tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10623297.post6036845871053211242..comments2023-11-17T06:40:12.183-06:00Comments on Don Singleton: Interfaith dialogueUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10623297.post-74782247460266083752007-05-09T17:14:00.000-05:002007-05-09T17:14:00.000-05:00I don't know that I would consider Wikipedia the f...I don't know that I would consider Wikipedia the final word, but <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paganism" REL="nofollow">in says</A> <I>The term can be defined broadly, to encompass the faith traditions outside the Abrahamic monotheistic group of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.</I><BR/><BR/>In any event it refers to non Abrahamic faiths. When Mohammad was inventing Islam some tribes were Jewish, some Christian, and some were pagan. He plagerized a lot from both Judaism and Christianity hoping to lure them into his new religion, and then turned against them when they were not fooled. I personally respect Hindus, Buddists, those that follow Baha'i, Confucianism, Sikhism, Taoism, etc.Don Singletonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02991386635454877389noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10623297.post-5609695602447175042007-05-09T14:50:00.000-05:002007-05-09T14:50:00.000-05:00(Quote from this blog begins:) "Swaraaj Chauhan bl...(Quote from this blog begins:) "Swaraaj Chauhan blogged ‘How about including Hindus, Buddhists and others in your future religious networking, Prime Minister Tony Blair?’<BR/><BR/>Because he is trying to find Moderate Muslims, and Islam considers Jews and Christians to be ‘People of the Book’.<BR/><BR/>Surat Al ‘Imran, 64 (Qur’an 3:64) says ‘O People of the Book! Let us rally to a common formula to be binding on both us and you: That we worship none but God; that we associate no partners with Him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than God.’<BR/><BR/>and it considers Hindus, Buddhists and others as pagans. That does not mean that Islam treats “People of the Book” as equals. They still must pay a special tax called Jizya if they want to practice their faith without converting to Islam." (Quote ends)<BR/><BR/>This is the reaction to my above post in the Don Singleton blog.<BR/><BR/>According to Wikipedia: “The term ‘Pagan’ is a Christian adaptation of the ‘Gentile’ of Judaism, and as such has an inherent Christian or Abrahamic bias, and pejorative connotations among Westerners, comparable to heathen, and infidel, mushrik and kafir in Islam. For this reason, ethnologists avoid the term ‘Paganism’, with its uncertain and varied meanings, in referring to traditional or historic faiths, preferring more precise categories such as polytheism, shamanism, pantheism, or animism.”<BR/><BR/>“The term Pagan is from Latin paganus, an adjective originally meaning ‘rural’, ‘rustic” or ‘of the country.’ As a noun, paganus was used to mean ‘country dweller, villager.’ In colloquial use, it could mean much the same as calling someone today a ‘bumpkin’ or a ‘hillbilly’. Some believe Paganus was almost exclusively a derogatory term.”<BR/><BR/>It is understandable that certain customs/cultures/religions must need to prove their superiority/solidarity in the face of religions that have greater antiquity and cultural strength, such as Hinduism and Buddhism.<BR/><BR/>Hinduism and Buddhism are much older than ‘Abrahamic tradition/heritage/religions’ and have survived/flourished without having to resort to the sword.<BR/><BR/>The former’s sweep is wider and the vision all encompassing. Hence its popular appeal and intellectual dominance.<BR/><BR/>The followers of Hinduism and Buddhism have found conflict resolution, and non-violence, much easier to follow than the ‘Abrahamic religions’. It is immaterial who is ‘pagan’ and who is not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com