Define 'Religion'

With time, people will tend to 'negatively charge' some words by attaching often vague and bad meanings. The thus smeared word is then used to lable the idea or the practice that someone doesn't like as a cheap way of creating a contempt for the latter. The term 'religion' has been extensively and incongruosly used just exactly for that purpose. When that happen, we must force people to define the word once and for all. Also the opposite can happen. People embody vague, positive but often inconsistent meanings to such concepts as 'love', 'science', 'spirituality' 'energy', 'God' etc. With time, words begine to mean anything that anyone want it to mean at anytime, creating a total confusion and communication break down. Meanwhile we amuse ourselves that 'everybody knows what the word mean' or 'it is beyond definition'. This wishy wooshy washy though has no place. We must form the habit of defining words even if 'everybody knows what they mean' just as we must question everything, even 'obvious things that everybody knows they are true, or even if they rifere to non-analytic concepts as 'space', 'time', 'spirit' or 'God'LIERS DODGE DEFINITIONSThere is uncanning reason why some people would rather look for petty excuse not to define strategic word. Though the more sharp we define a word, the less room we allow for the listener to guess what you mean, hence the less chance for misunderstanding, clear definition also makes it difficult for the speaker to lie without being cornered beyond resque by an objection! The key reason why debates often go in endless circles, with no winner is failure to define the strategic words used extensively in the debate. If we are not carefull, a murderer can get away with murder if no one in the court room can say what murder is even if 'everyone knows it very well'. He only have to challenge our 'common sense'. It is this magic wand of 'redefining words retroactively' that is behind all excuses pre-offered for not defining words including the stupid excuse: 'it is beyond definition'.IT IS IMPORTANT TO DEFINE 'RELIGION' WELLSuch definitions are not just aesthetics. Important decisions in perliament, courts, science etc can be made by invorking the word 'religion'. By just keeping saying 'this is religion', important science facts can be removed from science books. I can say 'cold fusion is religion' and demand that the government fundinding for the free energy research be frozen due to the constitutional need for there to be a separation between 'religion' and 'state'. On the other hand we can allow scientists to spend people's taxes peddling useless fantasies due to careless definition of 'religion' that merely remove god and/or spirituality from the picturesque.As usual, dictionaries are of no much use because they often offer more than one definition. These definitions can even be contradictory. Of course if I embody two or more incompatible notions under a single word, my ability to manipulate using the word is virtualy unlimited! I can dismiss anything I want without be cornered! If 'love' mean both war and peace all at once, I can kill people while also condeming those who do the same! I only have to unleash the correct one of the incompartible notions at the correct time. It is a sot of like a dishonest shell gamer having several cards hiding behind a 'single' card!Lets now consider these two definitions of 'religion' from dictionary:1:)The beleive in and the worship of God or a supernatural being2.)A beleif system that is firmly held by a group of people.We for instance want to know which of these two notions do the court system use when dismissing 'religion' in the name of 'church/state' seperation. Philosophers, scientists etc generaly agree that there is no agreed upon definition of 'God'. So we want to know how atheists are allowed to win in court by invorking 'god' and 'religion'. Whose definition do we go by? Atheists? Definition 1 include 'worship' as what define 'religion'. But why is atheist allowed to dismiss any beleif in any type of 'God' even if it does not involve any need for worship? Invorking intelligent factors, to explain a natural phenomena, for instance, does not constitute any need for dogma, worship, prayer etc. Ergo, there is no need to exclude 'god' a priori from science. However, atheists are often allowed just to do that! Following the atheistic reasoning, we can even dismiss a genuine, ET research if the supposed ET is powerfull enough to have created our moon! We only need to compare such a being with Yahweh!BELEIF IS NOT INCOMPARTIBLE WITH FACT.One tactic used by atheists to manipulate is false dilemas. They offer humans a choice between atheism and fanatisism. They have train people to say 'is it a fact or a beleif'. But that is not the case. We say 'is it a fact or a BASELESS beleif'. To see this we must again define 'beleif'.BELEIF: Accepting a statement or an idea as true without necesarily there being a direct evidence.The point is that this summarily sweep all INFERANCES, however reasonable they are in the basket of 'beleif'. The point is that 'beleif' can be so close to knowledge that it is infact a zero distance from it. You will beleive that a dynauser cannot possibly be inside the bonet of your car. But up until you open and check it, you donnot KNOW so! Ergo that 'dynauser is not in the bonet' was just a beleif, albeit a beleif that is close to fact, and certainly not a BASELESS beleif.THE PROPER DEFINITION OF 'RELIGION'The meaningfull one is the second definition:RELIGION: A set of beleifs held strongly by a group of people.It is the DOGMA and its ability to sway that characterise religion and not the specific contents of the beleif itself. It is, for instance a mistake to use the word 'religion' as a synonym of 'monotheism'. If a group of people in the street begine to shout 'theif, theif' and soon everyone join the corus and finaly beating up someone, that was just a religion that quickly developed and the quickly died!

Posted on 03/07/2026 by EraOfLightI am Sananda,And I come to be with you at this time, in these amazing times that you are entering now. And yes, those 2,000 plus years ago as the one Yeshua, I pronounced what would be “the end time” to those of…

Posted on 03/07/2026 by EraOfLightBeloved Ones,We are all feeling the collective wound inflicted upon many at this time. The separation between both Earths and the many attempts to retrieve the old order. The eclipse in Virgo has brought profound…

"I remember april nite-I joined in 2012-back in those days there were lots of fights, trolls, you couldn't express a conservative viewpoint about anything, or the wild banshees would attack."

Spiritual Blogs

Define 'Religion'

Comments

Latest Blog Posts

Sananda: The End Times; Channel: James McConnell | Source 1 2.

Earth’s Atomic Changes Impact On Us; By Natalia Alba | Source.

BASIC ASTROLOGY: SPRING EQUINOX 2026 - Six horoscope points in Aries for late March 2026.The theme for the United States is "deception or disappointments with associates (i.e. states) or partners."

Note: this page contains paid content.

Most Popular Blog Posts

FINALLY THE NEW PAPA SAID IT ! Killing Easter lamb has no basis in the Christian tradition

How Many of These 51 Spiritual Awakening Symptoms Do You Have?

find out if you are a star seed and where you really come from tests.

Note: this page contains paid content.

Blog Topics by Tags

Monthly Archives

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

Latest Activity

New Forum Posts

One With The Infinite By Ann Albers & The Angels

Crystalline Empowerment By The Crystalline Kingdom Through Natalie Glasson

Lightness of Being - Raise Your Vibration With Emmanuel Dagher

Baptism By Sacred Fire By Patricia Cota-Robles

Note: this page contains paid content.