The great civilising influence on religion has been science in that it is very difficult to nowadays take the bible or any other rligious statements seriously – not seriously enough to die for anyway. In theis the English got a head start since it has always been impossible to take its religious origins seriously & so it has always been a social club rather than fighters of heresy.
]]>The point i was making was that the religion may be the same, but the way its beleivers behave is different. Therefore, the way believers behave is dependent on lots of things other than what the religion says, and you cannot use what the religion says as a guide to how its adherents behave in the real world.
]]>Unless, of course, one of the really really really fundamental teachings of your religion, to which “believers” are constantly challenged to uphold themselves – not others – is “hate the sin, love the sinner”.
What is even more important is whether or not the religion allows for – or its followers assume the latitude to – enact punishment on others for what they believe to be sins.
Further:
“It’s not what the religion actually says that counts, it’s how followers of the religion behave. “
Well yes, and quoting how followers of a religion used to behave two hundred years ago is relevant to their behaviour today… how?
]]>