Why are there so many religions?

[Tuno]

“It is love alone that gives worth to all things.” - St. Teresa of Avila She didn’t in this case say “Christianity,” although she would have no other context of explanation for her experience. The Treasure, my dear friend in experience, is where you found it. How you account for it is your business. If your picture of the Church fits that, fine. I might suspect you have no other significant model as a cognitive line of exegesis. I lucked out and found one that fits better for me. So I continue to maintain, GOOD and religion are independent streams of consideration, only seeming to intersect by dint of need for verification and agreement. As an institution the Church has, in my view, done very poorly on many counts, despite many such exemplary members such as yourself.

**We, Who Witness the Heart**
 
We, who witness the Heart, are naked, walking
Bemused through countless avenues of feeling.
We are tracked by the stares of those who hide,
Cowering, not daring to look inside
The deep blue shade that’s caused, somehow,
By living anywhere but Now.
 
We wander with purpose, undermining 
All the ordinary lack of meaning
Of the prosaic run-of-the mill man 
Or woman who scrambles to sense what they can
Through the anesthetic layers of culture
Fed to them by any corporate vulture
Who can grab their hungry attention and stuff
Into their minds froth and pale commercial fluff.
 
You and I have met here serendipitously,
Not looking for each other, but consciously
Knowing that the Universe is not so unkind
As to prevent any true Seeker from the Find
Of this lifetime—or the string of them all—
That would burst them through this world’s sensory wall
Into the Freedom that can send one flying, reeling,
Into the realms of Heartfelt feeling.
 
Here I truly, squarely stand
Stretching forth this trembling hand
Holding out an olive branch
That is very nearly wrenched
From incoherent fingers
By a shaking that won’t stanch
A feeling that still lingers:
 
My cheeks are drenched
Weeping, sobbing, belly laughing,
Through the blissful pain of Being.
Laughing through the pain I feel,
Knowing only Now is Real,
I extend my hand to you, 
Trusting you can feel this, too.

 

[Ignatias20]

Why are there so many religions?

Most all religions were started by imperfect men. Men are not infallable.

Only one Church was started by Jesus Christ, the second person of the Blessed Trinity.
Jesus being God was infallable; therefore, any Church that Jesus started would be the True Church that God much preferred. Is that rational?

Are all religions equal? Are religions started to suit the cultures of the people on a local area? If you answer that Yes, then you put the cart before the horse.

Peter warned in 2ed Peter about Private Interpretation. If men privately interpret the Vulgate, the KJV, the Douay-Rhiems Bible or any other Christian Bible then they are facing the great possibility of error. So men other than the Magesterium with the Pope are fallable.

** The reason there are so many religions is that egocentric men who are arrogant took pride in starting new religions - a human condition.**

 

[colmcille1]

To the amadan,
You only had to post ONE post here to say everything I need to know about you.
A truly great man wrote: ’ Tell me what you love and I will tell you who you are’.
Do your research on that one as you like to blow your trumpet about your apparent erudition.
Amadan befits you.
The further Irish quote you can likewise find out about. Do it without your colossal ego.
I know you and I know your problem but like a child you do not want to be corrected.
Your words are mere bubbles of despair.
Btw, if any other prissy atheist is wondering, this post is very much on topic because, if you have not noticed, the atheists are the the ones stumbling in the dark and their attitudes in these posts reflect this. It is those selfsame attitudes of an amadan I am addressing here.

 

[Tuno]

Then you revile God and Truth, because those two as One are what I love.

 

[colmcille1]

Then you revile God and Truth, because those two as One are what I love.

Once again you are completely wrong. You THINK you love those two. A vast sad chasm of difference.
You are stumbling in the dark but there are many good and honourable people in the world willing to help you.

 

[inocente]

To the amadan,
You only had to post ONE post here to say everything I need to know about you.
A truly great man wrote: ’ Tell me what you love and I will tell you who you are’.
Do your research on that one as you like to blow your trumpet about your apparent erudition.
Amadan befits you.
The further Irish quote you can likewise find out about. Do it without your colossal ego.
I know you and I know your problem but like a child you do not want to be corrected.
Your words are mere bubbles of despair.
Btw, if any other prissy atheist is wondering, this post is very much on topic because, if you have not noticed, the atheists are the the ones stumbling in the dark and their attitudes in these posts reflect this. It is those selfsame attitudes of an amadan I am addressing here.

Let’s be clear here.

You are baiting with derogatory remarks.

You have been reported for trolling another thread.

You are acting against the best interests of CAF by disrupting the discussion and making others fearful to participate.

More than one Gaelic dictionary, including this one, defines amadan as fool/idiot. If correct, then under cover you have insulted a fellow debater and have then extended that to all “prissy atheists”.

