sd.397

[the iron horse]

Sunday Dispatch .397

All religions are not the same. All religions do not point to God.
All religions do not say that all religions are the same.
At the heart of every religion is an uncompromising
commitment to a particular way of defining who God is or
is not and accordingly, of defining life's purpose.

Anyone who claims that all religions are the same
betrays not only an ignorance of all religions but
also a caricatured view of the best known ones.
Evey religion at its core is exclusive.

~Jesus Among Other Gods , Ravi Zacharias

 

[maycocksean]

Sunday Dispatch .397

All religions are not the same. All religions do not point to God.
All religions do not say that all religions are the same.
At the heart of every religion is an uncompromising
commitment to a particular way of defining who God is or
is not and accordingly, of defining life's purpose.

Anyone who claims that all religions are the same
betrays not only an ignorance of all religions but
also a caricatured view of the best known ones.
Evey religion at its core is exclusive.

~Jesus Among Other Gods , Ravi Zacharias

Eh. . .

I just preached a sermon a few weeks ago at my church and the gist was that essentially all religions ARE the same in many ways. The devil is in the details. . .no pun intended of course. . .

Basically, I posited that all religions provide the following:

1. Ways of dealing with the reality of death
2. Addresses the reasons for pain and suffering.
3. Explains things the unexplainable (this is the one I find some atheists focus on and thus suggest that religion is going to disappear because science will have explained everything).
4. Provides a means of social control.

Christianity taken strictly as a religion, is about as good or bad as any other religion.

Of course I believe that there's more to Christian faith than religiosity. Or at least there should be. But I won't preach the whole sermon here. . .

 

[Vincent Vega]

3. Explains things the unexplainable (this is the one I find some atheists focus on and thus suggest that religion is going to disappear because science will have explained everything).

I'm not sure if science will ever be able to explain everything. So far I think science often has introduced more new questions than answering old ones, so there will always be some space for religion.

 

[maycocksean]

I'm not sure if science will ever be able to explain everything. So far I think science often has introduced more new questions than answering old ones, so there will always be some space for religion.

I agree, but you do hear the argument, that's all I'm saying.

I think there will be space for religion because of the other three factors as well, which science really doesn't address. All the existential stuff isn't really scientific in nature in the first place.

 

[melon]

I just preached a sermon a few weeks ago at my church and the gist was that essentially all religions ARE the same in many ways. The devil is in the details. . .no pun intended of course. . .

One of the more interesting bits of historical trivia is the etymological origins of the word "God" in Germanic languages and "Deus" in Romance languages. "God" comes from the Proto-Germanic root *ǥuđ- and originated theologically as a cognate for the Norse deity, Oðin. In Lombardic, for instance, his name is "Godan." This root also gave names to the Germanic Goths (Gutans), Geats (Gautar), and Gotlanders (Gutar), and the name is likely thought to have been derived from ancient Germanic ancestor worship.

"Deus," a Latin word, is even older, originating from the Proto-Indo-European *deiwos, which shares its name with the Germanic war god, Tiwaz (Tyr in Norse mythology), the Baltic creator god, Dievas, the Slavic sun god, Dazbog, and the Indo-Iranian Deva/Daeva, whom are, for purposes of simplicity, good gods in Hinduism and evil gods in early Zoroastrianism (as the religion originated as a schism from Vedic Hinduism). Later Zoroastrianism demoted the "daeva" to demons--hence, the irony that the same root word essentially refers to both gods and devils in modern religion.

Religions try to do a good job of obscuring their origins, and Judeo-Christianity is certainly no exception. One of the easiest ways to debunk this romanticism, however, is through linguistics, and even Judaism can be traced to an earlier polytheistic heritage, as evidenced by the pre-Judaic Semitic pantheon of gods, moving later on to first henotheism (the worship of one god, not precluding the existence of others who may also be worthy of praise) then monolatry (worship of one god who alone is worthy of worship, though other gods are known to exist), as implied in Exodus, in particular, and concluding finally with monotheism, which was likely introduced through Persian religious influence during the exile in the Persian Empire, as quite implied by the Old Testament Book of Ezra.

The evolution of religion is just as interesting as the evolution of civilization, as I see it.

 

[deep]

The evolution of religion .

When religious people want to argue against evolution.

I have often thought of telling them their belief system is proof of evolution.

but, it would be pointless.

 

[maycocksean]

When religious people want to argue against evolution.

I have often thought of telling them their belief system is proof of evolution.

but, it would be pointless.

I don't really care to argue against evolution. . .but how is belief "proof" of evolution?

 

[deep]

not belief

but their belief system

first, I respect you and the choices you have made in your life.


and I did say this would be pointless


but the Christian belief system along with the Islam belief system evolved out of Judaism


and if you read Melon's post he gave examples of what the Judaism belief system evolved from.

 

[maycocksean]

not belief

but their belief system

first, I respect you and the choices you have made in your life.


and I did say this would be pointless


but the Christian belief system along with the Islam belief system evolved out of Judaism


and if you read Melon's post he gave examples of what the Judaism belief system evolved from.

I don't necessarily have a problem with the evolution of religions--even my own. I was just saying that the evolution of beliefs or ideas really has no bearing on NATURAL evolution and thus doesn't "prove" or "disprove" it.

I would imagine the evolution of ideas should be evident to most thinking people, even Creationists--though I grant you that is not actually always the case.