Scoring Religions

[Jester]

Mormonism would be a plus 10 if I wasn't a Christian.

Do you have enough personal experience with Mormonism to judge it? How did it produce a monster like Mitt Romney? Or is he just a freak exception?

I think you're too focused on Mitt. Yeah he worked as a Wall Streeter, his first boss knew the Rothschilds, yeah his company may have laundered drug profits or other dirty money from Central America, yeah he was apparently photographed getting off a plane in Cuba, yeah he would have started a war in Syria already.......... but are we going to judge all pot-luck-macaroni-and-jello Mormons based on him? I thought the plan was strong families, patriarchal culture, honor among adhrents, and tribal cohesiveness? Aren't those the standards that you have discussed on other threads? Based on those standards, I would say Mormonism is the top "religion" for Non-Jewish Whites.

If you are actually looking for a religion offering spiritual comfort and a relationship with God, then I guess Mormonism would drop way down, below every other branch of Christianity.

I'm Catholic, more or less, but Catholicism is still only a 5, socially speaking.

Why do you prefer Catholicism to Orthodox Christianity?

Good question. Really the tribal thing. It's bigger, I can go more places. I joined the Catholic church at a time when I needed a priest to talk with and a service where the liturgy was in English so I could learn and get sustenance from it.

Like you I am still looking for a community wherein I can bond and raise a family.

Orthodox churches are fragmented by ethnicity, calendar, and other doctrinal issues. The doctrinal issues are laughably silly. But you hve to pretty much choose one and go with it. I would be happy at ANY Orthodox(Russian, Greek, Old calendar greek, Bulgarian, etc etc) or "Oriental" (Armenian, Ethiopian, Coptic, Syriac) church, if I had a wife there or was in some way accepted by the community.

Any church that recites the Apostles Creed and believes it, and accepts the historicity of the Old and New Testaments, is fine with me.

Protestant churches are fine with me too, but they tend to be intolerant perfectionists, less open-minded than Catholics or Armenians. Intolerant of concubines and polygamy, intolerant of violence, intolerant of patriarchy. Plus they censor the Bible and try to browbeat you into their Procrustean interpretation. Plus they quote Paul more than Jesus (or Moses). BUT, as we all know, SOME Pentecostals ("charismatics") are VERY full of the Holy Spirit and are very discerning and good at spiritual warfare. So I would be OK with such a place IF my family and I GET something for our time and money.

BTW...One area where ALL evangelicals, including Pentecostals, are GREAT , is in getting people SAVED and going to Heaven, getting them baptised in the Blood of the Lamb. So if I were advising YOU, I might put a good evangelical church at the top of the list. I'm already born-again ("saved"), and yes it was an evangelical Christian lady that "led me to the Lord."

But you can do the same thing through another church, if you find a priest or a nun who will work with you and lead you to the Lord. You can probably then lead the rest of your family to the Lord.

[fschmidt]

I think you're too focused on Mitt. Yeah he worked as a Wall Streeter, his first boss knew the Rothschilds, yeah his company may have laundered drug profits or other dirty money from Central America, yeah he was apparently photographed getting off a plane in Cuba, yeah he would have started a war in Syria already.......... but are we going to judge all pot-luck-macaroni-and-jello Mormons based on him? I thought the plan was strong families, patriarchal culture, honor among adhrents, and tribal cohesiveness? Aren't those the standards that you have discussed on other threads? Based on those standards, I would say Mormonism is the top "religion" for Non-Jewish Whites.

If you are actually looking for a religion offering spiritual comfort and a relationship with God, then I guess Mormonism would drop way down, below every other branch of Christianity.

I didn't mean to focus on Mitt. I only did this because I don't know much about Mormonism. What little I know seems really strange to me. It may work for some, but even as a non-Christian, I feel MUCH more comfortable at an Orthodox Christian service than at a Mormon service. My wife has a Catholic background and feels the same.

Why do you prefer Catholicism to Orthodox Christianity?

