How do you syncretize religions?

[Almustafa]

there are said to be enlightened beings; poets, prophets, & philosophers, who have witnessed the Absolute Truth & spend everyday struggleing to put it into words.

which is most likely how religions start

 

[Sha'irullah]

Do you have a better alternative, though? If "created by humans" is a flaw, it is a darned hard to avoid one.

I do not accept the belief in religions and I am a fervent god believing person.

 

[Almustafa]

one thought is that religions just "go bad" & expire after losing there effectiveness in liberateing people.
the bible for example was written for people who lived a very different life than modern day men and women.

perhaps everyone should just make a new religion...

but more realistically perhaps we should just replace the old faiths with a new religion that syncs them all up.

 

[Trantorfuzz]

The answer to the title question is "any way you want to."

Even contradictory religions can be syncretized. Just as the Christian God can be three and one, and the gods/Godhead of Hinduism can be many and one, one could syncretize a viewpoint like pantheism with the idea of a conscious God who interferes with history if one imagines that the universe as a whole is like Gaia. One could even imagine some kind of "Dialectical Religionism," in which contradictory religions yield a synthesis

Alternatively, one can do as others on this thread have suggested and pick and choose notions from two or more religions and piece them together into a non-contradictory mosaic.

Alternatively, one can use the terminology of one religion to describe the theology of another religion. We find this in West African-American transplant religions like Voudon, in which Catholic terms are used to describe a polytheistic theology.

When we speak of devising religions, it's important to remember this: Although reality is not human-made, accounts of reality are. We devise scientific theories to describe and predict the objective world. We devise works of literature to expand the vocabulary with which we describe subjective experiences. And we devise religions--not to investigate the workings of the universe--but to invest reality with significance.

So syncretize away!

 

[Rainbow Mage]

I have always pondered if a more appropriate way to mesh multiple religions into a solid framework could be done with a Bible, Shiva Purana and the Bhagvad Gita and then use a mallet and pound the books till you get one singular entity. Thus one has successfully syncretized 3 religions.

Perhaps this only works in cartoons but it is still a good endeavoring

That'd be one confusing mesh up

 

[Rainbow Mage]

About the only portions of the Bible that mesh with other scriptures are Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, Psalms and the "red letter" portions of the gospels. The "red letters" being the convention used for what Jesus actually said.

Even Psalms is iffy. Ecclesiastes I agree

 

[Rainbow Mage]

one thought is that religions just "go bad" & expire after losing there effectiveness in liberateing people.
the bible for example was written for people who lived a very different life than modern day men and women.

perhaps everyone should just make a new religion...

but more realistically perhaps we should just replace the old faiths with a new religion that syncs them all up.

Instead of seeking new religions and prophets all the time why not go back to Polytheism, the oldest of religions?

Polytheistic religions claim no set in stone truth for all time and can always continue progressing as humanity does.

Hinduism, arguably Polytheistic, is the perfect example for what I mean here. Hinduism has kept progressing even until now, yet it isn't new.

Maybe new isn't what we need?

 

[Sha'irullah]

That'd be one confusing mesh up

It would be an abomination to mankind .

Surat al-Krisna "For Krishna(swt) is one and without partners" Qur'ani-Gita :areyoucra

 

[Rainbow Mage]

It would be an abomination to mankind .

Surat al-Krisna "For Krishna(swt) is one and without partners" Qur'ani-Gita :areyoucra

I thought you said the Shiva purana was part of this mix too?

 

[Sha'irullah]

I thought you said the Shiva purana was part of this mix too?

Qur'anishiva-gita???

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Qur'anishiva-gita???

Yep you created one confused book there

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Are Allah, Krishna and Shiva the holy trinity of this mesh book?

 

[Jainarayan]

Even Psalms is iffy. Ecclesiastes I agree

I just got a copy of Ecclesiastes yesterday, but I haven't read it yet. It's very short. What synopses I've read of it seem to be very "inherent emptiness" oriented: sunyata. Some reviews said it's fatalistic and pessimistic. But I think it's different when viewed through the lens of sunyata.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

I just got a copy of Ecclesiastes yesterday, but I haven't read it yet. It's very short. What synopses I've read of it seem to be very "inherent emptiness" oriented: sunyata. Some reviews said it's fatalistic and pessimistic. But I think it's different when viewed through the lens of sunyata.

