Why is it that "Western" relgions tend to be thiestic and while "Eastern" religions not so much?

[sidetrack]

I’ve found it intriguing in how in the religions that historically have had a significant influence on the the *Western world (I’m including the old mythological European pantheons) there is an emphasis on theism (like in the Abrahamic religions) and belief (orthodoxy) but in a lot of **Eastern religions for some reasons there’s an emphasise on the influence of a belief system on a persons “lifestyle” (orthopraxy).WHY is this though?.Is there a core cultural difference in European and Asian societies that would have led one to emphasis theism more then the other (like say individualism vs. collective interests)?.Consider how while nearly all the old European pantheons of dieties dissolved (existing now like only in neo-paganism) while some Eastern belief systems like Taoism,Shintoism,Buddhism, Hinduism and Confucianism which were around for centuries before Christ’s birth are still here and flourishing (even though I have a feeling that part of that reason is that those belief systems will integrate other belief systems syncretically without much problems).I mean could you imagine how much more differently history would have turned out if say the Roman Empire replaced the old mythological pantheon with Buddhism instead?.How many philosophies would have not existed and what different ones would have formed?.What would’nt have happened and would’nt have been invented?.Could Europe ever had the possiblity of developing a lifestyle based belief system in ancient times?.Thank you for your time and please dont be reluctant to reply.

• In my mind I’m including Judaism even though geographically speaking it developed in the Isreal which is in South-western Asia (.a.k.a. the "Middle East).

Except for Islam and to some extent Hinduism.With Hinduism having a monist type of faith whether it’s practised more as an orthoproxy or orthodoxy really varies depending on the person personally and the sect I guess.

 

[KathleenGee]

Well, you have to look at where Judaism and Christianity began, and how these religions spread out.

St. Paul said Asia was reserved for the last days.

There are millions of Chinese Christians, even members of the Communist party are Christian while maintaining party lines.

 

[Nine_Two]

Well, you have to look at where Judaism and Christianity began, and how these religions spread out.

St. Paul said Asia was reserved for the last days.

There are millions of Chinese Christians, even members of the Communist party are Christian while maintaining party lines.

Where did St. Paul say that?

 

[ConstantineTG]

Back then, Asia didn’t mean China, Japan, etc.

 

[Sufjon]

I’ve found it intriguing in how in the religions that historically have had a significant influence on the the *Western world (I’m including the old mythological European pantheons) there is an emphasis on theism (like in the Abrahamic religions) and belief (orthodoxy) but in a lot of **Eastern religions for some reasons there’s an emphasise on the influence of a belief system on a persons “lifestyle” (orthopraxy).WHY is this though?.Is there a core cultural difference in European and Asian societies that would have led one to emphasis theism more then the other (like say individualism vs. collective interests)?.Consider how while nearly all the old European pantheons of dieties dissolved (existing now like only in neo-paganism) while some Eastern belief systems like Taoism,Shintoism,Buddhism, Hinduism and Confucianism which were around for centuries before Christ’s birth are still here and flourishing (even though I have a feeling that part of that reason is that those belief systems will integrate other belief systems syncretically without much problems).I mean could you imagine how much more differently history would have turned out if say the Roman Empire replaced the old mythological pantheon with Buddhism instead?.How many philosophies would have not existed and what different ones would have formed?.What would’nt have happened and would’nt have been invented?.Could Europe ever had the possiblity of developing a lifestyle based belief system in ancient times?.Thank you for your time and please dont be reluctant to reply.

• In my mind I’m including Judaism even though geographically speaking it developed in the Isreal which is in South-western Asia (.a.k.a. the "Middle East).

Except for Islam and to some extent Hinduism.With Hinduism having a monist type of faith whether it’s practised more as an orthoproxy or orthodoxy really varies depending on the person personally and the sect I guess.

Interesting thread, but I’m not sure that I understand the question.

