Is Christianity much different from Judaism and Islam?

Ad hominen is accusing the person personally, “you” are this or that.
Your presentation or your views are very short-sighted and [reflect] full of cognitive blindness.
What is wrong about that?
There is no need to be so sensitive.

My basic point is, if there are consensus of context between communicators, there is no issue.
The rest of your points are very frivolous.

So you admit that the presentation of Prismatic 567 or the view of of Prismatic 567 is short-sighted and full of cognitive blindness. Okay, I agree.

From another thread:

Prismatic 567 knows nothing about Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam; so he also knows nothing about the so-called “Abrahamic religions”; his presentation and views are very short-sighted, frivolous, and full of cognitive blindness.

This post is addressed to all posters, not any particular one.

It is unfair or rather useless to compare different religions. That does not serve any purpose but creates only confusion in the minds of the people.

One can compare only such religions which were initiated around the same timeline and within the same demography. I think that Jainism and Buddhism are the only two examples existed in the world. Every religion is different from other in one sense or other at the face value. It has to be because their purposes were different because of the mindset of targeted audience. It is as simple as that. Thus, they should not be compared.

One may say that biology is not logical because it does not use numbers like physics. Yes, that is true but still both are sciences but they deal in different subjects altogether. Can we compare biology with physics?

That is precisely what happens when one compares Christianity and Buddhism with Islam and Judaism. Their contexts were entirely different thus they are bound to be different. This difference does not make those superior or inferior. They should be considered different only.

Coming back to OP that whether Christianity is different from Judaism and Islam or not.

Yes, it is different but not in the sense in which OP is suggesting. Even Judaism and Islam are different from each other. People should not take it otherwise but Christianity is not a complete religion. Means, it addresses limited issues (though, not limited to the extent of Buddhism) but related to the largest section of the society. Judaism is more spreaded than Christianity and being the final one, Islam the most.

Quran, even being the shortest scripture that any religion has put forth so far, spares no vertical of the life.

I do not remenber it exactly now but Quran is merely 1/3 or 1/4 of the Bible. And, unlike Vedas, Bible or Torah, it is neither a systamatic text nor bestowed in a one go upon Muhammad. It took 23 years to Quran to be completely bestowed.

The practice was such that, whenever Muhammad had to face a new thing or dellima of any kind, a verse of Quran was bestowed to Muhanmmad by Jibrael ( Gabrial). That is why Quran covers almost all verticals of the life.

Buddhism is just opposite in this regard. It was never meant to be a mass religion, in the first place. Its targeted audience was spiritual investigators and scholars. A common man cannot follow Buddhism in the true sense. The core of the Buddhism is serious meditation to such extent where there would be almost no place for any other thing in the life. Everyone cannot follow that route. the moral part of the Buddhism was nothing new. It was already there in the Hinduism existed that that time.

Secondly, the core of Christianity is faith in a particular form of the God. Christianity sticks strictly to it. Unlike Buddhism, it does not allow its adherents to try and test in person. That is just opposite to Buddhism. I wonder how some people see similarities between the two.

Yes, they are on the same path regarding the morality. But, which religion differs on moral issues? Does Islam or Judaism say that one should lie, cheat or ill treat others?

The point people tend to miss that Christianity and Buddhism were supplements to Judaism and Hinduism. They were not full fledged religions by any means. A complete religion has to address all verticals of the life, including the rules and regulations for the war to sitting on the toilet seat. And, there are only two religions which pass this benchmark; Hinduism (as a whole) and Abrahamic religions (as a whole).

Rest are merely subsets or minor amendments which came up from time to time. Popularity of any particular subset (Christianity) is not an ideal benchmark to judge whether it is a complete religion or not. And also, let us not confuse merely some kind of spiritual practice ( Buddhism) as an independent religion.

Faith is faith and philosophy is philosophy.

with love,
sanjay

God has to tell you how to sit on a toilet seat?? Or the priesthood has to tell you??

