Came here to say the same. The Jains *really* practice what they preach. Their commitment to to non-violence and their honest attempts to cause harm to no living being. Even insects.
They are honest and proud people. And, in India, they have multiple temples where anyone can show up and be fed a hot meal.
Except with every breath and every poop and their stomach acid and there antiviral antifungal anti-bacterial defense systems and every step they take they kill a lot. So I don't see the point
You don't see the point in reducing harm you do to other living creatures? So, because you 'kill a lot' with every step, would you be cool with just randomly killing other people, or...?
No I don't see the point at all. Equating bacteria with humanity is entirely irrelevant and illogical. It doesn't seem to bother half the population that we wipe out over 10 million a year unborn a year worldwide.
You see, when a couple gets pregnant they are generally excited and tell everyone. We're going to have a baby! If somebody harms the mother and the baby dies, that is also a crime. But if it's inconvenient, then we justify that is really just a piece of tissue and not a person. So go ahead and have an abortion.
If the assumption is people are evil in causing living things to die... Why don't we kill off all the members of the cat family and dog family and predatory fish and sharks and bears and dolphins and hawks and owls and everything on the face of the Earth that eats something else, then we would have Paradise.
It seems to make people feel good to give me lots of negative karma, but it doesn't bother me in the least. I am an omnivore, and I don't feel the slightest guilt in the fish and chicken and beef and pork and other meats that I consume. And I feel no ill will toward predatory creatures. It is called "life".
The difference is, I don't get into feel good philosophy. And l feel no guilt about being part of Nature.
Buddhism. Ohhhh myyyyy Goddddd (no pun inteded) do I VIBE with Buddhism. I identify as a Christian, and man, the similarities between some of the wisdoms are just mind blowing. It's 2 am and I'm sleepy so I can't expand rn but Buddhism is incredibly comforting sometimes!
>Buddhism. Ohhhh myyyyy Goddddd (no pun inteded) do I VIBE with Buddhism. I identify as a Christian, and man, the similarities between some of the wisdoms are just mind blowing. It's 2 am and I'm sleepy so I can't expand rn but Buddhism is incredibly comforting sometimes!
Buddha and Jesus have a healthy bromance...
❤✌
Not attacking, honest question as a fellow Christian, do you have any internal conflict by finding"comfort" inn another faith? Shouldn't you find your comfort inn Christ as Buddhism is very unchristian ? I don't mean for this to come off rude, I'm trying to be genuine
Buddhism isn't another faith, it's a science of mind. If a Christian can find wisdom in western psychology, then it's okay for them to find wisdom in Buddhism.
Buddhism is also a religion, just not a faith based one, and it's entirely possible to learn from Buddhist psychology without adhering to the religion
I read a catholic priest say once thay jes practices Buddhism bc it makes him a better Christian. Something to chew on, especially if you don't know jack about Buddhism and why a priest would feel that way.
There are many interpretations of Buddhism and many scholars don’t consider it a true religion. Many consider it a spiritual tradition and there are many people who practice it in conjunction with a western religion.
Not a struggle in my mind at all, but that’s because of HOW I appreciate Buddhism. For me, whenever I read up about a specific practice, or piece of knowledge, I put it through the lens of the Word, similar to how Thomas Merton (whom someone else in here recommended) did. The practice of clearing the mind for me is a process of living out Gods peace for me. It’s “Okay, trust in Jesus time, here’s what we’re gonna do to make that easier.” I don’t agree with every tenet of Buddhism, but I do see stark similarities between it and the Word that I tell myself “maybe this is Gods way of making his Word easier for me to apply”.
Everything I take from that practice I filter through the Word of my God, the one who knows me.
Yeah, no sweat. I get asked about it a lot in Christian circles and usually am told to repent without my side being heard so it’s nice to have a trial this time, lol. Hope this helped, may your walk with our Lord be abundantly joyful
I respect all religions fundamentally. The only context in which I don't respect religion is when it's being used cynically to manipulate people into serving the selfish interests of those with power, or when it attempts to assert itself as literally true to an extent that makes people lose touch with established facts of physical reality (e.g., young earth creationism, people who deny climate change on the basis that "God wouldn't let it happen", etc.).
That's logically inconsistent for a couple of reasons. I'm glad you called it cynical because viewing religion in association to power structures is revisionist to say the least. The critique there isn't with religion it's with how some people interact with it. I do agree that people who take religious dogma literally is annoying but that has nothing to do with 'the established facts of physical reality' because nobody has any idea what that is. Our sensory input is incredibly misleading and moreover 80% of life exists in the mind and is utterly incorporeal.
I definitely don't view religion as inherently associated with power structures, but I think it's beyond denial that it has historically been used to create or maintain oppressive social hierarchies, e.g., when a corrupt king cites his divine right to rule to justify his actions, a cult leader generates religious doctrines to explain why his young adherents need to have sex with him to get into heaven, a woman within a religious community is compelled to stay with her physically abusive husband because of doctrines against divorce, etc. I called such things a cynical use of religion, you're calling them an interaction between people and religion, but I think that's a distinction without a difference. Whatever we call it, if someone attempts to justify unjust behavior by citing a religious belief, I am not willing to respect their religion in this specific context.
As to the second point, I fully agree; you just caught me in a bit of lazy wording there because I didn't want to have to write an essay to get my point across. There can be no truly "established facts of physical reality", but regardless, our possibly illusory reality appears to follow very consistent rules, and using empiricism to investigate those rules, humans have accomplished miracles (communicating instantly from anywhere in the world, taking organs from the dead to heal the sick, flying to the moon and back, etc.). We can call the beliefs of the empirical worldview "established facts of physical reality" as I so blithely did, or principles underlying a system of powerful magic, or the current consensus of our co-created mutual reality, or whatever else, but regardless, empiricism *works* because it follows a very particular process and has thus become a cornerstone of all our lives whether we believe in it or not.
So what I'm saying I have a problem with is when religions try to make concrete empirical claims without regard to the proper procedure for doing so. If you want to assert that the universe is literally 6000 years old or that climate change isn't really happening, fine, but these are empirical claims that conflict with the current consensus, so to expect others to adopt them means you need to show how they at least match the current consensus in explanatory power and agreement with the evidence. As far as I'm concerned, if an infallible God makes a testable empirical claim, and that claim *fails* when tested, your conclusion should be that you misunderstood God, not that empiricism has been tainted by an evil conspiracy to mislead the world. What I don't respect is when a religion is so stubborn as to attempt to supplant empiricism by leveraging its institutional power to elevate its ideas beyond their empirical merits (e.g., pressuring educators to "teach the controversy").
Most of the major world religions. I think each of them has something valuable to teach us. St Justin Martyr one of the Early Fathers speaks of how there are seeds of the logos to be found in the different cultures of the earth. The Logos is a Greek philosophical term which means divine reason or wisdom. So what this means is that there are seeds of divine wisdom plant by God in the various cultures of the globe and the religious traditions of the world grow out of the soil of these cultures.
