The difference is in the intention. On the surface, two people can act the same way -- appear generous, tolerant, etc. -- but they differ in what motivates them to act that way. For example, one can be acting out of a genuine regard for others, another one out of pity. It can take quite a while to discern those motivations.They're not "friendly" toward other religions, they just don't give a shit about them. Duh.
— baker
I'm not sure what is intended by your remark, but you can flesh it out if you feel like it. — Ennui Elucidator
Aww, ye of great naivete.I am personally familiar with these religions being friendly with other religions and even encouraging education about other religions to their members. There is "ecumenical" work, interfaith groups, etc. So "not giving a shit" isn't even close to right. Non-proselytizing religions exist.
Oh. So anything anyone calls "religious" should be considered religious?Should terms denoting religious identity be exempt from being meaningful?
— baker
Last I checked you aren't a sociologist, ethnographer, or any other thing that could provide a useful inquiry into what is properly classified as "religion." Hand waving about a lack of Jesus or Jesus analogs precluding a group from being religious is not of much interest to me.
I agree with your sentiment about some historical religions being more or less tolerant than others, but I disagree that there is anything inherent about Abrahamic religions. — Ennui Elucidator
Well, it rather comes with the territory, doesn't it? If, e.g., Jesus is the only true God, and Christianity the only path to God, it's a bit taxing to be "friendly" towards other, pretend Gods and their ignorant worshippers. — Ciceronianus
but it seems harmless next to the Southern Baptist. — Tom Storm
:100:There was no problem of tolerance until Christianity began its relentless destruction of antiquity. The Abrahamic religions are inherently intolerant. — Ciceronianus
Giving moral guidance...wrapped in an intriguing story of a hero living out those believes — stoicHoneyBadger
what if the goal of a religion is not to be factually correct, but to give people moral guidance, thumos and social cohesion? — stoicHoneyBadger
Yes! This is very good, an excellent observation. I have noticed, in discussing matters of "ultimate concern", eschatological issues, with certain Orthodox Jewish friends and acquaintances of myself, that there does not seem to be the same feeling of a need for escatological certainty, or for precise escatological definition, that I have noticed within Christianity. This fact begs a question: what, in your opinion, was the origin of the "dogmatic certainty" which seems to pervade Christianity, and appears so needful to Christians? — Michael Zwingli
The ancient pagan religions of the Greeks and Romans were certainly friendly, even the so-called mystery religions. It wasn't unusual for someone to be an initiate of the Mithras cult and an initiate of Isis or Magna Mater. One could worship Jupiter, Asclepius as well as other gods. There was no problem of tolerance until Christianity began its relentless destruction of antiquity. The Abrahamic religions are inherently intolerant. — Ciceronianus
How does Christianity survive without supernaturalism or the fact of Jesus (either as historical person or son of god)? How does it survive without a claim to exclusive access to heaven? Those are great questions for Christians and they seem to be working on them. If/when they move on and the Christian community follows them, will they in that instant stop being Christians? I doubt it. — Ennui Elucidator
This is a tough historical thesis to maintain, as it would require not just a comparison to the ancient Greek religions, but to all prior religions. — Hanover
If Abrahamic religions are inherently intolerant, it wouldn't make sense that the intolerance would lie dormant for over a thousand years until the advent of Christianity, considering the Abrahamic religion of Judaism pre-dated it by that many years. — Hanover
The effort to make Christianity "reasonable" requires the rejection of its claim to exclusivity and of the claim that Jesus is God. If neither claim is true, Christianity becomes something other than Christianity. — Ciceronianus
Judaism was quite intolerant and exclusive long before Christianity began. — Ciceronianus
There was no problem of tolerance until Christianity began its relentless destruction of antiquity. — Ciceronianus
As to the ancient Greek and Roman religions, we have good evidence that the pagans worshipped several gods, and that worshipping one of them didn't require that no other gods be worshipped. — Ciceronianus
One need only read the Old Testament to understand that the Jews were violent towards non-believers--they seemed to have been particularly enchanted by the thought of the infants of non-believers being wacked against stone walls--this fond wish is expressed more than once in the Old Testament. — Ciceronianus
:100: :fire:People who claim to be Christians have been trying to reconcile the preposterous with the rational for a long time-from the early efforts to incorporate Platonism, through the time of Thomas Aquinas, who tried to attach Aristotle to Christianity, to the more recent efforts of folk like Karl Barth. It's an impossible task, I think. — Ciceronianus
But what if the goal of a religion is not to be factually correct, but to give people moral guidance, thumos and social cohesion? — stoicHoneyBadger
Giving moral guidance in a form of only 10 commandments or 4 noble truth, etc. just printed on a page would not have much interest, so it need to be wrapped in an intriguing story of a hero living out those believes. — stoicHoneyBadger
Ok, but then why not make it plainly known that it’s fiction? It isn’t like knowing that X book is fictional makes it impossible for it to provide meaningful moral lessons. — Pinprick
Then why did you say:
There was no problem of tolerance until Christianity began its relentless destruction of antiquity.
— Ciceronianus — Hanover
Then religions should admit it instead of clinging to the irrationality of their beliefs by making a virtue of faith. — Pinprick
In that case you get secular humanism. Basically Christianity without Christ. ) — stoicHoneyBadger
People who claim to be Christians have been trying to reconcile the preposterous with the rational for a long time- — Ciceronianus
The effort to make Christianity "reasonable" requires the rejection of its claim to exclusivity and of the claim that Jesus is God. — Ciceronianus
.and of the claim that there is a "big man in the sky" (or existing anywhere else, or otherwise) who created all, and who takes a part in human affairs. — Michael Zwingli
Religions do admit it. Some religions don't. If you want to argue about what Christians believe, argue about Christianity, not about "religion." — Ennui Elucidator
That's the very essence of Christianity. — DanLager
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.