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.
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 😁
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.
“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.
We hate Microsoft. Long live RMS and the flying spaghetti monster!
Hail Eris! All hail Discordia!
Ramen!
Two words: Spanish inquisition
Didn’t expect that.
You never do
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.
-
Buddhism is widely accepting of other religions. I’m atheist, and love the teachings of the Buddhas.
Interestingly, Christianity is compatible with Judaism and Islam in that regard, though I’m not sure exactly what the other two say in kind.
The Christian God is the Muslim Allah, who is also the Hebrew Yahweh. All the exact same being.
Christianity embraces the God of the Torah but rejects the Muslim faith. There are exceptions but mainstream no.
You’re close, but some Christians would argue that the god worshipped by those of Jewish faith is not the same god either and therefore not embrace that god. Those Christians would say that since Jesus revealed the trinitarian (Father, Son, and Spirit) nature of their god, to reject that nature is to worship a different god altogether. Similar to how Muslims acknowledge their shared history and feel a respect for Judaism and Christianity, those Christians accept and respect those of Jewish faith, but will still point out their incomplete understanding of the god the Christians worship.
That is a belief that existed and maybe some still believe it, but I don’t think any large organizations would consider that canon. It’s generally considered a heresy, called Marcionism.
Christianity embraces the God of the Torah but rejects the Muslim faith.
Still, Allah is the same being as the Christian “God”.
I’m not saying Islam is canon to Christianity. Just that when Christians talk about God and when Muslims talk about Allah, they are talking about the same being.
Just like in English, we call the protagonist of the Pokemon anime “Ash”, but in Japan, he’s called “Satoshi”. But it’s the same character no matter which name you refer to him as.
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
Ok, so him first, Zeus or some other god second?
Yes. Pavel Datsyuk is not God, but when he stepped on that ice, he was no longer a man, but a god.
Some Christians in India worship Jesus as their top god, and local deities as secondary gods. I’m guessing this is common in places where Christianity spread peacefully into a culture with a polytheistic (and preferably decentralised) pantheon.
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.
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 extra lore added on top, varying politics during the times 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.
Tiny deism is quantum religion. And thus, it is all religions.
I think that’s baked into all the abrahamic religions. The Old Testament says so, and the Quaran also doesn’t like heretics, especially apostasy is considered really bad. As far as I know the death penalty is how to deal with apostates in Islam. But it’s not really better in christianity or judaism, the same tribal concept of extinguishing rival tribes is in the Old Testament and Torah. All these religions believe in the same god. So theoretically they’re more compatible with each other than for example with atheists or people believing in different or multiple gods. Or people renouncing their ways.
You can have a look at buddhism, hinduism etc to find a different perspective, indigenous beliefs, pantheism or agnosticism. Or the ancient greeks, romans or egypts or maya civilization. They all have a very different view than we have with our abrahamic God.
I personally like science. Just because it’s the only sane approach to knowledge. And it has proven to be the way that delivers the goods. And I think this and the observations I made contradict with the existence of any God. And we should not base our decisions on ancient tribal beliefs, so I’m not okay with any of the Gods who tell people what to do and what not to do. I link proper philosophy and progress in what we deem to be our current ethics.
Abrahamic religions do not have death written for apostasy that’s just some weird spooky myth Redditors tell
I’m afraid you’re wrong, though.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam
And I’ve talked to refugees who fled countries in fear of being killed for who they are. Ever heard of ISIS, the jihad? islamic state or sharia law? Wikipedia tells me it doesn’t happen that often in countries like Saudi Arabia or Qatar… And it’s mostly extra-judicial, not legal executions. But it’s in the scripture. And also part of the law of a dozen countries. And I’m pretty sure there has been some genocide out of similar reasons in the wars in Syria and Afghanistan in recent times.
And regarding the christians: What’s with the entire medieval times? And what was the whole point of the crusades? Christinity was in an open, bloody war against the heretics for centures. And I think they tortured apostates to death. Currently most of us don’t do corporal punishment or death penalty any more. But we sometimes shun apostates and make their lives miserable.
I don’t see a myth here…
Your reference is extremist terror groups backed by America. And you’re linking secular websites as a source. The irony is truly not lost here.
Which one is a bad source… secularism? wikipedia? the times? feel free to enlighten me. i know i sound a bit negative, but i’m not opposed to learning new things as i think this is somewhat a topic that is important for humanity as a whole. i mean the terror groups like ISIS aren’t seperate to the whole religion thing. wars and terror are part of that and can’t be viewed seperately. of course if you exclude all the bad parts of religion and just view the moderate ones that do less harm… it looks way better. but both are a part of the whole story.
And the question was if the death penalty for apostasy is part of islam. And I said yes, it is part of law of countries, additionally people do it in the name of God. And it’s written in the hadith. So whether you or I like that or how my neighbor practices islam or what the secular people think… doesn’t change the facts.
Fundie terror groups like ISIS and israel only exist because some morons fail to read more than three lines of a book and just ignore the rest.
You’re entirely changing the topic here. That was not what we were talking about. But I feel for the people living there. The whole situation is just bad. And it doesn’t get better. You’re right with the history. The USA and USSR were fighting and funded the most heinous and evil people, gave specifically them money and weapons out of their own political motivations. Oil and other interests added to it over the years. Lots of that did not have the intended consequences, they could have seen that coming and all of that brought the current situation into existence. And they added yet more bad decisions on top in recent times. It’s mostly politics and not religion. However I think some of the mujahideen and isis terrorists who actually do the murdering are fueled by religion. At this point it probably doesn’t matter much since all they’ve seen since they were 14 and started fighting is violence and death… I don’t have a point to make here. It’s bad. I’d change it if I could.
Nothing, I have none. #KISS
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.
In Gita, Shri Krishna says “I am everything”. This kind of kills the “otherness” of everything.
It’s all about perspective
