Is there such a thing as a universal religion?

[Rival]

For me, no, there never will be a universal religion, given that all such religions carry with them the baggage of their origins, and hence such tends to speak more as to their being human inventions. As you mention, their origins in particular cultures, even though so many do spread around the world, does tend to indicate why they first formed. Not sure we actually need any religions anyway, but we sure do need something to unite us rather than dividing us.

Thanks for getting it

 

[vulcanlogician]

Is Christianity a universal religion? Islam?

If they are exclusionary, then they can't be universal, right? So maybe certain kinds of Islam (perhaps Sufism) might qualify as "universal." Quakerism (in some forms) may also fit the bill there.

But let's be honest. Most Christians and Muslims don't have a universal attitude about their faith. You either BELONG to the faith or YOU DO NOT BELONG. And that ain't universal.

 

[LuisDantas]

From the passages I read and the book “the Tao in Islam” this not the case.

Meaning that you consider Taoism (or perhaps specifically the Tao Te Ching) to advise people to worship Allah? Is that it?

I suppose that my question then becomes "Why is the Qur'an so insistent on naming Allah and explaining his expectations?"

 

[Rival]

I need to find a different word because apparently no-one read the OP.

 

[LuisDantas]

If they are exclusionary, then they can't be universal, right? So maybe certain kinds of Islam (perhaps Sufism) might qualify as "universal." Quakerism (in some forms) may also fit the bill there.

But let's be honest. Most Christians and Muslims don't have a universal attitude about their faith. You either BELONG to the faith or YOU DO NOT BELONG. And that ain't universal.

If I may be so bold, the OP seems clear in admitting that Christianity and Islam are not as universal as one could hope.

 

[vulcanlogician]

If I may be so bold, the OP seems clear in admitting that Christianity and Islam are not as universal as one could hope.

Yeah. I just read the first post and responded with my immediate thoughts. I didn't mean to imply that there wasn't nuance to OP's view.

 

[Rival]

Let me rephrase.

In the Bible, nothing takes place outside a limited geographical area confined to the Fertile Crescent and Mediterranean.

All the names are Hebrew/Semitic languages or Greek.

All the languages are Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

All the concepts are Ancient Middle Eastern or Ancient Greek.

It only talks about animals, clothing, weather, food and customs native to the Middle East and Mediterranean.

Laws are based on Ancient Middle Eastern concepts.

All the prophets are Hebrews.


Is this universal? Why should Europeans, Americans, East Asians, be following a religion from a place that does not even know or care who they are, doesn't speak in their language, and insists that its intended audience are some kind of special chosen group and they happened to have all the prophets?

And what has any of it to do with me, living on an island in the North Atlantic?

So my question this this:

Is there such a religion that has none of these kinds of cultural associations at all, to be considered sufficiently applicable to every single society without alienating anyone or having people learn foreign histories, customs and laws?

 

[LuisDantas]

Is there such a religion that has none of these kinds of cultural associations at all, to be considered sufficiently applicable to every single society without alienating anyone or having people learn foreign histories, customs and laws?

I would think that Taoism qualifies (although I do not share @Link's perspective).

Maybe the references to nobility and the like are too specific? I would think not.

 

[Eli G]

I don't think there is such a thing as "universal religion", since religions involve one or more gods with characteristics that can be very different from each other. There are religions that worship gods that supposedly condone behaviors such as violence, theft, abuse, etc. and they even promote them, and protect those who practice them.

From the point of view of the true God, a God of high moral principles, He does not accept violence or sexual immorality as acceptable behavior, and his worshipers must show respect for these principles.

Ecumenism is a human utopia that separates people from the living and true God.

 

[LuisDantas]

Gods are not a requirement of religions, though. Never were, never will be.

 

[Regiomontanus]

And here we have the universal answer. The universal religion? My religion!

The truth is the truth. Accept it or not, that is on you; we are born with free will.

 

[Link]

Meaning that you consider Taoism (or perhaps specifically the Tao Te Ching) to advise people to worship Allah? Is that it?