Your friend,
Sufjon

 

[sidetrack]

Interesting thread, but I’m not sure that I understand the question.

Your friend,
Sufjon

My **main **question is why is it that “Western” religions tend to be theistic while “Eastern” religions not so much so?. My other questions that branch off from that are is there a core cultural difference in European and Asian societies that would have led one to be more theistic then the other and could Europe ever had the possibility of developing a lifestyle based belief system in ancient times?.

 

[Nine_Two]

Back then, Asia didn’t mean China, Japan, etc.

Which is part of the reason for my question. Did he specify Asia, or is that a paraphrase, the joy of geography over 2,000 years means you end up with two very different places being specified.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

I’ve found it intriguing in how in the religions that historically have had a significant influence on the the *Western world (I’m including the old mythological European pantheons) there is an emphasis on theism (like in the Abrahamic religions) and belief (orthodoxy) but in a lot of **Eastern religions for some reasons there’s an emphasise on the influence of a belief system on a persons “lifestyle” (orthopraxy).WHY is this though?.Is there a core cultural difference in European and Asian societies that would have led one to emphasis theism more then the other (like say individualism vs. collective interests)?.Consider how while nearly all the old European pantheons of dieties dissolved (existing now like only in neo-paganism) while some Eastern belief systems like Taoism,Shintoism,Buddhism, Hinduism and Confucianism which were around for centuries before Christ’s birth are still here and flourishing (even though I have a feeling that part of that reason is that those belief systems will integrate other belief systems syncretically without much problems).I mean could you imagine how much more differently history would have turned out if say the Roman Empire replaced the old mythological pantheon with Buddhism instead?.How many philosophies would have not existed and what different ones would have formed?.What would’nt have happened and would’nt have been invented?.Could Europe ever had the possiblity of developing a lifestyle based belief system in ancient times?.Thank you for your time and please dont be reluctant to reply.

• In my mind I’m including Judaism even though geographically speaking it developed in the Isreal which is in South-western Asia (.a.k.a. the "Middle East).

Except for Islam and to some extent Hinduism.With Hinduism having a monist type of faith whether it’s practised more as an orthoproxy or orthodoxy really varies depending on the person personally and the sect I guess.

Before Christianity, there were a lot of non-theistic religions in the West, if you mean Europe, from the Greek pantheon, Germanic gods, Arab gods, Viking gods, Celtic gods etc. There was also probably a lot of animism. If antything, these religions were animistic.

The Jews were probably unique in the pre-Christian world in having a singular Deistic religion.

However once Christianity took root, the West rapidly became Deistic. Since Islam combines elements of both Judaism and Christianity, it simply took on their theistic concepts as well.

In the East, Christianity took a lot longer to arrive as an organised religion, as did Islam. In the meantime Hinduism and it’s offshoot Buddhism tended to be the main religions, although once again there was a lot of Animism. Buddhism owes its meditative influence to the original Buddha, although there’s a lot of meditation in the Hindu tradition.

Japanese Shinto is a form of Buddhism as far as I can make out.

So until Christ arrived, there was not a lot of theocratic thought anywhere, other than in the limited influence of Judaism. Since Christianity spread to Europe and North Africa first, then the other regions remained under their respective religious traditions.

 

[Khalid]

I believe when St Paul spoke of Asia, he meant Asia Minor, i.e. the Greek area currently occupied by the Turks.

 

[Gearoidin]

Japanese Shinto is a form of Buddhism as far as I can make out.

Not really, although they do co-esist. It predates the arrival of Buddhism and is the native religion of the Japanese people. From the 6th century onwards it has been significantly influenced by Buddhism but it is not a form of Buddhism.

The essence of Shinto is the Japanese devotion to invisible spiritual beings and powers called kami, to shrines, and to various rituals. Kami are not really God or gods (although the word “kami” is often translated as " God". Kami are better described as spirits that are concerned with human beings - they appreciate people’s interest in them and want people to be happy. If they are treated well they will intervene in people’s lives to bring benefits like health, business success, and good exam results.

