Is it possible to believe in several religions at once?

[arthra]

A university professor of theology (who did his PhD at Harvard so this suggests that he is intelligent person) Mark W Muesse, has an interesting approach to religion.

He doesn't subscribe to one religion but instead sees himself as different percentages of various religions including Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, Jainism, Hinduism, Sihk etc. He adopts and believes in different aspects of these religions and makes it so that all his beliefs are compatible with one another.

My question is do you think such an approach to religion is workable or do you think it contradicts principles from the respective religions?

I haven't read anything about Mark Muesse..but as a Baha'i we do accept the Divine origin of the major world religions..So we see them as really one religion of God that has been revealed over time in various cultural settings and having important teachings for the people of the time and context they were revealed.

 

[NobodyYouKnow]

I think most of the principles of most religions overlap - so that if you believe in one, you inadvertently believe in the others too.

That is a very nice observation and I also fully agree...here, let me show you more:

Tao Teh Ching: "The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named is not the eternal name..."

The Bible: "Jesus told them, "Truly, I tell all of you emphatically, before there was an Abraham, I AM!" John 8:58

The Upanishads: "Brahman is not grasped by the eye, nor by speech, nor by the other senses, nor by penance or good works. A man becomes pure through serenity of intellect; thereupon, in meditation, he beholds Him who is without parts." - Mundaka Upanishad 3.1.8

Dhammapada: "Those who mistake the unessential to be essential and the essential to be unessential, dwelling in wrong thoughts, never arrive at the essential". - Stanza 11

Bhagavad Gita: "But this unmanifest is not the original divinity of the Being; there is another state of existence, an unmanifest superconsciousness beyond this cosmic manifestation, which is eternally self-seated , changeless and infinite. It does not perish with the perishing of all existence". BG 8:20

The Qu'ran: "No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision; He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things". Q6.103

The Bible: "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, says the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts." - Isaiah 55.8-9

Lotus Sutra: "At this time the World-honored One serenely arose from meditation and addressed Shariputra, "The wisdom of all the Buddhas is infinitely profound and immeasurable. The portal to this wisdom is difficult to understand and difficult to enter. Neither men of learning nor men of realization are able to comprehend it." Sutra 2.

The Upanishads: “‘In the beginning there was Existence, One only, without a second. Some say that in the beginning there was nonexistence only, and that out of that the universe was born. But how could such a thing be? How could existence be born of non-existence? No, my son, in the beginning there was Existence alone–One only, without a second. He is the truth. He is the Self. And that, Svetaketu, THAT ART THOU." Chhandogya Upanishad 6:2:3

Yeah, I got this pretty bad, haven't I? lol

 

[The Sum of Awe]

It's very possible, in fact is commonly done more often than not, more than we realize at least.

 

[Pegg]

Why does anyone have to be committed to any single religion if one adheres to the non-conflicting tenets? Most religions are syncretic anyway.

commitment shows real conviction

And if someone has a strong personal relationship with God, then surely that relationship should motivate committment and conviction.

but its like a man with several wives...he never really commits himself to anyone one of them.

 

[Jainarayan]

commitment shows real conviction

And if someone has a strong personal relationship with God, then surely that relationship should motivate committment and conviction.

But not everyone believes in a personal God. I don't. Yet at the risk of hubris I think I lead a at least as much moral life striving to be committed to all those foregoing quotes from various religions than one Christian, Jew, Muslim or Hindu who prays in their own house of worship and calls it a day, thinking they are so committed to their God and religion.

but its like a man with several wives...he never really commits himself to anyone one of them.

You know this? How? Especially considering that polygamy in the US is on the dl. Therefore, bad analogy.

 

[Vinayaka]

It's impossible to believe in several religions in their entirety at once unless you have multiple personality disorder. there are too many contradictions. People say they do, by the process of oversimplification, not really studying out any of the religions at depth. But when they do go into any depth, contradictions abound.

However, it is entirely possible to select non-contradicting beliefs from several religions. But that's not the same idea as practising them all simultaneously.

 

[metis]

It's impossible to believe in several religions in their entirety at once unless you have multiple personality disorder. there are too many contradictions. People say they do, by the process of oversimplification, not really studying out any of the religions at depth. But when they do go into any depth, contradictions abound.

The above is a blanket statement that I just cannot agree with, especially when one considers the eastern traditions.

 

[Brickjectivity]

It's impossible to believe in several religions in their entirety at once unless you have multiple personality disorder.

I'm not saying it is easy to accept, but it is possible. A terse explanation for believing seemingly contradictory truths:

Belief does not make a thing true, cannot prove it is true. To the person something is true but may not be true, really. Also believing two things are contradictory does not make them truly contradictory, so it requires only humility to accept they may not actually contradict each other. People are flawed in other words. If you recognize that you don't really know and only appear to know things, then you can believe two things that appear contradictory.

 

[Sand Dancer]

I don't see a problem.

 

[Quintessence]

It's impossible to believe in several religions in their entirety at once unless you have multiple personality disorder. there are too many contradictions.

