Skip to main content

Spiritual but not Religious?

By Carl S ~
Those who, in polls, describe themselves as not belonging to any religion are called “nones.” You'll hear, “I'm not religious, but spiritual.” Historically, it's generally been assumed you can't have one without the other. Do they truly believe one can be spiritual without dogmas or belief systems? Have they thought about what they're saying? Are they actually referring to a sense of awe about nature?

When a volcano first erupted or an earthquake devastated, that must have overawed all the senses and been awesome! Then, as one explanation, to conclude super-natural forces caused them made sense. Also, consider the powerful awe resulting from observing Nature unfolding in wondrous ways. Some organisms were found whose powers brought ”assuring answers” to the mysteries of the world, via their effects on the brain. Eating them made humans like unto gods knowing good and evil. In those times b.c. (before chemistry), primitives interpreted brain fuck-ups as gifts from gods. Like little children, they found these gifts beyond explanation, able to make the actual world even more awe-inspiring.

Contrast this to reality: centuries later, Darwin and others like him found awe in Evolution. When scientific methods began to replace theologies, they brought continuing discoveries, none of them attributed to spirits. Many must have left the discoverers awe-struck. After many experiments and frustrations, there would have been “aha!” results, where the solution is so obvious one wonders why one never saw it to begin with. So now we have awe without the spiritual, awe as a natural reaction.

Speaking of experiments: are there any which can explain how awe came to be spiritual? Sure. In fact, they may explain the origins of all religions: experiments with psychedelic plants, repeating ancient rituals and their effect on the mind-body connection. Magic mushrooms, ergot (from which LSD is derived), alcohol, and other potent substances, have been around since before humans. Their effects are described as “mind-altering, consciousness-raising, portals to the divine, sacramental, doors of perception to understanding The Oneness of All in the Universe.” They are also poisonous.

Walter Pahnke, a minister and physician, laid out a nine-category list of universal mystical experiences, based on his studies. If you're familiar with scriptural/ Buddhist traditions, you'll recognize he is also describing ritualized experiences caused by psychedelic, psychotropic plants. When acolytes personally subjected themselves to the effects, they became convinced they had found that “spiritual” they'd always heard about. To this very day, there are shamans/holy healers/enlighteners, carrying on this tradition. This psychedelic “spiritual” is being experienced by writers, intellectuals, etc. in the West! One only needs to be willing to make oneself vulnerable to hyper-suggestibility and the shamans desires to qualify! And, depending on the state of mind of each individual, the experiences will be religious, or not. The outcomes depend on one's expectations in certain settings, whether they will be heavenly or hellish. Sounds just like the religions we know.

How and why did the effects of psychedelic substances lead to religions, yet are now banned by those religions. Well, using these plants in rituals meant only the shamans had power over minds, to interpret the “understanding and revelations.” This was o.k. for the tribes, villagers, small cults, and hunters and gatherers. But you can't have everybody tripping out in advanced civilizations! What became of those “spiritual” happenings?

If those who want power over civilizations want to succeed, they can use the beliefs supporting the spiritual guides and healers. But before that, they have to drive those originators underground. So they took the “revelations” already in place, and claimed they came from their god. The feelings of awe are now connected with this god; the mystical/spiritual la-la's are now placed under the control of a god's agents. They only needed to adapt psychedelic-enhanced rituals and teachings to their own ends, substituting new rituals in imitation of the old, using powerful psychological settings and mood enhancement in place of psychedelic drugs. In other words, they created a new dependency: Their constant repetitions, chants, and rituals have become drugs, with drug-like convictions, and belonging to the “spiritual” realm.

You can understand why religions forbid using these drugs, and make them illegal, and why they are still being used. The conflict continues. And it isn't only religions that imitate their effects on the brain: Aren't live performances by rock musicians imitating those ancient rituals of psychedelic agents, by overwhelming the mind and senses with intense lights, extreme distortions of figures and backgrounds, and the mind-numbing volume of sound? Welcome to reviving ancient spiritual/mystical mind manipulation for the “spiritual, not religious” generation.

The danger with psychotropics: the fungi are deceivers, because they screw around with the brain's chemistry. Magic mushrooms, LSD, et al, will bring the convincing feelings of intense tranquility and solace along with a promise of personal immortality. The real world is not like that. The world contains examples for awe, but also for fear. It won't conform to psychedelic induced fungi-fuzzy desires and feelings of serene security. Nature doesn't care about them. Every animal, including us, has to learn how to survive, to be alert to danger, and one way this is done is in not being too trusting about one's feelings, or in others, and one's environments in nature.

Now, religious believers may think I'm crazy in making psychedelic fungus connections to their faiths. I've read many testimonies from those who've experienced these effects, and they are not crazy. What they relate lead us to one conclusion: “The Book of Revelations” was written by a person or persons unknown under the powerful effects of these substances. You want to talk about crazy? Here we are in the 21st century, where “sacred writings” of gullible ancient druggies are taken seriously by even more gullible people, who, as a result of them, are willing and anxiously waiting to see the world destroyed in order to make those “revelations” come true! Now THAT'S insane.

For me, reality is enough. Reality reminds me not to think about these things while driving at 50 mph. We should all mistrust consciousness-raising drugs and all religions, and for the same reasons. They all mess with brain cells. I'm glad I'm not a “spiritual” person. I've seen too many people hung up and fucked up over “spiritual.”


Popular posts from this blog

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo


By David Andrew Dugle ~   S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden –  Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

Why I left the Canadian Reformed Church

By Chuck Eelhart ~ I was born into a believing family. The denomination is called Canadian Reformed Church . It is a Dutch Calvinistic Christian Church. My parents were Dutch immigrants to Canada in 1951. They had come from two slightly differing factions of the same Reformed faith in the Netherlands . Arriving unmarried in Canada they joined the slightly more conservative of the factions. It was a small group at first. Being far from Holland and strangers in a new country these young families found a strong bonding point in their church. Deutsch: Heidelberger Katechismus, Druck 1563 (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) I was born in 1955 the third of eventually 9 children. We lived in a small southern Ontario farming community of Fergus. Being young conservative and industrious the community of immigrants prospered. While they did mix and work in the community almost all of the social bonding was within the church group. Being of the first generation born here we had a foot in two

Morality is not a Good Argument for Christianity

By austinrohm ~ I wrote this article as I was deconverting in my own head: I never talked with anyone about it, but it was a letter I wrote as if I was writing to all the Christians in my life who constantly brought up how morality was the best argument for Christianity. No Christian has read this so far, but it is written from the point of view of a frustrated closeted atheist whose only outlet was organizing his thoughts on the keyboard. A common phrase used with non-Christians is: “Well without God, there isn’t a foundation of morality. If God is not real, then you could go around killing and raping.” There are a few things which must be addressed. 1. Show me objective morality. Define it and show me an example. Different Christians have different moral standards depending on how they interpret the Bible. Often times, they will just find what they believe, then go back into scripture and find a way to validate it. Conversely, many feel a particular action is not