I only have a familiarity with Christianity and the “no other gods before me” thing. I am curious what other religions have to say about it.
Nothing, I have none. #KISS
I am a pagan. There are pretty much no widely accepted texts within paganism that make any statements about subject. In my experience most pagans are quite happy to coexist with other religions in general - and given that in almost all circumstances pagans will be in a small minority that makes perfect sense. On the other hand, most pagans that I know are far less happy to coexist with the more bigoted and hateful varieties of religion.
There is a strong feminist trend within paganism and this - particularly linked with the ahistorial but often assumed heritage of witchcraft, and the associated history of hanging and burning of witches - does not lead the more patriarchal end of the Abrahamic religions to sit well with a lot of pagans - and I know a lot who are far happier about visiting the roofless moss-covered shell of an abandoned church, with a hawthorn growing in the apse than they are visiting an occupied one (unless it is in search of a sheel-na-gig etc).
On the other hand, there is a strand of Norse paganism that crosses into white supremacy and neo-nazism, so that brings its own hate, bigotry and patriarchy. I do not know what their stance on other religions is.
“No God before me” can have, and does have in the history of Christianity, three possible interpretations.
- the exclusivist one (Evangelical churches mainly): the Christian God is the only God, you have to confess him directly to be saved.
- the inclusivist one (mainly the Catholic church, and some Protestants), the Christian God is the only God, but you can unknowingly pray him when you pray an other God within other traditions, in other words you can be Christian without knowing it.
- the pluralistic one (other Protestants), most religions are equally valuable, but if you are Christian you should pray only the Christian God.
Of course this is just a model, all positions are deeper than that and most people mix two or even the three models. I don’t know where the Orthodox Churches stand.
For myself, I tend to be somewhere between the second and the third model.
Thank you, I was tired of endless atheist non-answers.
Atheist here. My personal philosophy says to leave them alone as long as they leave me alone. If you start to preach or force it on me, I’ll do something in the range of: politely excuse myself, to tell you to fuck off, depending on how forceful, persistent, and annoying you are.
But in almost all such encounters so far I’ve just smiled and nodded because it was often coming from people using religion to bring them comfort in difficult times, and they were often not forceful. And if they say things like “God bless you”, I take it as a sign of respect, because they often say it out of either gratitude or out of positive feelings towards me. I’ve been fortunate enough to not encounter many religious fanatics, though I’ve heard many stories of them and am ready to pull out the Ol’ Reliable in the form of “Hail Satan” if it gets to that.
Just start answering your door naked holding a sword, they will NEVER return
And if they say things like “God bless you”, I take it as a sign of respect
Very different from someone in the South saying “God bless your heart”, which means they think you’re being stupid.
Same thing here, but I am worried about the influence of “magical thinking” on our society.
And you can’t escape this. Of course whether your neighbor goes to church on sunday is their choice to make. But in my opinion the state, schools etc should be secular. And they’re not. Religion influences politicians and people to have biases, for example towards abortion, gay marriage etc. and that definitely has an influence on law, my life and that of my fellow citizens. I think lots of christians forget what the word ‘evangelion’ (the gospel) means. It translates to “Good News”. And not not prohibition and trying to tell other people who they’re allowed to marry.
Yeah, secularism is definitely something we should strive for. The effects of religion depend on which it is and which country we are talking of course.
I mean the Age of Enlightenment happened in Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries. That’s a long time ago. I believe it’s (still) not part of the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany / constitution, where I live. It’s somewhat different for the USA due to their history. But they have the more annoying conservative politicians and parts of society. I think as of now, major parts of the population don’t care anymore about what the founding fathers came up with in the late 18th century. So there’s no advantage there.
Yeah I’m German too. We have religion in school and as a tax.
And we were a bit late to the party with same-sex marriage because of the party with ‘christian’ in the name…
What I think is outrageous is that we have denominational hospitals, schools and kindergärten, and they don’t have to abide by the same labor law as literally everyone else. They can - and will - fire people for things like divorce. Or being gay. All whilst being (sometimes entirely) funded by the state or health insurance.
And in my opinion we shouldn’t allow them to openly discriminate against women and gay people… Have a look at what the danish people did and force the catholic church to do same-sex marriages… and accept women as priests. I really don’t get why they get a special treatment when it gets to hating on people and they’re the only ones allowed to do it professionally.
Personally, as an agnostic (leaning atheist) I don’t have any particular dogma regarding other religions to follow. I will however share how I view religions.
-
I’ve yet to encounter a religion that is verifiably true. As such I consider the religions of other people to essentially be opinions (personal beliefs).
-
Opinions should not be held sacred in society, nor should they grant special rights.
-
The religions of others only really become a problem if they make demands based on said religious belief, attempt to impose their beliefs on others, or spread verifiably false information.
-
Asking seriously: “ no gods before me”, does that mean it’s ok to have gods after that god?
Before as in order of priority, not chronologically
It means “before” as in “in front of”, not “occurring previously to”
Okay, so, what about after? Meaning he’s #1, can you have a bunch of others behind him?
I guess like the Catholics do, with Mary and saints and such?
