Is it possible to believe in several religions at once?

[Manna]

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?

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

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?

There is nothing impossible to the magic that is the human mind.

 

[Sunstone]

The notion that any one religion has a monopoly on truth is a mainstream belief in only some religions, but not in all of them.

 

[ChristineES]

Sure, it's possible. I have found that religions have a lot of the same teaching, sometimes even more than half of the teachings. This is especially true if one or more of the religions are one without a deity.

 

[Tarheeler]

From what you describe, he isn't following any religion.

In picking specific noncontradictory tenets, he is building a belief system that only he follows. Rather that practicing them all, he practices none. And there is nothing necessarily wrong in that; if that is how he perceives God, then good for him.

 

[Vinayaka]

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?

Tricky and a lot of work to be sure. But this guy is a theology prof. It might sort of work somehow at that level.. theology only. But at the practice level? What do you do, rotate buildings each week. Where so you go? What rituals, and all that jazz.

Seems easier to try to find one that's already there you're almost aligned with already than top go create your own.

 

[Manna]

Tricky and a lot of work to be sure. But this guy is a theology prof. It might sort of work somehow at that level.. theology only. But at the practice level? What do you do, rotate buildings each week. Where so you go? What rituals, and all that jazz.

That's a good point about the theological and practical distinction. I guess the question would indeed be can it be made to be practical. For example, just as a person might listen to classical, jazz and rock music might it not be possible to have a person mix their religious practises (I know music and religion are two different things but just a light-hearted analogy).

Would we not feel more connected and at peace with each other if Jews celebrated Eid, Christians celebrated Hanukkah and Muslims celebrated Christmas. I think one religious group would feel a sense of respect if another religious group were to celebrate their holidays.

 

[Quintessence]

I think that to view religions as concrete, rigid boxes within which are absolutely distinct ideas, practices, and rituals is nonsense. Religion is essentially a social construct composed of various ideas and practices and claiming membership in a religion is a way of marking identity. However, those claiming membership in a particular religion hardly agree on what ideas and practices are "essential" and which are not. Therefore, it's pretty darned hard to sort out when the religion becomes not that religion and instead something else. As social constructs, what any particular religion constitutes is some loose consensus that we happen to agree upon and little more than that. Given the complexity of what we're dealing with here, I also find it nonsense to suppose people should (or can) check a single box when asked "what religion are you?" Especially in this age of information accessibility, it's silly to suppose a person's worldview is drawn exclusively from a single source. Perhaps in our extremely tribal and isolated days that would have been realistic, but now? Not so much.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Some people will go to extreme lengths to try to beat Pascal's Wager.

 

[LuisDantas]

It is certainly possible to adhere to several distinct religions at the same time to some degree.

However, a few of them make a point of being exclusive, so I don't think it can be an universal thing.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Tricky and a lot of work to be sure. But this guy is a theology prof. It might sort of work somehow at that level.. theology only. But at the practice level? What do you do, rotate buildings each week. Where so you go? What rituals, and all that jazz.

Seems easier to try to find one that's already there you're almost aligned with already than top go create your own.

You are removing the fun out of it though lol.

Here is something you should know about me for example....

I pray like a Muslim in a form of modified salat.
Use Pagan Symbolism.
Refer tog od by pre-Islamic names.
I practice Japanese kuji-in.
Find inspiration and enlightenment int he Qur'an and Bible.
I meditate on Shamash.
Pray to Allah(very complex).
I practice meditation in a similar manner as I learned from Hinduism.
I also use European sigils as a means of spiritual concentration.


You can easily decide which rituals you employ. I have practised Islam for a while and Hinduism moderatly so I use those two religions to simplfy my spiritual actions. I am familar with them, and they feel natural to me hence I chose them. I dislike them and I love them equally.
Combined with Deistic theophilosophy, panentheism, paganism and ritualistic sigil magic I have formed a whole other religion not counting my knowledge in pre-Islamic paganism


Picking an "off the shelf religion" is a total bore. I recommend you upgrade

 

[Sha'irullah]

Some people will go to extreme lengths to try to beat Pascal's Wager.

I guess you never met a practitioner of Buddhislamidharmaashintochristianijainibahaizorostrianipaganisataniwiccascientologiraelinism.

That religion takes Pascal's Wager up, up and away!