Really??

#-o

Not the God himself, but religion has to tell that, if it is meant to be religion in true sense. The faith in any form of the God cannot be a complete religion. It also has to tell its adherents how they have to lead their daily lives with that faith. And, for that, it has to cover all verticals of the life. Only then, its true purpose would be accomplished. Otherwise, it would run into trouble sooner or later.

Religion is almost like our present day constitutions. A citizen must have faith in his country, just like a religious person has in his God. That is fine. But, by merely having a faith in his country and without any further rules and ragulations (constitution), the life of its citizens would become messy. The ontology of the faith has to be completed by reaching to all verticals of the life.

with love,
sanjay

Zinnat, biology is Logical, namely biological. And biology uses numbers. We can compare biology with physics - not only because of the biological realm biophysics.

Suggesting? Here follows the OP:

That OP is not suggesting.

That’s why I quoted meyself:

See above.

In Judaism and in Islam it is allowd to lie, to negate, to deny their own religion, confession and so on.

Why do you say “Abrahamic religions”, although you also say that different religions should not be compared? You can only know it by comparison. So there is a contradiction in your text.

Christian popularity? Today? Who told you that, Zinnat?


“Verfolgte Kirche in atheistischem und islamisiertem Europa.” - koptisch.wordpress.com/2013/04/ … ttackiert/
Translation:
“Persecuted church in atheistic and islamised Europe.” - koptisch.wordpress.com/2013/04/ … ttackiert/

By the way, the red colored ones are also included exactly in Hinduism and blue colored ones with some difference.

with love,
sanjay

Thanks for the laws of the darkest ages.

It seems that after the current battle or civil war between Christians on the one side and the antitheists / atheists (including antimasculinists / feminists) and the fundamentalistic Moslems (the fighter for the darkest ages) on the other side the next battle or civil war in Europe will be between antitheists / atheists (including antimasculinists / feminists) and Moslems becausethe Christians will then be expelled from their home in Europe.

Visit Europe with its modern persecution of Christians. Don’t look away. Don’t listen to your double moral.

According to Peter Sloterdijk religions are misunderstood spiritual exercise systems. Currently the exercising antitheists / atheists (including antimasculinists / feminists) and their best friends, the even more exercising fundamentalistic Molems, are fighting together for the darkest ages.

The Jewish God is not the Christian God. That is - by the way - the reason why all monotheists are actually henotheists. They know that certain others have their own one god too and accept him, but they accept him merely as a god of the enemies.

But Christianity is not as much of that kind as Judaism and islam are. Christianity is not a pure henotheism (in everyday language: “monotheism”) like Judaism and Islam are. When Christianity came to Europe, it became more and more adapted to the European religions (later called: “heathendom”), first in the Ancient Roman Empire, then in the rest of Europe. So, Christianity became more and more poytheistic, but never completely.

Polytheism is much different from all that coming from Persia and the Arabian Peninsula: henotheism (in everyday language: “monotheism”). The European tradition of polytheism has almost only to do with projections of the humans: their gods are like humans with one difference: they are immortal, they are “undying humans”, so to say. The Ancient Greek optimzed the European polytheism. Their gods were the said “undying humans” as the said “projections of the humans”.

They’re all a part of the same chimera where the only difference that exists is who is God and who isn’t, or who is the messiah and who is not. Other than those differences they’re all practically identical.

My views on the OP is still the same [there are similarities and differences] as presented in this post above;
viewtopic.php?p=2515988#p2515988

but after studying Islam full time for nearly 3 years since then, I have gathered additional information on Islam.

One necessary criteria of comparison should be ‘evilness’ and this must be assigned a significant weightage in terms of the impact to humanity.
‘Evilness’ is defined in terms of human acts that are a net-negative* to the well being of the individual and therefrom to the group and humanity.

  • e.g. Escobar was a drug warlord who help many of the poor which is positive, but the negative acts committed by him was very evil [evidences] and the resultant is a net-negative.