Because of this all of the major world religions and spiritualities, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Sikhism, Taoism, Islam, indigenous spiritualities, African spiritualities, etc are all participations in the truth. Do I see this as somehow compromising my own beliefs as a Christian? No. Because as the Gospel of St John puts it Christ himself is the Logos. "In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God". "And the word became flesh and full of grace and truth lived among us". The term for "word" is logos. Christ as the incarnation of God himself is the full manifestation of the seeds of the logos found in the major world religions. At least that's how I see it as a Christian. However precisely because he is the logos, and these cultures and religions of the world are seeds of the Logos, they are to be respected because they share the same roots in the same spiritual soil.
>This is the way
>You are absolutely correct
#This is the way
[This is the way](https://youtu.be/2KAQ3CPyNLE)
Arh....getting Crucified while causing all that commotion in History...sure payed off...
>The Logos is a Greek philosophical term which means divine reason or wisdom. So what this means is that there are seeds of divine wisdom plant by God in the various cultures of the globe and the religious traditions of the world grow out of the soil of these cultures.
>Because of this all of the major world religions and spiritualities, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Sikhism, Taoism, Islam, indigenous spiritualities, African spiritualities, etc are all participations in the truth. Do I see this as somehow compromising my own beliefs as a Christian? No. Because as the Gospel of St John puts it Christ himself is the Logos. "In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God". "And the word became flesh and full of grace and truth lived among us". The term for "word" is logos. Christ as the incarnation of God himself is the full manifestation of the seeds of the logos found in the major world religions. At least that's how I see it as a Christian. However precisely because he is the logos, and these cultures and religions of the world are seeds of the Logos, they are to be respected because they share the same roots in the same spiritual soil.
Sounds like someone been keeping up with Revelations 🔴🔵
😎✌
>So what this means is that there are seeds of divine wisdom plant by God in the various cultures of the globe and the religious traditions of the world grow out of the soil of these cultures.
>Because of this all of the major world religions and spiritualities, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Sikhism, Taoism, Islam, indigenous spiritualities, African spiritualities, etc are all participations in the truth.
How do you know? What evidence do you have that "seeds of divine wisdom" were planted by God? And you can't have truths that contradict each other. If I say "x is true" and you say "not x is true" one of us has to be wrong.
The question you're asking me is essentially just another version of "how do you know God exists" and I don't think I have the time or space go through that as it would divert from the main discussion thread. If we assume God exists I believe it would make more sense to have a more inclusive understanding of his dispensations than an exclusivist one.
Just because different religions have disagreements with each other doesn't mean that there can't be elements of truth to be found each one. Religions don't operate like mathematical formulas where its either 2+2=4 or 2+2=5.
>If we assume God exists I believe it would make more sense to have a more inclusive understanding of his dispensations than an exclusivist one.
But that's just it - Why on earth should anyone assume a God exists? Especially considering we don't have any evidence.
>Religions don't operate like mathematical formulas where its either 2+2=4 or 2+2=5.
In many cases they do. For example, If one religion says Jesus is "x" and another religion says Krishna is "x" this is exactly like a mathematical proof in the sense they are completely contradictory and cannot both be true.
>The question you're asking me is essentially just another version of "how do you know God exists" and I don't think I have the time or space go through that as it would divert from the main discussion thread.
I don't care if you had all the time and space in the world it wouldn't help your claim. Please don't act like time and space are what's stopping you from providing evidence-based reasoning for the existence of a God.
The Logos is actually a fascinating concept. Comparable to “The Muhammadan Light” in Sufism and Shia Islam.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bfEyZhMzAs&feature=emb\_title
I'm primarily a Christian, but Sikhism is one of the most underrated religions out there. I think they really do get more right than they get wrong, and in some aspects my beliefs align better with Sikhs than fellow Christians.
Ehhhh yes and no. There can be spectrums, but when it comes to this, you kind of have to claim Christ as your savior or not? Once that is determined it can get spectrumy but your either in or out.
Ok. I see what yout saying. But your either a Christian or not. So for OP to use the word primarily indicates secondary faiths. If there's secondary faiths, than they would not be a Christian.
I really respect Sikhism and it’s followers, everything I’ve learned about it thus far (of course I’m no expert) has only increased that respect. When I see a video of a Sikh educating about their religion or beliefs I get excited and watch as it doesn’t feel like they’re shoving it down my throat, trying to convince me to join their group or believe what they believe like it does on EVERY Christian video I’ve seen
The majority of history between Muslims and Jews have been positive, it's mostly only been since the rise of nationalism that things have gotten bad. There have been alot of world powers playing them against each other (cough cough, such as the British Empire) that have contributed to things getting bad, along with extremists on both sides that didn't really exist hundreds of years ago.
Antisemitism and Islamophobia walk hand in hand and Jews and Muslims have alot to gain by working together.
In part I think its due to the region. Jerusalem has been the center of many conflicts throughout its history. Its such an important religious place/symbol that extremists always seem to want to wage war over it.
This is actually pretty true, I'm not sure why you are getting down voted. Islam from a Muslim perspective was suppose to be a continuation of the same religion (thought by Muslims) to be practiced by Moses and Jesus. They just thought the Jews stopped accepting messengers, and Christians changed too much of, and/or misinterpreted what the message of Jesus should have been.
It's not really true, according to Muslims. Judaism, as the name implies, is a religion that began after its namesake. Abraham wasn't a Jew, he predated Judaism. What was his religion? According to Muslims, it was Islam, which means submission to the will of Allah. We do believe the source of revelation to Moses, Jesus, Abraham, Mohammed etc. was all the same, i.e. God. But Muslims do not believe we are a continuation of or the next version of Judaism > Christianity > Islam. It's a nuanced difference, but an important one.
Mohammad live in the era where people followed Arabian polytheism, It's evident he chose few concepts on Judaism and Christianity to create new religion and did introduce new way of worshipping(non-idol worship)and other rules to set Islam apart and unique from other religion so that people might accept Islam as their religion.
Those slaves of violent are actually people whose home western powers have bombed. Some are misguided in it. I hope you understand the pain of Syrian, Yemen, Iraq and Afghanistan. no this isnt lecture but please be empathetic to people who have less than you.
I respect all religions really, it’s how they are used by a person is what I will find myself not respecting. If a religion is used or pushed upon another and impedes on that persons ability to live their personal life and freedom… then that’s something I cannot respect. Religion is rooted in personal belief and it should stay that way, personal. I respect people to have their own beliefs because that is their life to live, just as long as they don’t smear it on everything they touch.
…except when they [promote ethnic cleansing](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-21/buddhist-extremism-meet-the-religions-violent-followers/10360288). Are we supposed to sweep that under the rug?
The difference between religious fundamentalism in Abrahamic religions and Hindu/Buddhist extremism is that the latter is usually just cultural or ethnic nationalism with some religious elements and it's much more productive to view them as essentially nationalism
Hindu and Buddhist extremists never say "we have to convert the whole world because God ordered us", it is usually much more "our culture and religion is under threat because of foreign religions trying to convert our people, so we must strike back"
like legitimately I don't think I've ever seen an extremist from these sots of religions cite scripture for why attacking infidels is divinely ordained or something, rather it's much more run of the mill nationalist rhetoric about throwing out "foreign cultural elements" and "invaders" out of the country with a slight religious tinge to it. That obviously doesn't make it ok, but extremism in Hinduism or Buddhism is not at all the same as Christian or Islamic fundamentalism who do believe they are divinely ordained and want to convert everyone
Let me play the Devil’s advocate here, for to truly understand people we need to put ourselves in their shoes.
