between different religions?

What are the most significant aspects of each religion which
differentiates one from the other?

Why do you think these are the main differences?

Im no expert on religions. In speaking with people of different religions though, I think the differences are in the details. Things like what they call their 'creator' , which prophets they follow, etc. There are also different holidays and rituals used to commune with each other as well as their creator.


I find the overall message of humans being connected and needing to care for ourself and others,, to be fairly universal.

Most religions I have looked at have the same narritive with but differing words.

What I balance them by is simple.

If they preach hate and administer by the sword.. They are the food of the Beast and I will not consume such.

If they preach and administer generally good things. This I will consume such as I can. This I will sift Gems from the Sands.

It depends highly on which religions you are comparing.

Comparing all religions, through details or general principles, they are all a little different from each other in few ways to every way they can be different.

Why are there differences? Different people have different perspectives.

Also depends on how far you want to break down the term religion. Are you talking Buddhism and Christianity...... or Hinduism and Jehova Witness'....... or Catholic or Protestant, or ..........

True. Personally I would include self-proclaimed irreligious atheists/spirituals/other variations of irreligious under the umbrella as it still reflects having a metaphysical philosophy, although I wouldn't necessarily group them together as a religion. I hope they would agree as the chief complaint seems to be organized religion, not having metaphysical and life philosophies. I hope that makes sense.

Pick any religions you wish to compare.

The question of including irreligious or not is an interesting one. I
was not originally thinking of that - but see no reason why they could
not be included in the discussion. It's also a choice of belief system.

i don't see much of a difference between any of the religions, assuming that is that we accept the definition of religion as based on a belief in a deity, god, supreme being, etc. they are all inventions of mankind to provide answers to questions for which there are no answers.

You could say the same of "Philosophy" but both Philosophy and
religions address important issues of ethics, the nature of humanity
and our relationship to the rest of the world.

In short, I think you are wrong that all of the questions addressed
by religion or philosophy have no answers. There are useful answers
about what is right and what is wrong and why. There are points of
view which put our significance and insignificance in perspective.

To say that questions concerning these issues have no answers is
extremely simplistic and not true in general as I see it.

Yes I think that quote highlights a big difference between religious beliefs with regards to the environments in which we live, and on which we depend for life. Many of the older Native American beliefs included a great reverence for nature and the environment – I can’t really think of many religious beliefs (short of more cult oriented beliefs) that pay any attention to the environment or our relationship with it.



Want to back that up with some examples because it’s not clear to me what you are trying to say.

If you ask a Christian “Why did my beautiful loving and giving daughter have to suffer and die?” I’d be willing to bet that 99% of all Christians would have some kind of stock answer and they would believe it. Do you need some examples or have you heard them all a million times?

In what way and compared to what are humans significant or not significant and by what perspective would you make those judgments?




Then what is the point of human suffering? Do you have a simple answer?
What is the point of all these religions that instigate segregation and propagate homogeneity as long as it’s homogenous to their own beliefs? Is there a simple answer?

And of course the question: “What are the main differences between religious beliefs.” Not even philosophy would attempt to try to answer that one today. Would you?

My question is: For all the major differences that occur within a single religious category, why are these not seen as differences by those within the category – take Buddhism for example. There are more gods and goddesses than anyone really knows but they have all agreed that these are just different manifestations of the main gods. OK. How that different than say, Christianity vs. Mormons?

"How that different than say, Christianity vs. Mormons?

Interesting that you should mention this one.

Christainity (having based its foundation upon the Torah) has the same problem that the Torah does...

It is missing a part of the history of the human race.

That of the Third Tribe of Man. (The Torah lost the records of this tribe after but 8 generations from Adam).

LDS has a portion of that lost record.

I will not name the tribe.

they were not subject to but a small touch of the Flood. Because they had built a civilization in the place that god sent them...

And he was pleased with them.

Yet they faltered and brought themselves low by greed (and became but wanderers in a vast wilderness)

Christianity is the only one that offers us a

Saviour.


Although Christianity is listed among the world's

religions,

christianity is not about religion at all , but about

relationship.

Only thru our Saviour Jesus Christ that Christianity teaches us

about, is mankind able to be brought back

into Relationship with God.


No other religion in the world mentions or offers us a Saviour.


