Would you agree or disagree with this statement, and why?

Question

You can learn more about any given religion in the world by reading on-topic books about it, rather than reading that religion's holy book.

Answer 1

I somewhat agree. It is relevant to find on-topic books and read as it gives a basic outline of what the religion is and believes. But to get an idea of the truth in the message you really need to read the message itself.

Answer 2

Holy Books are fine for getting an overall view but there is no better way to find out about a Religion than to attend and talk with several members of the Religion. each individual has their own viewpoints --good or bad and therefore any topic needs to be considered from as many ways as possible.

Answer 3

I would disagree. Reading on-topic books only gives you the authors spin on the way that religion operates. Reading the religions holy book allows you to form your own opinions and make your own decisions. Once I had done that, then I would read a couple of the on-topic books to see how my opinions measure up to the so-called experts.

Good question!

Answer 4

Disagree Strongly.

I've read the Qu'ran and I got much more out of it than anything else I read about Islam. Most of the west is too Biased for comment.

As for the Bible. One day I sat down and read all four gospels back to back. When you read them all together it is a much different story than any Christian would try to have you believe.

All those quotes taken out of context can be distorted in a myriad of ways Philosophically and Academically.

When you read the Gospels you'll also find some gaping holes in KEY AREAS. Not to mention that it only represents about 5% of the Life of Jesus. Still good reading...

Even a single line from The Original Buddah is more profound than everything written about him afterwords. He came up with many of the fish moralities that later got attributed to Christ.

Most religious texts are designed to stand alone in one way or another.

If you want to find God, he his hidden in between the lines of all of it. But reading other peoples thoughts can often be more of a distraction. I was especially disappointed with Thomas Aquinas and St. Augusting. I think no religious man ever got his religion more wrong than St. Paul for that matter. So even parts of the Bible are just poor commentary on the earlier writings.

The Gospels Rock!
So does the Qu'ran!

Answer 5

Agree and disagree. I think reading holy texts is important, and then reading those both in support and not in support (and everything in between) of the given text is the best way to learn. Then you can really see where the issues people disagree on are, and allows you to better interpret it objectively.

Answer 6

I agree because many holy books require a background of knowledge to be able to interpret meanings for understanding. I suppose many "on-topic" books need to be read because each one probably offers a unique perspective of the religions interpretation. :)

Answer 7

Somewhat agree. You have to take into account the author's take on that religion. I wouldn't take the views of a Christian author about Paganism. Nor would I take the views of a Middle Eastern Muslim's view on the Jewish faith. It would probably be best to examine books from several perspectives about a religion before thinking you understand the objectives of that faith.

)O(

Answer 8

Disagree. Reading on topic books only give you someone else's viewpoint. The proof is in the read of the original.

Answer 9

i agree..

because what's written in a holy book sometimes has abstract meaning that's hard to understand, and you might interprete it in wrong ways.

i think the best way to learn a religion is reading both on-topic and holy books.

Answer 10

I disagree....to learn about a particular religion..one should go straight to the source and not the short cut versions of another...tater makes a good point...