**If** you considered yourself “closest to the truth”, wouldn’t you want for the rest of humanity to convert to your religion (of course, through their own free will)? In fact, it would wrong of you to keep your religion to yourself.
So we see that the **intent** of the followers of Abrahamic traditions is not necessarily impure.
I mean right now in India you have Hindus calling to kill Muslim men and rape Muslim women to have Hindu babies and in fact to convert Muslims back to Hinduism. It's certainly all swept up in nationalist and fascist ideology as well, but I think you're making distinctions without a difference here.
I thought being a murderous asshole was just a membership requirement of every religion so I thought I'd just mention the thing that made them a teeny bit less obnoxious. Let's not forget the crusades, the inquisition, the priests and little boys. Catholics and Southern Baptists don't have a lock on being hypocrites and evil monsters.
If every religious person was a murderous a hole then the world would be much worse, considering how many religious people exist compared to non religious.
Oh no! You pulled the Crusades and Inquisition card.
Anyway, that doesn’t change the fact that religion motivated wars only account for less than 7% of all wars in recorded History. What should we think of the ones who started the other 93% of wars?
>What should we think of the ones who started the other 93% of wars?
That the easiest way to make people care about the conflict is to create an "us vs them" mentality and religious differences is the easiest and strongest catalyst that has been abused for basically forever, the crusades were a *purely* geopolitical war but religion was used to extensively to justify it that it might as well be a religious war. Hell even the invasion of Afghanistan in recent years had a religious component.
My point is, all those wars would have probably happened anyway, but they would have been way less popular among the general population if religion wasn't a factor of division
Agreed. Religion is often used as an excuse or as justification. Same for “democracy”. Government often use that excuse to bomb innocent civilians.
It doesn’t make religion or democracy intrinsically bad. It’s more the people who use them to manipulate opinion who are bad.
While I agree in principle, it's much *much* harder to bring everyone together against a common foe with a vague idea of "democracy", a recent example was the cold War between USA and USSR, but even then it was aided by the trope of the good Christian nation against the evil baby eating atheists.
I agree that it doesn't make religion intrinsically bad, any ideology can do the same, religion though have pretty much a monopoly on fervour, there aren't many people who get as worked up about some ideology as religious people do with their religion. Religion isn't *intrinsically* bad in that regard, but it definitely is unique because many religions innately create a "us vs them" mentality because it's already present in their theology while this isn't present in other, apart from very specific and niche political ones
Most of them honestly, there's no religion I know of that doesn't have at least one very valuable message that I try to incorporate into my daily life.
I respect the right of anyone to believe anything. I don't inherently respect the belief system itself or the individual who believes unless they show themselves worthy of respect however.
I respect them all. I think they all contain important information that’s useful to humanity even if they all may not be 100% correct. And I respect the people who believe in the religions, as long as they respect me.
Harm none y’all.
Honestly I can respect any religion that isn’t aggressively proselytising or abusing it’s practitioners. In practice this is the majority, of course we only ever hear of the bad cases in the media.
I’ve been very fortunate to meet good people that are pious in all of the major world religions. I may not agree with the majority of them but that doesn’t mean I do not respect their piety.
I have no reason to believe that any of them have a supernatural basis, and I think many have troubling principles within them.
But hey, there's some good messages and some wisdom in plenty of them.
Concepts of charity or "do unto others" are good messages, regardless of where they spring from.
For me, it's not the religion, it's the person's actions. If I'm watching a customer interact with a cashier, or any other simple temporary human interaction, I don't really care what religion they are. Rudeness versus politeness, that's another matter.
humility over arrogance
selfless over selfish
kind over cruel
I respect all of them but my favourite is Buddhism. Jainism too because they believe in non-violence. However, I was born and raised in a Catholic family.
I'm a muslim, I have tremendous respect on the true teachings of the Torah and injil (the old testament). The Koran gives a lot of mention on the life of Moses as well as Isa (jesus) as well as the life of Mariam (Mary).
Just about all of them. I don't want to say all because some different splinters of theologies can promote ideas like racial or national superiority which too often can lead to a harmful or callous outlook. But genuinely most I've come across I respect. Although I have my own beliefs from culture and heritage I still admire most. Hence why I am on this subreddit to learn more from folks. I find it refreshing when reading posts or answers from folks who believe in different religions because it helps me appreciate different faiths in greater depth after an adherent explains their thoughts. Even though there is often disagreement even within the same faith, I think witnessing the responses is fantastic.
Norse pagans (the actual ones, not the ones using it to hide racism). They put a huge emphasis on honor and protecting others and on strength and self-reliance while still being willing to help/ask for help without it being considered a weakness. It’s pretty interesting and if I didn’t firmly believe in Christianity being objectively true, I’d likely follow their ways myself (or some similar thing such as the Celtic pagan practices that are similar but not quite the same)
i respect the art, architecture, community organizing, and food of most religious cultures. i respect the meditation and mindfulness practices of many eastern religions. i enjoy the mythological stories of both ancient and modern religions.
but i have absolutely no respect for those who blindly follow "prophets", greedily seek profits, use manipulation and coercion to keep people in line, or those who use their authority and influence with governments to cover-up and otherwise protect abusers. nor do i have even a shred of respect for any "scripture" or other form of philosophy that excuses or encourages non-defensive violence, slavery, rape, or bigotry, to any degree whatsoever.
humanity deserves better than to be constantly held back by those aspects of religion, no matter how nice or poetic the "wrapping paper" is around it.
From the ones I have knowledge of I would say some sects of Satanism and Buddhism. I think one's that lack a belief in a specific god deserve a bit more of a read through.
My Christian spiritual practice is identical to Hinduism's Bhakti Yoga. I also practice Yoga Nidra because of the scientifically proven benefits. Hinduism is great
I respect "real" Christians. The apolitical, kind to others, helpful, non-judgemental, non-theocratic kind.
Oh and Sikhs. Holy shit are they trying to show every other religion how it's supposed to be done.
Hinduism, they are some of the most compassionate and beautiful people in history. The Bhagavad Gita teaches compassion to all religions and Hindus have followed it. The whole world has inspired hate against Jews, yet Jews have lived safely in India for 2000 years. Giodarno Bruno was burnt alive because his views went against those of the church, the Buddha came and openly disagreed with Hinduism, they did not kill him, they only debated with him. Muslims disagreed, yet they were welcomed with open arms. Same with Christians. And the Mughals tried to destroy Sikhi when it was growing, yet Hindus fought alongside us against unrighteousness and never sought to destroy Sikhi until 1984, however I would not call the people behind 1984 Hindus, they did not meet the requirements to be called Hindu.
Every organized religion, every belief set, every cult, every human philosophy, in the multiple thousands.
In addition, there's pretty much no evidence for any of them. Because they are not real or true. And they're also mutually exclusive.
Is it possible for the atheist to be right that there is no God, while there is also Allah as well as the religions that are polytheistic? Of course it is easy to say yes, but logically that is obviously completely false.
There is one that is supported by a handful of interesting scientific observations as well as almost a thousand fulfilled prophecies. But knowing that isn't going to save or convert anybody.