Oh I think Ecclesiastes is excellent. I find it similar to the Tao te Ching.

You might like the wisdom of Yeshua b. Sira in the apocrypha

 

[Jainarayan]

Oh I think Ecclesiastes is excellent. I find it similar to the Tao te Ching.

Outstanding! Thanks for the heads-up.

I don't know how it happened, but I think the Tao Te Ching and Taoism is either the encapsulation and end result, or root of the philosophies that extend from China through South Asia to the Middle East. A lot of Jesuism (the core teachings of Jesus), Hinduism and Buddhism can be found in Taoism when one looks deeply enough, past the superficial layers.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Buddhism and Taoism have always went together just fine

 

[Raban]

I view many religions (not all, but any which seem to work towards the same ends, ie peace, relief of the suffering ect.) as not necessarily 'divinely inspired' but as people struggle to understand God, themselves, and the condition of existence, they start to understand God in their own terms, but they also understand some core tenets of which we should pursue in order to further humanity, and the rest of the universe (or multiverse). Now for myself, I do not believe in 'divinely ordained' prophets- that just seems irrational, and plain stupid to send to one group, a single person to tell them who, and what God is, and how they should be. However, I believe anyone can be a 'prophet' or one who has found the nature of God, and can instruct people on how to become better. In my opinion, there is one 'Word' but it speaks through many vehicles, to many peoples, in many tongues. So in this sense, anyone who chooses can 'speak the word' but that word is going to be drastically different based on culture, times, and other variables, but the essence works towards the same goals. In my belief, (even though I am relatively Christian) if a Satanist or Luciferian were to begin preaching, but his message was one of peace, and how to make other peoples lives better, than I would listen to him- because the essence if his words are 'the Word'. But this also means people can make mistakes. I do not believe there is in scripture, or prophet which is infallible, and I think there are many 'wolves in sheeps skin' as politicians, warlords ect. use 'revelation' in order to further their own power. Likewise culture plays into it as well, 'corrupting' the message, making it violent, or xenophobic. Therefore, I can learn from the Muslims, the Hindus, the Buddhists, the Zarathushtris, the Pagans, and even atheists, just as much as I can learn from the Christians- but I believe each and every person has to have a discerning mind, to identify truth, from lies, and sense anyone may be 'prophetic' anyone may say they are a prophet, making it very easy for evil things to seep into the good.

 

[Jainarayan]

Buddhism and Taoism have always went together just fine

Yes, because, imo, they can be either theistic or non-theistic. I lean towards a theistic form of both, but heavy on the philosophy. Theism in Buddhism and Taosim is more deism imo: there are devas, gods, goddesses, buddhas and bodhisattvas, but they subsume to a deistic God, more like the unmanifest Brahman. The devas, gods, goddesses, buddhas and bodhisattvas of Buddhism and Taosim are the "upperclassmen" to our "freshmen", that is, more advanced. They can graduate or they can stay back. For me, you might say that Hinduism is the personal theism branch, and Buddhism and Taosim are the more philosophical branches of my syncretism. This is why I say they supplement, augment and complement each other.

 

[SageTree]

I just got a copy of Ecclesiastes yesterday, but I haven't read it yet. It's very short. What synopses I've read of it seem to be very "inherent emptiness" oriented: sunyata. Some reviews said it's fatalistic and pessimistic. But I think it's different when viewed through the lens of sunyata.

Ecclesiastes is one of my favourite books in the Christian Bible, if not THE favourite book.
It is a most 'dharmaic' book, imo.

A lot of people I know do see it in the pessimistic/fatalistic view,
but I've found it to be more along the lines of what you are suggesting.

It speaks to who and what we are on so many levels.

I look forward to talking with you after you've read it.

Enjoy.

:namaste
SageTree


Edit: The Apocrypha suggestion of Sirach/Ecclesiasticus is a most excellent suggestion. Wisdom is excellent as well, as is Tobit.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

I think Ecclesiastes calls on us to find our own meaning to life. It calls all this pointless, but also affirms it all has its purpose and place