Nope, I didn't mention politics or extremists in this thread. I mentioned actions. I'm talking about the whole deal here.
Because there are loud and dogmatic adherents to Hinduism, too. (And seeing as you follow a variant of Hindu philosophy, you should know how crazy that is.) And there are loud, dogmatic adherents to peace-loving movements, as well.
Hinduism is an extremely diverse set of beliefs. Much of the loud and dogmatic ones have loud and dogmatic beliefs to go along with their actions.
Sames goes for Abrahamic religions. Except not every religion is the same. Some are inherently more dogmatic than others. For some of them, you've got to believe a given book is word-for-word from god to even be labeled a member of that religion. In another, a given creed covers like 90% of denominations or so.
Allah and Christ are characters. In different beliefs, their characters differ wildly. But if we're going to nitpick about every exception and every fringe, then we might as well not even use words, because the whole point of words to is provide a common understanding. Allah and Christ mean certain specific things to huge masses of people on this planet, and they were included in the campaign. And those specific things often include anger, judgment, wrath, caring what people do naked, caring what people do on certain days, caring what people say, etc.
The entire point of me mentioning that was to show that it fits well within the group selected. I purposely used a blunt way of describing an aspect of what millions (or billions) of people believe, even if it doesn't cover every Jew, Christian, or Muslim.
How a system is used by some isn't necessarily a good standard for judging it.
The system can be judged by what it is and still be found wanting. You can go to the source and read the holy books or ask groups of adherents of that religion what they believe.
Honestly, I was focusing on the angry part, not so much the naked part. Most people in general, religious or not, seem to care about what people do when naked.
(facepalm not at you, BTW, but at such people)
]Didn't say it wasn't. I focused on what you described.
I didn't say it wasn't. Like I said: I agree with the aphorism.
But that's the whole point. I don't see why you are adding unnecessary tangents to your own thread.
The point is that gods fit very well within that group of unproven phenomena. I used loud and dogmatic (and extremely common) ones as an example to illustrate my point, but it applies to most gods.