Good question. Really the tribal thing. It's bigger, I can go more places. I joined the Catholic church at a time when I needed a priest to talk with and a service where the liturgy was in English so I could learn and get sustenance from it.

Orthodox Christianity seems to have churches in every major city. In fact this is one reason why I may end up choosing Orthodox Christianity over Karaite Judaism, because Karaite synagogues are much harder to find.

But you can do the same thing through another church, if you find a priest or a nun who will work with you and lead you to the Lord. You can probably then lead the rest of your family to the Lord.

I'm always willing to listen, but I am also quite stubborn. I have my own concept of God which is the result of a lot of study and isn't likely to change. But I am always glad to discuss beliefs and ethics with religious people.

[publicduende]

Isn't it better to just abstain from joining any organised religion/cult and start learning about spirituality, or studying mankind's innate need for a contact with the trascendent?

Fschmidt, do you know Kabbalah, and what do you think about it?

[fschmidt]

Isn't it better to just abstain from joining any organised religion/cult and start learning about spirituality, or studying mankind's innate need for a contact with the trascendent?

Fschmidt, do you know Kabbalah, and what do you think about it?

I know a little Kabbalah and I hate it. Religion isn't supposed to be trascendent. The purpose of religion is morality in order to make groups of people functional, which is why one needs an organized group.

-----------------------------------------
“This command that I give you today is certainly not too difficult or beyond your reach. It is not in heaven so that you have to ask, ‘Who will go up to heaven, get it for us, and proclaim it to us so that we may follow it?’ And it is not across the sea so that you have to ask, ‘Who will cross the sea, get it for us, and proclaim it to us so that we may follow it?’ But the message is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, so that you may follow it. See, today I have set before you life and prosperity, death and adversity. For I am commanding you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in His ways, and to keep His commands, statutes, and ordinances, so that you may live and multiply, and the Lord your God may bless you in the land you are entering to possess.
-----------------------------------------
Deuteronomy 30:11-16

[publicduende]

Isn't it better to just abstain from joining any organised religion/cult and start learning about spirituality, or studying mankind's innate need for a contact with the trascendent?

Fschmidt, do you know Kabbalah, and what do you think about it?

I know a little Kabbalah and I hate it. Religion isn't supposed to be trascendent. The purpose of religion is morality in order to make groups of people functional, which is why one needs an organized group.

Got it. You are 100% in favour of organised religion as an institution that will emanate a prescriptive philosophy on the many aspect of a man (and woman's) life. The trascendence is actually a form of self-awareness of the universal laws needed to live a fulfilling and harmonious life with your fellow human being. I have also seen religion as the proverbial Forrest Gump's braces, which don't teach a man to walk, let alone run, when the act of walking and running are innate in human nature and will be naturally learned without the braces.

I personally think mankind deserves better than being put braces on and told that they will never walk without them.

[fschmidt]

Got it. You are 100% in favour of organised religion as an institution that will emanate a prescriptive philosophy on the many aspect of a man (and woman's) life. The trascendence is actually a form of self-awareness of the universal laws needed to live a fulfilling and harmonious life with your fellow human being. I have also seen religion as the proverbial Forrest Gump's braces, which don't teach a man to walk, let alone run, when the act of walking and running are innate in human nature and will be naturally learned without the braces.

I personally think mankind deserves better than being put braces on and told that they will never walk without them.

Yes, you got it. I think it would be easier to live in harmony with cockroaches than with people who aren't guided by religion. We have a brain so that we can invent things to make life more tolerable. This includes science, engineering, agriculture, and religion. Of all these things, I think religion is the most important.

[Jester]

.......I don't know much about Mormonism. What little I know seems really strange to me. It may work for some, but even as a non-Christian, I feel MUCH more comfortable at an Orthodox Christian service than at a Mormon service. My wife has a Catholic background and feels the same.

I feel the same way.

....but I am also quite stubborn.

I have my own concept of God which is the result of a lot of study and isn't likely to change. But I am always glad to discuss beliefs and ethics with religious people.

Serious, dedicated Orthodox Christians share these traits.

