Lazy Creek Homeschool

Art and Photo Blog | Unschooling Portfolio | Country Life | This Mom Writes

wild (but not uncultivated) musings of a Canadian unschool mom

Home | Archives | contact

Aren't All Religions the Same?

12:28 PM - Jan. 22, 2007 - Add to the Wildness

Okay, here we go. It has gone and happened again. I am off on a tangent that has nothing to do with homeschooling -- unless you're currently trying to teach your kids critical thinking.

Over at HSB2 (Homestead), I encountered this statement from a fellow called zoggypdx (his is not a blog for young folk, be warned) whose brain appears to tick over much like mine. I already like this guy, he reminds me very much of my good buddy Tig, who spent 20 years in addiction. Zoggy says:

Are not all Gods one? If you are Protestant, does it matter if you are Mormon, Anglican, Presbeterian, Evangelical, Baptist, Jehovas Witness, Mennonite, or Quaker? Does it really matter what Bible you read? Does your faith, in judging those of other faiths, become a form of idolatry, in putting your personal religeon above any of Gods teachings, in all of their forms?

I don't know. Enlighten me.

If you study the worlds religeons, they really aren't that different. The golden rule exists in all of them. Every one has a primary vision of love, understanding, and belief in God. The rituals may be different, but the message is the same. Who am I, or anyone else, to say that they are not all the word of God?

As I briefly mentioned at my spot over there, I would have said the same thing 11 years ago. But I learned something. Not an answer, but a question.

Is this the right set of criteria for the comparative evaluation of world religions?

Granted, it's the one handed us by our culture. It's the one my parents taught me and still mention from time to time. But does it really evaluate what religions offer to people and what religions require of people? In other words, does it define the crucial element of a good or bad idea: "What real-time effect will this have on my life?"

No. It doesn't. In fact, if I may be so bold, I'd call this a studied attempt at not considering what religion really is and isn't. To put it in terms zoggy might click with, it's like saying alcohol, pot and crystal meth are all the same thing because they're all addictive substances, they all cost you money you could be spending on groceries and a better house, and they're all liable to get you into trouble one way or another if you get too fond of them.

You can make that kind of generalization if you want to -- if you never intend to have anything to do with alcohol, pot or meth, because you never intend to have anything to do with addictive substances.

In the same way, the "all religions" argument is generally advanced by those who intend never to have anything to do with religion, except perhaps the occasional "social drink" equivalent for politeness' sake if the crowd requires it. A nod to God is not the same thing as imbibing the Bible, right?

The day I meet anyone who's capable of giving the Bible a nod without soaking up God, I'll...... know I'm in church somewhere.

In church, too, the lines get blurred. We easily think that if we love and try to understand each other, if we have an ideal of God, if we practice the Golden Rule, it's all good.

About ten years ago, I learned a new set of criteria for evaluating both world religions and specific denominations. It's one you don't pick up without picking up a Bible, so it's no surprise to me that it's not widely recognized outside of those circles which do that.

Logic and critical thinking demand that we test the claims of religious writings against reality, not against each other. So for instance, when the Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses (or Hal Lindsey) claim that the world is going to end in 1892 or 1984 or whatever lightning bolt (short-circuit?) moment they pick, we take that into consideration. Did it work? Is there something real working there? Anything at all? What is that something, and what is its real effect on people?

When God says, "I cannot lie," (Titus 1:2) we test that. We test it by putting it together with other things from the same package - in this case, the Bible. We take that and put it together with statements like, "we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law." (Romans 3:28).

Now, "the Law" refers to the Old Testament, particularly the first 5 books. It consists of all the 613 directives for being a good enough person in God's eyes, according to the Judeo-Christian system.

But, if the Bible is true, a person is justified (and y'all know what it means for you to be justified, as opposed to your spouse or your kid, when you get in an argument) -- a person is justified before God by faith, not by keeping 613 rules. Or any rules. Dig deeper in the Bible, and it turns out we're also not supposed to add our own rules to the list. It just doesn't help anything.

Let's add in something else. "All our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment." (Isaiah 64:6) Just as a note, the thrust of the passage is on what happens when people degrade from faith to religion.

This is an incredibly short summation of what the entire 66 books and 40-odd authors of the Bible say in harmony: The Bible's concept of God and humanity is one where an infinite, perfect God does the entire work of getting finite, fallible people to heaven.

So, my key precept for evaluating individual churches, denominations, religious systems in general, has become this:

Who does the work?

Is a happy (after)life attained by human effort? (Buddhism, Hinduism, most pagan religions, Alcoholics Anonymous)

By God's provision plus human effort? (Catholicism, many mainline Protestant denominations, Judaism, Islam)

Or by God alone? (The Bible. Yep, that's the only one on the list.)

That is the difference between my type of Christianity and every other one out there. That's the difference between me and a Catholic, me and a Lutheran, me and a Seventh-Day Adventist. That is the miracle of my life. I have no concern for laws -- and yet I am not lawless.

Thanks!
I enjoyed your post today. May zoggy continue to hear God's voice calling him.
Pomaleedon - 2:59 PM - Jan. 23, 2007

Untitled Comment
You have just summed up the major theme of "The Deadliest Monster: A Christian Introduction to Worldviews." Only you did it in a few paragraphs instead of almost 300 pages.

Actually, I enjoyed this book. Marissa and I read Frankenstein, Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde and this book as part of our homeschool last year.
AcceptanceWithJoy - 9:02 PM - Jan. 23, 2007

Last Page Next Page