Pros and cons of attempts at perceiving many or all religions as pointing to the same conclusions

[DawudTalut]

....................
Do you think common beliefs lead to common morals? I don't think it works that way.

Peace be on you.
Ethics like:
Measure full weight, keep clean, be sympathetic, keep environment clean, humanity-care, no racial bias, etc etc......there are many common ethics which IMO came from basic religion [rights of God and people, Hereafter]

but

if currently one does not believe God or or believe many gods [IMO, a change-with-time from basic religion]

even then

society practices them anyway.

 

[LuisDantas]

@DawudTalut , thanks for the reasonable reply.

If I may ask such a thing, what do you know of the origins of morality according to people who do not attribute it to Ibrahim's God?

 

[paarsurrey]

I don't either. Religion is like a yellow light: everyone knows what it's for, but it brings out different things in different people. Some speed up, some slow down, some just ignore it ...

Because of time and place, important dimensions.
Regards

 

[DawudTalut]

@DawudTalut , thanks for the reasonable reply.

Thanks for the award.

If I may ask such a thing, what do you know of the origins of morality according to people who do not attribute it to Ibrahim's God?

They can honestly find sense of approval OR sense of alarm inside their self when they are about to do something. Internal alarm is given to all but it is suppressed.

 

[LuisDantas]

Why or how would it be suppressed? Morality does not really change a lot between Abrahamics and non-Abrahamics.

 

[paarsurrey]

Hi Luis,
Agreed. In this case, as I explained to paarsurrey above, the original teachings as far as we can discern do in fact deviate from paarsurrey's claim. But it makes perfect sense to me to value teachings on their own merits, rather than how well they reflect one specific person's earlier intent. I've long resonated with Buddhism because the general philosophy makes the most sense to me. I could never pick a specific Buddhist sect to fit into, as I both like and dislike prominent facets of both Theravadan and Mahayanist sects in general, let alone more specific schools.

One can believe in any religion to start with, then one can search/research to find the best in them. One shouldn't be a non-believer. Right?
Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

One can believe in any religion to start with, then one can search/research to find the best in them. One shouldn't be a non-believer. Right?
Regards

Why not?

 

[syo]

I am a person who thinks that all religions are correct. There are differences among religions, so what?

 

[paarsurrey]

I am a person who thinks that all religions are correct. There are differences among religions, so what?

The difference could be removed/evened out or squared.
I agree with you. One should be a believer not a non-believer.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Why not?

The believer gets two rewards, on in this world and the other in the Hereafter.
So, why to be a loser?
Regards

 

[Sees]

I am a person who thinks that all religions are correct. There are differences among religions, so what?

It's difficult to hold to that unless you are completely impartial and value-less.

 

[Vinayaka]

Instead of repeating, 'All religions are the same," what's wrong with 'All religions are good," or 'All religions have merit'.

 

[Vinayaka]

The believer gets two rewards, on in this world and the other in the Hereafter.
So, why to be a loser?
Regards

No, I don't believe this, Paar.

The difference could be removed/evened out or squared.
I agree with you. One should be a believer not a non-believer.
Regards

No it can't. Paarsurrey.

 

[LuisDantas]

The believer gets two rewards, on in this world and the other in the Hereafter.
So, why to be a loser?
Regards

Sorry, but that does not make any sense to me.

 

[Vinayaka]

Why or how would it be suppressed? Morality does not really change a lot between Abrahamics and non-Abrahamics.

I would add atheists and 'nones' to that lot too.

 

[syo]

It's difficult to hold to that unless you are completely impartial and value-less.

?

 

[Sees]

?

If they are different but none of the differences matter to you, then you treat them all the same anyway theoretically. If you are not completely impartial and value-less then the differences aren't inconsequential and meaningless.

 

[syo]

If they are different but none of the differences matter to you, then you treat them all the same anyway theoretically. If you are not completely impartial and value-less then the differences aren't inconsequential and meaningless.

?

Are you saying that a different religion is a false religion?

 

[Sees]

?

Are you saying that a different religion is a false religion?

No. Their differences are meaningful though.

 

[syo]

No. Their differences are meaningful though.

So meaningful that one religion should destroy other religions?