Shinto is not a way of explaining the world. What matters are rituals that enable human beings to communicate with kami. Everything, including the spiritual, is experienced as part of this world. Shinto has no place for any transcendental other world, has no canonical scriptures, has no commandments but does teach some important ethical principles.

Gearoidin

 

[KathleenGee]

I interpreted to mean, in general terms, Eastern peoples…I will get back to my Scripture…just recalling from memory…

I just saw a program on the faith of Japanese Catholics…and it greatly moved me…
St. Francis Xavier came to Japan in the 1500’s. The Jesuits have their own charism of evangelizing and are astute working with rich and powerful personages.

There were a strong number of Japanese converts…then persecution began, and there was testimony of those who apostacized…held up on some kind of contraption and being forced to use their feet walking continuously back and forth over the pictures of Jesus and Mary.

Afterwards, the Japanese Catholics went underground…

Two hundred years later, trade between Japan and the West opened up, and Christian traders were allowed to build churches. Various denominations went up. The Catholic Church was St. Mary’s. The pastor wondered if any Japanese Catholics had survived. The Church documents everything in its work.

One day, a few Japanese people came in. They asked the pastor some questions. Then they finally revealed themselves as part of this underground Catholic church…they had images made of Mother Mary holding the Infant Jesus but in the form of Buddha, and placed this image in a cupboard.

They said there was this oral tradition being passed down generation after generation…that they would be safe to reveal themselves on three conditions:

1. The church was built on orders from Rome.
2. The priest was celibate.
3. The local church would be named in honor of Mary, St. Mary.

They began worshipping openly, but then in time had to move. They built a church using stone from the banks of the sea…taking them 5 years to build the church at Nagasaki.

St. Maximillian Kolbe worked among the Japanese with his printery. Then in August, 1945, the Americans dropped the atomic bomb within so many yards or so of the church, and many of the faithful were literally assumed into heaven…they finally saw themselves as the sacrificial offering to bring peace to Japan.

And 7 German Jesuits, who came out of Nazi Land, were there to serve the Japanese Catholics, but they survived, living very close to the epicenter. They were examined by over 200 scientists with no effects of radiation…and said they attributed to living out the message of Our Lady of Fatima.

 

[Xuan]

I’ve found it intriguing in how in the religions that historically have had a significant influence on the the *Western world (I’m including the old mythological European pantheons) there is an emphasis on theism (like in the Abrahamic religions) and belief (orthodoxy) but in a lot of **Eastern religions for some reasons there’s an emphasise on the influence of a belief system on a persons “lifestyle” (orthopraxy).WHY is this though?.Is there a core cultural difference in European and Asian societies that would have led one to emphasis theism more then the other (like say individualism vs. collective interests)?.Consider how while nearly all the old European pantheons of dieties dissolved (existing now like only in neo-paganism) while some Eastern belief systems like Taoism,Shintoism,Buddhism, Hinduism and Confucianism which were around for centuries before Christ’s birth are still here and flourishing (even though I have a feeling that part of that reason is that those belief systems will integrate other belief systems syncretically without much problems).I mean could you imagine how much more differently history would have turned out if say the Roman Empire replaced the old mythological pantheon with Buddhism instead?.How many philosophies would have not existed and what different ones would have formed?.What would’nt have happened and would’nt have been invented?.Could Europe ever had the possiblity of developing a lifestyle based belief system in ancient times?.Thank you for your time and please dont be reluctant to reply.

• In my mind I’m including Judaism even though geographically speaking it developed in the Isreal which is in South-western Asia (.a.k.a. the "Middle East).

Except for Islam and to some extent Hinduism.With Hinduism having a monist type of faith whether it’s practised more as an orthoproxy or orthodoxy really varies depending on the person personally and the sect I guess.

