The substance of any religion is their doctrine. Their doctrine explains what THEY “think” and why. What you’re calling substance is what YOU “think” based on some completely unproven psychological theory.
These “obvious differences” that YOU brought up as evidence that the Abrahamic religions are the “same”, are now irrelevant for the OP? If they are obvious differences, why did you bring them up as evidence that they are the same?
I responded directly to 4 of the 12 categories that you brought up as evidence that they are same. Of these 4 only “Worship and religious rites” is an outward form of the religions, the other three are doctrine and therefore substance. And now all of sudden because the evidence you presented as proof that they are the same, turns out to prove that they are not the same, you declare that the evidence you brought up is irrelevant for the OP.
How about you present evidence to prove this statement.
Discussing things with you is like trying to discuss something with a talking doll with a pull string. When someone presents evidence contrary to your pet theory, you either ignore it, or dismiss it, by continually repeating your pet theory over and over…just like pulling the string on a doll.
Philosophically, the ‘substance’ [or matter, essence, ouisa] of common forms is the most ultimate concept that common forms can be reduced to. Conventionally, those concepts which are nearest and next to the ultimate concept can also be regarded as ‘substance’ within context.
For example, the ‘substance’ of the physical world is ‘quark.’ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark
However, conventionally the atom, its nucleus & electrons can also be considered as ‘substance’.
All religions are reducible to their doctrines or main texts which represent the substance [not ultimate] of religions. The doctrines cannot be the ultimate substance of religions. Analogically to the physical world, they are at most molecules.
The penultimate substance of theistic religions is God.
Within theistic religions we have the main categories, i.e.
Abrahamic theistic Religions - common root to Abraham
Non-Abrahamic theistic
As such, ‘Abraham’ is the sub-substance of the Abrahamic Religions.
Meanwhile, the sub-ultimate substance of the non-theistic religions are their founders.
However, the ultimate substance of the non-theistic religions is the existential dilemma, a psychological theory.
My theory is, the ultimate substance of the theistic religions is also the existential dilemma.
Therefore the ultimate substance of all religions is the existential dilemma (ED).
I am very confident my psychology theory of ED as the ultimate substance of all religions is sound and can be justified.
Btw, ED is not only the substance of all religions, but the ultimate substance of all human behaviors and its resultants of good and evil.
I have not presented the full arguments for my theory and I do not intent to do it here [no imperative at all to do so], but I have left various clues that those interested can follow up with.
You missed my points.
I did not highlight the difference, it was you who dig out the irrelevant differences.
There are common aspects in the points I presented, but you deliberately and blindly ignore them and instead focus on the differences.
My evidence is based on the sameness and ignoring the difference which are irrelevant.
Analogically it is like, I say all humans are the same, while you insist they are different.
Both claims by you and me can be correct if we take into account the context.
I see all humans the same in terms of the DNA and common physical features [the substance], while you look at them in terms of external colors, height, voice, etc. [the forms].
The point is, substance overrides and is more critical than form in this case of the OP.
Note my explanations above that you deliberately ignored the sameness in those points.
Doctrines are not the main substance.
For the sake of his own selfish soteriological and salvation, Abraham has the odious impulse to the extent of killing his own son. This is inherent in all Abrahamic believers.
The malignant use of the “us versus them” impulse plus the evil laden verses in the Abrahamic Religion texts has contributed to all the terrible evils the Abrahamic believers had committed in the past to the present (e.g. ISIS).
The evil laden verses together the abuse of the “us versus them” impulse dehumanized non-believers as pieces of sh:t and SOME evil prone fundamentalists exploited that to kill with intents to exterminate non-believers. Examples, the inquisitions, killing of natives during missionary projects all over the world, genocides by ISIS, mass rapes, Boko Haram killing to hinder educations, etc.
You are the one experiencing a jammed string and pulling the strings frantically instead of understanding the mechanics and relation between the strings and the actions of the doll.
