Diogenes the Cynic

Islam does not worship a moon god. That's a Jack Chick slur. There is absolutely no truth to it.

mountainman

Moreover IMO it is a classificationary term of comparitive religious studies
which reaches towards generalism rather than diversity of dogma.

It suggestively emphasises the opposite of what modern research
at the edges of the field is suggesting. Stuff like "Is Q Buddhist"?

Having said this, we must acknowledge that the subject matter is
the name of a discussion board, not another religion, although
Alfred North Whitehead once said of religion, "It's what you do
in your spare time". (or something quite similar)


Best wishes,



Pete Brown

Doug Shaver

No. They are things I've read in numerous sources that seem reliable.

Clivedurdle

I am not talking about the name of this bit ofthe board at all, but wish to discuss whether abrahamic is of any value in reality. If Q is Buddhist for example, and xianity is really a druidic neo pythagorean religion....

mountainman

What was the problem with the term "World Religious Scripture"
or its like "Global Religious Scripture". Are we aiming too low, or
are we not able to be without (our western civilisation) preconceived
notions?

Toto

"World Religious Scripture" would step on the toes of another forum on this board, Non-Abrahamic Religion & Philosophy. We didn't see enough commonality between Eastern and Abrahamic scriptures to make global religious scripture a useful category.

There are possible links between Christianity and Buddhism, but all that we know fits easily into one or two threads.

All classifications are a bit artificial, based on convenience as much as anything.

The term Judeo-Christian gained currency after World War II, when Christian politicians who had talked about "our Christian heritage" wanted to be more inclusive, and expanded things to "our Judeo-Christian heritage." This phrase has been used to the point where a lot of people think that there is a Judeo-Christian religion, which does not exist. I suspect that "Abrahamic" is just an attempt to be more inclusive and emphasize whatever Christianity, Judaism, and Islam have in common, since the three religions did manage to coexist peacefully and productively in a few places, and hopefully will again.

I can see a politician in the western part of the US (Hawaii or California) talking about our "Judeo-Christian-Buddhist-Confucian heritage." But there are no common figures in those religious traditions to use as a name.

Clivedurdle

Alanwattic scriptures?

Peter Kirby

I just want to say on the record that I think the name change is not good.

I pushed for "Biblical Criticism & History" for the forum formerly known as "Biblical Criticism & Archaeology." "Biblical Criticism" and "History" are well-known fields of study, and potentially any issues historical concerning the three major religions of the West (and related topics) could be discussed in a forum titled "Biblical Criticism & History".

There is no department of "Abrahamic Scriptures Criticism" anywhere in the world, and the term "Abrahamic Scriptures" is indeed a seldom used one.

Meanwhile, thousands of people every month will search for "Biblical Criticism" on the dubdubdub, and they will find the IIDB lower on the list (currently #7 in Google and likely dropping) because of the name change.

Please change it back.

thanks,
Peter Kirby

Johnny Skeptic

I agree. There was no need for a name change.

Toto

Peter Kirby carries a lot of weight around here. You will notice that the admins were persuaded by his arguments, and we are once again BCH.