[QatzelOk]

Why do people say "I am Lutheran" or "I am Jewish" rather than simply saying that they "follow" these texts?

It seems to attribute too much power to text - to say that reading one "transforms" you into one of the lead characters.

[Oxymoron]

Meaning you dont just follow it like a sports team, rather you become Judaism or Islam or Christianity etc

[Suska]

because no one's charging to get in or putting walls up between the bleachers and the field? It is at any rate fair to say religion is an ongoing process enacted by the adherents. Besides they are very closely linked to racial background and traditional culture so generally it is something one is born 'as'

[QatzelOk]

they are very closely linked to racial background and traditional culture so generally it is something one is born 'as'

But in the Quran, religion isn't something that is passed on from father to son. It is something that you yourself embrace regardless of family background, ethnicity or language.

Idolatry - on the other hand - is passed on from parents to offspring.

21:52 (Asad) when he said unto his father and his people, “What are these images to which you are so intensely devoted?”
21:53 (Asad) They answered: ‘‘We found our forefathers worshipping them.”
21:54 (Asad) Said he: “Indeed, you and your forefathers have obviously gone astray!”

Surah 21 (The Prophets)
Idolatry is passed on from parents to children.

30:22 (Asad) And among his wonders is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the diversity of your tongues and colours: for in this, behold, there are messages indeed for all who are possessed of [innate] knowledge!

Surah 30 (The Romans)
Multiculturalism and differences between nations are healthy and intelligent.

These two verses from the Quran point away from ethnicity/religion as a normal, healthy combination. If your religion was determined by your ethnicity, perhaps you need take another look at what kind of "religion" you really "are." Is your identity more important than philosophy? More important than the quest for truth?

[Prosthetic Conscience]

But in the Quran, religion isn't something that is passed on from father to son

So one follows the Quran, but one is Muslim. Because whatever the Quran may say, Muslim fathers insist on "bringing up their children as Muslims" - and forbid their daughters from marrying non-Muslims. It's not what the book says, it's what the members of the religion say that counts.

[Vigil of Reason]

Why do people say "I am Lutheran" or "I am Jewish" rather than simply saying that they "follow" these texts?

Lutheranism and Judaism are not texts, they are the following of texts or interpretations of texts - and not all religions are based on texts. I think when one says he is Lutheran, he means he "follows" Lutheranism, which is the following of an interpretation of the Bible.

[QatzelOk]

So one follows the Quran, but one is Muslim.

First of all, in this thread, I'm not arguing about the way things are. I'm arguing about the ways they ought to be.

Saying you "are" Jewish or Lutheran is like saying you "are" Spiderman or that you "are" the instruction manual that came with your microwave oven. It attaches your identity to a text that was written by someone else.

Imagine saying that you "are" the instructions that came with your microwave oven.

The manufacturers of that oven want you to read the instructions so that you're satisfied with the product, so that you'll buy more and tell your friends about it. A quickly broken microwave oven is BAD BUSINESS for the manufacturer.

So to identify with those instructions - to kill people and take their land so that your microwave oven instructions can be realized on a huge scale that affects all of humanity... is a form of survival-threatening ignorance vis-a-vis the nature of text. It's fake, whereas survival is real.

[Vigil of Reason]

I think this is only a semantic issue. When you say "I am Lutheran", you automatically mean you follow Lutheranism. This is different from being the microwave instruction, because the term "Lutheran" is an attribute placed onto you. That attribute comes from some place like a text or a crazy man, just like the instructions come from the microwave company. Or else you would say "I am Lutheranism" if you are to say "I am the microwave instructions".

[sploop!]

I am an Atheist. By definition, I am not following anything. Does this help?

[Vigil of Reason]

I am an Atheist. By definition, I am not following anything. Does this help?

You follow the non-following of things.

[sploop!]

That sounds a bit Zen to me...

[QatzelOk]

I think this is only a semantic issue.

