Talk:Conreligion

I'm going to change the second sentence of Henotheism from "The difference between henotheism and monolatrism is that henotheists seem not to believe that the non-worshipped gods have no power on those who don't believe in them." to "The difference between henotheism and monolatrism is that henotheists seem believe that the non-worshipped gods have power on those who don't believe in them." I got rid of the double negative. If I have misinterpreted it, then please try to clarify it, as it is very hard to understand. Ydirbut 19:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Ancestor Worship
It seems to me that it lacks ancestor worship as one of the religion types. As I know literally nothing about that type of religion, would someone more knowledgable than I please create it. Ydirbut 19:39, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Agnosticism
The description of Agnosticism is totally incorrect. It starts with: "When a people believe there is a higher power ..." Unfortunately this is not Agnosticism. According to the American Heritage Dictionary (2000), Agnosticism is: * 1. The doctrine that certainty about first principles or absolute truth is unattainable and that only perceptual phenomena are objects of exact knowledge. * 2. The belief that there can be no proof either that God exists or that God does not exist. And Encarta Dictionary (2005) has simply: * View that God’s existence is unprovable: the belief that it is impossible to know whether or not God exists The presupposition that a deity exists, as in the definition provided here, is incorrect. Agnostics neither assume that a deity exists, nor do they assume that one does not. So the rest of the definition simply doesn't apply. A simpler and far more accurate definition of Agnositicism would be: "Belief that no deity's existence can be known for certain." Also, I should note that the idea that believing a deity requires having "set rules" for it/him/her, is equally erroneous. There are religions which believe in deities, but which accept a certain amount of subjectivity; for instance, the classical Gnostics, and their forerunners in the Greco-Roman mystery-religions.

PsiCop 02:00, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

As nobody is taking any initiative, I'll go ahead and change it myself. --Ajallan 17:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

More?
Isn't religion also about abstract ideas, philosophies, stories, legends, myths, etc, and not only gods? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.85.166.212 (discuss • contribs) 10:26, 8 April 2013‎


 * Yes, I would say so. You'll notice this book is listed as at the lowest stage of completion &mdash; the box in the upper right of the main main of the book (and so far only page of the book) has zero out of four quarters shaded.


 * This is quite a challenging topic to write a neutral book about; not impossible, but quite challenging. One would want to ask oneself, what is the available literature on the subject, and study up on it, to avoid simply loading one's own biases into the book.  I suspect there's not an awful lot of high-quality stuff written out there about religion-construction.  Probably comparative religion/mythology/folklore is what one would study.  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 10:48, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Rules
Most religions have rules on how one should or shouldn't behave, and how they can reach some goal. This might be important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.85.166.212 (discuss • contribs) 23:33, 10 April 2013

Demons
Could a major demon or evil being be considered a deity? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.85.166.212 (discuss • contribs) 23:33, 10 April 2013

Physical
Many religions make their god(s) seem like physical beings, but is there any where this isn't the case? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.85.166.212 (discuss • contribs) 23:33, 10 April 2013

Yes. See, for instance, the more philosophical forms of Islam (mu'tazila), most extant varieties of Judaism (actually, any "normative" modern rabbi will have a rather non-physical notion of God, but is willing to use physical language to describe God - but if you want an exceedingly aphysical God, check the Kabbalist notion of Ein Sof), several varieties of Christianity, and really clearly in Sikhism. Several religions do teach that their god(s) are very very non-corporeal, and oftentimes in ways that exceed or evade normal physical existence - or encompass all normal physical existence. However, one relevant question then is whether the laity's notion of God or the educated religious thinker's notion of God can be held to be the more correct notion wrt the religion. From a purely descriptive p.o.v., both need to be acknowledged. Sure, the Jewish, Christian and Muslim scriptures may make God seem very corporeal and physical, but a religion's scripture isn't just the words on the pages - it's the tradition of how to understand the words on the pages as well. --217.29.224.86 (discuss) 11:01, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Suggestion
You should begin with how religions form and evolve through time. :-)

Examples
May you show some examples of real and fictional religions in this book?