How do you look at a religion?

[illykitty]

Do you look at the followers of the religion and/or do you read what the religion has to say (basics, sacred texts, etc)? Do you have another way to look at a religion than these two? And why is it your preferred method?

I'll let a few posts come in before answering.

 

[rusra02]

Do you look at the followers of the religion and/or do you read what the religion has to say (basics, sacred texts, etc)? Do you have another way to look at a religion than these two? And why is it your preferred method?

I'll let a few posts come in before answering.

I think both are important to do. For example, many who are drawn to the Bible's appealing message are repelled by the conduct of many who claim to follow the Bible's teachings. Jesus said we could recognize his true disciples by their works, not merely their profession of faith in Jesus. In Matthew 7:15-23, Jesus repeatedly mentioned we would recognize true Christians from false by their "fruits" or their works, what they produce. John 13:35 says;"By this all will know that you are my disciples—if you have love among yourselves.”

 

[Gjallarhorn]

I look at the culture that produced it, the people who tend to follow it, the effects of the religion on its followers (aka, the culture produced by it), and the actual content of the religion.

 

[Smart_Guy]

My answer is as following:

It is the religion itself the one to judge!

Looking at the followers, or the media I might add, might, mostly does actually, give you a completely wrong view!

I know that trust me. I mean, I'm a Muslim, Arabs and Saudi, the worst combination you can ever get. Know me in person and I guaranty you will have a completely different view of the impression Muslims, Arabs and Saudis give. Why? because I follow the right Islamic ways in interacting with people. Oh, and because I know English of course

Anyways, looking at a religion directly, and I mean its main source; e.g. the Quraan in Islam, and understanding it well is the way to go at first, in my humble opinion!

So, what is the answer?

 

[Sabour]

Do you look at the followers of the religion

If you want to look at the people and measure, you should make sure that they are following what the religion is teaching. Is that easy?

For example let us look at Christianity. Every Christian has his own set of beliefs. Who is right I wonder?

At the begging of every debate with a christian, I throw my expectations of what he beliefs because one thing I have seen is that every Christian view Christianity in his own way.

Similarly, other religions have that too. However this degree varies between one religion and another.

So if you want to observe what certain groups are doing, you have to make sure that they are really following. That will lead us to studying what the religion teaches.

and/or do you read what the religion has to say (basics, sacred texts, etc)?

I think that is the most effective way.

Do you have another way to look at a religion than these two?

Well If I were to consider that I was searching for a religion, I would begin by stating what I can not logically accept. For example, my logical thinking tells me that God is one. I can not accept this any other way. That will save me time instead of looking into all religions.

Next thing I would do is that I would remove from my head everything I know about the religion and look at the material.

Then I would see who is really following and observe.

Finally I would look for proofs that the religion is not men produced.




My point is that religion is a complete system of life which you can choose to adapt and choose not to. It is not like if you are born into X religion you are a follower of X religion.

Therefore I think observing people actions won't help much except if it is beliefs which you are examining.

Normally I expect that most "followers" would know what are their beliefs in a certain religion. I am not sure about that though as I saw that Christianity is an exception.

 

[Treks]

I look at the core text(s) and supporting documents, the work of scholars of the religion, and the basics about the main branches of a religion.

 

[YmirGF]

Do you look at the followers of the religion and/or do you read what the religion has to say (basics, sacred texts, etc)? Do you have another way to look at a religion than these two? And why is it your preferred method?

I'll let a few posts come in before answering.

I'm not smart like so many other posters on RF, but what I do is look at the core texts, look at the effects of the followers and how they interpret those core texts but the main thing is how they mesh with my direct experience. My experience over the decades has always been about realization and never about revelation. Nothing was ever handed to me on a platter, so by default, any religion that has its roots in revelation instantly gets a large red x drawn through it.

 

[BSM1]

With eyes wide open!

 

[Twilight Hue]

Do you look at the followers of the religion and/or do you read what the religion has to say (basics, sacred texts, etc)? Do you have another way to look at a religion than these two? And why is it your preferred method?

I'll let a few posts come in before answering.

I note the actions and results primarily. Basically, the effect by way it's experienced and demonstrated by both adherents and observers.