Good luck and... Godspeed.

[publicduende]

Got it. You are 100% in favour of organised religion as an institution that will emanate a prescriptive philosophy on the many aspect of a man (and woman's) life. The trascendence is actually a form of self-awareness of the universal laws needed to live a fulfilling and harmonious life with your fellow human being. I have also seen religion as the proverbial Forrest Gump's braces, which don't teach a man to walk, let alone run, when the act of walking and running are innate in human nature and will be naturally learned without the braces.

I personally think mankind deserves better than being put braces on and told that they will never walk without them.

Yes, you got it. I think it would be easier to live in harmony with cockroaches than with people who aren't guided by religion. We have a brain so that we can invent things to make life more tolerable. This includes science, engineering, agriculture, and religion. Of all these things, I think religion is the most important.

Funny you say that because Judaism is one of the religions closer, in thought process, to the original mystery schools of ancient India, Egypt, and Greece.

You should be the first to ackowledge that man has an innate tendency to establish a contact with the Trascendent, and perceive the ultimate benefit of Good over Evil, without the need of external influences. Do you need a lawyer on your side to tell you what's good and what's not? So why would you need a priest to tell you, in a prescriptive way nonetheless.

In the Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna is puzzled over whether to obey his destiny of warrior fighting against members of his family, or follow what his compassionate heart tells him (that killing ain't good). Eventually, his mentor (Khrishna in disguise) reassures him that the greater good cannot be fully understood by our limited human minds and following his nature may, at least in his case, coincide with God's will.

I agree with you, though, when you say education to the trascendent is important, it's very very important. This is why, in ancient times, Theolology, which is basically speculation over the nature of God and His impact on our reasoning and free will, was an integral part of any science, or natural philosophy, curriculum.

[fschmidt]

Funny you say that because Judaism is one of the religions closer, in thought process, to the original mystery schools of ancient India, Egypt, and Greece.

You should be the first to ackowledge that man has an innate tendency to establish a contact with the Trascendent, and perceive the ultimate benefit of Good over Evil, without the need of external influences. Do you need a lawyer on your side to tell you what's good and what's not? So why would you need a priest to tell you, in a prescriptive way nonetheless.

In the Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna is puzzled over whether to obey his destiny of warrior fighting against members of his family, or follow what his compassionate heart tells him (that killing ain't good). Eventually, his mentor (Khrishna in disguise) reassures him that the greater good cannot be fully understood by our limited human minds and following his nature may, at least in his case, coincide with God's will.

I agree with you, though, when you say education to the trascendent is important, it's very very important. This is why, in ancient times, Theolology, which is basically speculation over the nature of God and His impact on our reasoning and free will, was an integral part of any science, or natural philosophy, curriculum.

Rabbinic Judaism has strayed far from its roots, which is why I reject it. The Old Testament is the most down-to-earth religious book ever written. God is no more transcendent than gravity is. One finds truth not by looking at one's navel, but rather by looking at the real, tangible world. To have any understanding of good and evil, one needs to study history, religion, and evolutionary psychology. And it helps to travel and see different cultures.

[publicduende]

Funny you say that because Judaism is one of the religions closer, in thought process, to the original mystery schools of ancient India, Egypt, and Greece.

You should be the first to ackowledge that man has an innate tendency to establish a contact with the Trascendent, and perceive the ultimate benefit of Good over Evil, without the need of external influences. Do you need a lawyer on your side to tell you what's good and what's not? So why would you need a priest to tell you, in a prescriptive way nonetheless.

In the Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna is puzzled over whether to obey his destiny of warrior fighting against members of his family, or follow what his compassionate heart tells him (that killing ain't good). Eventually, his mentor (Khrishna in disguise) reassures him that the greater good cannot be fully understood by our limited human minds and following his nature may, at least in his case, coincide with God's will.

I agree with you, though, when you say education to the trascendent is important, it's very very important. This is why, in ancient times, Theolology, which is basically speculation over the nature of God and His impact on our reasoning and free will, was an integral part of any science, or natural philosophy, curriculum.

