^^^^

  • vvilld@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Not while remaining faithful to their religion. A core tenant of all three faiths you named is that their God (which are all different interpretations of the same god) is the ONLY god and you cannot recognize any other god.

    Of course, there have always been varying interpretations of each faith. Christianity, especially, has lent itself to syncretism quite well. There have been (and still are) many cultures where the people would identify themselves as Christian, but see no contradiction in also recognizing aspects of other faiths, including sometimes gods (although they might call them some other word).

    If you’re following any of the major, world-recognized denominations of Christianity, Judaism, or Islam (eg Catholicism, Protestantism, Sunni Islam, Orthodox Judaism, Shia Islam, etc) then, no, you cannot worship pagan gods. But there are smaller versions of each religion which do.

    • Dr_Box@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      20 hours ago

      You are right but I’d like to point out that you could argue that the holy trinity is polytheistic, or like LDS believe this universe’s god is just one of many gods. But you are correct for the most part I just wanted to mention that

      • Maeve@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        15 hours ago

        At one time, the Church did indeed consider the Trinity idolatry and heretical.

    • NegativeLookBehind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      22 hours ago

      is that their God (which are all different interpretations of the same god)

      So what if you just worship the other interpretations? Let me guess: They kill you.

      • vvilld@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Well, there are a hell of a lot of Christians, Jews, and Muslims alive right now who aren’t actively trying to kill each other. Mostly, they just let others go about living their lives. It’s only the radical fundamentalists who try to kill others.

  • lyth@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Ex-Catholic here, standard response where I’m from would be “No, our God is the only god and trying to contact any spirits beside the Holy Spirit just opens you up to all the evil out there”.

    My understanding is that Abrahamic religions are universally monotheistic and have been since the Babylonian Exile got rid of the henotheistic aspect of Yahwism. Expect to get a lot of pretty convoluted reasoning if you ask a Catholic whether having three persons in the trinity is the same thing as polytheism.

  • Ziggurat
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    19 hours ago

    While it’s a core belief of Abrahamic monotheist that there is no god but Gods practically speaking some people kept some traditionul/pagan belief. I think obviously about some Africans doing their own mix, but even in Europe, tons of Pagan belief stay around, stuff like knocking on woodor having a Christmas tree, let alone various form of witchcraft which are also illegal for Christians but quite common, no matter whether it’s an old man reading runes or a teen girl praying the moon because it looks cool on TikTok

  • nocturne@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    23 hours ago

    They can do whatever they wish, they were given free will. Should their so-called god not like, it will strike them down or something.

    • Maeve@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      I think mainly it’s that deities allow us to suffer the consequences of our own in/actions until we learn the lesson at hand. It’s unfortunate that’s how it continues to be expressed, since religions began conceptualization.

      • Maeve@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        22 hours ago

        “covenant” here, to my understanding, means marriage. Abram choose to be spiritually wedded to the Caanite desert/warrior/storm god. El was a peaceful god. 72 recognized names of God, afaict, but I be confusing that with hermetic kabbalah (Christian mysticism). Each name recognizes different aspects. And gnosticism is something entirely different.

    • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Maybe the Jewish faith has kept to that but Christians have a long tradition of practicing syncretism and priests were happy just to get a Danish king to say “Hail Odin the all father and Freyr’s might and uh… also the Christian God I guess.”

      • DomeGuy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        22 hours ago

        There’s plenty of references in the OT to Jews doing the same thing.

        And European Christianity chased out worship of anyone save the God of Abraham rather violently after a generation or two.

    • Maeve@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 hours ago
      1. Jewish law doesn’t apply to gentiles, for good or ill.,

      2. “Before.”

      Now the mystic branches of these religions have a different interpretation, to lesser and greater degrees. The fanatics in each would kill them all.

      • solrize@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Yes, I think as a pure theological question, historical thought has been a bit complicated. So I linked to the Wikipedia article that hopefully goes into it a bit. I admit to not having read the Wikipedia article carefully. This isn’t my area at all.

        • Maeve@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Wikipedia takes the politicized view. Probably because Israel was occupied by Rome, and Constantine liked it. There are some views that say Christianity was invented by Jews for Rome, and there’s certainly no evidence for a singular, historical Jesus, to the best of my knowledge. Nonetheless, the Nicean council left out plenty, but left in some the lore that would be explained by and expounded on the books excluded. Probably again d/t Roman political purview.

          • Dadd Volante@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            16 hours ago

            Most historians agree Jesus very likely was a real person. Possibly even an algamation of multiple people.

            However, doesn’t make him the son of God or even a holy entity.

            Most likely he was a highly charismatic person who had a LOT of grievances with both the church and government, and his message turned into a political movement the Romans tried to quench ala Paul and the re-writings of the text at the time.

            We actually have a good chunk of knowledge on Pontius Pilate, who was a real person. A real person who would NEVER wash his hands of executing someone. He was a big fan of it.

            Part of the revision was to eject the Romans from the death of Jesus, and blame the Jewish people, in order to make the movement more palatable to the Roman people. Thus, the story of Pilate “washing his hands” of the matter because he thought Jesus was in fact, a righteous man.

            Jews didn’t crucify people. They stoned them to death.

            Jesus had a lot of criticism of the Roman occupation and was killed by the Romans.

            Decades later when mythology started to surround this human, we see the revisions really kick into high gear

            • Maeve@kbin.earth
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              15 hours ago

              I’ve read variations of these themes, over my short time on this planet. Maybe. Hard to say. I’m thinking of a millenia old game of “telephone/secret” however it’s called wherever people are.

              Anyway, the point is don’t take things so literally, religious and non-religious alike. And, like a bumper sticker I saw once, several decades ago: God has one son and we are all him.The best, worst and average among everyone on the planet, regardless of my personal opinion, I gather. And I think that’s probably what Joni Mitchell’s Woodstock and the whole hippie generation was about, despite politicians and media making it about sex, drugs, rock-n-roll. That’s probably also why recording studios and awards organizations make sure freedom music will never be mainstream, again.

  • DomeGuy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    This really depends on what you mean by “pray.”

    Sincerely worship and praise a pagan godhead as if they were responsible for the deeds Scripture attributes to God? No. It’s as bad as lying in court, stealing, or killing someone.

    Falsely go through the motions of pagan prayer, such as in a game, as an actor, or under threat of death? Usually. Some are sticklers, but most are OK with leaving cookies for Santa.

    Sincerely giving praise or worship to a being other than God, for things asserted as being done in God’s service or things not done by Her? It depends. Some may be hard no, some may be open yes.

    There are something like 3 billion nominal followers of the God of Abraham alive today. With such a large population, it’d be hard to find a statement that they all agree on, including “water is wet”.

  • ocean@lemmy.selfhostcat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    You can do whatever you want but in most cultures that isn’t allowed. Depending on how you define pagan gods that is allowed somewhat in east Asia through Shinto deities, Confucian, and ancestors.