The point is, let say we are like Democritus in his time [hopefully you know him?],
We are like Democritus chasing after the ‘holy grail’ of the physical world and there is the idea then of the ‘atom’ as the ultimate substance of the physical world.
Now in this quest, why should be bothered about the outer forms of the physical world, i.e. the Earth, water, air Sun, stars, planet, etc. This forms are irrelevant to the issue of finding the ‘atom.’ The path is to did deeper instead of outward to the external forms. The proof of the pudding, note we have dug out the atom, electrons, nucleus, various sub-atomic particles to quarks and now speculating on strings and Higgs’ particle.
This is why I deliberately brushed you off when you veer towards the form instead of the substance. It is wasting mine and your time to deal with the irrelevant.
I think you may not get it even after this detailed explanation, … whatever will be will be.
Prismatic does not seem to understand that the subatomic particles do not determine whether something is good or bad for life. Water molecules sustain life and cyanide molecules end it - both are made of protons, neutrons and electrons.
He has lost the essential features of the various religions by reducing to an abstract root.
You are off tangent again and you are totally ignorant of my main point of contention.
The subatomic particles example was an analogy to highlight the principle of unity within diversity.
I used another analogical example, i.e. the unity of humans in terms of DNA within its diverse forms.
My main point was to justify there was unity of the same root of ‘Abraham’ within the diversity of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, which collective are often termed ‘Abrahamic Religions’.
The story of Abraham indicate that the essence of the Abrahamic religions that follow the same root focus more on the animal or ‘lowest’ part of the brain. In addition, the Abrahamic religions also exploited the inherent primal “us versus them” impulse malignantly. The resultant is the existence of SOME evil laden verses in their holy texts being abused by SOME evil prone believers committing terrible evils upon humanity in the past and present with a greater threat in the future.
In contrast, the Eastern Religions [as listed in the OP] focused away and progressively on the ‘higher’ cortical brain. These religions do not rely on the common “us versus them” malignantly. There are no ‘significant’ evil laden verses in their religious texts which focus more on personal development to deal with the existential dilemma.
Based on the above central criteria as qualified, the Abrahamic Religions are Relatively inferior to these main Eastern Religions [as listed].
Your point has no relevance to the above at all.
Btw, I do not deny the Abrahamic Religions may be relatively superior if we use other criteria[s].
For example, the Abrahamic Religions are very effective [almost immediately] in relieving the angst of the existential dilemma [its a pseudo solution and a placebo]. This sort of quickie however results in SOME committing terrible religious-based evils.
For the Abrahamic believers all they need is just believe and viola! the passport to heaven and eternal life is given to them.
In contrast, the believers of Eastern Religions has to work at it by developing their brain or the lay believers has to do sufficient merits and other necessaries.
One good start towards objectivity is the resultants, e.g.
The figures [24,705] above are sort of a first draft and thus need some polishings and refinements.
The above statistics is since 911, we should consider statistics since the Abrahamic Religion emerged.
Note, just in case, you think the following are obvious.
There are evils committed by Buddhists in recent times (e.g. Sri Lanka, Tibet, Myanmar) and in the past, but these evils are not motivated by any evil laden verses from their religious texts.
The above statistic is sort of a first draft and it can be refined if need to. The evidences and facts are readily available for various media and government authorities.
Note this;
One can refine the above to Jihadists who claimed to commit the above based on their religion or to specific verses in their holy texts.
Here is one example where evil in committed in direct association with Islam;
The above claims by Islamists killing under compulsion of their holy texts is very common. Thus is it not difficult to collate statistics for such religious-based evils.
These evils are motivated by the believers own human nature and not catalyzed by evil laden verses. No, they are not better than the ones motivated by ‘evil laden verses.’ They are merely a different category of evil which must be dealt with seriously and separately.
In general there are no stringent policies to restrict anyone from becoming a Buddhist monk or a believer within the Eastern religious community.
