Right now I'm gonna tell you the difference between religion and Christianity. Now most people in the world have always thought the two were somehow almost the same, but even Heb 4:12 says no, and reveals the contrast of Christianity and religion. Many thinkers already have made the distinction between religion and Christianity. I guess historically the clearest line between religion and Christianity is drawn by the Swiss theologian, Karl Barth, who was without a doubt the greatest theologian of the twentieth century. In his voluminous Church Dogmatics, Barth wrote that "The revelation of God is the abolition of religion."
"It is always the sign of definite misunderstanding when an attempt is made to systematically coordinate revelation and religion..to fix their mutual relationship."
"In opposition to all 'religionism' the proclamation of the grace of God is introduced as the truth..." "Religion is unbelief. It is a concern of...godless man."
"Religion is clearly seen to be a human attempt to anticipate what God in His revelation wills to do and does do. It is the attempted replacement of the divine work by a human manufacture."
"It is a feeble but defiant, an arrogant but hopeless, attempt to create something which man could do. In religion man bolts and bars himself against revelation by providing a substitute, by taking away in advance the very thing which has to be given by God. It is never the truth. It is a complete fiction, which has not only little but no relation to God."
"What is the purpose of the universal attempt of religions but to anticipate God, to foist a human product into the place of His word, to make our own images of the One who is known only where He gives Himself to be known."
Background of the word "religion"
A little bit studying of our English word religion will reveal that we might not want to allow the word religion to be associated with Christianity. There are several Latin words which may have served as the origin of our English word religion. The Latin word religo meant "to tie or fasten." Another, religio, was used to refer to "respect, devotion and superstition." Religio was a recognition that men are often tied or bound to God in reverence or devotion (sound familiar?). It also puts man into a set of rules and regulations, to rituals of devotion, to a particular belief-system, or to a cause, ideology, or routine. Most who study this subject - really look into it - regard the English word religion to be derived from the Latin word religare which is closely aligned with the root word religo. The prefix 're' means "back" or "again," and the word ligare means "binding, tying or attaching." Other English words such as "ligature," referring to "something that is used to bind," and "ligament" which "binds things together," evidence the same root in the Latin word ligare. The Latin word religare, from which our English word religion is most likely derived, meant "to tie back" and to "to bind up." The purpose of Jesus' coming was not to bind us or tie us to anything (ritual, ideal, etc.) or anyone, though it might be argued that in recieving Jesus Christ by faith there is a spiritual attachment of our identity with Him. Jesus clearly said that He came to set us free,­ free to be functional humanity in the fullest sense, by allowing God to function through us to His glory. To some believing Jews, Jesus explained that "you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free" (Jn 8:32). Just for you today, a further explanation of the personification of that "truth" in Himself was then made when Jesus said, "If therefore the Son will make you free, you will be free indeed." To the Galatians Paul writes that, "It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery" by reverting back to the bondage of Jewish religion (Gal 5:1). "You were called to freedom, brethren" (Gal 5:13), Paul exclaims. "Where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty" (II Cor 3:17).
Jesus did not say, "I came that you might have religion, and practice it more faithfully," or "I came that you might have religion, and adhere to it more commitedly," or "I came that you might have religion, and define it more dogmatically," or "I came that you might have religion, and defend it more vehemently," or "I came that you might have religion, and thus behave more morally." What Jesus said was, "I came that you might have life, and have it more abundantly" (Jn 10:10). The life that He came to bring and express within us and through us is His life. "I AM the way, the truth and the life," declared Jesus to His disciples (Jn 14:6). The apostle John wrote that "He that has the Son has life; he that does not have the Son does not have life" (I Jn 5:12). "Christ is our life," is the phrase Paul uses in writing to the Colossians (Col 3:4), for Christianity is not "religion," but the life of Jesus Christ expressed in receptive humanity.
