|
|
Post by goz on Dec 8, 2019 21:33:19 GMT
If you, a Catholic and a Muslim BOTH claim that their different God is THE ONLY ONE Is it a different God? Both religions claim to worship the God of Abraham after all. I do think a lot of theistic religions are striving for the same concept, they just radically disagree on the details. So Brahman, Zeus, Yahweh etc might be seen as radically different descriptions of the same thing (God) rather than mutually exclusive entities. Some religions are quite open to that idea, at least to a degree: Catholic Scholastics were happy to apply Pagan thoughts about the nature of God to Yahweh, Sikhism merged Hinduism and Islam together, Baha'i says all religions have a unity and truth to them, Buddhism and Wicca leave themselves open to combination with other religions etc. Not saying the perennial view is the "more correct" way to view religions than the mutually exclusive one, but it does at least provide an interesting alternative. I totally agree with your view and the philosophy behind it. I am, however more interested in the view of the 'faithful' to any particular religion, being 100% sure that their particular religion IS the only one and the illogical mindset that introduces into the equation. What makes 'them' right an others wrong, be their on definition. I think this is the basis of 'fundamentalism in any religion and it is dangerous for obvious reasons.
|
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Dec 8, 2019 21:34:06 GMT
Atheism is the denial in belief in any deity. Theism is the belief that there is a deity. So it’s fifty fifty. Six of one and a half-dozen of another. You can make the High Popalorum from the ‘bark off the tree that we take from the top down. And that Low Popahirum is made from the bark that we take from the root up.’ Or eggs. The problems begin when one group of believers harm another group of believers who don't agree with their exact beliefs. Humans have fought over, and suffered and died over whose invisible friend is the right invisible friend. If everyone could simply COEXIST, I would have no problem with religion. It's that 'fighting and dying' business that turns me away. But, unfortunately, fighting and dying is hand-in-glove with Darwinian evolution.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Dec 8, 2019 21:50:41 GMT
So it’s fifty fifty. Six of one and a half-dozen of another. You can make the High Popalorum from the ‘bark off the tree that we take from the top down. And that Low Popahirum is made from the bark that we take from the root up.’ Or eggs. The problems begin when one group of believers harm another group of believers who don't agree with their exact beliefs. Humans have fought over, and suffered and died over whose invisible friend is the right invisible friend. If everyone could simply COEXIST, I would have no problem with religion. It's that 'fighting and dying' business that turns me away. But, unfortunately, fighting and dying is hand-in-glove with Darwinian evolution. Darwinan evolution becomes skewed when the results are no longer biological, butt social and political. See my comments in my last post.
|
|