Therefore when a Buddhist monk or a common Buddhist who had just watched porn, then it so happened his lust got the better of him and ended up raping or/and murdering someone, we cannot blame Buddhism per se for that. We cannot blame the religion if there are no evil laden verses that condone evils upon non-believers.
In contrast, a Danish cartoonist drew some cartoons of Muhammad, the prophet of Islam. Some Muslims perceived such act as an insult and a threat to Islam, therefrom they rioted and killed non-believers because the holy texts condone the killing of non-believers if they insult the religion. thereligionofpeace.com/Quran … -islam.htm
The truly arbitrary bit is that he’s using that statistic to condemn ‘Abrahamic Religions’. Why not just Islam? Why not all religion? Why not all patriarchal religions? Why not all non-eco-centric religions? He’s taking a completely arbitrary slice of the pie because he’s desperate to prove East > West.
Right. Lately not even Muslims in the US and around the world want to be associated with the brutality of the Muslim extremists. During the past year Muslim groups have stood up to condemn these actions. Maybe there isn’t a single monolithic Muslim religion let alone a single Abrahamic one. And maybe the same its true of the Eastern religions as well. To lump the religions together like this is to oversimplify a highly complex sociological problem.
Personally, I have a really hard time looking at religion objectively because of my own experience relative to it. I suspect that other people have the same problem because we’re all situated somewhere existentially relative to it. If people claim objectivity without acknowledging the difficulty of overcoming their own subjective prejudices, I tend to doubt them. It isn’t that this isn’t an interesting and perplexing problem. But, I might be more impressed if difficulties were explicated instead of offering a single statistic as if it sheds any light on the question.
I had used that statistic because it is the most easily available as a first draft. i.e. 24,732.
It was 24,705 on Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:05 am -see my post earlier.
Note on the Sources of the above stats:
Even in the absence of the full facts, one can readily gather a sense of truth [intuitively and hypothetically] in those numbers from the daily news of terrible evils oozing from the Islamist community as committed by SOME Muslims.
If you have other readily available statistic which are reasonably reliable, I will readily accept them for reference.
The following are the main religions in the world at present;
Christianity
Islam
Judaism
Hinduism
Buddhism
Taoism
Jainism
Sikhism
If I were to estimate the number of deadly attacks as influenced by their holy texts by each of the following religion since 911, it will be as follows;
Christianity - less than 100
Islam -appx 24,732 per statistic above.
Judaism – less than 100
Hinduism – less than 100
Buddhism – less than 100 (those in Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Tibet, are not texts related)
Taoism — less than 100
Jainism – zero
Sikhism – less than 100
The above refer to number of incidents not number of fatalities.
Can you prove me wrong with the above estimates, the number re Islam from the statistic linked and the rest estimated to the best of my knowledge.
Prove me wrong on the above estimates, anyone?
If not at least give me a clue where I could be wrong.
East > West??
That is very narrow and distorted thinking.
The Abraham Religions are spread all over the world and the largest Muslims population is in Indonesia. There is a large number of Christians in the Philippines. Besides the Abrahamic Religions originated from the East, i.e. Middle East not from the ‘West.’
I have a very strong interest in the subject of ‘Religion and Spirituality’ and thus has done exhaustive research and continual monitoring on this topic.
Being human, subjectivity is inevitable but I do make it a point to be as objective as possible.
I approach to the problem is as if I am an alien assign to Earth to resolve all the terrible evils on Earth and my specialty is religious-based evils.
My first task is to collate all evidence of evils from all sources, i.e. secular, religious related, religious-via-holy-texts, and various categories.
Since my specialty is religious-via-holy-text-evils, I will focus on that specialized aspect and leave it to my fellow aliens to deal with the other categories.
I note the first draft of the estimated number of deadly attacks as influenced by their holy texts by each of the following religion since 911, is as follows;
Christianity - less than 100
Islam -appx 24,732 per statistic above.