Biblical usage of the word "religion"
When we really look at the biblical usage of the word "religion" you will see it is seldom used with any positive implication, but generally has a negative connotation. When Paul traveled to Athens he observed an abundance of idols, even an idol to the "unknown god," lest they might have missed any. Paul stands up and declares, "Men of Athens, I observe that you are very religious in all respects" (Acts 17:22). What does Paul mean by referring to their pervasive idolatry as being "religious?" Well, the Greek word that Paul used was deisidaimon, which is derived from two other Greek words: deido, meaning "to fear or respect," and daimon, the word for "demon." What Paul was saying was that he had observed that they had "great fear or respect for demons," and were very religious and superstitious. Festus used the same Greek word to refer to the Jewish religion, when he explained to King Agrippa that the Jews who brought charges against Paul "had some points of disagreement with him about their own religion" (Acts 25:19). In his epistle to the Colossians, Paul was confronting the regional religionism of Asia as well as the Judaizing religionism that constantly followed his ministry. He wanted to show the superiority of the gospel of grace in Jesus Christ over all religion. In referring to the moralistic activities that religionists were attempting to impose upon the Christian believers in Colossae, Paul asks, "Why do you submit yourself to decrees, such as 'Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!'? These are matters which have the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence" (Col 2:20-23). The word translated "religion" is the Greek word ethelothreskia, which is a combination of two other Greek words: ethelo meaning "will, desire, delight or pleasure," and threskeia meaning "worship or religion." Paul is describing such moralistic religious actions as "will-worship" of "self-made religion;" activities which man imposes upon himself and others, believing that such willed self-effort serves as a benefit before God in moralistic performance. Paul denies the veracity of such thinking, regarding such as mere "self-made religion," and of no benefit against the selfish patterns of fleshly indulgence. James explains that, "If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man's religion is worthless" (James 1:26,27). The Greek word that he uses is threskeia, meaning "worship or religion." Misinterpreting the character of God in our behavior often indicates that we are engaging in "worthless religion." James continues, though, to use threskeia in a positive way when he refers to "pure and undefiled religion" (James 1:27), wherein the worth-ship of God's character is genuinely expressed in practical ministry to orphans and widows, and in the expression of the purity of God's character. In that case genuine Christian worship shows as we are receptive to the activity of God and express the worth-ship of His character in our behavior. In light of the negative inferences of the word religion in the New Testament, we should avoid applying this word to Christianity.
Christianity and world religions
People fail to differentiate between Christianity and religion so it causes many to lump Christianity together as just another religion to study in world religions. The story is told of Guatama Buddha, who lived about four hundred years prior to the birth of Jesus Christ. He was dying. Some of his devout folowers came to him and asked how they should perpetuate his memory. "How should we share with the world the remembrance of you? How shall we memorialize you?" Buddha responded, "Don't bother! It is not me that matters; it is my teaching that should be propagated and adhered to throughout the world." Does that seem to be self-effacing? Does that sound like a noble ideal to you? "Don't focus on me, just remember my teaching." If Jesus had said something like that, it would certainly legitimize much of what we observe all around us today in the so-called "Christian religion." The "Christian religion" that has formed around the teaching of Christianity is involved in the propagation of various understandings, denominations and sects, of the Bible. Most of those who call themselves Christians today seem to think that Jesus advocated the same thing that Buddha is alleged to have uttered. "Don't focus on me, just remember my teaching." Jesus did not say anything like that! NO! In fact, what Buddha said is contrary to everything Jesus taught, and everything recorded in the New Testament scriptures. Jesus did not say, "Just remember my teaching." Jesus said, "I AM the resurrection and the life" (Jn 11:25). "I AM the way, the truth and the life" (Jn 14:6). He did not say, "I will show you the way; I will teach you the truth; I will give you the life." His own very presence is the only way for man to be man as God intended. The reality of His person is the truth of God. The very personal presence of the risen Lord Jesus is the life of the Living God, everything He came to bring to this world. In Buddhism the person of Buddha may not be of any importance except for historical observation, but in Christianity the living Person of Jesus Christ is the reality of God's presence restored to mankind.