Hi sidetrack,

I don’t think it’s as clear cut as that. Judaism and Hinduism both developed in Asia and they are both theistic. That being said, I believe they both emphasize orthopraxy over orthodoxy, as do most Asian religions/philosophies. Christianity was developed in great part in Europe, and I think that’s the reason orthodoxy was emphasized more during its development. It was heavily influenced by the Greek and Roman cultures. In many ways Judaism has more in common with Hinduism than it does with Christianity.

As far as Rome replacing the old mythological pantheon with Buddhism, it would no longer have been a conquering empire. That would be a contradiction. Buddhism is not a religion/philosophy of conquerors. Of course, the Christianity that Christ taught wasn’t either, but it didn’t take the Europeans long to turn it into one. The virtues of humility and meekness that Christ taught didn’t fit well with “empire” although they were given lip service. The “spread the word” teaching was much more adaptable to conquest, and it was used for all it was worth.

Xuan

 

[KathleenGee]

Xuan,

Sorry for any Christian forms abusing Eastern people. Yes, Buddhism is about one finding serenity for one’s soul and dealing with suffering.

About what Christ taught and what the Church taught, here is where you have go back to the earliest practices of Christianity and it all centers on the Word of God and Eucharist.

Catholic missionaries did indeed work with native peoples, drawing and exemplifying their strengths…but I read one time about a Chinese observer who was so drawn to Christianity, but the indifference and selfishness of the Western Christians living among them in prior times was such a counter witness to the Gospel.

One of the true charisms of being in the authentic spirit of the Church is not to be for itself, but to give itself out for others. I don’t see either the depth of humanitarianism in the East…but I see the works of Christ in the world…how many around the world are striving to be more caring for others, to help others without seeking anything in return.

 

[Xuan]

Xuan,

Sorry for any Christian forms abusing Eastern people. Yes, Buddhism is about one finding serenity for one’s soul and dealing with suffering.

About what Christ taught and what the Church taught, here is where you have go back to the earliest practices of Christianity and it all centers on the Word of God and Eucharist.

Catholic missionaries did indeed work with native peoples, drawing and exemplifying their strengths…but I read one time about a Chinese observer who was so drawn to Christianity, but the indifference and selfishness of the Western Christians living among them in prior times was such a counter witness to the Gospel.

One of the true charisms of being in the authentic spirit of the Church is not to be for itself, but to give itself out for others. I don’t see either the depth of humanitarianism in the East…but I see the works of Christ in the world…how many around the world are striving to be more caring for others, to help others without seeking anything in return.

Hi KathleenGee,

I agree that a lot of Catholic missionaries are doing a lot of good in the world. And I agree that they have good intentions (I donate to a couple of them myself). My point was that things weren’t always this altruistic. I honestly don’t know if Catholicism would be more orthopraxic today if it hadn’t gotten so tied up with the Roman Empire.

Xuan

 

[CopticChristian]

I’ve found it intriguing in how in the religions that historically have had a significant influence on the the *Western world (I’m including the old mythological European pantheons) there is an emphasis on theism (like in the Abrahamic religions) and belief (orthodoxy) but in a lot of **Eastern religions for some reasons there’s an emphasise on the influence of a belief system on a persons “lifestyle” (orthopraxy).WHY is this though?.Is there a core cultural difference in European and Asian societies that would have led one to emphasis theism more then the other (like say individualism vs. collective interests)?.Consider how while nearly all the old European pantheons of dieties dissolved (existing now like only in neo-paganism) while some Eastern belief systems like Taoism,Shintoism,Buddhism, Hinduism and Confucianism which were around for centuries before Christ’s birth are still here and flourishing (even though I have a feeling that part of that reason is that those belief systems will integrate other belief systems syncretically without much problems).I mean could you imagine how much more differently history would have turned out if say the Roman Empire replaced the old mythological pantheon with Buddhism instead?.How many philosophies would have not existed and what different ones would have formed?.What would’nt have happened and would’nt have been invented?.Could Europe ever had the possiblity of developing a lifestyle based belief system in ancient times?.Thank you for your time and please dont be reluctant to reply.