 

[LuisDantas]

Do you look at the followers of the religion

Sure. That, after all, is the test of how valid and useful a religion ultimately is.

and/or do you read what the religion has to say (basics, sacred texts, etc)?

That too. It is quite useful to make attempts at finding out how dogmatic, how prepared to deal with disagreements and how encouraging of critical thinking a faith is.

Do you have another way to look at a religion than these two? And why is it your preferred method?

I usually try to find out what the core concepts and teachings are, and how clearly they are presented; how adaptable to unexpected or unusual circunstances (from the perspective of its originators) it is; and how much it values wisdom and responsible boldness as compared to devotion to tradition and sacred texts.

Most religions are remarkably easy to gauge by those means.

 

[ChristineES]

Do you look at the followers of the religion and/or do you read what the religion has to say (basics, sacred texts, etc)? Do you have another way to look at a religion than these two? And why is it your preferred method?

I'll let a few posts come in before answering.

I don't look at people in regards to their 1. Ethnic group, 2. Religion/faith, 3. Political party, 4. etc. I try to keep each person separate from those kinds of things, since I don't believe people act a certain way due to those things. If I want to know about a religion, I will study the religion and maybe attend some of the services of a religion (If the faith even has a service)

 

[Badran]

I look at the culture that produced it, the people who tend to follow it, the effects of the religion on its followers (aka, the culture produced by it), and the actual content of the religion.

This.

 

[illykitty]

I personally tend to prefer to judge a religion by the scriptures and the teachings, because that's the original intentions. If the core of the religion isn't great, then it's clearly off the table. There's also certain cultural practices that can get mixed into religion that goes against the core.

I guess observing the followers is useful to see how humans can interpret it, how much it can be twisted and if the religion is practical. A religion might have really good things on paper but if no one can apply it...

That's my opinion and I thank you for yours as well. Been really interesting replies! Keep 'em going!

 

[arthra]

Do you look at the followers of the religion and/or do you read what the religion has to say (basics, sacred texts, etc)? Do you have another way to look at a religion than these two? And why is it your preferred method?

I'll let a few posts come in before answering.

Both are important... by both I mean "look at the followers" and the scriptures or teachings!

 

[steeltoes]

I look at religion from afar.

 

[George-ananda]

I just study masters who I revere who have lived in modern times. Ancient scriptures do best with a modern telling for me.

I don't associate with any other religionists (but that's probably just my loaner personality type).

 

[Sir Doom]

I believe that religious beliefs are highly subjective and that no two people share the same religion even when they share the same religion. Thus, it is important for me to discuss what someone believes with that person. That being said, it is often the case that people will reference text and other people to formulate their beliefs (that's actually almost always the case) and so it is important to have an understanding of these things as well.

When push comes to shove, though. I cannot ascertain what a person believes simply by knowing what religion they identify with. I must speak to them personally.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Hey guys, look at me to judge Islam instead of looking at those suicide bombers

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Do you look at the followers of the religion and/or do you read what the religion has to say (basics, sacred texts, etc)? Do you have another way to look at a religion than these two? And why is it your preferred method?

I'll let a few posts come in before answering.

I look at both in order to separate the true practicers from the majority - because often times a religion has a larger portion of apathetic, or lazier practicers.

 

[Nooj]

Do you look at the followers of the religion and/or do you read what the religion has to say (basics, sacred texts, etc)? Do you have another way to look at a religion than these two? And why is it your preferred method?

I'll let a few posts come in before answering.

i look at both, because i don't think the two can be neatly separated.

there's the thing i don't like where people only look at the text or magnify the text to the detriment of the living practitioners. for example, many muslims say that because the qur'an says nothing about amulets, that the practice of wearing qur'anic verses for protection and blessing them is un-islamic. but many muslims do just that. then it becomes easy to denigrate them as pagan inventions. but religion itself as a human phenomenon is rarely as easy or clear cut as the pure religion that exists only in the heads of people.

but at the same time it's because the text is so powerful that muslims even use it like this in the first place! it's the ways that people use the scripture that is most interesting sometimes, because the scripture does not speak for itself, but gets people to speak for it.

also it's important to note that one is just looking at a religion. that doesn't mean you know what the religion is really like. looking at a religion as a bystander or interested outsider is different from living as a religious person of that religion.