Rabbinic Judaism has strayed far from its roots, which is why I reject it. The Old Testament is the most down-to-earth religious book ever written. God is no more transcendent than gravity is. One finds truth not by looking at one's navel, but rather by looking at the real, tangible world. To have any understanding of good and evil, one needs to study history, religion, and evolutionary psychology. And it helps to travel and see different cultures.

Agree on the entire line. You seem to contradict your previous statements, though, when you say "one has to study...", and "it helps to travel". So you advocate every man's journey of self-discovery of the Trascendent? You haven't mentioned the world "religion" or "priest" in this line of thought. Which makes me think that we are ultimately saying the same thing. Perhaps, by organised religion you mean a system of religious/spiritual education, something like the Islamic Madras, that will provide every young soul with the intellectual and cultural tools to explore spirituality?

[fschmidt]

Agree on the entire line. You seem to contradict your previous statements, though, when you say "one has to study...", and "it helps to travel". So you advocate every man's journey of self-discovery of the Trascendent? You haven't mentioned the world "religion" or "priest" in this line of thought. Which makes me think that we are ultimately saying the same thing. Perhaps, by organised religion you mean a system of religious/spiritual education, something like the Islamic Madras, that will provide every young soul with the intellectual and cultural tools to explore spirituality?

Maybe the issue is the definition of "transcendent". Is science transcendent? If you think so, then the issue is just words.

The application of science is engineering. The application of religion is morality. Morality benefits groups of people but is actually harmful when applied only to individuals. The purpose of organized religion isn't to find religious truth, but rather to apply it to a group.

[publicduende]

Maybe the issue is the definition of "transcendent". Is science transcendent? If you think so, then the issue is just words.

The application of science is engineering. The application of religion is morality. Morality benefits groups of people but is actually harmful when applied only to individuals. The purpose of organized religion isn't to find religious truth, but rather to apply it to a group.

Well science is not trascendent, because, by definition, is meant to be something multiple intellects can access, comprehend and finally apply - which is when it becomes engineering. Perhaps some areas of mathematics or physics can be so subtle and dense to trascend even the most refined of intellects. Very few people had a perception of science that bordered the trascendent. Perhaps Einstein, certainly Tesla. And maybe "our" Ettore Majorana.

Call me anticlerical, but to me the application of religion is a monopoly or morality. It's more about feeding people with a tiny herring everyday, rather than teaching them how to fish. This form of force-feeding morality might have worked centuries ago, when the average cultural level was abysmal, with a tiny elite swimming in privilege against an ocean of ignorance and superstition. At this stage of mankind's evolution, I believe it can only be good to start taking the wheels off.

[Halwick]

How would you score religions that you know on a scale of -10 to +10? A negative score means that you would prefer being isolated to joining that religious community, and a positive score means that you would prefer joining that religious community to being isolated. Here are my scores from lowest to highest:

Reform Judaism -10
Modern Protestantism -8
Atheism -7
Islam -5
Catholicism -2
Orthodox Judaism +1
Odinism (pagan) +2
Orthodox Christianity +3
Karaite Judaism +5

Please post how you would score the religions that you know.

Why did you exclude Buddhism and Hinduism?

If Southern Baptists were on the list, I'd probably rate them a -10. Never met a more mean-spirited, narrow-minded and prejudiced group of people who has the temerity to call themselves "good Christians".

And why the negative rating on Islam? What other religion promises 72 (presumably female) virgins when you die?

[fschmidt]

Why did you exclude Buddhism and Hinduism?

Because I don't have enough personal experience with them to judge them.

And why the negative rating on Islam? What other religion promises 72 (presumably female) virgins when you die?

I wonder where they get those virgins from? Given the state of the world, I assume they would be running low on virgins.

[Jester]

Rabbinic Judaism has strayed far from its roots, which is why I reject it. The Old Testament is the most down-to-earth religious book ever written. God is no more transcendent than gravity is. One finds truth not by looking at one's navel, but rather by looking at the real, tangible world.

+1