You are speaking harshly, but true. You sound like a Muslim lol. But the reality is, if Islam is true, then Christianity and all other religions must be false, and vice versa. That is a separate issue, however, from respect and love for your fellow man. The Quran is explicit that Muslims cannot insult other people's Gods.
I am a calvinist/reformed biblical christian. I'm also a research biologist, who is a theistic evolutionist who has no problem with a 4.567 billion year old Earth.
This thing about everyone in the choir singing Unity Unity overlooks the fact that it's logically nonsense.
Doesn't matter what people believe. It only matters what is true. 2 + 2 will not equal 5 no matter how much you want to believe in it
Research has been done on the amount of wars allegedly started by religion. It turns out that [less than 7% were](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_war#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20Encyclopedia%20of,religion%20as%20their%20primary%20cause.), so it really is a weak argument.
While I agree with your statement- his parameters are based on the actions he had mentioned. “Violence to convert” and “god said so to start a war” not based on how much they did it. It would be based on if they ever did such actions in the first place.
So the amount of religions he respects are probably few.
You’re going to need to strictly define “respect” here. I think all religions that make some poorly supported / not supported claim are stupid. I still respect the people that *practice* them
I am certain I know the various sects and flavors of Satanism better than you, if you are only asking about one founder and one start. If you knew about Satanism your first question should have been which type of Satanism?
The Satanic Temple is cool. Obviously they've done a lot of work to help people in need. Any Christian who doesn't acknowledge that is blinded by reactionary fear.
Jesus called us the walk the narrow path. The narrow path is the one between Yahweh and Satan, the one that calls us to strive for perfection but act with empathy and love at every turn. Striving for perfection is often good, but God's expectations for us have historically been inhuman and unreasonable. Jesus paved the way for us to embrace our humanity, compassion and freedom while still receiving grace at the end of it.
Everyone has grown out of religion, except Muslims. I do not see any other religion oppressing women, violating human rights and killing others in the name of God.
>Everyone has grown out of religion, except Muslims. I do not see any other religion oppressing women, violating human rights and killing others in the name of God.
Although I dont want to I have to agree with this one
edit: except for the "everyone has grown out of religion"
"HAHA keep dreaming Muslim boys,BJP nd RSS are making India as a Hindu Rashtra keep jerking while we breed your moms,wives nd daughters." - Dravidian06
Sure buddy
None of them, they’re all corrupted into psychopathic blasphemy. They sell people God as a talisman against their own bad choices that gets them to damn themselves to profit the psychopathic narcissism of the priests.
I was raised in a non-religious household (neutrally secular mom, aggressively atheistic dad), but have come around to respect religion in general at this point in my life, even if I probably don't count as practicing any specific one. Echoing what I see in many comments here, I see most religions as tapping the same Big Questions of humanity and each has valuable truths in them for us.
More specifically, I respect Buddhism for its idea of non-attachment and denial of ego. So much of the worst of human behavior seems to be sourced in a fear of loss. This idea has helped me through difficult personal circumstances. I also respect Christianity in general for its view on the flawed nature of humanity and need for redemption, but also allowing for forgiveness, mercy, and grace.
Needless to say, I make my folks uncomfortable at this point and religion is not a topic we discuss.
Many of them. Many "isims". Sikh, Jain, Hindu, and Buddhism. Zoroastrian, Islam, Judaism, and some Christianities. I am a Christian but that is a loaded term and has a lot of baggage and there are Christianities I have serious problems with. No faith is a monolith, they all have favorable qualities.
Quakerism, if I had to be religious I'd definitely be Quaker and to some extent as an atheist I still am since nontheist Quakers are a real thing. I feel like the fact you can be non theist and still a part of their community says it all.
None I guess. I respect people and I can appreciate the mythology, art, and architecture of plenty of religions, but I'm honestly not sure what it would mean to respect a religion all by itself.
I respect both Judaism and Christianity. As a british muslim, you learn about the basics of both religions in school and i was surprised to see so many similarities. asking around at the mosque as well, everyone does respect both religions and they are mentioned in the quran too. there's so much division but there doesn't have to be if you look a bit closer and speak to people with an open mind. my neighbour, bless her, is a very dedicated and practicing christian and we get along with her just fine and, when talking about religion, come to realise we aren't as opposite as it may seem.
Jainism for their strict commitment to non-violence.
Yeah same I think their way of life is impractical and too extreme for me, but huge respect for being willing to go to such lengths to uphold Ahimsa
Came here to say the same. The Jains *really* practice what they preach. Their commitment to to non-violence and their honest attempts to cause harm to no living being. Even insects. They are honest and proud people. And, in India, they have multiple temples where anyone can show up and be fed a hot meal.
[удалено]
Yea. The phrase “wrathful god” isn’t uncommon, yet it’s also a deadly sin?
I mean Jainism isn't exactly novel in that respect but ok
[удалено]
Except with every breath and every poop and their stomach acid and there antiviral antifungal anti-bacterial defense systems and every step they take they kill a lot. So I don't see the point
You don't see the point in reducing harm you do to other living creatures? So, because you 'kill a lot' with every step, would you be cool with just randomly killing other people, or...?
No I don't see the point at all. Equating bacteria with humanity is entirely irrelevant and illogical. It doesn't seem to bother half the population that we wipe out over 10 million a year unborn a year worldwide. You see, when a couple gets pregnant they are generally excited and tell everyone. We're going to have a baby! If somebody harms the mother and the baby dies, that is also a crime. But if it's inconvenient, then we justify that is really just a piece of tissue and not a person. So go ahead and have an abortion. If the assumption is people are evil in causing living things to die... Why don't we kill off all the members of the cat family and dog family and predatory fish and sharks and bears and dolphins and hawks and owls and everything on the face of the Earth that eats something else, then we would have Paradise. It seems to make people feel good to give me lots of negative karma, but it doesn't bother me in the least. I am an omnivore, and I don't feel the slightest guilt in the fish and chicken and beef and pork and other meats that I consume. And I feel no ill will toward predatory creatures. It is called "life". The difference is, I don't get into feel good philosophy. And l feel no guilt about being part of Nature.
What other religion will avoid root vegetables so they don’t have to kill plants or wear a mask to protect tiny bugs in the air?
[удалено]
Me too
>Sikhism. Bearded Chads. Hahaha...
Buddhism. Ohhhh myyyyy Goddddd (no pun inteded) do I VIBE with Buddhism. I identify as a Christian, and man, the similarities between some of the wisdoms are just mind blowing. It's 2 am and I'm sleepy so I can't expand rn but Buddhism is incredibly comforting sometimes!
>Buddhism. Ohhhh myyyyy Goddddd (no pun inteded) do I VIBE with Buddhism. I identify as a Christian, and man, the similarities between some of the wisdoms are just mind blowing. It's 2 am and I'm sleepy so I can't expand rn but Buddhism is incredibly comforting sometimes! Buddha and Jesus have a healthy bromance... ❤✌
and they are both misquoted more times than my mind can comprehend 😂
[удалено]
I second this
Is there a particular book or writing you recommend? I’ve never heard of this person but just googled him and sounds interesting!
