Why do religious people always defend religion…..

naomi24 | 15:54 Sat 24th Nov 2012 | Religion & Spirituality

46 Answers

…. regardless of the religion? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a religious person on here argue against another religion. I can understand them defending their own, but why defend those they obviously disagree with? Why, for example, does a Born Again Christian, or a Catholic, defend a Muslim or a Jehovah’s Witness – or vice versa? When presented with the unsavoury aspects of an alternative religion, they either disappear, or have no hesitation in distancing themselves from doctrine and practices that they, personally, find unacceptable – so why do it in the first place? Why not just be honest?

Christmas debate

Classification of Religions

Answers

1 to 20 of 46

1 2 3 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.

-- answer removed --

sandyRoe

Rightly, or wrongly, they think that faith is a valuable thing to possess. While religion can serve as a cover for paedophile priests, warrior Imams, and the like, followers of the golden rule which seems to be common to all religions, treat others as you would want to be treated, can surely be doing little harm.

emmie

because honestly and religion are surely anathema to each other.

emmie

sorry, should be honesty...

naomi24

Question Author

It seems to me that by doing it they are undermining their own religion – not to mention their own credibility.

sandyRoe

Different paths to God, perhaps?

-- answer removed --

Zacs-Master

Dead end street, rather than path.

emmie

anyone who reads a book, compiled thousands of years ago, and says that everything or almost everything is right and should be adhered to, be it the Bible or the Koran should have a lie down in dark room until they get over it.

modeller

They dare not because they have too much in common . If you believe in a fantasy the moment you expose another's fantasy you are inviting criticism on your own. The same thing applies to religious practices they don't want examination from anyone but in particular from another theist. .
If the Pope argues with the Archbishop of Canterbury that would have far far greater impact than say with Richard Dawkins.

sandy # Rightly, or wrongly, they think that faith is a valuable thing to possess# Are you actually saying having a faith can be wrong. ?

ludwig

It's because they all have this thing called faith in common. That means they're sort of on the same side - as long as there are atheists about. Atheists are the common enemy, especially 'aggressive' ones, so believers will pitch in to defend the concept of faith rather than the actual beliefs of a different religion.

In a weird way a Christian has probably got more in common with a satanist that an atheist, because they're both playing in the same game - just on opposing teams.

naomi24

Question Author

//It's because they all have this thing called faith in common.//

But it reflects so badly upon them, on their honesty, on their integrity, on the genuine faith they claim to hold - but they don’t seem to recognise that. I read their supportive posts and I know they don’t really believe what they’re saying. If they did, they wouldn’t believe as they do. It is the height of hypocrisy.

bednobs

maybe they've gone off for a cup of tea while the debate's going on

joko

its safety in numbers.
believers against non believers.... they want to unite to gather strength to support their own beliefs ... and even though its a different believe it is more akin to another religion than to npo belief at all.

it is interesting though, because you would think that, for a religious person, someone who not only doesnt believe what they believe but believes something different all together is much worse and more of a threat to their own beliefs - than one that doesnt believe at all.

naomi24

Question Author

Joko, //you would think that, for a religious person, someone who not only doesnt believe what they believe but believes something different all together is much worse and more of a threat to their own beliefs - than one that doesnt believe at all.//

Yes, that would be the logical thought, but if people feel compelled to compromise their principles to the point of hypocrisy in support of religions to which they hold no allegiance whatsoever simply to protect their own against the ever-growing advancement of rational non-belief, then confidence in individual faith is clearly very fragile.

sandyRoe

Modeller, I think that Aleister Crowley and others of his ilk would probably have been happier, more grounded people, if they'd not had faith.

Father-Ted

Because they are united against a mutal enemy which I am sure I have no need to specify, why even catholics and protestant would unify against an increase in the price of guinness.

sandyRoe

Praise the Lord, Hallelujah! The ranks of the believers are augmented by a man of the cloth.

Father-Ted

If you would wish to avail youself of my online confessional my son then my address will be found in the good book if you are a true believer.

sandyRoe