understand, truly following the Buddhist path is incredibly hard due to being incredibly boring in that it derives you of certain liberties, like having sex whenever you want, eating whatever you want, or partying and having a blast, or striving towards higher ambitions and goals. Buddhism seems to be a path of simply existing on Earth as peacefully as humanly possible haha. I admire and commend adherents of Buddhism for their commitments to their vows, but I also feel it's a bitof an extreme path; with ironically, not very much balance to it. I just personally wouldn't be able to be a part of something that's based on suppressing carnal desires.

Satanism though, I deeply enjoy the company of Satanists haha. They are pretty balanced in terms of "good" and "evil"; they seem to understand that there's a proper time and place for everything, no matter how horrible, or how cruel it may seem. Surely one should always strive for less extreme alternatives, but I believe sometimes there is no other choice but to embrace the darkness, returning to the light (or twilight haha) once the job that needs to be done is finished. The only thing that bothers me about Satanists is that I haven't met very many who seem capable of pulling themselves back out of the darkness once it has served it's purpose. Some can, for sure, but a lot seem to just be delinquents who want to shock their parents to get more attention, or something like that haha. For that, I cautiously support Satanic philosophies; I try to see the good points of all religions I come across; in the past I tended to focus on just the negative aspects and was very anti-religious haha.

B. de Corbin
19 Mar 2019, 01:30
From what I understand, truly following the Buddhist path is incredibly hard due to being incredibly boring in that it derives you of certain liberties, like having sex whenever you want, eating whatever you want, or partying and having a blast, or striving towards higher ambitions and goals. Buddhism seems to be a path of simply existing on Earth as peacefully as humanly possible haha. I admire and commend adherents of Buddhism for their commitments to their vows, but I also feel it's a bitof an extreme path; with ironically, not very much balance to it. I just personally wouldn't be able to be a part of something that's based on suppressing carnal desires.

I don't think you understand the whole point of Buddhism. To understand what you are talking about, you may want to explore the Four Noble Truths. Haha.

Sollomyn
19 Mar 2019, 05:18
I don't think you understand the whole point of Buddhism. To understand what you are talking about, you may want to explore the Four Noble Truths. Haha.

You're right, I probably don't; I've only looked into it briefly. Thanks for the tip; I'll look into the Four Noble Truths some other time; sounds too simple to not be a little more complicated than that though, haha. If I recall correctly, there's also multiple types of buddhism, too; I could have just been looking at one of the really stringent ones.

thalassa
21 Mar 2019, 07:03
Is there a neutral religion exist anywhere on this planet? You know a religion that balances good and evil.


I practice a bioregional witchcraft rooted in deep ecology, an agnostic/pantheistic concept of existence, and a polytheistic religious humanist ritual practice. Good and evil are human constructs, and as such, have whatever value we assign them.

Optimistic discord
01 Apr 2019, 11:07
If we look at European Saxon/Norse faiths, once you get outside the cults of the nobility and warrior classes, faith becomes a lot more practical.
Focus shifts to local wights and their ilk.
Offerings and ceremonies to appease/gain favour with field wights and spirits. Rites to gain protection from house wights.
Offerings to ancestors, rites to appease ancestors, rites to imbue offspring with parts of ancestral spirits/fate.

Lots to do with grudges and Vendettas.

Death rarely had a heaven/hell analogue, you lived on doing much the same as before. Just under-hill, or in the mists etc. It's one reason why burial gifts were given.

Without the moral pressure of " obey or go to hell" their faiths don't really fall into the" good/evil" dichotomy.
Punishment and justice in the physical world was much more impacting.

Aside: one of the reasons why Christianity spread so well in the UK was because of the idea of heaven, and that baptism got you in there.as well as getting you divine aid in battles..
There were recorded incidents where people refused baptism or switched back to their original faith, when they discovered that their ancestors could not go with them, or if conversion had no immediate benefit.