Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:33, 26 August 2004

This is a list I had started to construct before I found this one. The Anome

Here is a list of some religions, past and present.

Present

• Judaism
  • Orthodox Judaism -- Hasidic Judaism -- Ultra-Orthodox Judaism -- Modern Orthodox Judaism
  • Conservative Judaism (also known as Masorti Judaism outside of the USA)

• • Reform Judaism (also known as Progressive Judaism outside of the USA)
  • Reconstructionist Judaism (For all practical purposes, this new movement only exists in the USA.)
• Christianity
  • Orthodox Christianity
  • Catholicism
    • Roman Catholic Church
  • Protestantism
    • Anglicanism
    • Baptist church
• Islam
  • Sunni Islam
  • Shi'ite Islam
• Hinduism
• Buddhism
  • Theravada Buddhism
  • Mahayana Buddhism
• Jainism
• Shinto
• Zoroastrianism

Past

• Egyptian mythology
• Sumerian mythology
• Finnish pre-Christian religion
• Greek mythology
• Celtic mythology
• Norse mythology
• Prussian Baltic Pre-Christian religion
• Roman mythology
• Ancient Sardinian religion

Regarding the African Methodist denominations just added... is it the intent to add every single Methodist denomination to the list? When I last checked a few years ago (when I was a Free Methodist), there were more than forty. Do we want every single Protestant denomination? I think there are at least 20,000. Where to draw the line? Wesley 11:42 Sep 3, 2002 (PDT)

Any objections to sorting the entries within each group (indent level) chronologically instead of alphabetically? (It seems strange to list Christianity before Judaism and Buddhism before Hinduism, when in each case the former evolved from the latter.) Mkweise 19:52 Jan 27, 2003 (UTC)

I think the sacred texts should be taken out, and replaced with a link to sacred text. It seems like an unnecessary duplication. I'm also not sure the mythologies should be listed here, as there is a more complete list at mythology and they aren't practiced anymore -- if they've been revived in some way, they should be at the Pagan and Polytheistic religion section (as dievturiba, goddess worship and others are now). Tuf-Kat

I've got no prob with eliminating this duplication. I just happened to bump into this article when I recently added the 2 Mormon texts to the list. B

How about getting Christianity back to rthodox - Catholic - Protestant? As it is, Christianity takes much more space than the other religions, which is also a sort of bias? And then create a separage article Christian denominations which can be as fine tuned as editors want? -- Irmgard 20:15 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)

That's true, but the larger list of Christian religions is simply because, well, there are so many Christian denominations. Depending on how you define a denomination, movement and sect, there are said to be over 10,000 distinct types of Christianity worldwide. However, for purposes of producing an easy to read article, there is much merit in your proposal. Over time this list could become very long, and swamp the entry. We could have this entry discuss only the religions, and their major sub-divisions, but not all the splinter groups, sub-denominations, etc. RK

Sure, there are any number of Christian denominations - but for that matter, Hinduism would be an even longer list, if we want to list all Hinduism subgroups in this cat. Why not just create a Christian Denominations article, refer to it for details on Christian subgroups. There we can then subgroup the subgroups and divisions of subgroups. This article here is about religions, not about denominations and someone looking for an overview on World Religions probably won't care too much about the difference between the Church of God (Cleveland) and the Church of God (Anderson). Irmgard 22:51 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be on List of religions or something similar? -- goatasaur

list of religions makes sense to me.

After fixing my wiki I realize that the list redirects here. Shouldn't it be the other way around? -- goatasaur

Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism are incorrectly listed as Vedic religions.

Under which category should Bokononism go? I hesitate to put it under "mock" religions, since I am a practicing Bokononist.

How do you practice a fictional religion? Anjouli 11:58, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

What about the Universal Life Church? It is not really a Christian denomination - any advice on where to put it? Also, it is a strange irony that atheism is always listed as a religion!2toise 13:01, 8 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Unfortunately, if you stick to the first paragraph of the article, it IS a religion (the system etc... which denies the supernatural). In the end, believing in the inexistence of God has as strong consequences as believing in His existence. Pfortuny 11:46, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Perhaps Religions and Belief Systems would be a better title? Anjouli 12:00, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I don't think Jedi should be listed under Fictional Religion. First of all, the name of the religion should be The Force, then, as it is officially recognized in Australia, it should be listed in New religions. Any opinion?

I agree. Granted, The Force may seem to be a daft 'religion', but there are plenty of 'authentic' religions that are stranger. Anjouli 07:58, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

The article on Jedi calls it a (fictional) religion, whereas The Force is called "the object of the Jedi and Sith religions", so I think it should be listed as "Jedi", not "The Force". The question of whether it's a "new religion" or a "mock religion" should depend on whether it actually has followers who take it seriously, not on whether it's officially recognized. My impression is that virtually everyone who has ever specified their religion as "Jedi" has done so tongue-in-cheek, and for that reason it should be classified as "fictional". --Arteitle 02:59, Mar 17, 2004 (UTC)

Move?