• In my mind I’m including Judaism even though geographically speaking it developed in the Isreal which is in South-western Asia (.a.k.a. the "Middle East).

Except for Islam and to some extent Hinduism.With Hinduism having a monist type of faith whether it’s practised more as an orthoproxy or orthodoxy really varies depending on the person personally and the sect I guess.

This question needs clarification. What it is you are asking? Reconsider this. Jesus was an Asian Jew. Christianity is an Eastern Religion…Christianity commenced in the East and spread West…the roots are East and West…I suggest you reformulate this question.

 

[KathleenGee]

Xuan,

You also have to take into account the imposition of the secular world into religion, the Industrial Revolution, Marxism, Cold War, rampant materialism, disinformation about religion causing the most wars…the information society and all the gadgets…massive changes.

In Catholicism we are all on different levels, conversion a life long process to be more Christ like…but the grace is in the unity of the Church…love covers sins so to speak…doesn’t justify them…

But to live the Gospel in today’s terms…you have to go back to an example of a person who did in the midst of so much corruption…St. Francis of Assisi…and people don’t realize this, I certainly didn’t…he just didn’t strip naked and told his bishop God is now his father…he lived alone out in the woods for some time, and gradually drew his followers…who then went out more and more to their encounters with the people.

To see true religion in practice, one has to strip one’s self of things.

Yes, there needs to be both orthodoxy – the correct way of thinking, and orthopraxis – the correct way of acting. So we have to pray to be saints and to pray for saints to come. One blogger said we should pray for another St. Paul.

You have to be detached and pray deeply every day, listen more to the movements of the Holy Spirit around you in regards to the needs of others…and we live just too too fast.

God bless you!

 

[sidetrack]

I’m REALLY thankful for everyone responding.I thought that this was going to be one of my threads were I have a complicated question I’d really like answered but barely anyone answers if at all.So far,thankfully I’ve gotten more answers then I thought I would.

I don’t think it’s as clear cut as that. Judaism and Hinduism both developed in Asia and they are both theistic. That being said, I believe they both emphasize orthopraxy over orthodoxy, as do most Asian religions/philosophies. Christianity was developed in great part in Europe, and I think that’s the reason orthodoxy was emphasized more during its development. It was heavily influenced by the Greek and Roman cultures. In many ways Judaism has more in common with Hinduism than it does with Christianity.

Thank you,espeically Xuan for being closer then some to answering my question.However what still puzzles me is what is it about having a monotheistic belief system develop mainly in *Europe * makes it become more about orthodoxy as a result.Is it b/c the Romans used it to reinforce their empire and thereby adherence and loyalty to their emperors?.I mean in ancient China they could have done something similar with Buddhism,Confucianism and Taoism to reinforce their empire (I dont know if they did) but even centuries after it was introduced in China those belief systems are still about orthopraxy over orthodoxy.Is there some sociological,anthropological or cultural component that could answer why is it that since Christianity was developed in Europe, it ended up emphasizing orthodoxy over orthopraxy during its development ?.Thanks everyone for their time.

 

[KathleenGee]

Again, you may be overlooking an institutional form of orthopraxis.

The Catholic Church is a public institution. I don’t know how long back people were able to worship publicly, except beginning at the time of Constantine…giving freedom and support to the rebuilding of edifices and the episcopacy when it was almost decimated by the last Roman emperors…and I can’t say that Constantine was ruling from Europe.

As a public institution, the Catholic Church in its history has established hospices, hospitals, shelters, education, universities and professorships serving the general populations. Not only that, but Catholic philosophers, artists, musicians contributed greatly to development of the human person, and all this falls under the category of orthopraxis as a public institution. And you did not have to be Catholic to be benefitted.