Scripture interpretation and "religion"
The new covenant implemented in the Person and work of Jesus Christ was designed to supplant and supersede all of the old forms of religion that had existed since the fall of man. Careful study of the new covenant literature, which we know as the New Testament, evidences the constant exposure of the radical difference between religion and the dynamic life of Jesus Christ in the kingdom of grace. Beginning in the accounts of the life and ministry of Jesus in the Gospels, it is apparent that Jesus was constantly confronting religion as He proclaimed the kingdom of grace that He came to reveal in Himself. The Pharisees and scribes of Judaism were the religionists who placed themselves in antagonism to all that Jesus did and said. They did not have the spiritual understanding to comprehend what Jesus was proclaiming. Approximately one-third of Jesus' teaching was in parables, which only served to befuddle the religious teachers for they seldom realized that Jesus was comparing their religious modus operandi with the function of the spiritual reign of God that He came to bring in Himself. Eventually the religious leaders realized that the parables were exposing them, and they began to take measures to silence their nemesis by execution. In the Acts of the Apostles, Luke carefully explains that in the earliest history of the church, the initial Christian leaders were progressively made aware of the radical difference between the Christian gospel and all religion. Christianity had to be unencumbered and unhindered from any identification with Judaic religion. Peter's dream in Joppa, the inclusion of Cornelius and the Gentiles, the antagonism of the Jewish leaders in Judea, all represent pictorial vignettes of the progressive awareness of how Christianity had to break free from all religion. Paul's epistles bear the repetitive theme of explaining the difference between religion and Christianity. In his epistle to the Romans, Paul explains that righteousness is not in religious rites or the Law, but in Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. In the epistle we know as First Corinthians, Paul counters the religious excesses that were developing in the young church at Corinth. In the epistle we identify as Second Corinthians, Paul carefully differentiates between gospel ministry by the grace of God and the manipulations of religious method being evidenced by the intrusive pretenders. Writing to the Galatians, Paul pits the gospel versus religion, forcefully denying that there is "another gospel" as inculcated by legalistic religion. In contrast to religious exclusivism, Paul explains to the Ephesians that all men become a new humanity in Jesus Christ. Combating the effects of the regional religionism of Asia, Paul wrote to the Colossians emphasizing the pre-eminence of Jesus Christ, who is our life. In all of Paul's epistles the theme of Christianity as distinct from and confronting religion is to be found. The writer of the epistle to the Hebrews likewise explains how the old and new covenants of God are to be differentiated, and the old tenets of Judaic religion are replaced by the life of Jesus Christ. The epistle of James indicates that merely going through the rituals of religion is vain, but Christian faith is the outworking of the life of Jesus Christ. The Revelation of Christ as witnessed by John is indeed the climax of the new covenant literature. In pictorial form Jesus reveals that religion will continually attempt to overcome and secularize Christianity as it was doing in the seven churches of Asia. Jesus is the victor over religion, though, and will overcome all the onslaughts of conflict that will inevitably come between Christianity and religion. Throughout the entirety of the New Testament there is a continuous explanation of the difference between Christianity and religion. Why has this not been made more apparent to Christians in order that they might be more discerning and cease to equate the two? Dare we explain that the interpretation of the new covenant scriptures has been done primarily by commentators and theologians who are thoroughly inundated in "Christian religion?" Religious interpreters whose very livelihood is on the line would be hesitant to expose their own religious methods, even if they had the spiritual discernment to recognize that such religious practices were being exposed in the scriptures. We have witnessed a tragic history of misinterpretation of the Bible throughout the history of "Christian religion."

