(no subject)

[sophiaserpentia]

Crossposting to challenging_god.

Is it fair to judge a religion on the basis of actions done by its followers? By this I mean of course weighing the good deeds as well as the bad ones. Or should this judgment be made simply on the basis of the teachings themselves?

Underlying this question is another one: to what extent is a religion defined by the people that make it up?

Comments

[alobar.livejournal.com]

In my mind, a religion is responsible for teachings its followers how to act. When people of a religious bent abuse others, and are chastised for it by the leadership, a religion is doing its job. But when the church does not chastize or curb the abuses, I feel that religion should lose societal privilege -- such as tax exempt status.

Religions often begin with individuals claiming divine inspiration for their lives &/or their writings. When those individuals die, power begins to accumulate into the hands of people more interested in power than sanctity. At some point in the evolution of a church, the church must curb its own people, or the church must be curbed by society -- else the sham corrupt racket calling itself a religion destroys all of society.