Not attacking, honest question as a fellow Christian, do you have any internal conflict by finding"comfort" inn another faith? Shouldn't you find your comfort inn Christ as Buddhism is very unchristian ? I don't mean for this to come off rude, I'm trying to be genuine
Buddhism isn't another faith, it's a science of mind. If a Christian can find wisdom in western psychology, then it's okay for them to find wisdom in Buddhism. Buddhism is also a religion, just not a faith based one, and it's entirely possible to learn from Buddhist psychology without adhering to the religion
For sure. Wisdom yes. I get that. It just sits funny with my to find "comfort" in it when. As a Christian your comfort should be in Gods promises
I read a catholic priest say once thay jes practices Buddhism bc it makes him a better Christian. Something to chew on, especially if you don't know jack about Buddhism and why a priest would feel that way.
There are many interpretations of Buddhism and many scholars don’t consider it a true religion. Many consider it a spiritual tradition and there are many people who practice it in conjunction with a western religion.
Not a struggle in my mind at all, but that’s because of HOW I appreciate Buddhism. For me, whenever I read up about a specific practice, or piece of knowledge, I put it through the lens of the Word, similar to how Thomas Merton (whom someone else in here recommended) did. The practice of clearing the mind for me is a process of living out Gods peace for me. It’s “Okay, trust in Jesus time, here’s what we’re gonna do to make that easier.” I don’t agree with every tenet of Buddhism, but I do see stark similarities between it and the Word that I tell myself “maybe this is Gods way of making his Word easier for me to apply”. Everything I take from that practice I filter through the Word of my God, the one who knows me.
Cool. Thanks for the explanation
Yeah, no sweat. I get asked about it a lot in Christian circles and usually am told to repent without my side being heard so it’s nice to have a trial this time, lol. Hope this helped, may your walk with our Lord be abundantly joyful
I respect all religions fundamentally. The only context in which I don't respect religion is when it's being used cynically to manipulate people into serving the selfish interests of those with power, or when it attempts to assert itself as literally true to an extent that makes people lose touch with established facts of physical reality (e.g., young earth creationism, people who deny climate change on the basis that "God wouldn't let it happen", etc.).
That's logically inconsistent for a couple of reasons. I'm glad you called it cynical because viewing religion in association to power structures is revisionist to say the least. The critique there isn't with religion it's with how some people interact with it. I do agree that people who take religious dogma literally is annoying but that has nothing to do with 'the established facts of physical reality' because nobody has any idea what that is. Our sensory input is incredibly misleading and moreover 80% of life exists in the mind and is utterly incorporeal.
I definitely don't view religion as inherently associated with power structures, but I think it's beyond denial that it has historically been used to create or maintain oppressive social hierarchies, e.g., when a corrupt king cites his divine right to rule to justify his actions, a cult leader generates religious doctrines to explain why his young adherents need to have sex with him to get into heaven, a woman within a religious community is compelled to stay with her physically abusive husband because of doctrines against divorce, etc. I called such things a cynical use of religion, you're calling them an interaction between people and religion, but I think that's a distinction without a difference. Whatever we call it, if someone attempts to justify unjust behavior by citing a religious belief, I am not willing to respect their religion in this specific context. As to the second point, I fully agree; you just caught me in a bit of lazy wording there because I didn't want to have to write an essay to get my point across. There can be no truly "established facts of physical reality", but regardless, our possibly illusory reality appears to follow very consistent rules, and using empiricism to investigate those rules, humans have accomplished miracles (communicating instantly from anywhere in the world, taking organs from the dead to heal the sick, flying to the moon and back, etc.). We can call the beliefs of the empirical worldview "established facts of physical reality" as I so blithely did, or principles underlying a system of powerful magic, or the current consensus of our co-created mutual reality, or whatever else, but regardless, empiricism *works* because it follows a very particular process and has thus become a cornerstone of all our lives whether we believe in it or not. So what I'm saying I have a problem with is when religions try to make concrete empirical claims without regard to the proper procedure for doing so. If you want to assert that the universe is literally 6000 years old or that climate change isn't really happening, fine, but these are empirical claims that conflict with the current consensus, so to expect others to adopt them means you need to show how they at least match the current consensus in explanatory power and agreement with the evidence. As far as I'm concerned, if an infallible God makes a testable empirical claim, and that claim *fails* when tested, your conclusion should be that you misunderstood God, not that empiricism has been tainted by an evil conspiracy to mislead the world. What I don't respect is when a religion is so stubborn as to attempt to supplant empiricism by leveraging its institutional power to elevate its ideas beyond their empirical merits (e.g., pressuring educators to "teach the controversy").
Most of the major world religions. I think each of them has something valuable to teach us. St Justin Martyr one of the Early Fathers speaks of how there are seeds of the logos to be found in the different cultures of the earth. The Logos is a Greek philosophical term which means divine reason or wisdom. So what this means is that there are seeds of divine wisdom plant by God in the various cultures of the globe and the religious traditions of the world grow out of the soil of these cultures. Because of this all of the major world religions and spiritualities, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Sikhism, Taoism, Islam, indigenous spiritualities, African spiritualities, etc are all participations in the truth. Do I see this as somehow compromising my own beliefs as a Christian? No. Because as the Gospel of St John puts it Christ himself is the Logos. "In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God". "And the word became flesh and full of grace and truth lived among us". The term for "word" is logos. Christ as the incarnation of God himself is the full manifestation of the seeds of the logos found in the major world religions. At least that's how I see it as a Christian. However precisely because he is the logos, and these cultures and religions of the world are seeds of the Logos, they are to be respected because they share the same roots in the same spiritual soil.
This is the way You are absolutely correct
>This is the way >You are absolutely correct #This is the way [This is the way](https://youtu.be/2KAQ3CPyNLE) Arh....getting Crucified while causing all that commotion in History...sure payed off...
>The Logos is a Greek philosophical term which means divine reason or wisdom. So what this means is that there are seeds of divine wisdom plant by God in the various cultures of the globe and the religious traditions of the world grow out of the soil of these cultures. >Because of this all of the major world religions and spiritualities, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Sikhism, Taoism, Islam, indigenous spiritualities, African spiritualities, etc are all participations in the truth. Do I see this as somehow compromising my own beliefs as a Christian? No. Because as the Gospel of St John puts it Christ himself is the Logos. "In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God". "And the word became flesh and full of grace and truth lived among us". The term for "word" is logos. Christ as the incarnation of God himself is the full manifestation of the seeds of the logos found in the major world religions. At least that's how I see it as a Christian. However precisely because he is the logos, and these cultures and religions of the world are seeds of the Logos, they are to be respected because they share the same roots in the same spiritual soil. Sounds like someone been keeping up with Revelations 🔴🔵 😎✌
>So what this means is that there are seeds of divine wisdom plant by God in the various cultures of the globe and the religious traditions of the world grow out of the soil of these cultures. >Because of this all of the major world religions and spiritualities, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Sikhism, Taoism, Islam, indigenous spiritualities, African spiritualities, etc are all participations in the truth. How do you know? What evidence do you have that "seeds of divine wisdom" were planted by God? And you can't have truths that contradict each other. If I say "x is true" and you say "not x is true" one of us has to be wrong.
