Religious rules/guidelines

[osgart]

The rules or guidelines in any religion or spiritual teaching only apply to those who follow the religion they believe in.

The rules don't account for those who are not believers of the religious teaching.

Any thoughts?

Can you show an example of a religion that doesn't impose their rules on others who don't share in religion? Many religions lay claim to an ultimate truth that everyone is accountable to.

In my religion I have guidelines. I know there are universal eternal laws. They are called virtues. However I do not think that any religion so far has gotten it right. Universal eternal laws are not there to condemn, or to confine people; if they wish to avoid stop signs they do so at their own and other people's peril. Thus the need for laws and accountabilities. I don't think universal eternal laws can be avoided. Either a person is good to you, or they are searching, or neutral to you, or they are doing harm to you. There is no way around that.

Whatsoever a person does to themselves is their own business, but to inflict damage to others is unacceptable. Self defense against damage, or murder is justified.

Humanity, often enough, always wants to create their own truth apart from virtues. In the name of freedom and liberation, people want unrestricted liberty to do whatsoever they want to do whensoever they want to do it. Many only cry justice when they themselves are harmed. So they say there is only subjective morality.

Yet a wise person knows the simple truth of eternal laws that are for the benefit of life and not the harm thereof. Morality is objective and simple. Nature makes situations complex, but at the roots morality is simple. A person can only do their best.

Having said all that, I want everyone to have their own truth for themselves and those that responsibly consent to that truth are more than welcome to enter into such truth. I would never deny people their own free will for themselves and their like minded peers.

I know very well there is an objective universal eternal truth. It's the best truth out there. It's reserved for those that truly desire it.

Virtues are not complex. Either a person is doing virtues, or they are being objectively neutral, or they are searching, or they are commiting vices against people.

Words are easily twisted, or changed, or can be very ill suited to express.

Self defense is a virtue against abuse and murder.

In my religion that is the path I follow. Whether a God exists or not I can not say. But just as a father fights for the safety and well being of his children, a person should defend their truth always.

So my path is very much like what you say. If people don't need virtues then I let it be, until it crosses into destroying, or harming loved ones.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Can you show an example of a religion that doesn't impose their rules on others who don't share in religion? Many religions lay claim to an ultimate truth that everyone is accountable to.

In my religion I have guidelines. I know there are universal eternal laws. They are called virtues. However I do not think that any religion so far has gotten it right. Universal eternal laws are not there to condemn, or to confine people; if they wish to avoid stop signs they do so at their own and other people's peril. Thus the need for laws and accountabilities. I don't think universal eternal laws can be avoided. Either a person is good to you, or they are searching, or neutral to you, or they are doing harm to you. There is no way around that.

Whatsoever a person does to themselves is their own business, but to inflict damage to others is unacceptable. Self defense against damage, or murder is justified.

Humanity, often enough, always wants to create their own truth apart from virtues. In the name of freedom and liberation, people want unrestricted liberty to do whatsoever they want to do whensoever they want to do it. Many only cry justice when they themselves are harmed. So they say there is only subjective morality.

Yet a wise person knows the simple truth of eternal laws that are for the benefit of life and not the harm thereof. Morality is objective and simple. Nature makes situations complex, but at the roots morality is simple. A person can only do their best.

Having said all that, I want everyone to have their own truth for themselves and those that responsibly consent to that truth are more than welcome to enter into such truth. I would never deny people their own free will for themselves and their like minded peers.

I know very well there is an objective universal eternal truth. It's the best truth out there. It's reserved for those that truly desire it.

Virtues are not complex. Either a person is doing virtues, or they are being objectively neutral, or they are searching, or they are commiting vices against people.

Words are easily twisted, or changed, or can be very ill suited to express.

Self defense is a virtue against abuse and murder.

In my religion that is the path I follow. Whether a God exists or not I can not say. But just as a father fights for the safety and well being of his children, a person should defend their truth always.

So my path is very much like what you say. If people don't need virtues then I let it be, until it crosses into destroying, or harming loved ones.

Mostly all religious people tries to share their religious beliefs, that is not the religions fault, it is probably based on many factors.
Some do it because they are told by others to go out and share. But of course others see how much a certain religion help them an want to share their faith, in hope that others can get what they have.

Then there are forums like RF where sharing and discusting/debate arise because we want to discuss religious topics

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I don't know if you don't understand me or don't know this is not a debate thread or just want to pick a fight, but I'm declining to argue this with you.

I've stated my position and I'm sticking with it.

Yeah, you are right.

 

[PearlSeeker]

The rules or guidelines in any religion or spiritual teaching only apply to those who follow the religion they believe in.

The rules don't account for those who are not believers of the religious teaching.

Any thoughts?

It depends whether they fall in the category of universal morality (compassion, reciprocity...). Not all do.

It also depends on the context. If a nonbeliever steps in a religious place it is expected to behave respectfully. This means that some rules apply to him as well (dress code, silence... ).

 

[Spirit of Light]

It depends whether they fall in the category of universal morality (compassion, reciprocity...). Not all do.