Once again you are completely wrong. You THINK you love those two. A vast sad chasm of difference.
You are stumbling in the dark but there are many good and honourable people in the world willing to help you.

And now you’re telling someone else what they think.

Please be good and honorable and STOP IT NOW.

 

[inocente]

I would accompany that with something directly pertinent to comparative religions which contains annotated source material, such as Ceriminara’s Handbook for Religious Sanity.

Unfortunately it seems to be out of print. Looking around Amazon today, History of the World’s Religions (Noss 2007) looks good but the price tag is $77 US. Ever read it?

 

[martywheaton]

---

What is your opinion?***

Well, I think it’s man’s way to understand the world around him and the manner in which it works, is all.
What we don’t understand or grasp with the human mind, which obviously has its limitations, we attribute to a all powerful, other worldly being. Just human nature, I suppose.

I can’t let go of the idea that there just might BE another intelligent force that we as humans do not fully understand…so…

Phoenixrrt, you hit the proverbial ‘nail on the head’ without realising it, “Just human nature, I suppose.” ‘Just’? I think it is more than incidental that we are inexorably drawn towards the supernatural and that we (humanity) have expressed this aspect of our ‘human nature’ via religion/ philosophies.

David Hume claimed, in his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, that he though it possible that there were historical societies which possessed no supernatural/religious sentiments. With hindsight, we now know he was incorrect. Every society, without exception, has not only believed and expressed the supernatural, but has based their entire society around it, laws, morals etc.

This goes to the heart of the question, “Why are there so many religions?”, because religion, an innate sense of the supernatural, is as natural to humanity as breathing. However, implicit in this question, for the unwary and plain biased, is the assumption that they are all relative and therefore meaningless. This is simply incorrect (remembering that the supernatural is an innate part of who we are, we must ask,‘Why’?) and the result of a fight between two other aspects of our nature 1. a propensity towards sloth/laziness 2. reason (reasonableness). We need to overcome the former and apply the later. In other words, we must seek using reason and an open heart and then we will find the fullest expression of religion, true religion. We require Grace, of course, but its efficacy sometimes only becomes apparent afterwards.

The Church, Christians, has always believed that all other religions, although all by definition expressing some truth, were but a precursor of the full revelation which was to come in Christ and that the gift of reason allows us to discern truth from falsehood.

I read that back and it seems a little muddled, but I’m sure you’ll get the gist.

P.S. @Inocente. There is no “trolling” in the above comments. These are, for some, emotive issues and their responses can reflect this - but nothing inappropriate or out of context was said. As my American cousins say, “Lighten up, dude”.

 

[Tuno]

Unfortunately it seems to be out of print. Looking around Amazon today, History of the World’s Religions (Noss 2007) looks good but the price tag is $77 US. Ever read it?

Thanks, Inocente, though I’ve read similar (if the title is a clue, but we know books and their covers, lol!) I’ve not read that one. I will see if I can’t find it. And though it is out of print, the other one is available on Amazon or other book searches sometimes for as little as $1 or about the same as the title you mentioned. Go figure. Hint: the title I gave is actually the subtitle, so as not to freak out some of the more fundamentalist birds on here. I’m a bird, too, but I’m kind of in the rara category.

 

[Tuno]

Yes, I agree, mostly, with ph62 and MartyW. There is a kind of dialectic in learning, even about religion. Some, as I said, get stuck in the first or second phase and don’t mature in their considerations to a more inclusive and useful perspective. But the vast majority don’t, or only occasionally care, ore become case-hardened in habitual thought. For me, my interest was kind of from day one, and I was lucky, I guess. I even had thoughts for a while of becoming a priest. But my third phase was ignited by a documentary I saw in my Catholic high school and became full blown after an unbidden and powerful mystical experience that completely pulled the rug out from under me, as such might for anyone.

I don’t see that we can schedule or regulate what happens to us in our lives, but certainly we can be, and are, responsible for our responses to such things, as distinct from having reactions about them. Kind of the difference between proactive and passive. I chose to be proactive and am grateful for the patterns of perceptions I learned as I encountered other faiths in my search, my own coming up short in answers. I, personally, did not find “have faith” and its accompanying angst to be a sufficient resolution. I also could not bend my experience into a contortion which would fit any of the offered dynamics and maintain my integrity. I own what I came to and stand whole and honest before God with it.

So I followed dove’s advice even before I met him on here and found some people who could help me. They included, but were not limited to Catholic clergy. Eventually I found an exemplar who had, I found out later, scholars and mystics of many faiths, from East and West, including Jesuit professors and other higher ups in the Church, consulting him about enigmas they had encountered on their Journey. He had a long standing reputation for resolution of such conundrums. One of these consulting personages you would immediately recognize, but I am bound by privacy.

