Most of the discussion of religions i read or listen to at some point bring up the question of certain contradictions between religions. "How can both religions coexist, both be right, if they disagree on ...(whatever)"
This may just be my interpretation of religion, but I don't see the problem with religions having certain disagreements, certain contradictions. I don't take a literal interpretation of religion, so it doesn't bother me that they would disagree over how the world was formed, etc.
I think of religion as something that helps people find purpose in their lives, helps them define their morality, lets them connect with other people (in more than a social way). I have friends of many religions, and they are all good people, so to me it doesn't seem which particular religion you follow. They all tend to agree on the basic moral guidelines, and differ only in the anecdotes they use to tell them, and the basic routines they ask followers to adopt. Even my friends with no professed religion (and I do say "professed religion" - though I myself currently follow none, I cannot deny the influence of Christianity on me through my upbringing and community. I believe it is impossible to live without the influence of some religion, at least for now.). ... Even my friends with no professed religion are morally stable, drawing their morals from the unspoken agreement of the community.
Therefore it seems to me that the distinction between religions based on differences in their stories is foolish. Since these religions agree on most moral guidelines, I don't see a significant difference between them. Religions cannot be "right" or "wrong", they can only be suitable or not suitable sources of moral guidelines for someone, depending on that person's community and persona. They either work or they don't, and what works for some people doesn't work for all.
On that note, I would ask my readers if there is truly a reason to distinguish between followers of different faiths. Apart from the radical interpretations, each major religion seems to provide a stable, functional set of moral guidelines for a community. And when the religions come into contact, at least on small levels, they seem to be able to function together without problems. It's just when they come into contact on a large scale that there have been problems. because people have always differentiated between people of different faiths, there has been paranoia, sometimes justified, that has led to conflict.
Jews v. Muslims (Israel), Muslims v. Hindus (India/Pakistan), etc. - conflicts that arose because of land conflicts and fears of oppression, but even deeper than that because people of other faiths have always been considered "them", always distinct from "us". Would there have been a problem if the Jews emigrating from Europe to Israel hadn't been seen as different from the people already there (of course, with Jews it's harder. they have their own race, not just a religion. the result of a non-missionary faith)? would there have been a problem if the Muslims and Hindus of India had not seen themselves as different groups with different interests to protect?
It seems to me that there is about as much difference between people of different faiths as there is between people of different races. We're beginning to respect that people of different races are the same, so why not people of different religions?
That last question was not rhetorical. Please answer, I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Your friends might take a liberal side not a traditional side of their religion. I do not know for certain, of course. Usually people that take their religion literally, you will hear traditional Jew, traditional Muslim, etc..., you will see differences among them. Some of these groups tend to take things very literal, are also known as extremists, usually are not open minded, and will discriminate immediately because their specific lines will not meet the specific lines of another. Some extremist groups will even kill to eliminate the "outsiders."
It is great to have basic moral guidelines, it keeps us balanced, I think, but we need to watch also the details of religions and what each asks of the believers. We got to be careful what we call ourselves. There are deeper slices of religions that need to be known if we are to claim we belong to one. Either way, I know plenty of good people that are of different faiths, just like you, and they are neat and wonderful people but sometimes, the people I have encountered have not taken the time to study in depth what their faith proclaims and asks of them. It is also a trick that I sometimes see when priests manipulate in that they decide when it is time for them to give you this or that piece of information about their believes in order to make you first feel like you are embraced or belong to something meaningful so that when it is time to introduce a new idea you were not aware of about their faith, that normally you will disagree with, you will be more willing to except it because you have already been accepted in their community and have embraced you. Man has to use logic and has to think for himself in every circumstance.
Either way, you make a good point in that you do know people of all different faiths that are wonderful people, I know I do too. We just have to consider too, are they really into their faith or just kind of scratch the surface. I am not saying it has to be one of the other, but there is a difference.
Carmen
You bring up some very good points. I think when it comes to religion, people tend to collect into groups of similar thought. They want to do so.
Martin Luther, for example, did not want his movement to create a branch of Christianlity called Lutheranism. But people form groups and instinctively label those groups. Is there a difference between two people if they both believe in the same ideals if one is considered a Christian and the other Muslim? There is no technical difference. People want to make it black and white, but religion and frankly humanity are very intertwined. In a way where you can't easily seperate one religion from another as they are all based on human existence.
It's through this division and seclusion that we create these rifts when, all considered, we aren't that different. Race is very similar as you suggested. We divide by color out of instinct and fear those we view as different.
...is the way that they thing their religion makes perfect sense, but all others are completely rediculous, even though ALL religions are essentially premised upon the exact same arguments for what they believe.
percivale
thanks, percivale!
Insert Shameless Self-Promotion Here -- http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ada-castellon
"Religions are all the same! They're all boring crap!"-- William Murderface Murderface Murderface
Insert Shameless Self-Promotion Here -- http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ada-castellon
"What is the meaning of human life, or of organic life altogether? To answer this question at all implies a religion. Is there any sense then, you ask, in putting it? I answer, the man who regards his own life and that of his fellow creatures as meaningless is not merely unfortunate but almost disqualified for life."
- Albert Einstein
"To talk of immaterial existences is to talk of nothings. To say that the human soul, angels, god, are immaterial, is to say they are nothings, or that there is no god, no angels, no soul. I cannot reason otherwise ... without plunging into the fathomless abyss of dreams and phantasms. I am satisfied, and sufficiently occupied with the things which are, without tormenting or troubling myself about those which may indeed be, but of which I have no evidence."
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, August 15, 1820