Religion
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
7. religions, Archaic. religious rites.
8. Archaic. strict faithfulness; devotion: a religion to one's vow.


You have it all wrong. Buddha's last message to his followers states as follows:

"Behold, O monks, this is my last advice to you. All component things in the world are changeable. They are not lasting. Work hard to gain your own salvation. Do your best. "

Or perhaps in a more literal translation as contained in the Maha-parinibbana Sutta,

"vayadhammaa sankhaaraa appamaadena sampaadethaa
all things are perishable, through vigilance Awaken!"

In this message contains really one of the few of the true core teachings of Buddhism, that all is impermanent and that as Gautama Buddha says,

"Believe nothing, o monks,
merely because you have been told it ...
or because it is traditional,
or because you yourselves have imagined it.

Do not believe what your teacher tells you
merely out of respect for the teacher.

But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis,
you find to be conducive to the good,
the benefit, the welfare of all beings
that doctrine believe and cling to,
and take it as your guide."

Thus a religion of non-religion. A religion is distinctive in its solace and determination in the illogical absurdities, or rather, an affirmation of faith in the testing of all reason and logic. Buddhism is quite the opposite, that, with due consideration of the evidence that you should consider such to be true to your own. In this way Buddhism is more of a practice than a religion. Whatever beliefs you find to be most true to you, you can use them in the context of the Middle Path in your meditations and attainment of enlightenment. Christianity on the other hand is the affirmation of illogical, the leap of faith. Christianity is religious in that Christ told his followers to with faith and dillegence, follow him as their king and savior, and his father as creator God. Christianity is religious precisely because Christ told his followers to ' in remembrance of him', in an infatuation of blood sacrifice reminiscent of man's most barbaric practices, to eat his body and drink his blood. It is religious precisely because it is an infatuation with images, idols, authority, and the tyranny of a Big-Brother God.

For Fucksakes...isn't This Hate Speech...?

What is hate speech DH?

Opps, nevermind, I see you have over stayed your welcome.

For fucksakes isn't this way too long of a post?

You guys are just blinded to what religion is.. Anything can be made into a religion but it's the individual that changes that by faith.

A dogma of non-dogma? Atheism doesn't have dogmas, it's a rejection of a dogma. Without theism there can be no atheism.

I'm unaware of any atheists worshiping the scientific method. Of course they can be awed by nature, and the success and brilliance of the scientific process of unfurling understanding about our grand universe, but not worship. Worship connotes belief in a god. Be it themselves, nature, or science, they're not atheist if they think whatever it is is God.

Atheism isn't a belief system. It is hard to find actions taken 'in the name of atheism' (faith) because it is merely a rejection of a belief. Of course, there are those that have the courage of their convictions in their skepticism of religion; but seriously, I don't think that is at all a bad thing.

The real question that should be asked on this thread of topic is not, "Whether or not Christianity is a religion, or just what is religion defined, but rather what is TRUE RELIGION?" Everyone knows that anything that one wishes to make an obsession can be defined as a religion. So the question must be addressed as to what is the value of anyones religion, and is it as practiced a true religion, which benefits both the person of faith and the world in general?

The answer is quite simple. Atheists and infidels of all types have argued that religion offers nothing worthwhile to society. Allow me to immediately concede to that argument, false religion and cults do not substantially benefit man as stated in James 1:26.

True and Pure religion is very much beneficial. In contrast, to vain religion, which worships the created instead of the creator( as many religions such as Hinduism etc, place man at the center of everything in importance), the scriptures speak of pure and undefiled religion. God inspired James to speak as such, "Pure religion and undefiled before God the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." (Vs.27 of Chapter 1). Consider the personal benefit (keep himself unspotted...) and the benefit to others (visit the fatherless and widows....). Hence, pure religion is of value to the practitioner and to those who benefit from his actions.

Pure religion is of great value to a nation and to society in general. The religion of the Creator of man teaches man to, "submit yourselves to every ordinance of man...honor all men, honor the king" (1Peter2:13,17). True religion influence men to pay their taxes and to "owe no man anything, but to love one another" (Rom.13:1-. Religion is opposed to the lack of civil discipline, to hatred, adultery, and fornication, stealing, lying, and the mistreatment of others in general (Rom.13:1-7, Col.3:5-10).

I am of the opinion that the greatest announcement affecting society and mankind ever made was by the author of Christianity: "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would men should do to you, do ye even so to them...(Matt.7:12). True religion promotes strong families, good work ethics, mental health, and strong character in general (Eph.5:22, Col.3:22,23 Phili.4:6-.

Allow me to ask, WHAT DOES ATHEISM, IN COMPARISON, CONTRIBUTE BESIDES CONFUSION AND CHAOS? True religion is only beneficial if we first find it and then practice it.

I will close with the script of 2nd Cor.4:3-4, "But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost; In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them."

For truly there are none so blind as are those that just refuse to see. Ralph