Judging a Religion

[mangalavara]

I find that sometimes(not always, by any means) people born into a religion never actually look at the texts; they just kinda go by what Ma or Pa said/did. Or, they just use it as a cultural label and assume whatever their culture pushes is what the religion pushes(I think you see a lot of that in the US).

This is one reason that I cannot judge a religion by the actions of its adherents.

A lot of religious individuals are ignorant of what their religion actually teaches. By listening to Hamza Yusuf, for instance, I learned that most Muslims don’t read Qur’an or any other texts, and that so many Muslims follow what they hear from young men who aren’t even ulema. Moreover, when it comes to Hinduism, I’ve read that most Hindus in India don’t know things that those of us from the West who embraced Hinduism know well. Further, I’ve heard a well known Sikh explain that Sikhs in general get much of their information about Sikhi from unreliable sources rather than their Guru. How could one judge almost any religion then by the behavior of its adherents if the adherents don’t even understand the religion properly?

One more reason that I cannot judge a religion by its adherents is that human beings are incredibly fallible entities. From my perspective, judging a religion by its adherents requires one to assume that the adherents not only understand the religion properly but also that they practice it correctly and faithfully during every waking moment. Most of us fail to do many things correctly and faithfully, so how could we expect a community to somehow do much better but with respect to religion?

 

[firedragon]

I am Hindu.

I appreciate it that you call me ‘brother.’ Vasudhaiva kuṭumbakam.

Sarvey janah sukhino bhavanthu.

The honor is all mine my brother. It's such a pleasure.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I hope you never encounter them. It's not fun.

ETA: however, it's true they do have usefulness as negative role-models.

Who is "them" and "they?"

Usefulness as negative role models for whom?

 

[dybmh]

Who is "them" and "they?"

There's several groups which practice a religion which include the qualities you referred to.

The one that came to mind immediately are a branch of LHP'ers. They practice what they call energy-vampirsm.

Usefulness as negative role models for whom?

Those of us who prefer not to be energetic food for leeches.

 

[SalixIncendium]

There's several groups which practice a religion which include the qualities you referred to.

The one that came to mind immediately are a branch of LHP'ers. They practice what they call energy-vampirsm.

Why do you assume I've never encountered them?

I mean, I'm pretty sure I was married to one.

Those of us who prefer not to be energetic food for leeches.

Why would you choose someone who can zap your energy as a role model?

 

[dybmh]

I'm usually pretty arrogant, but not arrogant enough to think that I can interpret religious texts better than those who practise that religion.

So you don't even try. Got it. You're applying natural human faults to the religion itself and sheltering yourself from information which will challenge your anti-religious inclinations? It's an honest question.

It is possible to read and derive the author's disposition of any book. But it's never going to happen if you don't try.

---

Regardless. If you actually trust the adherent, then you should do so consistently? Agreed? I'm guessing you immediately distrust, are skeptical of the opinion of any you label an "apologist". You don't trust them to be objective? But you trust that their behavior is not compromised in the same way?

But you wouldn't apply those same skeptical standards against a fellow skeptic? Because skepticism is never biased or unfair?

 

[dybmh]

Why do you assume I've never encountered them?

Good point, maybe you didn't notice them. Or had only met the ones who were immature and not very skilled at their practice. Either way, you listed "malevolent" as one of the qualities of a religion which you hadn't encountered? Am I remembering wrong? Do you consider energy-vampirism benevolent? neutral? If not, what's left? Therefore, they're malevolent. You either haven't encountered them, or you forgot to include them when you considered who to reply. Which is it? Is there a 3rd option?

Why would you choose someone who can zap your energy as a role model?

Negative role-model, Salix. Negative role-model.

ETA: It's an energy suck, or sapping resources. Not Zap.

 

[Spice]

Do not conform to the pattern of this world but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is-his good pleasing and perfect will.
Romans 12:2

I may explore religions in depth that I have no intention of converting to, because to be converted to any one religion puts chains on my spiritual growth.

So I most definitely judge a religion as admirable if it allows ample opportunity for questioning, exploration, and personal discernment, even if it has faith tenants and practices I cannot agree with. I will not allow my knuckles to be smacked by a ruler while I reach for knowledge of inner peace.

 

[Whateverist]

How do you judge a religion as to whether it is good or bad, beneficial or malevolent, helpful or useless, harmless or harmful, fine or problematic?

A religion which confers beliefs on its practitioners which enrich the experience of its adherents with meaning and peace is okay. If it can do so without being a dick toward everyone else then it is A-okay.