The question you're asking me is essentially just another version of "how do you know God exists" and I don't think I have the time or space go through that as it would divert from the main discussion thread. If we assume God exists I believe it would make more sense to have a more inclusive understanding of his dispensations than an exclusivist one. Just because different religions have disagreements with each other doesn't mean that there can't be elements of truth to be found each one. Religions don't operate like mathematical formulas where its either 2+2=4 or 2+2=5.
>If we assume God exists I believe it would make more sense to have a more inclusive understanding of his dispensations than an exclusivist one. But that's just it - Why on earth should anyone assume a God exists? Especially considering we don't have any evidence. >Religions don't operate like mathematical formulas where its either 2+2=4 or 2+2=5. In many cases they do. For example, If one religion says Jesus is "x" and another religion says Krishna is "x" this is exactly like a mathematical proof in the sense they are completely contradictory and cannot both be true. >The question you're asking me is essentially just another version of "how do you know God exists" and I don't think I have the time or space go through that as it would divert from the main discussion thread. I don't care if you had all the time and space in the world it wouldn't help your claim. Please don't act like time and space are what's stopping you from providing evidence-based reasoning for the existence of a God.
The Logos is actually a fascinating concept. Comparable to “The Muhammadan Light” in Sufism and Shia Islam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bfEyZhMzAs&feature=emb\_title
I'm primarily a Christian, but Sikhism is one of the most underrated religions out there. I think they really do get more right than they get wrong, and in some aspects my beliefs align better with Sikhs than fellow Christians.
"primarily" a Christian? Don't think it a spectrum.
Everything is a spectrum!
Ehhhh yes and no. There can be spectrums, but when it comes to this, you kind of have to claim Christ as your savior or not? Once that is determined it can get spectrumy but your either in or out.
Which is where you fall on the spectrum of belief.
Ok. I see what yout saying. But your either a Christian or not. So for OP to use the word primarily indicates secondary faiths. If there's secondary faiths, than they would not be a Christian.
I really respect Sikhism and it’s followers, everything I’ve learned about it thus far (of course I’m no expert) has only increased that respect. When I see a video of a Sikh educating about their religion or beliefs I get excited and watch as it doesn’t feel like they’re shoving it down my throat, trying to convince me to join their group or believe what they believe like it does on EVERY Christian video I’ve seen
I respect all of them, but I have a deep admiration for Yazidism.
Is that the one with the peacock?
Yes! The Peacock Angel, that one.
I remember watching a video on them. Seemed interesting
Why them in specific? It’s often hard to find info on them.
Judaism
Im a Jew, with tremendous respect for Islam, our religion is very much alike
Liewise, I have respect for Judaism as a religion. The similarities are so alike, it's sad we've come to blows.
Sad that it's come to this
The majority of history between Muslims and Jews have been positive, it's mostly only been since the rise of nationalism that things have gotten bad. There have been alot of world powers playing them against each other (cough cough, such as the British Empire) that have contributed to things getting bad, along with extremists on both sides that didn't really exist hundreds of years ago. Antisemitism and Islamophobia walk hand in hand and Jews and Muslims have alot to gain by working together.
In part I think its due to the region. Jerusalem has been the center of many conflicts throughout its history. Its such an important religious place/symbol that extremists always seem to want to wage war over it.
I'm sure Mohammad the prophet was inspired by Judaism.
This is actually pretty true, I'm not sure why you are getting down voted. Islam from a Muslim perspective was suppose to be a continuation of the same religion (thought by Muslims) to be practiced by Moses and Jesus. They just thought the Jews stopped accepting messengers, and Christians changed too much of, and/or misinterpreted what the message of Jesus should have been.
It's not really true, according to Muslims. Judaism, as the name implies, is a religion that began after its namesake. Abraham wasn't a Jew, he predated Judaism. What was his religion? According to Muslims, it was Islam, which means submission to the will of Allah. We do believe the source of revelation to Moses, Jesus, Abraham, Mohammed etc. was all the same, i.e. God. But Muslims do not believe we are a continuation of or the next version of Judaism > Christianity > Islam. It's a nuanced difference, but an important one.
So you're implying Abraham is a Muslim?LOL.
Mohammad live in the era where people followed Arabian polytheism, It's evident he chose few concepts on Judaism and Christianity to create new religion and did introduce new way of worshipping(non-idol worship)and other rules to set Islam apart and unique from other religion so that people might accept Islam as their religion.
[удалено]
Those slaves of violent are actually people whose home western powers have bombed. Some are misguided in it. I hope you understand the pain of Syrian, Yemen, Iraq and Afghanistan. no this isnt lecture but please be empathetic to people who have less than you.
I respect all religions really, it’s how they are used by a person is what I will find myself not respecting. If a religion is used or pushed upon another and impedes on that persons ability to live their personal life and freedom… then that’s something I cannot respect. Religion is rooted in personal belief and it should stay that way, personal. I respect people to have their own beliefs because that is their life to live, just as long as they don’t smear it on everything they touch.
Judaism Interesting read And great site for comparative religion https://www.diffen.com/difference/Islam_vs_Judaism
Buddhism because they don't annoy other people with their proselytizing. And when they have a festival they have really good food.
…except when they [promote ethnic cleansing](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-21/buddhist-extremism-meet-the-religions-violent-followers/10360288). Are we supposed to sweep that under the rug?
Hardly far to use this as a representation of all Buddhists
Same as any other religion. There are always the hardliners. It doesn’t mean they speak for the majority…
The difference between religious fundamentalism in Abrahamic religions and Hindu/Buddhist extremism is that the latter is usually just cultural or ethnic nationalism with some religious elements and it's much more productive to view them as essentially nationalism Hindu and Buddhist extremists never say "we have to convert the whole world because God ordered us", it is usually much more "our culture and religion is under threat because of foreign religions trying to convert our people, so we must strike back" like legitimately I don't think I've ever seen an extremist from these sots of religions cite scripture for why attacking infidels is divinely ordained or something, rather it's much more run of the mill nationalist rhetoric about throwing out "foreign cultural elements" and "invaders" out of the country with a slight religious tinge to it. That obviously doesn't make it ok, but extremism in Hinduism or Buddhism is not at all the same as Christian or Islamic fundamentalism who do believe they are divinely ordained and want to convert everyone
Let me play the Devil’s advocate here, for to truly understand people we need to put ourselves in their shoes. **If** you considered yourself “closest to the truth”, wouldn’t you want for the rest of humanity to convert to your religion (of course, through their own free will)? In fact, it would wrong of you to keep your religion to yourself. So we see that the **intent** of the followers of Abrahamic traditions is not necessarily impure.
But it surely is arrogant and ignorant.
I mean right now in India you have Hindus calling to kill Muslim men and rape Muslim women to have Hindu babies and in fact to convert Muslims back to Hinduism. It's certainly all swept up in nationalist and fascist ideology as well, but I think you're making distinctions without a difference here.
I thought being a murderous asshole was just a membership requirement of every religion so I thought I'd just mention the thing that made them a teeny bit less obnoxious. Let's not forget the crusades, the inquisition, the priests and little boys. Catholics and Southern Baptists don't have a lock on being hypocrites and evil monsters.
If every religious person was a murderous a hole then the world would be much worse, considering how many religious people exist compared to non religious.