Then on the parish level, one has to researched old documents to see the livelihood of the faithful in living out their faith. It goes way back to the beginnings of Christianity to help the poor, the widows and orphans.

Pride promotes itself, but virtue tends to hide itself. Our Savior always told us to do things before God alone.

But yes, you ask a deep and insightful question…and I am sure many others here can provide much more than my sharings.

 

[CopticChristian]

Hi sidetrack,

I don’t think it’s as clear cut as that. Judaism and Hinduism both developed in Asia and they are both theistic. That being said, I believe they both emphasize orthopraxy over orthodoxy, as do most Asian religions/philosophies. **Christianity was developed in great part in Europe, and I think that’s the reason orthodoxy was emphasized more during its development. **It was heavily influenced by the Greek and Roman cultures. In many ways Judaism has more in common with Hinduism than it does with Christianity.

As far as Rome replacing the old mythological pantheon with Buddhism, it would no longer have been a conquering empire. That would be a contradiction. Buddhism is not a religion/philosophy of conquerors. Of course, the Christianity that Christ taught wasn’t either, but it didn’t take the Europeans long to turn it into one. The virtues of humility and meekness that Christ taught didn’t fit well with “empire” although they were given lip service. The “spread the word” teaching was much more adaptable to conquest, and it was used for all it was worth.

Xuan

Christianity is an Eastern Religion, founded by an Asian Jew named Jesus.

 

[Khalid]

I don’t think that any actual religion (that is, a system with a basis in either history, theology, or philosophy, in a way that it looks to the metaphysical or greater order, and doesn’t merely attempt to appease the forces of nature or imaginary spirits) was ever founded in the West as we know of it today. The most “Western” of all religions were founded in, and developed in, the Middle East, nothing further west than Asia Minor or the Levant.

(In rough chronological order)

Vedic: India
Hinduism: India (direct descendant of Vedic religion)
Judaism: Levant and Egypt
Jainism: India
Zoroastrianism: Persia (Iran and Syria)
Buddhism: India
Confucianism: China
Daoism: China
Gnosticism: Egypt and the Middle East
Christianity: Levant, Asia Minor and Greece
Manichaeism: Persia
Islam: Arabia, Egypt and Persia.
Sikhism: India

It does seem to hold true that the further East one goes, the more the emphasis is on orthopraxy instead of orthodoxy, reaching its ultimate expression in Confucianism for exclusive orthopraxy, and its ultimate expression in gnosticism for exclusive orthodoxy. All other religions have a combination of both, with some bent more towards orthopraxy, and some towards orthodoxy. There may also be a pattern according to chronology as well.

All of the “Western” religions were straight mythologies, such as the various Greek, Roman, and Germanic paganisms and the mystery cults, of which very few had any historical basis, nor any theology or philosophy as we know it (the Greek philosophers worked outside of the paganism, not inside of it - Socrates was executed for “atheism”) although the far East also had its share of equivalent systems, based not on any lofty metaphysical desire but essentially for the control or coaxing of natural processes and the favor of petty gods, such as Shinto, and Africa developed only those fetishist and animist tribal religions.

Even modern attempts of people to make religions in the West are utterly ridiculous and are mere throwbacks to 1) the ancient heresies (such as Arianism or Gnosticism/New Age/Scientology, to a point, Mormonism and Masonry), 2) throwbacks or lack of eradication of indigenous animism, such as Santeria and Voodoo, 3) religions that aren’t religions, such as the various cults derived for the benefit of leaders, or around something like drug use (the Way of Infinite Harmony, Santa Muerte), or 4) revivals of the ancient paganisms and mythologies of the barbarians, sometimes in a syncretic manner (Asatru, Wiccanism), or the paganisms of cultures that didn’t even believe in their own paganisms (like Rome and Greece), of whence it was said, “Of the [pagan] religions, the philosophers know them to be equally false, the people believe them to be equally true, and the magistrates think them to be equally useful”.