Here I present a thread to discuss interrelation of religion. Just a simple fleeting idea wondering of the similarity of a star being used in what is called Satanism (which I never have seen as a religion) and the Judaic star. I wonder what year the Judaic star became aspect of Judaic symbology and why. Yes I am aware that the star is known to be the star of David Yet I never have heard a cute Judaic story relevant to the name David. Perhaps a man named David had been the writer or English translator of the Talmud or the Kabbalah.
Thanks, I also have wondered of the span of time between B.C and A.D seems to be an interesting area of study. I have wondered if the original Jesus of Nazareth Film and later Francis of Asissi Films were perhaps somewhat true of historical relevance.
They are referring to King David. For a cute story, consider David and Goliath. Or the bromance between David and Jonathan.
Broadly speaking, Western thinkers have generated three schools of thought on that. (There are a many variants on each one, but we can ignore that.) 1. Exclusivism -- This is the idea that one religion is true (Christian exclusivists would say Christianity while exclusivists in other religions would name their own religion) and all other religions false. Salvation (or whatever it is) is only attainable through the true religion, so followers of all other religions are shit-outta-luck at best, and active agents of evil at worst. 2. Inclusivism -- This is the idea that while one religion is true (inclusivists would name their own religion here) other religions can be partially true and might reflect the truth in a distorted or incomplete way. Inclusivists often believe that other religions can serve as the first-steps of a religious ascent, but that the final steps are only possible by means of the true path. If salvation (or whatever it is) is possible for followers of other religions, it's only possible on the true religion's terms. In Christian terms, that means that while members of other religions might be saved (that's up to God) it's still Christ's atoneing sacrifice or whatever that's making it possible. Muslims tend to be inclusivists regarding the other 'religions of the book', I guess. Mohammed and the Quran provide the true picture, but Judaism and Christianity have it partly right and aren't entirely worthless. 3. Pluralism -- This one argues that all religions are pretty much equally true and that salvation (or whatever it is) is attainable by following any of the paths. (Certain paths might be better for certain individuals.) This option is often a minority heretical position in more exclusivist traditions, popular among esoterists. Pluralism is easier for polytheists who believe that many divinities exist and may believe that different ethnic groups have their own patron gods and goddesses. The right god to worship depends on who and where you are. Pluralism remains prevalent among Hindus, who tend to be monotheist these days, but still believe that the one God manifests in countless ways to different people. We see pluralist ideas in many Western believers in a deeper 'perennial tradition' underlying the conventional religions and among some of the more heterodox Muslim Sufis. The idea here is that people start out at the crudest levels of religion and then ascend into the heights, where all paths ultimately come together into one (a higher path not identifiable with any of the cruder conventional religions followed in what can be violent and intolerant ways by less spiritually-advanced people).
