Are almost all faiths pieces of a large puzzle

[Riverwolf]

I spent several years as a Christian studying other religions. I've concluded that they all are allegorical teachings of AstroTheology, mixed in with spiritual wisdom.
Their are more similarities than differences when you see them for what they are.

Which religions were you studying, and in what context?

Were you just reading books or articles? Were you taking Comparative Religion classes? Did you travel to the places where they are regularly practiced, and join in the practices for extended periods of time? How Christocentric was/is your thinking in this regard? (Suggesting that there's a singular source, this "AstroTheology" you speak of, seems to indicate a heavy Christocentric leaning, since that's a concept that only can be applied to other religions when they're viewed from the perspective that they're all "wrong" and that there's some nebulous "right" or "original" way, such as has been pushed by Christianity.)

 

[Walter Russell]

Which religions were you studying, and in what context?

Were you just reading books or articles? Were you taking Comparative Religion classes? Did you travel to the places where they are regularly practiced, and join in the practices for extended periods of time? How Christocentric was/is your thinking in this regard? (Suggesting that there's a singular source, this "AstroTheology" you speak of, seems to indicate a heavy Christocentric leaning, since that's a concept that only can be applied to other religions when they're viewed from the perspective that they're all "wrong" and that there's some nebulous "right" or "original" way, such as has been pushed by Christianity.)

I read the religous texts themselves and books or articles from so called authorities.
The religous texts themselves was my main focus. I mostly focused on the big religions, Islam,Hinduism,Buddhism,Taoism,Judaism but i've also studied to some degree many others like Greek Mythology, Egyptian Mythology, Native American, Inca etc...
I haven't travelled due to my fear of flying :/
I wouldn't say my Christianity at the influenced me in a way that negatively affected my research. The proof of that is the fact that i'm no longer a Christian.
The moral teachings of atleast all the religions i've studied all teach that love is the most beneficial way for one to conduct themselves. The differences in the religions are based on the cultural differences and that part of any belief system is pretty easy to identify.
You can trace most gods back to earlier civilizations like Roman back to Greek back to Eygpt back to Babylon. The gods having similar characteristics with a name change. Also many of these are easy to associate with the planets or constellations we can observe fir ourselves today ie Hercules being the son of Zeus and his 12 labors, Same with Egypt's Horus etc... Once you realize the pattern its easy to see.
I've since gone back and re read the bible and the stuff just jumps out at me know. I believe theres great wisdom in all the religous texts. Its just that their exoteric stories are hiding their esoteric truths and religious institutions use the exoteric stories to try to control us while keeping the esoteric truth from us.
I've found the eastern religions to be more forth write with spiritual knowledge.
More than anything I agree with an old proverb "those who look outward dream, the who look inward awaken"

 

[Riverwolf]

I read the religous texts themselves

What of the religions that lack such texts?

and books or articles from so called authorities.
The religous texts themselves was my main focus. I mostly focused on the big religions, Islam,Hinduism,Buddhism,Taoism,Judaism but i've also studied to some degree many others like Greek Mythology, Egyptian Mythology, Native American, Inca etc...

Interesting. Hinduism, as you should know from your research, isn't actually a single religion, but several religions, and yet you list it as one of the "big religions." Furthermore, you list Daoism and Judaism as "big", even though the former is largely an ethnic religion with a comparatively small worldwide population, and (AFAIK) Daoism has merged pretty seamlessly with Shen Dao.

As for "mythologies", you should also know from your research that those stories tended to be secondary in function to the actual indigenous religions they come from. This is consistent with surviving indigenous traditions, such as Shinto.

I wouldn't say my Christianity at the influenced me in a way that negatively affected my research. The proof of that is the fact that i'm no longer a Christian.

That's not really what I was getting at. Whether Christian or not, if you grew up in America, you're going to approach things from a Christian default, since that's the first form of religion most of us are exposed to. As a result, it's the benchmark for comparison, if you understand my meaning.

This may be compounded by actually practicing Christianity, but it affects all of us who grew up with it as the default point of comparison.

The moral teachings of atleast all the religions i've studied all teach that love is the most beneficial way for one to conduct themselves. The differences in the religions are based on the cultural differences and that part of any belief system is pretty easy to identify.
You can trace most gods back to earlier civilizations like Roman back to Greek back to Eygpt back to Babylon.
The gods having similar characteristics with a name change. Also many of these are easy to associate with the planets or constellations we can observe fir ourselves today ie Hercules being the son of Zeus and his 12 labors, Same with Egypt's Horus etc... Once you realize the pattern its easy to see.

This is absolutely untrue, and demonstrates at best a superfluous understanding of how all these cultures related. While there might have been some degree of exchange between them, the Netjeri and Olympioi are fundamentally different from each other in terms of their origins, by virtue of Kemet being Afro-Asiatic, while Hellas is Indo-European. From your research, you should be able to tell at a glance what I'm referring to with these terms, correct?

 

[Walter Russell]

What of the religions that lack such texts?



