From another thread: So: Who decides who is religious? Do you believe that anyone who claims to be religious, indeed is religious? Discuss.
Not really. If they just believe in god, and not that god is involved in our lives, that's not religious.
Belief is a matter of thought: Religion is a matter of praxis. A person determines whether they are religious, not through their words but their actions.
When someone claims to be religious it is demonstrably true or false. Do I believe a person that says he is religious? Sure, as long as I don't have any reason to doubt it.
Not many people I've ever encountered have ever stated to me "hey, I'm religious". They usually just do whatever it is people do then go to their respective church or temples and there they are showing their religious side. But few ever are stating that they are religious unless they are extremists or radicals that want to create a problem.
I disagree. If you believe in God(s) you are religious. If you go to church however and you don't believe in it, but you're just going to church because it's tradition or you're under some sort of peer pressure, then you're not religious.
That's not quite true. Just believing in a god or gods makes you theistic. If you also have a set of beliefs and practices involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs, then you are religious. Definition of "theism" Definition of "religion"
The very definition of religion (or being religious) is a mixed bag. Whether we are talking about being religious in brushing our teeth every day or in believing and practicing religious dogmas, religion itself has a very broad range. But more specifically, since we are in the Religion subforum, and assuming that we are referring to religion in regards to the supernatural, the answer is pretty simple. ULTRA here claimed that nobody decides. I think quite the opposite is true. Anyone can decide whether or not someone is religious, regardless of if it is themself or others. Traditionally, religion - or being religious - was thought of as someone who simply believed a supernatural teaching (such as Christianity, Islam etc). No practice or ritual was necessary to represent their beliefs. However, more recently, a new term has come into light: "Spiritual". In previous history, "spiritual" and "religious" were, in definition, one in the same. Yet, in modern society, we find that though the defining characteristics of being "religious" has slightly more or less stayed the same (meaning to belief), being "spiritual" has somewhat taken on it's own meaning. It seems that with the changing times, being "spiritual" has come to identify someone who believes, and being "religious" means to take a proactive stance in their beliefs - to practice the rituals associated with that belief system. Now, understanding that the two are different in contents, the definition of being "spiritual", in my own observation, has also come to mean that the believer is more moderate or passive in their belief and practice. Whereas, the "religious" are more stern and adherent to their religions teachings, regardless of their own personal mentality or judgements against their teachings. I've said this before somewhere on this site, but cannot recall exactly where. Regardless, I still find that the following phrase, though different in structure, can apply to this discussion: "Morality is doing what is right regardless of what you're told. Religion is doing what you're told, regardless of what is right." It seems very simple that, by abiding by the definitions as I have provided here, one could seemingly replace "Morality" with "Spirituality" (so that I am clear, the two are unrelated and I do not mean to replace one with the other to mean the same thing in it's own definition. Morality does not equal Spirituality. I'm simply changing the words to show that typically the people who are "spiritual" tend to be more lenient and moderate in their belifs. I.E. Being "spiritual" does not, in essence, require the same adherence and practice as being "religious".) Now, as I digress, anyone can be either religious or spiritual by the their own consideration or that of others. We need no authority to designate who is and who is not one or the other. We are able to discern that on our own, based on our own interpretation. I hope that what I've said here is understandable. The definition of who is religious (or spiritual) is really a subjective pretense which can be applied to anyone.
Buddhism does not believe in god(s), but is considered a religion. God does not have to be a part of religion. Atheism is sometimes considered a godless religion, by some, but not all. As far as deciding, it depends on the benefits one can gain by going one way or the other. Percieved maximization of benefits helps each decide how the lawyers will need to argue. There are certain tax benefits for being a religion. Sometimes you need a lawyer to get those benefits by getting you called a religion. In the case of separation of church and state, if you wish to influence the state, your lawyers will need to argue your religion is not a religion. Atheism tends to use the legal religion denial approach since state wide influence is more important than tax benefits.
Atheism is only considered a religion by religious people that cannot understand that a person can live without being religious.
Devas including Brahmas: variously translated as gods, deities, spirits, angels, or left untranslated Incorrectly. Bull.
Having been a student in a Theravada Buddhist Temple (in Houston, TX), it has become my understanding that Buddhists themselves do not consider their beliefs as religious, but rather as a "philosophy". Many, in fact, despise the title of being a religion because they state that one can be a Buddhist Christian if they so please - that the practices of Buddhism can be applies to any member of any faith.
to be religious your actions must match or appear to match the requirements of said religion. "spiritual" however, whoever thinks he's spiritual i'd grant him that. one may find his spirituality in killing others, one however can't say he's muslim if he doesn't believe the quran is god's word.
Who decides who is religious? Mostly, any self appointed POW. But unless he can add mind reading to his abilities all he can go by are what he perceives as signs of religiosity based on his own subjective opinions of what those should be