It is obvious the Quran [core of Islam] contains tons of evil laden elements that inspire and compel SOME [20%, pool of 300 million :astonished: ] Muslims who are evil prone to commit terrible terrors, violence and a range of evils upon non-believers and even on Muslims. There are glaring evidences to support this claim.

Christianity [NT] in the NT has an overriding pacifist maxim that prevent Christians from committing terrors, violence and evils on non-believers, i.e. ‘love your enemies’ love your neigbors, give the other cheek, etc. There are no evidence Christians has ever killed non-believers shouting “Jesus-u-Akbar” or calling upon the name of Jesus or God.
Even if any Christian has done so, there are no verses in the NT that called upon and give sanction for a Christian to kill non-believers.

Since evilness is such a critical threat to humanity, it must be given a significant heavier weightages. Based on glaring evidences Christianity is much more positive than Islam.

They all have origins in the Arabian peninsular, are related to each other, but Christianity is much more different from Judaism and Islam than Judaism and Islam from each other.

Yes, all are Abrahamic. Christianity is Judaism, it was never meant to be its own separate religion. Jesus was a radical rabbi of his day trying to reform Judaism while also claiming to be the son of God where the Pharisee rabbi elders wouldn’t have any of that which is why he was crucified with the aid of the Romans. Jesus was the radical rabbi that wanted to make everybody Jewish under the new pact and covenant of God. Christianity is basically Judaism 2.0 on steroids. :wink:

[Christianity was a heretical Jewish sect of Judaism itself that became its own religion after the worst of ancient Europeans adopted it later enforcing it onto everybody else through pain unto death.]

At any rate for the record I maintain the world would of been better off staying pagan as all three religions of Abraham in my eyes are poisonous, pervasive, and destructive. I detest all three religions as a kind of living scourge upon this world. For me there is no such thing as the wise or intelligent Christians, Jews, and Muslims. They all stem from virus plague like religions hailing from the same origin.

Although I’m an atheist pagan values do at least for me seem superior to Christian ones in terms of community, independence, and individual accomplishment. Such values that all Christians, Jews, and Muslims have always lacked.

the main 3 religions- christian, muslim and jew… put complete faith in vague, static scriptures that were written eons ago. people who believe in these books are never critical, they accept no logical faults in the words.

Christianity is a case of ‘a religion is better than no religion’ which is optimal to a particular circumstances and time.
Given the very desperate psychological states of people in the past and even at present, I don’t think non-theistic spiritual practice are effective nor optimal for the masses.
I rate Buddhism [with other Eastern spiritualities] as the most superior of all religions but to be effective it is too advance for the present masses.
Christianity is so easy, just belief and viola one is saved and the angst is suppressed.

As I had stated elsewhere, ALL humans are infected with a ‘zombie parasite’ and when active [in the majority] within the human psyche compels the individual human toward believing and clinging to a supernatural being and therefrom to religion to relieve the related angst.

Thus no matter what if there is no god nor religion, humans will be driven to invent them to relieve them of the related angst, otherwise the majority of human will be paralyzed with psychological fears and anxieties.

The thing with god[s] and religions is some of them contain malignant evil elements that inspire and motivate their desperate believers who are evil prone to commit terrible evils and violence upon non-believers.

Some of the Eastern religions do not have any negative evil baggage in their doctrines thus they are useful to a greater extent than those with evil baggage. Nevertheless the resulting organization and those evil prone believers do commit by themselves but not in the name of religion.

The Abrahamic religions has evil elements with Judaism and Islam [the worst of all] contain tons of evil elements. Christianity has negative elements to hinder the progress of humanity but not as evil as Judaism and Islam.

All religions has their pros and cons in relation to the circumstances and time they exist. But what is very glaring is whatever pros in Islam at present is outweighing its cons into the future. As such we need to defang Islam as soon as possible followed by Judaism, Christianity and all other organized religions in the future and replace them with fool proof self-development programs to deal with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis.