Let’s just save it to say that while I respect the Church, despite its skeletons which invariably are a part of human institutions, and which in maturity ought rightfully be admitted and faced, I was saved from going mad by going outside my birth religion. And in a roundabout way I respect it more now, though I see it very differently, having had the acquaintance of both its mysteries and boondoggles. So as we might find in a conversation that is elevated by including speakers of different backgrounds and perspectives, I found that a particular piece of my puzzle was amenable to explanation from someone not in my immediate “family.” And I am grateful for that, I’m OK with it, and I’m enriched by what I learned along the way.

I therefore find the adamantine insistence on one “right” and “true” way useful for someone who may not have had a shock that lands them in a position of desperate inquiry that isn’t solvable within the closed canon of one faith. Later, I discovered that there were others in the Church who had had similar experiences to mine and yet did accomplish a resolution. The Church generally wasn’t happy with some of them, and I can now see that as a matter of public interpretation they are still largely misunderstood. But that is why I was so exceptionally fortunate to find someone who had clarity about my case due to living experience–and accurate, practical exegesis of the state in question.

So I thank Colmcille for his sage advice, as indeed there were “many good and honorable people” who helped me when I was in the dark night of my soul. I am daily grateful for the many graces I have received.

 

[antroji]

There is something about your posts I really like, Tuno. I’m reminded of the adage “When you know you Know, you Know you know.” My sense, Colmcille, is that Tuno is more in that catagory that just the mere intellection you accuse him of.

 

[inocente]

The Church, Christians, has always believed that all other religions, although all by definition expressing some truth, were but a precursor of the full revelation which was to come in Christ and that the gift of reason allows us to discern truth from falsehood.

I’m a Christian who has always been conscious that we all have our differences in belief. Here on CAF for example, it’s rare to find two Catholics agreeing on every point of doctrine.

So, would you go further and say that if God has a plan then part of that plan is many religions, in the sense that none of us seem able to grasp the whole truth of Almighty God?

PS: Some people start off making good courteous contributions but then find emotive issues across a number of threads, upsetting various people. After trying a light reminder or two, a shot across the bows of a friend is good for a go if it stops them being banned.

PPS: What’s an Observing Member? I mean if you can post, what’s the “observing” bit about?

 

[Ignatias20]

May I use the poster Tuno as an example of a question that popped into my mind?
There is no animocity or dieresion aimed at theis poster - believe me! It is very curious
that Tuno boldly states that he/she is:

1. non-religious
   2.not Atheist
2. not Theist
3. not Agnostic

Am I correct in saying that people such as this will Not say:

1. " Religion May be Important to Humans". non-religious
2. “There absolutely is no God”. Atheist
3. "There is a God, but He wound up the universal “clock” and now has stepped back…he will not interfer. Theist
4. "Well there may or nor be a God…but if God does exist He has no interest in me nor I Him. Agnostic

You might have written the 4 statements differently - never-the less…
The question is:
** This is a Catholic site, supported by Catholics, is frequested by mostly Catholics so why does one who is non-religious and one who will not admit that there is a God be interested in what Catholics are saying? This is unusual.
Is this poster considering that Holy Mother Church just might be a “life preserver” for those who are lost in the sea of existance in this mean old world?**

OR could he be a fervent Catholic who is attempting to draw out Catholic Truths from us.

 

[Tuno]

You read my banner, I 20, but did you read anything else I posted and think about it? Nevertheless, I will indulge your questions.

1. non-religious = though raised an RC, one who devotedly practiced and promulgated the Faith as I knew it at the time, then having a very extensive catechetical knowledge, I now do not attend services nor preach Catholicism or any other religion. Nor do I understand any religion as a matter solely of faith to be adequate to certain experiences available to the Soul’s Journey except as a scaffolding for structuring experience.
2. not atheist = I Know God IS
3. not theist = not in any dualistic religious sense of believing in a personal God or God as “Person” in any form. If we are talking about a God who acts personally in the Universe, we are not talking about the Supreme. Or we are talking about allegorical pointers to what is Ineffable and not transmittable in words, especially English due to several of its intrinsic flaws.
4. not agnostic = see #2

So I’m not sure what your interpretations refer to: they don’t refer to me. And of course the Church may, or may not, be a “life preserver” for it’s adherents, as may any faith or belief system. The Church was for me until I had a radical insight into the nature of human awareness and necessarily had to modify my understanding of theology to accommodate that. Faith, as I acquired it, and see many do, was not adequate to meet the exigencies of direct insight.

And I am on here because my understanding of the word “Catholic” has reverted to the original meaning of that word, as it has by inference for several others on here, whatever labels they go by in their banner. I have very satisfactory exchanges with them, as well as with many who are Catholic in a more traditional sense. I also have my differences, especially with adamantine faithers who have no vision beyond the closed canon of their belief and ascribe to those beliefs the adequacy of Totality. But that can change. It did for me.

