Classification of religions

[GoodGame]

I'd look to sociology for classification, e.g.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociological_classifications_of_religious_movements

A cult would be mainly based on the charisma of a leader or the newness of a topic. Hinduism would definitely not be a cult. It may be synthetic and apparently less organized on the surface, but that doesn't make it a cult. It is highly institutional in its society so that alone should make it a religion.

 

[Ataxerxes]

One thought on a "religion" being a mythology.

To the ancient Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, the myths weren't that important to the religion. There was no central belief in the myths. They could have two completely different, mutually exclusive stories about the origins of a god or goddess and not be troubled by it.

In the Christian tradition, belief is important. Ancient religions didn't see it as important. If you went through the proper rituals, attended the festivals, you were a good, pious citizen. That was what was important for honoring the gods and ensuring their continuing favor. Whether or not you actually believed was seen as nearly irrelevant.

This was one of the things that made the Romans see the Christians as unreasonable. "We're only asking you to go through the motions to honor the state gods, you don't have to believe" was their attitude. Also, of course, to the Romans believing in the existence of one god didn't mean the others didn't exist.

Also, several religions are somewhat decentralized and varied. It's been mentioned that Hinduism is very decentralized, but different buddhists may have great variety in their belief as well. To some, it's an important religion, to others, it's mainly a philosophy. Even Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, have tremendous variety in beliefs. Unitarians and Catholics, although both Christians, don't have a lot in common.

 

[Traitorfish]

This was one of the things that made the Romans see the Christians as unreasonable. "We're only asking you to go through the motions to honor the state gods, you don't have to believe" was their attitude. Also, of course, to the Romans believing in the existence of one god didn't mean the others didn't exist.

In fact, the Romans pejoratively referred to the Christians as "atheists", seeing their denial of all-but-one god as tantamount to denying all gods. Hyperbolic, perhaps, but it shows the culture clash.