In high school I made up a pretend religion (order of the gecko) with some friends as a joke that had a positive take without the baggage that the religions we were familiar with. The tenets were about actually being accepting and opposing intolerance.
A couple decades later I heard about the Satanic Temple and other than the symboligy it was basically the same!
Smoking weed to resolve differences
I’ve actually put a lot of thought into this lately, what with the most recent schism in The Satanic Temple.
The seven tenets are great. I’d keep those.
I would start with the understanding that it was an atheistic religion, and I would treat it as such. I would write a constitution, and a charter, and any group that agrees with and meets the requirements laid out in the constitution should be allowed to affiliate themselves. It should be organized as a non-profit.
I like the way that TST’s ministry program worked before Doug threw most of the ministers out. I’d steal that. I would amend the process slightly though; I’d say that any person with a diagnosed personality disorder would not be eligible for ministerial positions, as narcissists, people with borderline personality disorder, etc., should not ever be in leadership positions. I would say that any person that successfully completes the ministerial program should be eligible to be a leader of a congregation, and people that have not passed would not be.
I would propose that the congregations send representatives to a national (or international) convention where they decide what the organization’s position should be on issues–I believe that it takes two majority votes in the SBC over a period of four (?) years for major doctrinal changes, or changes to the constitution–and those representatives would also select board members, who would in turn select a president. (I’d have terms of board members be offset so that there was never a period where a large percentage of the board was turning over.) Fundamentally, the church should be run by the people, and should be serving the congregants, rather than the congregants serving the organization.
I believe that yes, members and congregations should be paying in to the national organization, but no person within the organization should be getting paid for their work. I don’t care if it’s a collection, a set amount per person per week, or what; operating a religion requires funding. That said, the only compensation to anyone within the org should be minimal travel expenses for people that need to travel for their position; otherwise, it should be entirely a lay ministry. (Yes, that would be a financial hardship for some ministers, but I’d rather see that than have people seeking leadership for the financial benefit.) Finances should be fully transparent, and visible to all members, so that everyone can see where money is coming in from, and where money is going.
I also like the Mormon model of fully engaging all members. As long as it’s not onerous, I think that this can help individuals feel seen and heard, and also keep them feeling like a part of community. I would do things like have each members selected in turn to deliver brief biweekly sermons, with sources, and then have members in each congregation engage in a roundtable discussion about the sermon. You would want to have the possibility of sub-groups within each congregation so that different needs of individual members could be taken care of.
I made some notes somewhere, but I’m not sure where they are right now.
Simply, I would love to start a religion on an already existing short story, The Egg: YouTube Link
Solves a bunch of programs with karma and if everyone believed it the world would undoubtedly be a better place.
Thank you I’ll check it out today.
singing
Like, if there was some other community where I could go and just sing songs with my neighbors, church would lose like 80% of its appeal to me.
Buddhism is effectively a “how to” guide to satisfaction , it just goes against everything corporations preach. To be fair, I’m not strong enough to be a Buddhist, but of the religions I’ve studied, it seems pretty open and shut, “follow these instructions and you will have a good life”. Buddhism wins. But it doesn’t involve parties and such
Nothing is True Everything is Permitted
Origin
This idiomatic expression originates from Friedrich Nietzsche, the famous philosopher who wrote the phrase in his 1859 book, “The Geneology of Morals.” However, Nietzsche attributes the phrase’s origin to Hassan-i-Sabbah, the leader of the historical Assassins. This sect was a part of Isma’ili and Shia Islam. However, there is no verified proof of these claims.
Maybe not the best source https://english-grammar-lessons.com/nothing-is-true-everything-is-permitted-meaning/
Free access to a ps5/ series x with free online.
General tenants about being excellent to eachother, none of that smiting bullshit for people to cherrypick.
Multitheistic with different gods responsible for different aspects of reality with the general commandment of the religion being that the best way to become closer to the gods (or specific god of preference) is to understand their creation and thus understand them (go do science!)
Throw in some enjoyable aspects like funerals being a celebration rather than a sombre occasion; colour code the gods so we don’t even up with everything being fucking gray or gilded; And have a neat little offering ceremony for each god thats simple but unique and inexpensive so people can go all starsigny on it, offerings being a good luck thing rather than mandatory.
A religion that aims to have well built and healthy bodies to earn the favor of the gods from said religion.
What about disabilities?
Just worship cats.
Didn’t this exist already?
Bast is best
Cookie based dogma.
“Blessings to the Future Generations” forward-thinking traditions rather than handicapping the now to fit the past’s biases
Nice, that’s great.
I don’t think there is a religion that can be overwhelmingly beneficial today.
Most religions already emphasize kindness, generosity and compassion but it is ultimately easily corruptable. Every religious group seemingly has to hate somebody.
Long ago it would have imperative to human development, to explain the world around us and to motivate people to work cooperatively. Science has fulfilled that role however and now it seems religion makes individuals closer minded, refusing to believe in reason.
If religious people sternly stuck to their principles (looking at American Christians) I don’t even think we’d be having this conversation in the first place.
The most fun parts of religion are the camaraderie and intricate, abstracted rituals that used to serve one purpose but now serve a different, often symbolic one.
So lots of that. Spaced out throughout the year as to give followers a way of marking the passing of time and a reason to call out of work at regular intervals.
Oh, let’s toss in a lil religious specific language to aid as a group identifier and how about some arbitrary rules/guidelines that aren’t strictly enforced and vary by region but give those rules loving peoples something to grab onto.
The details don’t really matter all that much, as long as it can serve as a way to find community and camaraderie in new places, reinforce solidarity with your fellow humans, and give some rituals for timekeeping and distraction from modern life.
Ah gotta get Festivus on the calendar! I like the rules idea too, maybe a few super random things just to be quirky.
For some people, it’s important to have rules!! Of course you need the standard social construct rules, but the less necessary ones are important too. I think they give structure and consistency to people, so even if they’re arbitrary, it fulfils that need and as long as isn’t disruptive to society, I don’t see the harm. Plus, knowing someone also follows the same rules, rituals and holidays you do gives you instant rapport with them, so it aids in building a sense of community. Polite people outside of the new religion will also be curious and interested in hearing about these rules/rituals and whatever reasoning could uphold them, and the followers likely will enjoy explaining them, so this helps them build friendships outside of the religious group as well.
Tho it’s crucial that others aren’t ostracized for not following the more arbitrary ones and that those that do follow them don’t feel any actionable feelings of superior devotion or what-not. I think you can ostracize people who violate rules that relate to already well established social constructs (theft, murder, etc), but not the more frivolous restrictions and behavioral requirements we’d invent here.
I like pancakes. And green beans.
You just described the Esperanto community 😅
I’d like to think these are just some of the universal things of what makes a community fulfilling and fun, as I was mostly trying to abstract some of my favorite things about being Jewish from the faith component.
I think you did a great job distilling it. I can see many parallels with other communities I know too.
