HowDidIGetPrem
Active member
Awards
I figured I'd beat this dead horse of a topic because it helps me vocalize how I feel about the dominant religions. When religion is claimed to be bad, people tend to reply that "religion isn't bad, people using religion as an excuse for evil are bad." I always agreed with what that reply is saying in its literal sense, but also hated the implication that the religious text itself is completely fine. I've also always hated the followup that would always follow the reply that these evil and murderous, "not-true" sects are different, in regards to authenticity, from the other "true" sects. In shorter words, I believe "non-true" sects are just as authentic as "true" sects and that religious text IS evil or, at least, morally compromised.
Before I get into that though, I want to make some disclaimers and clarification. Firstly, I do not think all Christrians, Muslims, Jainists, or whatever are evil or like the Taliban. I get that the biggest threat to Muslims are other Muslims, which is proof enough that they're not the same. Next, by "One-True" religions, I mean exclusionary religions in which you're only granted heaven/afterlife-success if you follow a specific text and/or practices. Hinduism and the like avoid being grouped here because they are very open in regards to who succeeds upon death. Lastly, my usage of sect refers to literal sects and to religious members with very similar cultural tendencies even if they aren't recognized as official sects.
I'll first explain why religious text is evil/morally dubious because doing so will make it easier to understand why evil sects are just as authentic as other sects. Everyone agrees that some religious leaders use religion for evil, but those who use it as a defense usually don't acknowledge that it is often those same leaders who chose what the Quran or Bible contains or how either is commonly interpreted. Additionally, the texts are heavily warped by the culture, which were ancient and are not ideal standards for modern times, they were created in. E.g. Islam's covering of women derives from the culture not the other way around and was not a concern originally, translations of the Bible are not exact and it shows a trend (revealing of the Leaders' bias) of submitting women to men in areas where the "original," Hebrew Bible does not, and many bits of the Bible and related (but non-canon for most sects) scripture are blatantly from the Pagan communities that they conquerored as a tool to facilitate integration after conquest.
That is to say that the texts as we know them are not simply words waiting for evil or good to interpret them, but already influenced by both evil and good. It also is to say that a religion's true practices and rules are constantly being muddied and already muddied because religion cannot separate itself from cultural influence. This is why we in the US are having religious people saying getting vaccinated violates their religious rights, which not the Bible but talking heads have led them to conclude. Religion is too influenced by decades of culture to ever remain "pure" or "true," and this is why you get Christians and Muslims that defy, cut, or reinterpret its writings to either be more kind or brutal.
So for a religious sect, whether morally good or bad, to go "those of another sect/religion are destined for failure because they do not follow the religion as intended," the reality of the situation is that they also do not follow the religion as it was intended because that is impossible. In other words, no one adhering to a "One-True" religion will achieve success in death unless their religion is actually wrong and a welcoming one is correct.
Before I get into that though, I want to make some disclaimers and clarification. Firstly, I do not think all Christrians, Muslims, Jainists, or whatever are evil or like the Taliban. I get that the biggest threat to Muslims are other Muslims, which is proof enough that they're not the same. Next, by "One-True" religions, I mean exclusionary religions in which you're only granted heaven/afterlife-success if you follow a specific text and/or practices. Hinduism and the like avoid being grouped here because they are very open in regards to who succeeds upon death. Lastly, my usage of sect refers to literal sects and to religious members with very similar cultural tendencies even if they aren't recognized as official sects.
I'll first explain why religious text is evil/morally dubious because doing so will make it easier to understand why evil sects are just as authentic as other sects. Everyone agrees that some religious leaders use religion for evil, but those who use it as a defense usually don't acknowledge that it is often those same leaders who chose what the Quran or Bible contains or how either is commonly interpreted. Additionally, the texts are heavily warped by the culture, which were ancient and are not ideal standards for modern times, they were created in. E.g. Islam's covering of women derives from the culture not the other way around and was not a concern originally, translations of the Bible are not exact and it shows a trend (revealing of the Leaders' bias) of submitting women to men in areas where the "original," Hebrew Bible does not, and many bits of the Bible and related (but non-canon for most sects) scripture are blatantly from the Pagan communities that they conquerored as a tool to facilitate integration after conquest.
That is to say that the texts as we know them are not simply words waiting for evil or good to interpret them, but already influenced by both evil and good. It also is to say that a religion's true practices and rules are constantly being muddied and already muddied because religion cannot separate itself from cultural influence. This is why we in the US are having religious people saying getting vaccinated violates their religious rights, which not the Bible but talking heads have led them to conclude. Religion is too influenced by decades of culture to ever remain "pure" or "true," and this is why you get Christians and Muslims that defy, cut, or reinterpret its writings to either be more kind or brutal.
So for a religious sect, whether morally good or bad, to go "those of another sect/religion are destined for failure because they do not follow the religion as intended," the reality of the situation is that they also do not follow the religion as it was intended because that is impossible. In other words, no one adhering to a "One-True" religion will achieve success in death unless their religion is actually wrong and a welcoming one is correct.
