I'll change up the format with two of my own quotes, but also will answer some of the bullet points fro the template:
Not really a fan of religions that say "Here is the one and only true prophet, if you do not embrace him unquestioningly in this one, singular chance you are given at life, you are doomed for all of eternity", so that's basically all Abrahamic religions.
When I was 12 or 13 and was taking the classes for confirmation in the Lutheran Church, I openly challenged my pastor on this during the class. He seemed amused by my fervent questioning "But why? But WHY?", but also a bit happy that he was at least getting some response from our small group of five pre-teens/teenagers.
I just couldn't fathom why God would basically condemn huge swathes of his children, whom he supposedly loves, just because they happened to be born before he chose to send his prophet/savior down to Earth, or lived someplace remote and out of reach of salvation. Furthermore, could God not understand that people will defend their own pre-existing belief system against some interloper who claims to have The Word? Why condemn them for that? And finally, why is it that you can be a horrible person and violate so many of his commandments, but be saved through faith alone, while someone who was a good person and lived a life in accordance with the ideal then be condemned for simply not believing?
I also find the Catholic Church's idea of a purgatory for Virtuous Pagans to be unsatisfactory, mostly for the same reasons above. If this is how God actually is, then God is an as*hole for creating a system where so many of his own children are set up to fail from the very beginning, through no fault of their own but God's fault. I also find the Muslim idea that Christians and Jews are People of the Book and thus get a chance for a "get out of jail free" card when they die and go before the gates of Heaven and Mohammed is like, "So yeah, you guys were 95% of the way there, here's the full truth, do you accept this or not?" and you have a chance at salvation. How arbitrary is this?
It's straightforward in terms of consistency (I don't "church shop") and yet complex in terms of faith: raised in a dual-nationality, multilingual, dual-religion household. Father and mother agreed to have us raised between both Lutheranism (ELCA) and Brahmo Hinduism.
Went to church regularly and was baptized, also attended every major event at the local Hindu temple.
Both of my parents have always given us a lot of space and freedom when it comes to religion, and have never tried to force something onto us. However, my mother was by far the strongest and dominating influence.
We still keep traditions on both sides, but my mom was far more interested in the actual "instilling values" part compared to my father, and is also much better at keeping Bengali Hindu traditions, e.g. only eating vegetarian after someone passed away (which is something that I do myself now that I live alone). I still celebrate Christian holidays such as Advent, St Martin's Day, Christmas, Good Friday, Easter, All Saints' Day, and Epiphany, but this is also just a factor of now living in a country where these days are taken seriously by the public.
At this point I don't really see any point in identifying as a Christian. It has done really nothing for me, either in finding meaning in the world or daily life. It means nothing to me, other than holidays I organize dinner parties for or go light candles in a cemetery. In retrospect, it's a huge mistake IMO for churches to confirm people so young, since I did not understand at all why I should have been confirmed in the Lutheran Church and was clearly pressured by my father's and the congregation's social expectations.
But I can't really identify as a Hindu, despite finding far more meaning and relevance in the teachings and values, since I was never really immersed in it as a child, can't speak Bengali, and Hinduism is a very place-specific religion. Furthermore, it is very clear that many of my family members, whether they are still back in Calcutta or are in the West, are stereotypical of the hybrid British-Indian-educated Bengali middle class, in that they repeat the stories of Hinduism to their children but clearly don't truly believe in it themselves (they are probably closer in actual beliefs to Unitarian Universalism), and yet they are very much about keeping traditions and observing certain holidays (much as Unitarians still keep certain Christian traditions like Sunday worship).
I don't really identify as anything, simply because I've never needed to. If asked, I just say that my parents agreed to raise us between Lutheranism and Brahmoism, and just leave it at that. I do believe there is *some* kind of higher power, but I don't really think much beyond that and just try to be a good person.
: Idk, and tbh idrc. I like to think there is something but if there isn't, that's also comforting in a sense
Worship: only drop in to church / temple on the big days, go through phases of trying to go regularly and not showing up at all for months at a time. I do take both Christian and Bengali Hindu religious days pretty seriously, and use it as an opportunity to pause, reflect, and read/re-read the meaning and importance of certain holidays. Even though Sweden is a very secular country, it's still fundamentally a Christian country, and many people take the holidays very seriously and do things like go to church for the community and tradition, and do nice community-oriented things such as lighting candles in the graveyards on All Saints' Day. It's much easier to take traditions seriously when you live in an environment where there's a stronger sense of community and tradition.
Ghosts, spirits, angels, and demons: don't believe in these at all
Spiritual objects: do the objects themselves have any power? No. But do they have spiritual
value? Yes, absolutely.
Religious law: Sort of, but it stems more from personal values that I don't fully attribute to religion. Nothing is explicitly religious about eating vegetarian between the time someone dies and their funeral, it's also a region-specific thing. Some things, like not having an issue with fornication/promiscuity but believing that adultery is a severe wrong against your partner stem also from a principle of harm and breaking trust, but can also be religious.
Spreading the word: No. Perpetuating values is good, but those can exist outside of religion as well. Personally I recoil from anyone of any other religion openly soliciting people to try to convert them, whether it's Evangelical missionaries going to Central America, Hindu fundamentalists trying to convert Muslims and Christians in India, Muslims trying to convert Christians or other religious minorities in the MENA region, etc. Something about it is so off-putting to me. If you set up shop outside of public transit and just smile at people, say hello, offer literature, and strike up conversation with people passing my, no problem. If you make yourself available and people come to you, that's fine. Also please stop putting literature and postcards in my mailbox, I get excited when I have mail and dislike the waste of paper.