 

[Spice]

I have - quite a bit of the Bible since it was the default religion here, and I have looked into other religious texts too, but can't say I have read them through, given they often seem to make the same claims, and it would take a lot more work than I would want to put in to study them properly - with perhaps not being any the wiser at the end. And I have read various works comparing the religions. The one belief system I came away from having quite some agreement was Buddhism, since much seemed to make sense to me.

And Tao. I have much in common with Tao.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Good point, maybe you didn't notice them. Or had only met the ones who were immature and not very skilled at their practice. Either way, you listed "malevolent" as one of the qualities of a religion which you hadn't encountered? Am I remembering wrong? Do you consider energy-vampirism benevolent? neutral? If not, what's left? Therefore, they're malevolent. You either haven't encountered them, or you forgot to include them when you considered who to reply. Which is it? Is there a 3rd option?

You keep saying "they're," "them," etc. Religion is a belief system. Just so we are on the same page, there is a religion called "energy-vampirism," correct? If so, I'm unclear why you continue to refer to the religion as "they" and "them." A religion would be an 'it' unless we are speaking of more than one religion.

So if it is, indeed, a religion, please show me scripture and/or doctrine for this religion...or some formal organization...anything that would qualify it as a religion.

Negative role-model, Salix. Negative role-model.

Ah, so a "negative role-model" would not be a subset of role models?

ETA: It's an energy suck, or sapping resources. Not Zap.

Please explain the distinction.

 

[Heyo]

So you don't even try. Got it. You're applying natural human faults to the religion itself and sheltering yourself from information which will challenge your anti-religious inclinations? It's an honest question.

What would I gain? Aren't (at least some) religions supposed to make their adherents more moral? If I see the followers acting immoral, I know that that religion has failed in its attempt.

 

[dybmh]

You keep saying "they're," "them," etc. Religion is a belief system. Just so we are on the same page, there is a religion called "energy-vampirism," correct? If so, I'm unclear why you continue to refer to the religion as "they" and "them." A religion would be an 'it' unless we are speaking of more than one religion.

The religion is malevolent. It doesn't have a written scripture or a founder, because, it is a branch of the LHP. It is not organized like a conventional mainstream religion. Because of this, the way to evaluate whether it is malevolent or benevolent is by observing what the adherent is doing. The actions of "them", the adherents, are malevolent.

Because it is a branch of the LHP, and the LHP is not organized like conventional religions, it does not have a name like other religions have names. LHP practitioners adopt practices which are consistent wth their own values and individual goals. The proper way to refer to the group in focus is: "the ones who practice energy-vampirism." More specific, if needed, would be: "the ones who practive energy-vampirism in the LHP." But to call "energy-vampirism" a religion in itself is not accurate. None the less, the "ones who practice energy-vampirism" are a group. A group of individuals, practicing a religion which is malevolent. Maybe you were only considering organized mainstream religions in your answer? If so, that is incomplete.

 

[dybmh]

Ah, so a "negative role-model" would not be a subset of role models?

Yes. Obviously.

Usefulness as negative role models for whom?

Please refer to your own question for context. You are asking me, who could benefit from a negative role-model of a malevolent group.

Dude, that's a stupid question.

Ah, so a "negative role-model" would not be a subset of role models?

Dude, thats a stupid question. Are you serious? You're going arround in circles asking stupid questions? Are you trolling?

 

[dybmh]

Please explain the distinction.

Uh between suck and zap? You are asking stupid questions today? Is this a new hobby?

Uh...

lighting goes ZAP.

black hole goes SUCK.

Here's an educational video:

 

[GoodAttention]

Uh between suck and zap? You are asking stupid questions today? Is this a new hobby?

Uh...

lighting goes ZAP.

black hole goes SUCK.

Here's an educational video:

The miscommunication of sap and zap was worth it to just to see John Candy's (canined) face again RIP Uncle Buck!

 

[dybmh]

The miscommunication of sap and zap was worth it to just to see John Candy's (canined) face again RIP Uncle Buck!

I love that movie. Space-balls? Classic.

 

[GoodAttention]

I love that movie. Space-balls? Classic.

The fact Mel Brooks is alive is proof God exists.

 

[stvdv]

How do you judge a religion as to whether it is good or bad, beneficial or malevolent, helpful or useless,

I never judge a Religion
As I like "Freedom of Religion"

I judge people by their actions

Relgion is more than just the people

 

[SalixIncendium]

Maybe you were only considering organized mainstream religions in your answer?

No. I was considering 'religion' in my answer, which is what the question asked. What you've described qualifies as a practice, not a religion.