Interesting. Hinduism, as you should know from your research, isn't actually a single religion, but several religions, and yet you list it as one of the "big religions." Furthermore, you list Daoism and Judaism as "big", even though the former is largely an ethnic religion with a comparatively small worldwide population, and (AFAIK) Daoism has merged pretty seamlessly with Shen Dao.

As for "mythologies", you should also know from your research that those stories tended to be secondary in function to the actual indigenous religions they come from. This is consistent with surviving indigenous traditions, such as Shinto.



That's not really what I was getting at. Whether Christian or not, if you grew up in America, you're going to approach things from a Christian default, since that's the first form of religion most of us are exposed to. As a result, it's the benchmark for comparison, if you understand my meaning.

This may be compounded by actually practicing Christianity, but it affects all of us who grew up with it as the default point of comparison.



This is absolutely untrue, and demonstrates at best a superfluous understanding of how all these cultures related. While there might have been some degree of exchange between them, the Netjeri and Olympioi are fundamentally different from each other in terms of their origins, by virtue of Kemet being Afro-Asiatic, while Hellas is Indo-European. From your research, you should be able to tell at a glance what I'm referring to with these terms, correct?

I was referring to them based on their influence in the modern world and the similarities of their deities.
I do know that Hinduism and Taoism are both made up of many different teachings and i'd be lying if I said I knew them all. But that doesn't negate anything.
Every indigenous culture had a priest, not one excluded. They held the knowledge and power. They spoke of their knowledge in story form. In these teachings were knowledge and wisdom.
This took place around the world but as populations grew, the true meaning of these stories were kept hidden from the masses.
Slower growing areas of the world has kept more of their knowledge.
The worlds first Universities were in Temples and its where Science has its roots.
As for moral teachings, Any teaching of rebirth or reincarnation i've ever read is centered on stillness of mind, over coming the tempations of the body and peace. Islam's very meaning is peace, Jesus taught it also.
Theres a solid view of similarities but no I haven't spent 10years in a forest or desert somewhere learning indigenous culture.
As for the Christianity view point again, chalk it up to being an empath I guess, because I have no trouble seeing and understanding someone else's view point and if I find it more reasonable than my own, i'm not too proud to concede.

 

[Riverwolf]

I was referring to them based on their influence in the modern world and the similarities of their deities.
I do know that Hinduism and Taoism are both made up of many different teachings and i'd be lying if I said I knew them all. But that doesn't negate anything.
Every indigenous culture had a priest, not one excluded. They held the knowledge and power. They spoke of their knowledge in story form. In these teachings were knowledge and wisdom.
This took place around the world but as populations grew, the true meaning of these stories were kept hidden from the masses.
Slower growing areas of the world has kept more of their knowledge.

By that logic, we Northerners should have kept this thing quite well, since we "developed" far more slowly than Mediterranean cultures... and yet there's no trace of this "thing" within what little survived.

The worlds first Universities were in Temples and its where Science has its roots.

The sciences do, indeed, have their roots in many pre-scientific notions, many of which were religious.

Universities, however, were always universities. Places of worship weren't/aren't often places of learning until proselytizing religions showed up.

As for moral teachings, Any teaching of rebirth or reincarnation i've ever read is centered on stillness of mind, over coming the tempations of the body and peace. Islam's very meaning is peace, Jesus taught it also.

I wouldn't exactly call that teaching a "moral" one.

Consider, also, the term "spirited." The word implies lots of energy, passion, and dedication. It has little to do with "stillness."

Theres a solid view of similarities but no I haven't spent 10years in a forest or desert somewhere learning indigenous culture.

You don't have to. Japan's indigenous religion survives just fine, in pretty decent harmony with modernization.

As for the Christianity view point again, chalk it up to being an empath I guess, because I have no trouble seeing and understanding someone else's view point and if I find it more reasonable than my own, i'm not too proud to concede.

Having empathy doesn't mean seeing exactly what others see; it means feeling the emotions that we perceive others to be feeling. It's a natural part of human social behavior, and is held by the vast majority of people. Some of us just have it a bit stronger, including myself.

But I'm not talking about others' viewpoints. We simply cannot help being even a little Christocentric when looking at non-Christian religions. We use Christian terminology where we very often shouldn't, confusing matters quite heavily.

If you look for differences, you'll find differences, and if you look for similarities, you'll find similarities. There's similarities with us all, but that does not in any way imply some singular "source" that's been obfuscated.

Be careful of Confirmation Bias.

 

[Walter Russell]

By that logic, we Northerners should have kept this thing quite well, since we "developed" far more slowly than Mediterranean cultures... and yet there's no trace of this "thing" within what little survived.



The sciences do, indeed, have their roots in many pre-scientific notions, many of which were religious.

Universities, however, were always universities. Places of worship weren't/aren't often places of learning until proselytizing religions showed up.



I wouldn't exactly call that teaching a "moral" one.

Consider, also, the term "spirited." The word implies lots of energy, passion, and dedication. It has little to do with "stillness."



You don't have to. Japan's indigenous religion survives just fine, in pretty decent harmony with modernization.



Having empathy doesn't mean seeing exactly what others see; it means feeling the emotions that we perceive others to be feeling. It's a natural part of human social behavior, and is held by the vast majority of people. Some of us just have it a bit stronger, including myself.