You are supposed to never have any other god before the Christian god at any moment. That means that if you pray to the Christian god every day of the year except for one day where you suddenly pray to another. Then during that day you put another god before the Christian god. Think of it like cheating in a relationship. Even if you are exclusive to your partner 99% of the time that 1% still counts as cheating.
But what if I pray to the Christian Catholic God thing first, and then pray to other Christian Catholic Saints, or whatever they’re called, isn’t that putting their God first and then other people / gods second? Which means pray to him first and not last.
So I would pray to this Catholic god, then something else, therefore he is “first” and not “before”.
Know what I mean?
Indoctrinated I mean raised catholic so I got this one. To them, praying to saints is just a way to pray to God. You ask the saints to intercede for you. Basically pass them a note to pass to the big G personally.
How’s that not putting someone or something before god?
It doesn’t make sense sense.
With catholicism you’re pretty much allowed to make up anything. We just have one god. But that’s obviously not enough so we made up the holy trinity, so he/she is one… But also three. And we’ve incorporated pagan holidays and beliefs. There it fairies, monsters etc, we just call them angels and deamons and such. And you can pray to god… Or saints or whatever you like. There is a process to it. It has to by accepted by the pope and the vatican. And it takes some time. But they’re not opposed to contradicting dogma. And don’t believe in logic in the first place. So I’d say go ahead… You can simultaneously have gods before and after and at the same time have it the other way around. It doesn’t need to make sense. If you’re catholic, talk to the pope. He’s infallible. Just don’t introduce “making sense” to anything. We can’t have that with religion.
It’s just a few very old books with how people tried to make sense of the world back then, plus a few thousands of years of lore added on top, varying politics and a few old men running the business.
Not before literally, but above. Catholics only worship God, but they venerate other figures. Like imagine you want to send a message to the ceo of your company, but you’re a lowly wage slave. Do you snap off an email to the big guy himself, or do you ask your manager to pass the message along? Probably the latter. But even though you’re going through a middleman, the ceo is still the big boss. Same thing with God and saints.
Yes. Pavel Datsyuk is not God, but when he stepped on that ice, he was no longer a man, but a god.
My (lack of) religion’s attitude towards all religions:
My best friend already has been for a little over a decade and he’s going to officiate my eventual wedding 😁
I am a Thelemite, which means I am a follower of the mystical system designed by The Golden Dawn and Aleister Crowley. The idea of other prophets is addressed directly in our primary sacred text, Liber AL vel Legis:
“All words are sacred and all prophets true; save only that they understand a little…”
Most Thelemites I’ve met, myself included, interpret this to mean that most religions have kernels of useful teachings in them, but the difficulty of describing the experience of a prophetic epiphany leads to misunderstandings in the message by either the prophet or the followers.
A common practice among some Thelemites is to not criticize other religions for their ideas since we don’t always know the utility they could have for another person, but we do engage in criticism of religious organizations that are doing harmful things to people, especially actions that prevent liberty or self expression.
The thing that makes Thelema a little different than other religions is that we study a variety of aspirational techniques for self actualization in an attempt to have our own epiphanies about ourselves and the world rather than exclusively taking someone else’s word for it. Thelemites are encouraged to use or ignore even Crowley’s own writings depending on how it resonates with us as individuals. We often combine tarot, meditation, journaling, yoga, ritual magick, and every other aspect of our life to create a focus towards a goal that we believe to be our “true will”, or purpose for existence.
I encourage anyone interested in learning more to check out Lon Milo DuQuette’s videos on YouTube, or visit an Ordo Templi Orientis lodge near you to see our rituals performed live.
93’s to all my fellow magicians if you are out there!
Buddhism is widely accepting of other religions. I’m atheist, and love the teachings of the Buddhas.
May you all be touched by thy noodley appendage
I’ve seen that porn and I am not onboard, but you do you so long as nobody gets hurt.
The ‘religion’ I think most accurate is all in on a deity of light.
Given light can be more than one color at once when not measured and different separated eventual observers can each measure different results then as long as a deity of light was fundamentally unobservable during this life and only observed on a relative basis after departing it - such a deity’s qualities and characteristics are entirely up for grabs.
Believe what you want. If I’m right, all options are on the table - relative to you. So your beliefs don’t constrain anyone else’s or vice versa.
Even though I do think there’s a rational underlying mechanical objective truth to how that setup may have been achieved, my guess is most people wouldn’t like that version nearly as much as their own dearly held beliefs, spirituality, or superstitions, so my genuine hope is that after death what they most hoped to be the case for themselves is what they’ll find irregardless of how it works behind the scenes or what it might be for others.
It’s all about perspective
In Theravada Buddhism, it call other religious views as just Micchaditthi (Pali word), originally meaning just “wrong view”. But in recent years, atleast in my country the word is slowly becoming akin to stronger words like blasphemer, infidel, etc, which is quite sad because in the scripture, it seems obvious that the word wasn’t use in such meaning.
I always thought the Ottoman Empire’s millet system was interesting. Basically since it was a Muslim country that allowed other religions to exist, how do you rule them? Doesn’t seem quite fair to make them follow your religious rules, but also you are a religious empire protecting everybody and what’s in it for you to protect these non believers?
So they just had different legal systems set up for each religious community, and non-Muslims just had to pay a tax (the jizya).
The bible says you are allowed to do with god’s enemies as you wish.