Judaism – less than 100
Hinduism – less than 100
Buddhism – less than 100 (those in Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Tibet, are not texts related)
Taoism — less than 100
Jainism – zero
Sikhism – less than 100
If from the above, the numbers in No. 2 re Islam do not ring alarms bells, then, there is something morally wrong with the person (human, aliens or any morally rational entities).
From the first draft of the above, we can do more detailed research, verifications and analysis to refine its objectivity.
Seems like you are now arguing against the OP thesis that lumps Judaism and Christianity and Islam together as inferior. By your reckoning it appears as if Judaism and Christianity are no more evil than most eastern religions. Your claim that you can somehow look at all this as if you were an alien is doubtful. How do you know you are not simply be deceiving yourself as to your own objectivity?
By the way I not presenting my views as if I am God. It is open for discussion and opposing views.
If you reread the OP you will note I am comparing the differences of the main neural and psychological paths are directed at. The Abrahamic religions as a group is directed and focus more on the ‘lower’ brain whereas the Eastern religions focus on the ‘higher’ faculties of the brain. In addition, there is the malignant use of the primal “us versus them” impulse.
The statistic of evils re fatal terror attacks [where Judaism and Christianity at present in contrast to the past are insignificant] is just one example of the resultant of the above differences.
The inferiority of the Abrahamic Religions contribute to other negativities beside the very obvious evils of violence and terror.
The other evils from the Abrahamic Religions [including Judaism, Christianity] which I had not highlighted are intolerances, cruelty, hindering of Science, social issues, cultural, political and others.
Another critical difference is the personal spiritual development of the followers, the Abrahamic Religions exacerbate the primal impulses, instincts and emotions while the Eastern Religions take the trouble to modulate these impulses to leave the person to potential for peak actualization of self.
Prism has already stated that his opinion concerning inferiority and evil are merely his personal preference. There is nothing objective about his “study as an alien”. It’s just an opinionated, not sufficiently involved and thus ignorant yet emphatic, self-justifying alien/foreigner/outsider/novice.
Judaism, Christianity and Islam have mystical traditions that probably involve similar neural pathways to the mystical traditions of eastern religion. There are also us vs them practices in eastern religions. There has been a recent resurgence of Hindu fundamentalism for example. So, most of these aspects seem to be present in all the religions and it is a matter of more or less which is difficult to measure.
Right and it illustrates how value judgments are unavoidable when evaluating goodness or evil. There’s no value free “alien” objective way to do that.
But, you wouldn’t argue that Eastern societies are less evil than Western ones would you? Because if they aren’t then it may be that eastern religions are just more passive and tolerant toward social evils that exist whereas Abrahamic religions are more engaged and therefore end up being more complicit in them. For example, Taoism teaches inaction with respect to the state whereas Islam doesn’t recognize separation of religion and state. The net result could be that the society in question is no more or less evil but that the respective religion is responsible in a different way. In the example Taoism would be passively complicit in the evil of the state and Islam would be actively involved. But, the net amount of evil may be no more or less. [Of course, evil is not the religious intent in either case.]
I already addressed that above. They all have traditions of spiritual development. Who can say which is the top unless they have scaled to the top of all of them? The inner traditions of the Eastern and Western religions are more similar then the outer aspects.
Nothing involving human beings has ever been monolithic so far as I am aware, and I don't know how it possibly could be. We are chaos. However, that doesn't mean that certain organizations and ideologies can't be our enemies. I have a dark view of ethics and philosophy lately, and I don't think 'they aren't all bad' is sufficient to justify inaction. So in the end, "Is Muslim evil?" isn't a question with an answer because it is composed of individual humans with individual wills. However, it may be necessary to [i]act as though[/i] it is as a matter of national or cultural security. Or not. Each nation and people will have to look at the data and the trends and decide that for themselves.
I think it’s easier to be objective with regards to an end than it is to be objective about the existential nature about something. A group of people could disagree forever about the fundamental nature of Islam, or theism, or religion, and agree to certain actions to prevent the next terrorist attack, or to ensure peaceful relations with a Muslim nation, or whatever.
