One aspect of conservatism vs progressivism is attitudes to scripture. Many conservatives answer questions about their faith with a quote from their scripture, with the subtext that this is the authoritative word of God, Buddha, etc. In which case it's like a closed system resistant to change, after all how can we change God's revelation?
If the attitude is that the scriptures are human writings, relative to their time and cultural context, open to scholarly research and re-interpretation, then that's what I'd characterise as at the liberal end of the spectrum. |
Nice observation.
Have you noticed some people write conservatively in one religious forum and then write very progressively in another religious forum? |
No actually I haven't but will defo look out for it. I have noticed however that some people can be conservative religiously, but liberal politically. And vice-versa. |
If you look closely, you will see some people getting after people fro various religions for using their scriptures but they themselves demand evidence from one of their scriptures when the occassion arises.
And then..... I haven't noticed people being conservative religiously but liberal political, and vice-versa. I have to see if I can notice that. |
"demand evidence from one of their scriptures" yeah I know what you mean, and believing that scriptures represent evidence to use in a rational argument is another sign of conservatism in my book. Conservative religiously and liberal politically. Examples of this in my area are evangelical churches who take seriously and practically the Biblical injunctions to look after the poor and homeless etc. They set up food banks, nurseries, lunch clubs for the elderly, aid for refugees & asylum seekers etc; and criticise politicians for not doing enough for these people and the community in general (rather than supporting individualism). Liberal religiously and conservative politically. A rarer type, but I've come across a few in liberal churches, mostly business owners who argue for business-friendly free market economics. They also want their individual freedom to extend to the religious sphere. Interesting that individualism leads to right-wing politics but liberal religion, with vice-versa for communalism. Or do you have a different observation. Blessings to all. |
My observation, which might be disputed by some, is that political beliefs are more important to people than religious beliefs are. In effect we are serving two masters and our passion leans to the political. Consider any period of time and consider which of the two you have talked/thought about and how often.
|
@Molearner when I scan through my (inexpert) knowledge of history, I'm seeing that separation of politics and religion is more pronounced in the modern period, and also varies across different cultures. In middle ages Europe, for instance, politics was in the hands of the monarchy and aristocracy which were deeply steeped in Christianity. Indeed the Roman Catholic church was the European Union of its day. I could advance similar arguments for the other main religions.
Politics is about how we run our economic lives, defence, education, healthcare and all sorts of survival needs so you're right it's naturally very important. But also religion has traditionally been the identity around which the community is formed, so is arguably more foundational than politics. In countries where large-scale religious observance is on the decline, I'm fascinated to see what if anything replaces it. Perhaps for some people political campaigning becomes an outlet for their moral beliefs and identity. |
What if you value both sides of the spectrum? Both sides have good and negative views. What do you call that besides confused?
|
Quote:
I'm curious as to the term 'Conservative religion' chosen here. Of course examples can be given over differing religions and what people of that religion have done (whether in a country, a region, a group of people, an organisation etc). However, when one looks beyond the above categories and boils it down to individual people, I'm not sure that there would be one religion more conservative than others. Sure people may point out how about X religion, they did this, what about Y religion, they did that, but then we're looking more towards the collective than individuals. I don't see it as X religion is more or less conservative than Y religion, I see it more as individuals and how they interpret religions. For example, many people will point out Afghanistan being a conservative Muslim country, and mainly due to the Taliban! But if the young men of Afghanistan were given opportunities of getting a decent education, getting a decent career, how many of them would want to join the Taliban? Look at pictures of Afghanistan in the 60's when Taliban had not infiltrated society-how incredibly different to present day Afghanistan! I still think it's individuals that make (or are forced to make) a religion conservative, because it's down to interpretation. Hey sorry to hijack the conversation here folks, but it is an interesting topic, and I just wanted to offer my two cents here :smile: |
Hi Melantha, and everyone.
I've never been to Afghanistan, although I've heard of hippies travelling there in the 60s and 70s so there must have been some appeal to the alternative minded people. A question is, why did the Taliban come along and swing the country to the right? There were a lot of external threats such as the Soviet invasion, and external threats usually make people band together and unite for protection. Other Muslim countries had changes in the period too. Iran had its revolution with the Ayatollah, Egypt went from socialist to conservative. Perhaps reactions to the Cold War, and the Israel-Palestine situation. After all, Islam was a big powerful empire up to WW1, and the loss of that power must have hit some people hard. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 12:10 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums