Skip to main content

Why are we?

I know the title of this blog is a bit broad in its presentation, but the question it asks is one that billions of people throughout history and today have wondered at one point in time. 

According to estimates of Adherents, an independent, non-religiously affiliated organization that monitors the number and size of the world's religions, there are some 4,300 religions in the world today. 

Nearly 75 Percent of the world's population practices one of the 5 most influential religions in the world: Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism.

Christianity and Islam are most widely spread across the world, with more than half of the world's population having religious affiliations with one of the two religions.  One of the most widely-held myths among those in English-speaking countries is that Islamic believers are Arabs.  In fact, most Islamic people do not live in the Arab Nations of the Middle East. 

Here are the top 20 largest religions and their number of believers:

1. Christianity - 2.1 Billion
2. Islam - 1.3 Billion
3. Nonreligious - (Secular/Agnostic/Atheist) - 1.1 Billion
4. Hinduism - 900 Million
5. Chinese Traditional Religion - 394 Million
6. Buddhism - 376 Million
7. Primal-indigenous - 300 Million
8. African Traditional and Diasporic - 100 Million
9. Sikhism - 23 Million
10. Juche - 19 Million
11. Spiritism - 15 Million
12. Judaism - 14 Million
13. Bahai - 7 Million
14. Jainism - 4.2 Million
15. Shinto - 4 Million
16. Cao Dai - 4 Million
17. Zoroastrianism - 2.6 Million
18. Tenrikyo - 2 Million
19. Neo-Paganism - 1 Million
20. Unitarian-Universalism - 800 Thousand


These totals are approximations based on the best data available at the time, but it drives a point home to those of us who really enjoy looking into the answers to the difficult questions in life.  4,300 religions in the world....why?  And why are so many people connected to religion in the world?

You will note that my title for this blog is simply 'Why are we?' Interestingly enough, the reason most religions exist is to add some solidity to the foundation for the answer of that question.  The true answer, simply put, is that no one really knows 'why we are'.  No one living on this earth can say with truth to facts that we exist for a specific reason.  That was a reason some religions were created on this earth.  People simply didn't have answers to the question that is the title of this blog, and the creation of godly figures and a history that lives in spirituality and is grounded in the faith of the masses was the easiest way to make sense of the answers people didn't have.  Faith, not fact, is the basis for religion.  Faith is something in your heart and mind, and not something tangible that you can see in a physical sense.  So in order to feed the minds of those with questions and to control a society of people who wanted answers, religions were born.  Those same religions offered a sort of moral compass to be created in society that offered punishments for breaking the rules and a payoff in the afterlife for those who followed the rules. 

By building in the structure of punishment and reward, governments around the world were able to keep the populous in line and scared of punishment.  So I am getting away from my question here by explaining one of the reasons religion exists in the world today.  It exists to provide a faith based answer to the "Why are we?" question, because no one who is alive knows the answer.

The interesting fact is the amount of people who are not religious in this world.  By not religious I do not include those agnostics and others who believe in a higher power but haven't locked down a true faith.  I mean those who believe that we are born, live, die, and that's it.  It is hard for me, someone who thinks about everything very deeply, to comprehend such a meaningless existence. 

I was raised Catholic, but left the Catholic Church after I was Confirmed and became an adult.  The reasons I left were many, but include things like me not agreeing with praying to the Virgin Mary, and not agreeing with saying things like, "I believe in one holy and apostolic church...".  I didn't agree with many of the teachings, and I went on a journey to find myself after I left the Catholic Faith. 

I once visited another church with a friend of mine who was excited to show me his place of worship.  He knew my mindset about the approach many organized religions take with new members, and assured me that his church was different.  It was the Church of Christ.  He said it is great, because we start by breaking off into groups of people who are around the same age, and someone runs a bible verse review where we read a verse and discuss it prior to going into the main church and singing songs for about 20 minutes.  It sounded interesting, so I went.  The man who ran the group I attended had me stand up and introduce myself, so I did.  He then proceeded to thank me for coming to the Church of Christ, and said that with time, he hoped that the church would be able to help save me...and I didn't hear the rest because I stood up and walked out the door, followed by my friend who knew right away that I was angry.  I didn't need to be saved, and someone who had never met me had no right to assume that I did. 

In my view, Church can be in a barn; no stained glass and expensive statues, no beautiful wood work and marble, and no judgment.  In my opinion, people from all religions should be able to come together and celebrate life, which is really what religion is about.  It is a celebration of life, and a collective understanding that we should all do good unto others and live life in a moral fashion so we can experience and afterlife that we aren't truly sure exists in the way we believe it does, or at all.

Some religions have gods, some don't.  Some religions have strict rules about drinking, smoking, sex, and any number of other things; some are much more tolerant.  But all religions (or at least the majority of mainstream religions) include a structure of values you must live up to.

I had an argument with my grandmother once, who is a devout German Catholic woman.  I had just arrived back from the first year of the Iraq War, and some things really opened my eyes.  I explained to my grandmother about my first engagement with the enemy.  At war in Iraq you have two people aiming weapons at each other.  One person is from a "Liberating" force that has arrived to make life in the country better.  The second person is a member of that country being liberated who is fighting for what he or she believes is right.  Here is a man or woman who has grown up their entire lives under a totalitarian rule where the leader of their country has determined what books they can read, what is allowed on television, what they can learn in school, etc.; a leader who has driven into this person's mind a hatred for America that runs so deep because individual thought has never been an option for the citizens.  I asked my grandmother if she thought that man would go to hell for his actions, and she said yes.  I asked why.  She said that because he was a Muslim and because he was trying to take the life of me. 

You see, I have a problem with that for a very good reason.  Iraq was filled with brainwashed people who had never been given an option to think for themselves.  How can I hold against any of them the way that they feel about my country or me?  I can't. I told my grandmother that I felt that man had just as much a right to a positive afterlife as any of the rest of us, because his actions weren't his choice. 

So we have all looked up at the star filled sky at night at some point and asked ourselves what the point of all of this is.  All I can say is that if you really think deeply about life, there is really no possible way this isn't all part of a larger plan we are just not aware of yet.  Why are we?  We are, and in our first life, that is all that we need to know apparently.  We will garner our facts after we take our last breaths on this earth.  To think that there isn't anything else is too difficult for my mind to comprehend. 

The reason this question is so hard is because of how our minds are built.  We learn to look for tangible evidence to solve problems.  There is none in faith.  I can look at life and not be sure of where the starting point was.  I can say that I believe the starting point was XXX, but then I ask myself, "If XXX was the starting point, what existed within this space before that point in time?"  Does the Universe End?  Our minds tell us that it must have to end because it couldn't possibly go on forever, but our minds also tell us that if the Universe does end, what exists beyond it because nothingness is something we cannot comprehend as human beings.  Something has to take up space, and space is difficult to imagine being infinite. 

That paragraph should make it clear to everyone why this is such a difficult subject; a subject we may never know any more about.  I am interested in your thoughts and opinions, but I will close with the following:

Why are we?  I cannot answer that question, but what I can say is, "We are!"  Since we are, we need to move forward inclusively, find ways to all co-exist without wars and religious separation that is ludicrous because none of us know any more than the others what the facts of life are.  We are, so live!  Live you life like you only have one, and if it turns out that's the case, there will be no regrets before you take that last breath.  If it turns out there's something more after death, it will be the single greatest revelation you have ever received once you find that out. 

Come together in life and stop purposely separating yourselves because of differences in religion and culture.  We should all be embracing each other's differences and learning from one another to make the world a better place, instead of divisively separating everything and everyone.

DUNK! 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Trump and the DOJ Trying to Silence Mueller...

Mueller is set to sit in front of Congress on Wednesday this week and answer questions regarding the Mueller Investigation.  The DOJ, and organization that is supposed to look out for the best interests of America but has recently decided to become Trump's personal Law Firm, has sent correspondence to Mueller about what he can and cannot answer. For instance, you have the question of the 10 documented cases of obstruction in volume 2 of the report.  Mueller made it clear that he was bound by DOJ policy and could not indict a sitting president.  One very important question the Congressional Leadership will likely ask is, "If Donald Trump wasn't the sitting President, would you have indicted him based on the amount of evidence in the report?"  That question in every respect is fair.  You are asking the head of an investigation if they would have indicted someone had an arbitrary roadblock not been in place.  I say arbitrary roadblock because the policy is...

Electoral College

I have seen a ton of talk about the Electoral College in recent months.  The majority of Americans feel that going to a Direct Popular Vote like the rest of the world is the way to go.  Those on the Right seem to be completely against abolishing the Electoral College.  The question is why? The most common argument given is that we shouldn't let voters in all the big cities decide who is in office for the entire country, and that with Direct Popular Vote, those people who live in rural communities also get a say.  When you break down that argument, you quickly find all the holes that exist within it.  Let's start by talking about one other thing that is completely unfair in our current political system.  Let's look at the Senate. In the Senate, each State elects 2 Senators to go to Congress in Washington D.C.  Sounds fair right? Let's look at the most populous states and least populous states and how many people in each state Senators repres...

Truth Matters

If there is one thing I need to keep reminding myself in today's world of political discourse, it is that Truth Matters. At any point in time I can turn on (insert news agency here) News and what I see is vastly different depending upon the news agency I watch.  Why is that?  Every mainstream news organization is bias in some way based upon who runs or owns the news organization.  Don't get me wrong; there are great and impartial journalists and agencies out there, but we are talking in aggregate and not about individuals or one-off agencies. When an issue like immigration is at the forefront of political discourse you can tune into CNN, MSNBC, and FOX and likely get three completely different takes on immigration.  Each news organization tailors their message to speak to what they feel is their viewer base and potential viewer base. That in and of itself is understood by people who follow politics on a regular basis and dig through multiple news sources in ord...