I suppose that my question then becomes "Why is the Qur'an so insistent on naming Allah and explaining his expectations?"

God has no name. The only name is his path, and its only metaphorically his name. But there is a reality that makes heaven and earth balanced or otherwise it would be corrupted. Tao and verses about heaven and earth needing God are in sync.

I will buy the book "The Tao in Islam" - I read it way back at the bookstore when I use to have time to spend hours on it.

I will get the book though. He followed Tao and became a Sufi Muslim. And wrote that book.

 

[Link]

To be honest, it was so long ago, I don't even remember if the author was a male or female. It's been years.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I would think that Taoism qualifies (although I do not share @Link's perspective).

Maybe the references to nobility and the like are too specific? I would think not.

I think you have the right of it that Taoism began (mythologically) as advise for specific rulers from specific times and regions and will always carry those context clues in studying it, at least from a historical perspective. From philosophy and theology perspective? I'm not sure. Taoism is deeply connected to Chinese medicine with concepts like wu xing, and culturally Chinese philosophy is all over the i-ching and other texts. Not to mention all the specific language concepts and etymology that goes into words like 'Tao/Dao' 'yin' 'yang' 'wu wei'.

It might be possible to strip the context from it, but I think you'd be left with something which has lost a lot of nuance in favor of broadest accessibility.

 

[Link]

This is the book I'm talking about: The Tao of Islam

 

[LuisDantas]

I think you have the right of it that Taoism began (mythologically) as advise for specific rulers from specific times and regions and will always carry those context clues in studying it, at least from a historical perspective. From philosophy and theology perspective? I'm not sure. Taoism is deeply connected to Chinese medicine with concepts like wu xing, and culturally Chinese philosophy is all over the i-ching and other texts. Not to mention all the specific language concepts and etymology that goes into words like 'Tao/Dao' 'yin' 'yang' 'wu wei'.

It might be possible to strip the context from it, but I think you'd be left with something which has lost a lot of nuance in favor of broadest accessibility.

To be fair, I am not sure that it is possible to be at all religious without accepting the duty to build our own personal nuance.

By that perspective, "universal religion" may be a contradiction of terms.

Or it may not be. There is also the counter-argument that religion is meant to address universal considerations (such as the conflict between the need for acceptance and the need for individual authenticity) and propose arguably universal values such as at least the basics of ethics.

 

[Quintessence]

I need to find a different word because apparently no-one read the OP.

It's not really your fault.

The problem is that folks using this forum are not going to be coming from a cultural background that emphasizes connection to place or to the land. That's the product of a few different intellectual currents in the West. I'd point primarily to globalism/multiculturalism and telecommunications/transportation that has facilitated that, as well as disconnectedness from and objectification of our environment (both the human cultural environment but especially the non-human environment). It is the exception to the rule that modern, domesticated humans in Western culture develop a connection to place. They will not understand what you are on about.

I wouldn't have understood what you were on about if I didn't practice a reconstructed version of indigenous religion for which connection to place and land is of extreme importance. It is just not part of mainstream culture.

 

[Rival]

It's not really your fault.

The problem is that folks using this forum are not going to be coming from a cultural background that emphasizes connection to place or to the land. That's the product of a few different intellectual currents in the West. I'd point primarily to globalism/multiculturalism and telecommunications/transportation that has facilitated that, as well as disconnectedness from and objectification of our environment (both the human cultural environment but especially the non-human environment). It is the exception to the rule that modern, domesticated humans in Western culture develop a connection to place. They will not understand what you are on about.

I wouldn't have understood what you were on about if I didn't practice a reconstructed version of indigenous religion for which connection to place and land is of extreme importance. It is just not part of mainstream culture.

I'm glad you saw through my anger and understood the point I am trying to make

It seems religion is far too academized and for some reason Westerners just expect it to be that way. Now don't get me wrong, I love study and I am a theology student myself, but religion is about so much more than books and prayer. I am torn apart between two religious views and while I believe both are valid expressions, I do really 'feel' the Gods here and you can't 'unfeel' them. Trying to get across to people that I would prefer native customs, seasonal changes, languages etc. just makes people think you're some kind of racist now, when really I'm just looking for a connexion to the place where I live, eat, walk around, partake in society and so on. All these things are spiritual. Yet we have lost spiritual connexions to things like food, plants and so on, unless it's trough some convoluted tradition; and even then, those traditions are just as valid, but if I said I think crumpets are sacred because they're one of the oldest local foods no-one would get it.