In the future [I am optimistic with the trend of the exponential expansion of knowledge] we will naturally work toward enabling universal human values without a need for a God.

The Ancient Greek religion had been a polytheistic mysteries cult religion without any church and only with cult places before it became a cult church during the first three centuries A.D. (Julian the Apostate [Flavius Claudius Julianus] was one of its supporters, and it was based on Neopythagorism, Neoplatonism, Stoicism and probably part of a “pseudomorphis”). At that time, there were at least six greater religions in the Romam empire: (1) rests of the said Ancient polytheistic mysteries cult religion without any church and only with cult places, (2) the said Ancient Greek religion as a part of a “pseudomorphis” cult church, (3) Zoroastrianism and its derivations, e.g. Mazdaism, (4) Manichaeism, (5) Judaism, (6) Christianity and its many derivations, e.g. Jewish Christianity, Greek Christianity, Arianism, Catholicism …

In other words: Christianity changed a lot within four or (in certain regions) even seven centuries before its real stability through two of its main versions: the Greek (later called: “Orthodox”) one and the Catholic (Western) one. At this time, your mentioned “heretical Jewish sect of Judaism itself” had already vanished for a long time.

“Abrahamic” does not prove that the said three religions are the same and that they accept the Old Testament in the same way. All bananas, all apples, all oranges are subordinations of the superordination fruit, but nevertheless: they are not the same. All elephants, all cats, all dogs are species of the mammalia class, but nevertheless: they are not the same.

If I had (but I do not have [as you know]) to accept your “chimera” supposition and to answer the question which of the three “Abrahamic” religions matches which of the three animals lion, ram, snake the most, then I would say: “the lion matches Islam, the ram matches Christianity, the snake matches Judaism the most”. :wink:

[tab]

[/tab]

What I said was that Christianity is a heretical sect offshoot of Judaism where originally under Jesus discipleship the goal was to radically reform and change Judaism itself from the inside out not to become a new religion. Christianity only became a new separate religion or identity away from Judaism because the Pharisee rabbis stopped Jesus and had him killed who was himself a kind of rabbi looking to revise the old testament of the Jews. Either way Christianity and Christians embrace a sort of spiritual Judaism, Christians are spiritual Jews. For me there is very little difference between a Christian and a Jew.

If we want to get historically technical Zoroastrianism influenced Atenism which then preceded to influence Judaism. Christianity came about with Jesus and his followers that sought to radically transform or reform Judaism yet failed to do so where later it became its own distinct separate religion despite almost being indistinct from Judaism itself.

While all Christians and Jews never like admitting such Christianity is sort of like a weird step brother of Judaism that nobody likes talking about.

Islam is more of a political response to medieval Christian/European expansionism in that the Arabic nations and those nations surrounding them didn’t know what to do with a unified continental Europe under Christianity. They didn’t want to embrace Judaism or Christianity where instead they created their own religion of Allah with the prophet Mohammad. By doing so the Arabic and surrounding nations were able to compete against medieval Christian Europe yet retain their own distinct identity. It is because of all that Islam has always been a sort of reactionary religion to both Christianity and Judaism.

I still stand onto my position as an atheist and somewhat of a pagan sympathizer that I despise all three of those semitic Abrahamic religions. I am the ultimate anti semite and I make no apologies for being such. The seeds of Abraham are nothing but poison poisoning the well that is our planet. All three religions will not be happy until they bring about a global crisis stemming from the middle east that we see the emergence of today. All the followers and leaders of all three religions are bat shit insane or whacko. Once again, I make no apologies for my comments.

In a much better alternate historical timeline Rome and the rest of the world would of remained pagan where the likes of Constantine never came to be, Jews would of remained in a constant never ending diaspora scattered to the four winds, and the Arabs worshipped Ahura Mazda or similar gods where Islam never existed. If history played out like that instead of with what we have now the world would be better off. It’s unfortunate that we’re not so lucky.