Does that help?

 

[colmcille1]

Okay, folks, lets get something out in the open here.

First off, I do not take any moral or ethical instruction from any atheist or any other shade of non-believer.
Why?
Because when they claim to be a non-believer they forfeit all claims to any God-given morality. So they haven’t a leg to stand on when it comes to giving ANYONE moral instruction. You understand me so far?
Next, prissy reminders of my “trolling” don’t cut the ice either so save your breath on that one. And why would such reminders not matter? I’ll tell you why.
As long as there is a filthy and repulsive human from Scotland on this website (and don’t pretend you don’t know to whom I refer) then I will ignore your finger-wagging.
Inocente, take note of the above. Your worldview (inasmuch as it may be discerned from these posts) is light years away from mine. I live in a country where I am actively involved in promoting the TRUE FAITH. The opposition I face spans a wide spectrum. Anything from disillusioned Catholics right through to deeply disturbed individuals who really need psychiatric help.
Antroji, you read this amadan differently. That is your prerogative. Are you seriously suggesting I follow your reading because that would somehow be a “nice” thing or a “polite” thing to do? Not a chance. I am here to tackle head-on insufferable ignorance.
I couldn’t care less if my words seem “uncharitable” to an amadan. Said amadan does not operate from any credible morality. Unless you label moral relativism as credible. If you do, then you really are in no position to comment on other posters.
So, in conclusion, I will continue to point out wrongs. These forums are open 24/7. Check out the sad fellows and tell me then if you believe I should stop.

 

[Tuno]

 

[colmcille1]

And of course the Church may, or may not, be a “life preserver” for it’s adherents, as may any faith or belief system. The Church was for** me until I had a radical insight into the nature of human awareness and necessarily had to modify my understanding of theology to accommodate that. Faith, as I **acquired it, and see many do, was not adequate to meet the exigencies of direct insight.

And** I am on here because my understanding of the word “Catholic” has reverted to the original meaning of that word, as it has by inference for several others on here, whatever labels they go by in their banner. ** I have very satisfactory exchanges with them, as well as with many who are Catholic in a more traditional sense. I also have my differences, especially with adamantine faithers who have no vision beyond the closed canon of their belief and ascribe to those beliefs the adequacy of Totality. But that can change. It did for me.

Says it all, amadan!

 

[Tuno]

Okay, folks, lets get something out in the open here.

First off, I do not take any moral or ethical instruction from any atheist or any other shade of non-believer.
Why?
Because when they claim to be a non-believer they forfeit all claims to any God-given morality. So they haven’t a leg to stand on when it comes to giving ANYONE moral instruction. You understand me so far?
Next, prissy reminders of my “trolling” don’t cut the ice either so save your breath on that one. And why would such reminders not matter?** I’ll** tell you why.
As long as there is a filthy and repulsive human from Scotland on this website (and don’t pretend you don’t know to whom I refer) then **I **will ignore your finger-wagging.
Inocente, take note of the above. Your worldview (inasmuch as it may be discerned from these posts) is light years away from mine. I live in a country where I am actively involved in promoting the TRUE FAITH. The opposition I face spans a wide spectrum. Anything from disillusioned Catholics right through to deeply disturbed individuals who really need psychiatric help.
Antroji, you read this amadan differently. That is your prerogative. Are you seriously suggesting I follow your reading because that would somehow be a “nice” thing or a “polite” thing to do? Not a chance. I am here to tackle head-on insufferable ignorance.
I couldn’t care less if my words seem “uncharitable” to an amadan. Said amadan does not operate from any credible morality. Unless you label moral relativism as credible. If you do, then you really are in no position to comment on other posters.
So, in conclusion, I will continue to point out wrongs. These forums are open 24/7. Check out the sad fellows and tell me then if you believe I should stop.

Yes; we both use personal pronouns. Your point pertinent to the multiplicity of religions is???

 

[colmcille1]

Yes; we both use personal pronouns. Your point pertinent to the multiplicity of religions is???

Ah no, tell me you are only, as Americans would say, “yanking my chain”?!

Ehhh…ever heard of moral relativism?

 

[Tuno]

Yes. St. John of the Cross wrote about it. Perhaps you have heard about him? It’s a translation, but here’s essential what he said:

I COBBLED THEIR BOOTS

How could I love my fellow men who tortured me?

One night I was dragged into a room
and beaten near death
with their shoes

Striking me hundreds of times
In the face,
Scarring me forever.

I cried out for God to help, until I fainted.

That night in a dream
A dream more real than this world,

A strap from the Christ’s sandal
Fell
From my bleeding mouth,

And I looked at Him and
He was weeping and
Spoke,

"I cobbled their boots:
How sorry I am.

What moves all things is God."