Semantic issues can be very important.

If people recognized that they simply follow (or don't follow) texts, then a lot of real pain could be avoided.

People believe they internalize the texts that were written for them. Relgious birthright comes from the semantic understanding of a text as being "transformative" - even if that text was read (and followed) by one of your distant ancestors.

When a person gets an abortion, she is NOT following Roman Catholicism. For her to say "I'm Catholic" makes no sense.

Likewise, when a person says, "I'm a secular Jew," this makes absolutely no sense. It's like saying "I'm a tennis player who's never played tennis."

[Suska]

I somewhat agree, this issue seems to have a relative in the scientific dialect. We moderns are ceasing to write in objective terms, we express as truth only what we personally observed, and attribute our citations. So it becomes less proper to say things like "such and such is true" and more proper to say things like "our experience suggests such and such"

[Vigil of Reason]

When a person gets an abortion, she is NOT following Roman Catholicism. For her to say "I'm Catholic" makes no sense.

It makes no sense not because she said "she is ...", but because she does not truly understand what the "..." is. Not everyone speaks as accurately as you might do.

[Lucky Strike]

It seems odd to me to take this reductivist stance towards religion, e.g., "it's only a text." If someone called themself a Bibleist and you thought that was weird, I might agree; however, there's much more to Christianity (and other religions) than their texts alone. There's a community, a tradition, an organization - all things to which one may belong.

[Todd D.]

When a person gets an abortion, she is NOT following Roman Catholicism. For her to say "I'm Catholic" makes no sense.

Not necessarily. Remember that the first Pope wasn't exactly a model of strength and wisdom, for he denied Christ 3 times before the man was even crucified. Despite what the holier-than-thou stereotype is, Christianity's main tenet, what the entire faith is built upon, is that you are weak, you are flawed, and you ARE going to mess up.

Now, it's obviously true that Catholicism views Abortion as a grave sin, and that by getting one, you are faltering in your walk, but it doesn't follow that it automatically excludes you from "Being Catholic". For that, you would have to hold to a theological belief that is heretical within Catholicism. Saying "I'm a Catholic who doesn't believe in the Virgin Birth" would be a better example.

[QatzelOk]

it's obviously true that Catholicism views Abortion as a grave sin

Actually, Catholicism doesn't view anything. It's the word for the adherence to Catholic Doctrine, which means "following" it.

If you stop following the doctrine, it's senseless to suggest you embody it with your being.

You could say, "I support Catholicism, but don't practice it." But "I am" would be much too strong if you had intentionally broken one of the Pope's big rules.

[Todd D.]

You're absolutely wrong.

If you are Catholic, it means that you are a member of the Catholic Church, which means you BELIEVE what the Church believes (at least on the core issues). It doesn't mean you ALWAYS follow it to the letter, or that you're never going to falter, never going to mess up. Again, within Christianity, it's downright GUARANTEED that you are. To suggest that you stop being a Christian because you slip up is completely missing the point of the faith.

[QatzelOk]

It doesn't mean you ALWAYS follow it to the letter, or that you're never going to falter, never going to mess up.

Aborting a baby isn't simply "faltering" if you're Roman Catholic. It's murder.

Unless you have ideas of your own about the morality of killing unborn feotuses. Which is fine by me. But it's not Roman Catholic. You can't claim to "be" something that you reject on such a primary moral level with your actions. It's like saying you "are" vegetarian, but you just ate a ham sandwich.

You can claim to have followed Roman Catholicism for a while, but to have changed what you follow. Which, once again, is fine by me.

Just don't say you "are." You can't "be" an ideology. But you can follow a religious school of thought.

[Muslim]

Why do people say "I am Lutheran" or "I am Jewish" rather than simply saying that they "follow" these texts?

A matter of word efficiency. To save space and writing/typing time.

And, by the way, we don't follow texts, we follow religions. Religions are not just texts.