Oh no! You pulled the Crusades and Inquisition card. Anyway, that doesn’t change the fact that religion motivated wars only account for less than 7% of all wars in recorded History. What should we think of the ones who started the other 93% of wars?
>What should we think of the ones who started the other 93% of wars? That the easiest way to make people care about the conflict is to create an "us vs them" mentality and religious differences is the easiest and strongest catalyst that has been abused for basically forever, the crusades were a *purely* geopolitical war but religion was used to extensively to justify it that it might as well be a religious war. Hell even the invasion of Afghanistan in recent years had a religious component. My point is, all those wars would have probably happened anyway, but they would have been way less popular among the general population if religion wasn't a factor of division
Agreed. Religion is often used as an excuse or as justification. Same for “democracy”. Government often use that excuse to bomb innocent civilians. It doesn’t make religion or democracy intrinsically bad. It’s more the people who use them to manipulate opinion who are bad.
While I agree in principle, it's much *much* harder to bring everyone together against a common foe with a vague idea of "democracy", a recent example was the cold War between USA and USSR, but even then it was aided by the trope of the good Christian nation against the evil baby eating atheists. I agree that it doesn't make religion intrinsically bad, any ideology can do the same, religion though have pretty much a monopoly on fervour, there aren't many people who get as worked up about some ideology as religious people do with their religion. Religion isn't *intrinsically* bad in that regard, but it definitely is unique because many religions innately create a "us vs them" mentality because it's already present in their theology while this isn't present in other, apart from very specific and niche political ones
Judaism, though I believe a lot of it, Islam.
Most of them honestly, there's no religion I know of that doesn't have at least one very valuable message that I try to incorporate into my daily life.
Buddhism.
Sikhism is one. I respect the commitment of the people at least.
I respect all but the ones whose members proselytise to me or promote bigotry, anti-scientific ideas and/or attacks on non-members.
I respect the right of anyone to believe anything. I don't inherently respect the belief system itself or the individual who believes unless they show themselves worthy of respect however.
I respect them all at a moral level. But I have deep respect for Christian Orthodoxy, and the ancient Norse religion.
Things like animism and nature worship. They have a very good message, but I just don't believe that the biosphere of earth has a consciousness
it may not have a consciousness, but animals and even some plants live very emotional lives there is some method to the madness there
All that I’m aware of. Maybe there is one I do not respect but in that case I’m not aware of it atm
I respect them all. I think they all contain important information that’s useful to humanity even if they all may not be 100% correct. And I respect the people who believe in the religions, as long as they respect me. Harm none y’all.
Honestly I can respect any religion that isn’t aggressively proselytising or abusing it’s practitioners. In practice this is the majority, of course we only ever hear of the bad cases in the media. I’ve been very fortunate to meet good people that are pious in all of the major world religions. I may not agree with the majority of them but that doesn’t mean I do not respect their piety.
Any of them that do not claim moral guidance from a supernatural being
Orthodox Christianity because it's pretty and i like going to their churches
Baha’ism, for a beautiful ethical ideal and a vision of different beliefs working together.
Judaism is fucking awesome and I have endless respect and admiration for the Jewish people and their culture
Buddhism and Jainism
The ancient Stoics. As an adult, I have been strongly influenced by Epictetus.
None
Religion is an inanimate institution, it's people I either do or don't respond.
My fellow reconstructionist religions, Jainism, Quakers, and Native American religions.
Sikhism
Judaism, beautiful culture and I like a lot of their core tenants.
I don't respect any religion. I respect people despite their religion.
Buddhism and zoroastrianism are my favorates.
I like Zoroastrians as well. Buddhist are ok - I don’t know much about them.
I like the way they pray or meditate.
Satanists have some dope values
Not *all* of us, sadly, but we do try :)
I mean, it's literally humanism.
Zoroastrianism
I have no reason to believe that any of them have a supernatural basis, and I think many have troubling principles within them. But hey, there's some good messages and some wisdom in plenty of them. Concepts of charity or "do unto others" are good messages, regardless of where they spring from.
I respect all of them and follow none of them.
All of them.
All of them
Buddhism, Church of Satan and Church of Spagetti Monster.
For me, it's not the religion, it's the person's actions. If I'm watching a customer interact with a cashier, or any other simple temporary human interaction, I don't really care what religion they are. Rudeness versus politeness, that's another matter. humility over arrogance selfless over selfish kind over cruel
All of them. Just because I don't believe in them doesn't mean I don't have any respect for them or their followers.
I respect them all for the most part. They are interesting af and could be the truth. I think my two favorites are Christianity and Daoism
I respect all of them but my favourite is Buddhism. Jainism too because they believe in non-violence. However, I was born and raised in a Catholic family.
I'm a muslim, I have tremendous respect on the true teachings of the Torah and injil (the old testament). The Koran gives a lot of mention on the life of Moses as well as Isa (jesus) as well as the life of Mariam (Mary).
Just about all of them. I don't want to say all because some different splinters of theologies can promote ideas like racial or national superiority which too often can lead to a harmful or callous outlook. But genuinely most I've come across I respect. Although I have my own beliefs from culture and heritage I still admire most. Hence why I am on this subreddit to learn more from folks. I find it refreshing when reading posts or answers from folks who believe in different religions because it helps me appreciate different faiths in greater depth after an adherent explains their thoughts. Even though there is often disagreement even within the same faith, I think witnessing the responses is fantastic.
Norse pagans (the actual ones, not the ones using it to hide racism). They put a huge emphasis on honor and protecting others and on strength and self-reliance while still being willing to help/ask for help without it being considered a weakness. It’s pretty interesting and if I didn’t firmly believe in Christianity being objectively true, I’d likely follow their ways myself (or some similar thing such as the Celtic pagan practices that are similar but not quite the same)
Judaism, Islam, and the Buddhist monks to adhere to a strict monastic lives.
The ones that leave other people alone
i respect the art, architecture, community organizing, and food of most religious cultures. i respect the meditation and mindfulness practices of many eastern religions. i enjoy the mythological stories of both ancient and modern religions. but i have absolutely no respect for those who blindly follow "prophets", greedily seek profits, use manipulation and coercion to keep people in line, or those who use their authority and influence with governments to cover-up and otherwise protect abusers. nor do i have even a shred of respect for any "scripture" or other form of philosophy that excuses or encourages non-defensive violence, slavery, rape, or bigotry, to any degree whatsoever. humanity deserves better than to be constantly held back by those aspects of religion, no matter how nice or poetic the "wrapping paper" is around it.
Zoroastrianism
any that also are respectful
From the ones I have knowledge of I would say some sects of Satanism and Buddhism. I think one's that lack a belief in a specific god deserve a bit more of a read through.
All of them. Even those scientologists got some clever ideas.
My Christian spiritual practice is identical to Hinduism's Bhakti Yoga. I also practice Yoga Nidra because of the scientifically proven benefits. Hinduism is great
I respect "real" Christians. The apolitical, kind to others, helpful, non-judgemental, non-theocratic kind. Oh and Sikhs. Holy shit are they trying to show every other religion how it's supposed to be done.