It also depends on the context. If a nonbeliever steps in a religious place it is expected to behave respectfully. This means that some rules apply to him as well (dress code, silence... ).

If a non believer step in to a religious place they freely chooses to go there, and if there is certain rules to follow yes they would be adviced to do so.

 

[osgart]

Mostly all religious people tries to share their religious beliefs, that is not the religions fault, it is probably based on many factors.
Some do it because they are told by others to go out and share. But of course others see how much a certain religion help them an want to share their faith, in hope that others can get what they have.

Then there are forums like RF where sharing and discusting/debate arise because we want to discuss religious topics

I see no problem in wanting to share religion. Life would be dull and unprofitable if everyone were to remain silent. Or even worse if only those deemed qualified were allowed to speak.

Issues of truth are inescapable things. It's best to talk of them things.

Religion is also a way of thinking that comes natural. Intuitions are not always wrong. A lot of intuitions fall under the category of religion.

The trouble comes when a truth is false and blinds people to the good. Otherwise I'm not opposed to religion because it is an attempt at knowing things about life other than scientific things.

 

[LuisDantas]

The rules or guidelines in any religion or spiritual teaching only apply to those who follow the religion they believe in.

The rules don't account for those who are not believers of the religious teaching.

Any thoughts?

That is probably true... but also insufficient except perhaps in very specific circunstances.

Religion as I understand it is supposed to be not so much about rules as about values and attitudes. Perhaps more relevant still, they are supposed to be about community as well.

Therefore, there are a few very important caveats.

• Religious rules are at least as important for the ability and decision to transcend them or even violate them outright as they are for being followed. There isn't really any other way of developing religious wisdom. Obedience and fear are not even poor substitutes for wisdom, but rather full impediments to it.
• Religion is supposed to matter, to make a difference. And in this world that we exist in it is not really possible to contain the effects of our beliefs, actions and omissions to ourselves and our brothers and sisters of faith. The effects on others must be taken into account, always.

 

[CharmingOwl]

The rules or guidelines in any religion or spiritual teaching only apply to those who follow the religion they believe in.

The rules don't account for those who are not believers of the religious teaching.

Any thoughts?

I think the reason they are following the rules is important. My practice has some rules for the third eye/ pineal gland but it would be extremely unnecessary to force these rules on other groups as they have no desire to work with that. For groups like Christianity or Scientology where they believe their religion is necessary to save the world, it creates a kind of dogmatism and a kind of drive to make sure everyone is acting in line with it. In modern fundamentalist states like Saudi Arabia it is actually illegal to convert because enough people not practicing the religion would create problems for their society because of this.

 

[Alien826]

Yes, I noticed that too. It lacks the required "I believe/feel/think" as indicated in the rule against preaching and proselytizing.

I'm not particularly bothered by the the possible transgression of that rule. People do tend to state strongly held beliefs as facts. My problem is that it signals that any contrary opinions will be automatically denied without further debate.

Incidentally, and totally off topic, I think that rule needs some work. It seems to have caused some posters to append "in my opinion" to everything they post. Some things are genuinely not a matter of opinion, and also not even vaguely proselytizing. "My name is John. In my opinion".

 

[Alien826]

You see them as two different items. I don’t.

If might be interesting to read why you hold that view, as opposed to simply stating it.

 

[Alien826]

Can you show an example of a religion that doesn't impose their rules on others who don't share in religion? Many religions lay claim to an ultimate truth that everyone is accountable to.

Buddhism comes close, especially in it's original pure form. I'll share a story.

This comes from my days as a Buddhist. We had a Tibetan Lama as part of our group. He was returning from a trip overseas and was in a cab taking him home from the airport. This was in Atlanta, very Bible Belt. The taxi driver saw his robes and asked about them. On hearing that he was Buddhist, the driver embarked on an extended attempt to point out that Christianity was the true religion ... I'm sure you can imagine. The Lama related this to us and someone asked "Did you try to correct him and tell him about Buddhism?" The Lama was shocked. "Oh no" he said. "He is exactly where he needs to be in his journey. It would be very wrong for me to interfere".

Incidentally, I don't see proselytism as enforcing one's religious rules on others, so long as that's as far as it goes. The listener doesn't have to "convert" or even listen if he doesn't want to. What I object to is things like "blue laws" that attempt to constrain the behavior of others.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Hi 9-10ths_Penguin. Good evening. The Word of Yahweh doesn't work like that.

I don't care.

We either obey it, and receive blessings or we disobey it and receive a curse.

So we can infer from the many atheists doing quite well, who have lots of things we'd consider blessings and nothing we'd consider curses, that God approves of what they're doing.

In our faith we aren't forcing anyone to keep the Biblical Laws. We're all here voluntarily because we want to keep the commandments and prove our love to Yahweh.

Good. Please keep it that way.

I have never said I want a say in how things are done in my faith just because I keep the Laws.

I know. That was me.

We are all working to please Yahweh through the keeping of His Laws.

"We are all"? Please speak for yourself, thanks.