Move to List of religions? --Jiang|Talk 00:43, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

• Yes, I was going to suggest that and realized you already had. --Xiaopo's Talk 08:02, Mar 15, 2004 (UTC)

Why is Brianism the only 'religious' group that has two entries on this page? Is this allowed for other relgious groups too? Some other religious groups can and should have a double classification e.g. Sathya Sai organization. Andries 17:51, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I don't agree with the classification of ISKCON under bhakti movement. It should be classified under Gaudiya Vaishnava . I agree though that ISKCON is a bhakti movement but so are some forms of Chrisianity but we don't classify them under bhakti movement. Andries 18:09, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

What's the point of the Vedic religions category? it might as well be removed, since its only descendants are all under Hinduism.

Alternatively, there could be a heading of 'Dharmic' religions, (and I'm not sure of this title). Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism all have the concepts of dharma, karma, and reincarnation in common. The current arrangement implies that they these religions are not related except in coming from India, and this is obviously not so. Imc 17:43, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

"Dharma" is simply the sanskrit word for "teaching" or "doctrine", although there are some new-ageish authors who use that word as a sort of "positive karma" meaning. And Buddhism is not actually reincarnationist. Actually there isn't a whole lot unifying even Hinduism except vocabulary, so the distinction you propose is quite subtle, perhaps to the point of not being useful. Luis Dantas 10:20, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I disagree entirely with Dantas. In that case, Bible's just a Greek-derived word for book. Dharma is a concept that is found only in the Vedas and later Indian religions. New-agers have nothing to do with it. For this reason, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism are also known as Hindu Dharma/Sanatana Dharma, Buddha Dharma, Jaina Dharma and Sikh Dharma. They're very much connected as their philosophies overlap. Also, Hinduism has more than vocabulary and is solidly grounded around Vedic philosophies in Astika traditions as well as Bhakti movements and Puranic sects. Dharma religions is quite appropriate. --LordSuryaofShropshire 19:46, May 4, 2004 (UTC)

All religions overlap to some extent. It would be quite puzzling if those born on what is currently India were an exception. And yes, of course "Bible" _is_ just a word meaning "book". If you consider _all_ religious movements that claim to follow Abraham's God, there indeed little (if anything at all) unifying them in either doctrine or practice. The difference is that Hinduism tends to be more inclusive and to welcome an amazing variety of forms of religious interpretation and practice, while the most widespread Abrahamic religions make a point of understanding that there are those who do not "follow the book". I don't see either stance as inherently more "correct" than the other, but the point remains that at the end of the day there is precious little (or nothing) unifying Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism other than language. As a matter of fact I sometimes wonder if there is anything unifying Buddhism either - certainly _not_ language even if we decide that some of the more eccentric branches are not actually Buddhism (yet another can of worms). If there is a core of common beliefs among the four Dharmas mentioned and, say, most forms of Chinese and Japanese Buddhism then it is certainly not too easy to spot. Not to make too big an issue of it, but I take it that you disagree with those who believe that the Upanishads give Hinduism a very different face and in fact oppose much of the teaching of the Vedas? There are many respected authors in either side of this argument. Luis Dantas

but the point remains that at the end of the day there is precious little (or nothing) unifying Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism other than language.

karma, mantra concepts (bija, like AUM, etc.) rebirth-reincarnation (different but related), symbolism (lotus, gods & goddesses), ahimsa (first appeared in Chandogya Upanishad); such things represent more than language and go to concept.. the biggest unifier is Dharma, which obviously is interpreted differently but such differences, as you pointed, can be found within religions as well as without. Yoga is another unifying factor, and while Patanjali is clearly of the Vedic school, vipassana and later yoga movements in the other faiths call to a sort of Dharma-tradition sharing of the concepts, and following individualization as well. Also, it's been noted by many that core ideas and systems of meditation have been derived from older traditions; the Upanishads seems to have set off reform and Mahavir and Buddhadeb ratified the feeling in their new traditions. Hindus, Jains and Buddhists subsequently imbibed so much from each other that some traditions cannot be distinguished from between religions. The Tirukural, for example, is desparately claimed by members of both the Jain and Hindu faiths. As for Tantra, Vajrayana Buddhism is practically a Tibetan face of right-hand Shiva-Shakta tantra traditions.

"I take it that you disagree with those who believe that the Upanishads give Hinduism a very different face and in fact oppose much of the teaching of the Vedas?"