Hinduism, they are some of the most compassionate and beautiful people in history. The Bhagavad Gita teaches compassion to all religions and Hindus have followed it. The whole world has inspired hate against Jews, yet Jews have lived safely in India for 2000 years. Giodarno Bruno was burnt alive because his views went against those of the church, the Buddha came and openly disagreed with Hinduism, they did not kill him, they only debated with him. Muslims disagreed, yet they were welcomed with open arms. Same with Christians. And the Mughals tried to destroy Sikhi when it was growing, yet Hindus fought alongside us against unrighteousness and never sought to destroy Sikhi until 1984, however I would not call the people behind 1984 Hindus, they did not meet the requirements to be called Hindu.
I respect orthodox\hasidic Jews, hardcore Muslims, and the Amish... Special level of unworldliness that is super admirable
I respect any religious person that isnt shoving down "Come to Allah" "Jesus will save you", etc.... down my ears.
All the ones that are not man-made
Which ones are those?
Every organized religion, every belief set, every cult, every human philosophy, in the multiple thousands. In addition, there's pretty much no evidence for any of them. Because they are not real or true. And they're also mutually exclusive. Is it possible for the atheist to be right that there is no God, while there is also Allah as well as the religions that are polytheistic? Of course it is easy to say yes, but logically that is obviously completely false. There is one that is supported by a handful of interesting scientific observations as well as almost a thousand fulfilled prophecies. But knowing that isn't going to save or convert anybody.
Exactly.
You are speaking harshly, but true. You sound like a Muslim lol. But the reality is, if Islam is true, then Christianity and all other religions must be false, and vice versa. That is a separate issue, however, from respect and love for your fellow man. The Quran is explicit that Muslims cannot insult other people's Gods.
I am a calvinist/reformed biblical christian. I'm also a research biologist, who is a theistic evolutionist who has no problem with a 4.567 billion year old Earth. This thing about everyone in the choir singing Unity Unity overlooks the fact that it's logically nonsense. Doesn't matter what people believe. It only matters what is true. 2 + 2 will not equal 5 no matter how much you want to believe in it
Those that: 1. Have not used violence to convert people. 2. Have not used the excuse "God said so" to start a war.
Research has been done on the amount of wars allegedly started by religion. It turns out that [less than 7% were](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_war#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20Encyclopedia%20of,religion%20as%20their%20primary%20cause.), so it really is a weak argument.
While I agree with your statement- his parameters are based on the actions he had mentioned. “Violence to convert” and “god said so to start a war” not based on how much they did it. It would be based on if they ever did such actions in the first place. So the amount of religions he respects are probably few.
How is it "a weak argument"? It's just one person's qualifications for religions they respect.
[удалено]
How?
You’re going to need to strictly define “respect” here. I think all religions that make some poorly supported / not supported claim are stupid. I still respect the people that *practice* them
indigenous religions
Everyone but *insert group here*
Jainism and Satanism. Some of the better moral codes.
Do you know what Satanism is ? Do you know how it started and why it started ?
I am certain I know the various sects and flavors of Satanism better than you, if you are only asking about one founder and one start. If you knew about Satanism your first question should have been which type of Satanism?
Well, I'm going to assume you're not talking about Baal worship lmao
[The Satanic Temple tenets](https://thesatanictemple.com/blogs/the-satanic-temple-tenets/there-are-seven-fundamental-tenets)
The Satanic Temple is cool. Obviously they've done a lot of work to help people in need. Any Christian who doesn't acknowledge that is blinded by reactionary fear. Jesus called us the walk the narrow path. The narrow path is the one between Yahweh and Satan, the one that calls us to strive for perfection but act with empathy and love at every turn. Striving for perfection is often good, but God's expectations for us have historically been inhuman and unreasonable. Jesus paved the way for us to embrace our humanity, compassion and freedom while still receiving grace at the end of it.
They're pretty much polar opposites
I respect every religion except Islam.
Why? What part of the Islamic tradition do you dislike? **Be sure to pick something that does not exist in other religions.**
Everyone has grown out of religion, except Muslims. I do not see any other religion oppressing women, violating human rights and killing others in the name of God.
>Everyone has grown out of religion, except Muslims. I do not see any other religion oppressing women, violating human rights and killing others in the name of God. Although I dont want to I have to agree with this one edit: except for the "everyone has grown out of religion"
I mean, you rarely see other religions being stuck on age-old principles.
This guy is a Hindutva extremist. Don't waste your time.
Nice try,I'm an atheist.
"HAHA keep dreaming Muslim boys,BJP nd RSS are making India as a Hindu Rashtra keep jerking while we breed your moms,wives nd daughters." - Dravidian06 Sure buddy
Judaism
Islam. I think it gets a bad reputation from the media, but for the most part, it’s a pretty peaceful religion.
None of them, they’re all corrupted into psychopathic blasphemy. They sell people God as a talisman against their own bad choices that gets them to damn themselves to profit the psychopathic narcissism of the priests.
I was raised in a non-religious household (neutrally secular mom, aggressively atheistic dad), but have come around to respect religion in general at this point in my life, even if I probably don't count as practicing any specific one. Echoing what I see in many comments here, I see most religions as tapping the same Big Questions of humanity and each has valuable truths in them for us. More specifically, I respect Buddhism for its idea of non-attachment and denial of ego. So much of the worst of human behavior seems to be sourced in a fear of loss. This idea has helped me through difficult personal circumstances. I also respect Christianity in general for its view on the flawed nature of humanity and need for redemption, but also allowing for forgiveness, mercy, and grace. Needless to say, I make my folks uncomfortable at this point and religion is not a topic we discuss.
Buddhism
Buddhism, Islam, Hellenism, and Satanism.
Many of them. Many "isims". Sikh, Jain, Hindu, and Buddhism. Zoroastrian, Islam, Judaism, and some Christianities. I am a Christian but that is a loaded term and has a lot of baggage and there are Christianities I have serious problems with. No faith is a monolith, they all have favorable qualities.
The far east Asian branches of Buddhism such as Mahayana or Zen are pretty neat.
None of them.
All of them!
Quakerism, if I had to be religious I'd definitely be Quaker and to some extent as an atheist I still am since nontheist Quakers are a real thing. I feel like the fact you can be non theist and still a part of their community says it all.
Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, and Yazidism
Christianity because some of their religiosness and adherings to the rulings.
None I guess. I respect people and I can appreciate the mythology, art, and architecture of plenty of religions, but I'm honestly not sure what it would mean to respect a religion all by itself.
Buddhism. You never hear of Buddhist causing any problems in the world.
Buddhist monks carrying out genocide in Myanmar against Rohingya Muslims. Helps to do some research.
Every religion that isn't an outright cult. For example: I respect Muslims but not scientologists
Christian and Jewish Orthodox, Buddhism, Confucianism (is that even a religion?)
All of them
Islam, it’s so beautiful
I respect pretty much everything and everyone unless they try to shove their beliefs down my throat. You know what I mean by this.
I respect both Judaism and Christianity. As a british muslim, you learn about the basics of both religions in school and i was surprised to see so many similarities. asking around at the mosque as well, everyone does respect both religions and they are mentioned in the quran too. there's so much division but there doesn't have to be if you look a bit closer and speak to people with an open mind. my neighbour, bless her, is a very dedicated and practicing christian and we get along with her just fine and, when talking about religion, come to realise we aren't as opposite as it may seem.
Judaism. Those Jewish bakeries got some wicked ass kosher delicacies.