But I'm not talking about others' viewpoints. We simply cannot help being even a little Christocentric when looking at non-Christian religions. We use Christian terminology where we very often shouldn't, confusing matters quite heavily.

If you look for differences, you'll find differences, and if you look for similarities, you'll find similarities. There's similarities with us all, but that does not in any way imply some singular "source" that's been obfuscated.

Be careful of Confirmation Bias.

Universities, however, were always universities. Places of worship weren't/aren't often places of learning until proselytizing religions showed up.

By that logic, we Northerners should have kept this thing quite well, since we "developed" far more slowly than Mediterranean cultures... and yet there's no trace of this "thing" within what little survived.



The sciences do, indeed, have their roots in many pre-scientific notions, many of which were religious.

Universities, however, were always universities. Places of worship weren't/aren't often places of learning until proselytizing religions showed up.



I wouldn't exactly call that teaching a "moral" one.

Consider, also, the term "spirited." The word implies lots of energy, passion, and dedication. It has little to do with "stillness."



You don't have to. Japan's indigenous religion survives just fine, in pretty decent harmony with modernization.



Having empathy doesn't mean seeing exactly what others see; it means feeling the emotions that we perceive others to be feeling. It's a natural part of human social behavior, and is held by the vast majority of people. Some of us just have it a bit stronger, including myself.

But I'm not talking about others' viewpoints. We simply cannot help being even a little Christocentric when looking at non-Christian religions. We use Christian terminology where we very often shouldn't, confusing matters quite heavily.

If you look for differences, you'll find differences, and if you look for similarities, you'll find similarities. There's similarities with us all, but that does not in any way imply some singular "source" that's been obfuscated.

Be careful of Confirmation Bias.

Priest had all the knowledge and trained their disciples in temples, so that would make them the first high level learning center. Which btw studied the Universe. So ya, pretty much the first University.

"Stillness" of thought certainly is different from "spirited" but I was referring to a state of meditation. Sorry if I didn't make a vlear statement. I'm out and about and typing quickly when I have the oppurtunity.

I do see the differences also but I like to go against the societal grain and focus on what we have in common rather than what mskes us different.

 

[Riverwolf]

Priest had all the knowledge and trained their disciples in temples, so that would make them the first high level learning center. Which btw studied the Universe. So ya, pretty much the first University.

And what of those traditions that don't have Temples? Or those traditions where the priests just learned various rituals and didn't really spend time learning about other matters? The Druids were said to be very well learned in many matters, but one thing they were CLEARLY not well-learned in was how to defend themselves.

In any case, the root of the word "university" actually has almost nothing to do with the "universe" as we think of it today. It referred to the general homogeneity of individual (European, post-Christian) institutions of learning.

Be careful when trying to construct your own etymologies without first looking up what they actually are. False Friends are a Thing.

"Stillness" of thought certainly is different from "spirited" but I was referring to a state of meditation. Sorry if I didn't make a vlear statement. I'm out and about and typing quickly when I have the oppurtunity.

I do see the differences also but I like to go against the societal grain and focus on what we have in common rather than what mskes us different.

I actually think "the societal grain", as you put it, has gone too much into similarities than differences in the past few decades. At least in my area. To the point where differences are wholly ignored, which isn't any better than wholly ignoring the similarities. Trying to force homogeneity where it doesn't exist can obfuscate certain situations, and end up being VERY insensitive.

There are similarities and differences; both need to be acknowledged.

 

[Walter Russell]

And what of those traditions that don't have Temples? Or those traditions where the priests just learned various rituals and didn't really spend time learning about other matters? The Druids were said to be very well learned in many matters, but one thing they were CLEARLY not well-learned in was how to defend themselves.

In any case, the root of the word "university" actually has almost nothing to do with the "universe" as we think of it today. It referred to the general homogeneity of individual (European, post-Christian) institutions of learning.

Be careful when trying to construct your own etymologies without first looking up what they actually are. False Friends are a Thing.



I actually think "the societal grain", as you put it, has gone too much into similarities than differences in the past few decades. At least in my area. To the point where differences are wholly ignored, which isn't any better than wholly ignoring the similarities. Trying to force homogeneity where it doesn't exist can obfuscate certain situations, and end up being VERY insensitive.

There are similarities and differences; both need to be acknowledged.

In my experience homogeneity is just a ploy to pack diverse people together just to highlight their differences and pit them against each other.

 

[Riverwolf]

In my experience homogeneity is just a ploy to pack diverse people together just to highlight their differences and pit them against each other.

In my experience, the exact opposite is true: packing diverse people together just to highlight their similarities, and not always for peaceful purposes.

For example, Caesar lumped all the "Germanic peoples" into a single homogeneous group, despite the fact that each of those tribes who lived East of the Rhine and North of the Danube was a distinctive Tribe unto itself, with distinct cultures. They weren't remotely homogeneous. But Caesar needed them to be for his propaganda machine, because it made the "barbarian threat" look much greater than it actually was, and thus justified his Gallic Wars to expand the Frontier.