File talk:Prevailing world religions map.png

Muslim population in world — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4052:2391:9F06:0:0:1EA4:F0AD (talk) 11:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Eastern Christians
I think Armenians and Ethioopians are not Orthodox, but Monofisites. Lele giannoni (talk) 12:20, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, the Armenian Apostolic Church and Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church are not Eastern Orthodox but rather Oriental Orthodox, which are Non-Chalcedonian Miaphysite churches (which is often considered to be heretical Monophysitism by the Chalcedonian churches), they, and the other Oriental Churches, are known as "Orthodox". While I've felt that the characterisation of both groups as "Orthodox" seems disingenuous in glossing over significant theological differences, which are probably greater than those separating the Eastern and Western Churches, the perception (which is important, for example Hinduism includes a number of sects, some of which are more dissonant with each other than, say Islam is to Christianity!) of a kinship of the "Orthodox churches" might justify using the same colour on this one map, perhaps. But your general point is valid. --Varavour (talk) 23:57, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Haiti
Haiti is now 85 percent catholic — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.199.24.136 (talk) 19:07, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

China
This map is inaccurate. There is no religion called "Chinese Religion." If whoever made this map was referring to Confucianism, well, that is more of a philosophy than a religion, but it would still be more accurate to call it "Confucianism" rather than "Chinese Religion." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.241.10.115 (talk) 13:22, 10 December 2013 (UTC)


 * There are certain drawbacks to the approach the map takes, namely being that in much of East Asia the concept of "religion" does not exist in the absolutist and exclusive sense that it does in the Abrahamic faiths- you can't possibly be both a Christian and a Muslim but it's perfectly acceptable to be both a Buddhist and a follower of Shinto in Japan- although I will note that the Theravada Buddhism predominant in Southeast Asia seems, at least from what I've read, to be considerably less tolerant of syncretism than the Mahayana Buddhism common in East Asia.
 * Regardless, this does make saying who is what and drawing general characterisations fairly difficult, as does the rise of irreligion (particularly when no one counts who calls themselves what, as is in the case in Communist China). For example, I am perpetually baffled when reminded that there are more Catholics in The Netherlands than Protestants, (as should those familiar with its history), which, while accurate, create misleading impressions. (It also explains why Belgium hobbles along with its two ethnic groups, who have ceased caring about the factors (i.e. their Catholicism) that caused them to become an independent state in the first place. But I digress.
 * You are correct, however- there is no such thing as a singular "Chinese religion" that could be said to predominate in China, unless you wanted consider the Three teachings a proper religion. I would say the most obvious answer would be to stripe China with colours for "Mahayana Buddhism" and "Nature religion" (i.e. Chinese folk religion), as is done in Japan, and I suppose in Vietnam as well.
 * It really all boils down to perceptions, as I said before, with the example of the "Orthodox" churches being deemed a single group despite having fundamental theological differences. Hinduism includes a number of sects with a handful of common traits, the number of which is all but certainly fewer than those between, say, Islam and Christianity, with the different sects not even having a shared creator deity between them. Yet it is a religion, an "-ism", and is seen as such by most people. By that standard you could very consider there to be a "Chinese religion", but as a reasonably well-informed person but a non-expert in regards to Eastern religions, I generally have not heard of a "Chinese religion" as such, so I'd consider changing it to something along the lines of what I've suggested to be the best choice. --Varavour (talk) 23:57, 22 November 2014 (UTC)