 

[Sha'irullah]

I think that to view religions as concrete, rigid boxes within which are absolutely distinct ideas, practices, and rituals is nonsense. Religion is essentially a social construct composed of various ideas and practices and claiming membership in a religion is a way of marking identity. However, those claiming membership in a particular religion hardly agree on what ideas and practices are "essential" and which are not. Therefore, it's pretty darned hard to sort out when the religion becomes not that religion and instead something else. As social constructs, what any particular religion constitutes is some loose consensus that we happen to agree upon and little more than that. Given the complexity of what we're dealing with here, I also find it nonsense to suppose people should (or can) check a single box when asked "what religion are you?" Especially in this age of information accessibility, it's silly to suppose a person's worldview is drawn exclusively from a single source. Perhaps in our extremely tribal and isolated days that would have been realistic, but now? Not so much.

I could not give you a frubal but when I am able to I will give this post one

It seems to me that you have come to similar conclusions that I have. Religions are "social constructs"(very weird that me and you use the exact same phrase as I have been using the "social construct" a lot in the past) and they emanate from cultures and individuals with biases and particular positions on matters.

They are propagated through tools such as prophecy or revelation in order to achieve acceptance by the public.


Now that mankind has intellectual evolved past exclusivity and the monopoly on god we can weed through religions and dissect them for value and their true essences instead of clinging to them like little children grasping their blankets.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

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?

Yes, in fact Baha'is believe all major religions have their source of inspiration from One God. The differences between them is only due to the fact that each of these religions came for a different Age and people. As each Age have its own requirements, each religion sent by God for that Age has teachings suitable for its own time. The Baha'i Faith is revealed for our time.

 

[NobodyYouKnow]

I am Hindu...no wait, I am Buddhist....Go away, Wicca, I am a Hindu...no, scratch that...Buddhist, not Wicca...

Meh, I am all three and I don't care if anything 'contradicts' I can work my way around it.

 

[Sha'irullah]

I am Hindu...no wait, I am Buddhist....Go away, Wicca, I am a Hindu...no, scratch that...Buddhist, not Wicca...

Meh, I am all three and I don't care if anything 'contradicts' I can work my way around it.

Your soul must hate you haha!

"Pick a religion already you moron and stop cherry picking!". I bet that is how your soul sounds when you put a microphone to it .

But what you are doing is smart I must say

 

[NobodyYouKnow]

Your soul must hate you haha!

"Pick a religion already you moron and stop cherry picking!". I bet that is how your soul sounds when you put a microphone to it .

But what you are doing is smart I must say

LOL...thank you (and thanks for another 'pet'...my Frubal zoo is growing)...

My Soul doesn't really 'hate me'...well, it did...until I sort of went 'let's find a common denominator' here...why do I like to 'cherry pick' at these religions specifically? what is it they all have in common and so much so, that it's difficult for me to decide between them?'

Then, I found my answer...the only thing that is common to all three, is the notion of Chakras and Kundalini. All three doctrines focus on meditation and contemplation as the key to Nirvana/Moksha/Absorption.

So, this was the answer I wanted and this was why I couldn't choose, because it was all the same.

Knowing that, I should focus my awareness on one path, but if it weren't for my love of Lord Shiva, I would be a Buddhist already...however, Buddhists also worship Lord Shiva in the form of Mahakala, so....Mahakala became my personal Deity, along with another Hindu/Buddhist 'crossover Deity'...Dakini.

Wicca gave me the 'grounding' and the 'common sense' to not let myself get carried away with this and to remain focused on the present, and the goals I had to achieve...besides which, my personal beliefs and resolves will always contain the following:

As with everything else...and to express my favourite saying on here yet again....'it's complicated'. lol

 

[psychoslice]

Yes of course you can be interested in several religions at once, but to believe in all is not really possible, there would be too much contradiction because all religions very rarely agree with each other, so i would just take the best that suites you from each one.

 

[roger1440]

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?

Let’s say this Ph D fool is 27% Christian, wouldn’t that mean Jesus is 27% of a Messiah? If Jesus is 27% a Messiah, than he is no Messiah at all. It’s like being a little pregnant. A woman is either pregnant or not pregnant. There is no middle ground or shades of grey.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Let’s say this Ph D fool is 27% Christian, wouldn’t that mean Jesus is 27% of a Messiah? If Jesus is 27% a Messiah, than he is no Messiah at all. It’s like being a little pregnant. A woman is either pregnant or not pregnant. There is no middle ground or shades of grey.

He's probably one of those people who think that Jesus is just a great spiritual teacher or a "cool guy" and that's about it.