A question for you. Aren't there contradictions inherent within religious traditions considered to be a single category already? How is this different from the apparent contradictions that arise from following tenants of traditions considered to be in different categories?

 

[Jainarayan]

However, it is entirely possible to select non-contradicting beliefs from several religions. But that's not the same idea as practising them all simultaneously.

This is how I view it. If I can speak for you I might expand it that you are saying one could not be a practicing/observant Jew and take communion in a Christian church as a regular part of practice. However, I see no reason why a Jew or Muslim could not follow the moral teachings of Jesus as he spoke them, though of course those teachings are rooted in Judaism already. A Hindu could not fully practice Buddhism which on the whole is non-theistic and does not view a self the way Hinduism does; though the reverse is possible. Likewise I don't think a practicing Catholic could regularly take part in Jewish services or practice unless it focuses on love of, and devotion and service to God. A Jain may like some of the tenets of Islam, but could not take part in Eid al-Adha, the Feast of the Sacrifice wherein an animal is sacrificed and the meat distributed, and call himself a Jain. Those are all aspects of blending religions that could not work, as I see it.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

I guess it depends on what you consider a religion. Belief in God, or the set of rituals and beliefs that bring one closer to God.

 

[Jainarayan]

I guess it depends on what you consider a religion. Belief in God, or the set of rituals and beliefs that bring one closer to God.

There you go! :yes: Without the specific rituals and specific or required beliefs, we have 'Spiritual But Not Religious', which is not to say there's anything wrong with that.

 

[NobodyYouKnow]

The above is a blanket statement that I just cannot agree with, especially when one considers the eastern traditions.

Same here.

Even within the school of Hinduism, it is difficult to find two people who agree on a lot of things.

There are so many 'schools of thought'...I mean, a Hindu can be a Hare Krishna or an Aghori Sadhu and they would be as different as a Hindu from a Jew.

Hare Krishnas are vegetarian, dress conservatively, don't have sex or take drugs...

Aghori Sadhus are cannibals and eat beef, are naked and smear their body with ashes, practice tantra and smoke dope and drink whisky.....I think that is my type of religion. *jks

Even in Christianity, you have the Catholic and Protestants...so different from each other....

So when somebody says 'can you believe in several religions', often it's hard enough to believe in one.

 

[BSM1]

Following more than one belief? Nah...that's crazy talk.

 

[Vinayaka]

If I can speak for you.

You can't. Simple as that. No offense intended.

 

[Pegg]

Why does anyone have to be committed to any single religion if one adheres to the non-conflicting tenets? Most religions are syncretic anyway.

I suppose it depends on the type of relationship a believer develops with God.

If the relationship is a good one, a close loving bond, then what need would the person have of other gods?

 

[sarek]

As a practitioner of esoteric spirituality I subscribe to the inherent possibility of finding out for myself. At the ultimate theoretical culmination point all belief would end. The journey of spirituality involves gradually replacing belief with understanding.

While there is such a thing as knowable objective truth, there are and have been many channels for it to percolate down to our subjective level. This has given rise to various beliefs which each are able to elucidate their own aspects of the whole.

For a seeker, however, any belief can never be more than a starting point.

 

[NobodyYouKnow]

As a practitioner of esoteric spirituality I subscribe to the inherent possibility of finding out for myself. At the ultimate theoretical culmination point all belief would end. The journey of spirituality involves gradually replacing belief with understanding.

While there is such a thing as knowable objective truth, there are and have been many channels for it to percolate down to our subjective level. This has given rise to various beliefs which each are able to elucidate their own aspects of the whole.

For a seeker, however, any belief can never be more than a starting point.

That was so eloquently stated. *frubal

I am also a practitioner of 'esoteric spirituality' within my own belief and thus, I have earned such labels as 'hippie' or 'new ager' or 'neo Hindu' and other things, when my beliefs are thousands of years old and sometimes even predate Hinduism.

They see these terms as being bad things because they see me as 'corrupting the pure essence of Hinduism', when I felt that was lost a long time ago, when Hindus started arguing over texts and teachings, becoming no more than a 'religion of philosophy'.

My point and purpose here, is not to speak, but to let my posts 'speak for themselves' and I have managed to do it quite a few times...always remember this; 'give a fool enough rope and he'll eventually hang himself' and that is my whole philosophy when it comes to discussing/debating religion.

I lead people on in their own delusions until they eventually see what I am doing and I can still remain like an 'ice queen' throughout...unfortunately, I tend to bring out the 'worst in people' without intention, but it happens...I am seen as being a 'lose cannon' or a 'hot potato'...at least I am seen as being 'insane' and at worst, I am seen as being 'dangerous'.

Anyway...unless you are already established within a belief and happy living within that box, that's fine...however, some of us wish to renovate and make extensions to our little 'box' because it's just too confining and we cannot breathe.

 

[metis]

Following more than one belief? Nah...that's crazy talk.

Nah, I think labeling this as "crazy talk" is just crazy talk. Who are you to say people cannot mix and match if that's what they believe? Should I label your beliefs as "crazy talk"?

Instead, I believe we should respect other people's beliefs even if we solidly disagree with them. If we don't, then we better not whine if someone insults what we may believe.