Sigh.

 

[Eli G]

In ancient times there were already social relations between people and countries of different religions and cultures. There were even international languages such as English in most of the developed world.

In the Bible there is an interesting story when the Assyrians exiled the Israelites from the north and filled that land with people from many conquered countries and with different religions. They asked the Assyrian rulers to bring practitioners of the religion of the original settlers there because they were having many misfortunes and they believed that it was the God of those inhabitants who was doing that because of their different religious practices and beliefs.

Obviously they did not believe that all religions lead to the same God.

2 Kings 17:24 The king of As·syrʹi·a then brought people from Babylon, Cuʹthah, Avʹva, Haʹmath, and Seph·ar·vaʹim and settled them in the cities of Sa·marʹi·a in place of the Israelites; they took possession of Sa·marʹi·a and lived in its cities. 25 When they first began dwelling there, they did not fear Jehovah. So Jehovah sent lions among them, and they killed some of the people. 26 It was reported to the king of As·syrʹi·a: “The nations that you have taken into exile and resettled in the cities of Sa·marʹi·a do not know the religion of the God of the land. So he keeps sending lions among them, which are putting them to death, because none of them know the religion of the God of the land.”
27 At that the king of As·syrʹi·a commanded: “Have one of the priests whom you took into exile from there return to live there and to teach them the religion of the God of the land.” 28 So one of the priests whom they had taken into exile from Sa·marʹi·a came back to live in Bethʹel, and he began to teach them how they should fear Jehovah.
29 However, each different nation made their own god, which they placed in the houses of worship on the high places that the Sa·marʹi·tans had made; each different nation did so in their cities where they were living. 30 So the men of Babylon made Sucʹcoth-beʹnoth, the men of Cuth made Nerʹgal, the men of Haʹmath made A·shiʹma, 31 and the Avʹvites made Nibʹhaz and Tarʹtak. The Seʹphar·vites would burn their sons in the fire to A·dramʹme·lech and A·namʹme·lech, the gods of Seph·ar·vaʹim. 32 Although they feared Jehovah, they appointed priests for the high places from the people in general, and these officiated for them at the houses of worship on the high places. 33 Thus, they feared Jehovah, but they worshipped their own gods according to the religion of the nations from which they had been deported.
34 To this day they follow their former religions. None of them worship Jehovah, and none follow his statutes, his judgments, the Law, and the commandment that Jehovah gave the sons of Jacob, whose name he changed to Israel. 35 When Jehovah made a covenant with them, he commanded them: “You must not fear other gods, and you must not bow down to them or serve them or sacrifice to them. 36 But Jehovah, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt with great power and an outstretched arm, is the One you should fear, and to him you should bow down, and to him you should sacrifice. 37 And the regulations, the judgments, the Law, and the commandment that he wrote for you, you should always follow carefully, and you must not fear other gods. 38 And you must not forget the covenant that I made with you, and you must not fear other gods. 39 But it is Jehovah your God whom you should fear, as he is the one who will rescue you out of the hand of all your enemies.”
40 But they did not obey, and they followed their former religion. 41 So these nations came to fear Jehovah, but they were also serving their own graven images. Both their sons and their grandsons have done just as their forefathers did, down to this day.

 

[Starlight]

The perennial philosophy is a perspective that views religious traditions as sharing a single, metaphysical truth or origin.The perennial philosophy states that at the heart of each authentic tradition lies one Universal, Timeless Truth that transcends all time and space.

Perennialism has its roots in the Renaissance interest in neo-platonism and its idea of the One ,from which all existence emerges.

A more popular interpretation argues for universalism, the idea that all religions, underneath seeming differences, point to the same Truth.

Perennial philosophy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I believe this is the closest to universal religion