Only Christianity.

And this Saviour Jesus Christ,spoken of in Christianity, is

offered up for the whole wide world , and is available

to every single person in the whole wide world....no matter

what religion one may already be involved in.

"they were not subject to but a small touch of the Flood. Because they had built a civilization in the place that god sent them..."


This right here, is an example of what

false teachings do:


They will teach SOME truths of the Bible , but will ALWAYS

LEAVE OUT ,or CHANGE , or COMPROMISE the Rest

of the Truth of God's

Word , that are written in the Holy Bible.


Also, they usually create their own

bible "version" ,along with the teachings

of some leader , who supposedly has found or discovered some

new "revelation" .....that btw, ALWAYS goes CONTRARY to what

already has been Written in God's Holy Word, called the Bible .

The main difference between religions.


Well you've got your three Abrahamic religions which all pretty much use the Bible and whose life depends on the existence of King David, who many people believe never existed...(includes me.) These are Christianity, the Muslim religion, and Judaism. That also of course includes all of the spin-offs from that... which includes Mormans.

Then you have your eastern religions, your goddess religions, Buddism etc.

And of course their's my religion which is the flying spaghetti monster, the one true God.

Huh? All religions that I know of hold Nature sacred.




What I was saying is that many essential philosophical questions
such as good and evil and the origin of life and suggested codes of
ethical behavior are addressed in religion. These are real answers
to important questions which do not go “unanswered”.

About suffering the usual answer goes something like this. All
people suffer in life and everyone dies. No one is spared in the
end. No one knows why there is suffering. It is beyond human
comprehension exactly why one person suffers more than another.
Variations in suffering may only be chance. So, it is our
obligation as ethical people to try to help all who are suffering
and particularly those who suffer most. We must try to help others
as a holy obligation to aspire to ultimate kindness which is
godliness.




Well, a quick look around the vast cosmos will reveal humankind to
be a speck of pointlike nothingness. Not good enough for you? How
about the timeline then? Homo sapiens have been around a couple
hundred thousand years at best. Recorded history maybe a couple
thousand. The age of the Universe is about 14 billion years.
Pretty insignificant historically.

Now how significant is our extremely fleeting existence so far? It
is hard to say certainly each of us is immeasurably significant to
those we love and who love us. That is why they are called our
significant others.





Then what is the point of human suffering? Do you have a simple answer?
What is the point of all these religions that instigate segregation and propagate homogeneity as long as it’s homogenous to their own beliefs? Is there a simple answer?

And of course the question: “What are the main differences between religious beliefs.” Not even philosophy would attempt to try to answer that one today. Would you?

My question is: For all the major differences that occur within a single religious category, why are these not seen as differences by those within the category – take Buddhism for example. There are more gods and goddesses than anyone really knows but they have all agreed that these are just different manifestations of the main gods. OK. How that different than say, Christianity vs. Mormons?




About suffering the usual answer goes something like this. All
people suffer in life and everyone dies. No one is spared in the
end. No one knows why there is suffering. It is beyond human
comprehension exactly why one person suffers more than another.
Variations in suffering may only be chance. So, it is our
obligation as ethical people to try to help all who are suffering
and particularly those who suffer most. We must try to help others
as a holy obligation to aspire to ultimate kindness which is
godliness.

There does not have to be “a point of human suffering”. Why do you
want to find an excuse for it? What is the point of struggle? There
does not have to be any point to struggling or effort. We simply
must struggle to live. Some expend more effort than others. But
everyone struggles. Same with suffering. These are simple answers.

Segregation and homogeneity? These are not religious precepts. All
religions I am familiar with emphasize the unity of the family of
humankind. It is only erring individuals who are divisive.
Personally I think it is wrong for any religion to say we are right
and you are wrong unless you believe the way I do. But some
religions do say such things and this would be a major difference
between religions. That is a simple answer.

Would I dare to try to answer such questions? Sure. Why not?



See above answers!



You want to know what all the different gods and goddesses mean?
How is that different for Christianity and Mormonism? Well, Mormons
and Christians only have One God for example. That is a pretty
obvious difference. But if you take as you suggest the different
gods and goddesses of the other religions as different
manifestations of a single God then I guess it has to be the same
God. That seems pretty obvious too if there is only One.

Well I think that is cleared up a little.

What else do you think are some main differences between various religions?

no, you could say the same of philosophy. i wouldn't. perhaps religions do address issues of ethics but that does not mean they address those issues in a way that everybody can agree is ethical. ethics are best addressed by thought within each individual. when we look to dogama, religious or otherwise, for ethical standards, we tend to fail at ethical reasoning on our own such as happened in the crusades, the inquisition and now this jihad humanity must indure.



i never said that philosophy has no answers. you tied philosophy and religion together, not me. why we're even discussing philosophy when the question is about different religions is beyond me. the question of god, a deity, a supreme being, etc. which all religions must address simply have no answers. the human mind simply is incapable of knowing the existence of god, the afterlife and other supernatural phenomena. of course you think i'm wrong. takes an agnostic to think i'm right.

The question of god, a deity, a supreme being are also philosophical
questions. Religion basically addresses philosophical questions.
There is no real distinction between religion and philosophy.

It is in the Merriam Webster dictionary.

Definition of PHILOSOPHY
1
a (1) : all learning exclusive of technical precepts and practical arts (2) : the sciences and liberal arts exclusive of medicine, law, and theology <a doctor of philosophy> (3) : the 4-year college course of a major seminary b (1) archaic : physical science (2) : ethics c : a discipline comprising as its core logic, aesthetics, ethics, metaphysics, and epistemology
2
a : pursuit of wisdom b : a search for a general understanding of values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than observational means c : an analysis of the grounds of and concepts expressing fundamental beliefs
3
a : a system of philosophical concepts b : a theory underlying or regarding a sphere of activity or thought <the philosophy of war>
4
a : the most basic beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an individual or group

Many people who have personal experience with God of course disagree
with you. Why do you presume to tell everyone else that they cannot
know God despite their experiences to the contrary?

How do you know that others cannot know? Do you have proof that
everything about God is unknowable? This I find implausible.



Religion (which is at it's core philosphical) has plenty of good
answers and there is no good reason to ignore that and focus solely on
non-essential dogma, rituals or perversions of religion like jihad or
the crusades for example.

I believe the purpose of religion is to have a set of rituals designed to provide a connection to the Divine. And, different religions use different rituals to that end. Ultimately, the goal is the same.

quote from the very definition that YOU provided; "exclusive of medicine, law, and theology".

is theology not religion?



i presume to tell nobody anything. a question was asked in the op. the only presumption i made was to answer the question as i see it. that i think the human mind incapable of knowing such things as god is no different than you thinking the human body is incapable of flight.



yes. put up a smiley face laugh if you think such adds to your point. it doesn't ofcourse but put it up anyway. obviously i don't know what others cannot know. i don't recall saying i know anything. i've simply tried to answer your question as best i could using my own thought process. of course you seem to already have all the answers so i wonder why you began the thread in the first place.



i realize that you and many, many others consider religion, especially your chosen religion, to be philosophical in nature but not everybody agrees and certainly the definition that you yourself posted illustrates that quite well. yes, religious dogma does provide some good answers regarding ethics but it fails miserably in others. and the good answers to ethical questions can all be elsewhere the most obvious being just plain common sense. a typical example of where religious dogma fails is in the golden rule. why do unto others as you'd have others do unto YOU when you can do unto others as others would have done unto THEM? yet countless people of faith spend their lives thinking of how they themselves like to be treated and rarely give a thought to how others wish to be treated. why is this? because it's part of the learned dogma, of course, and not part of simple human common sense thought.

This is an excellent question.

I think the only thing it boils down to is the name of he particular god.

All gods want us to be good, to respect our parents and cover our national debt. The main god is usually male, middle aged, and has a chronic gout problem (for wearing sandals, year round.)

I think in a way gods and religions are like football teams. It represents a certain kind of... you know... team shirt. If the players of the team your team is battling were traded for each other by the team owners during mid-game, what would you do? Coz the players would go into the dressing room and exchange uniforms and come out back into the field and continue in the other jerseys, as if nothing had happened, business as usual.

This is what I mean. A god is a god is a god by any other name. Why worry which name you worship him under? And why go at each other's throats when it comes to blashpemy?

Would you root for Micky Roundrow if he walked across the floor? Or would you root for the team that wears your colors on their sleeves?