NationStates Jolt Archive

Not the religion you believe in, but the one that gets it closest to the truth. Please explain your reasoning, and also specify if your choice was not on the poll.

As a Christian, I chose Judaism because our groups share many of the same books and life philosophies, we both worship and revere the one God, and we are both awaiting the Messiah to come (or return) to the world.

So… the religion apart from one's own? Is that what you're saying?

i'm athiest/a-religious but a pacifist hippie... buddhism seems to get pretty close to what i believe in

then again christianity would, at its purest level, as well... ish

Hmm… not sure what to go for. :(

Other than my own? Tough call between Baha'i and Hinduism ... gotta go with Baha'i.

Well, I started this thread because of a story one of my history teachers told our class. Please, if anyone has more knowledge on or confirmation of this event, post away:

Some Russo-Slavic group of people (I have no idea which one; again, confirmation from anyone knowledgeable would be great) were trying to adopt a state religion. They invited Jewish, Christian, and Muslim representatives to make their cases.

Then, they asked each group which religion was the closest to the truth, out of the other two groups. The Christian and Muslim representatives both answered that Judaism was closest, so the state went with Judaism.

Sufi'ism.

Not the religion you believe in, but the one that gets it closest to the truth. Please explain your reasoning, and also specify if your choice was not on the poll.

As a Christian, I chose Judaism because our groups share many of the same books and life philosophies, we both worship and revere the one God, and we are both awaiting the Messiah to come (or return) to the world.
Christianity, because that is the first religion on Earth, all others came years later, and Jesus actually lived during the times of the birth of Christianity, no matter how many people disagree with that or me, it's gotta be closest to the truth - we all refer to our lord as God, even Allah as God, we all refer to Heaven and Hell in every religion. Christianity was first, then Judaism, wich is more of the brother of Christianity.
If people think it's Islam, that's only because of it's Jihad and too many religous rules, like praying 5 times a day, the pilgramage, etc.
Religion doesn't need too many religous rules and customs. That only shows that it's a devoted religion, but not the TRUE religion.

Actually, it was either Sikh or Hinduism (my memory fades) that was the first... by about 1600 years. Also i'm pretty sure that judaism came before christianity. Islam came a few hundred years later.

Christianity, because that is the first religion on Earth, all others came years later, and Jesus actually lived during the times of the birth of Christianity, no matter how many people disagree with that or me, it's gotta be closest to the truth - we all refer to our lord as God, even Allah as God, we all refer to Heaven and Hell in every religion. Christianity was first, then Judaism, wich is more of the brother of Christianity.
If people think it's Islam, that's only because of it's Jihad and too many religous rules, like praying 5 times a day, the pilgramage, etc.
Religion doesn't need too many religous rules and customs. That only shows that it's a devoted religion, but not the TRUE religion.

Wasn't Jesus Jewish???

Not the religion you believe in, but the one that gets it closest to the truth. Please explain your reasoning, and also specify if your choice was not on the poll.

As a Christian, I chose Judaism because our groups share many of the same books and life philosophies, we both worship and revere the one God, and we are both awaiting the Messiah to come (or return) to the world.

All religion is rubbish. Fairy stories are the realm of children, there should be no room for religion in the lives of grown-ups.

Not including atheism, which isn't really a religion, but a belief, (to me, following a religion involves following a sort of set of rules), I think The Church of Satan is the most accurate. Contrary to what people think, the C of S is not a church of satan-worshippers. It's a group of atheists that have joined together to recognise the animal nature and cardinal pleasures of the human race. The one thing I don't agree with in satanism is injuring others (strictly adults, as Satanism doesn't condone the harm of children) that stand in a satanist's way.
In truth, it's a bit of a joke, but it's on the right track, as it recognises that most religions involve rules that supress human pleasures, such as sex and eating excessively.

I'd say atheism because I prefer not to believe or make choices without evidence (I'm the person who shouts and ticks the box for "no religion" to sound clever and so I'm never proven wrong ;) )

Christianity, because that is the first religion on Earth, all others came years later, and Jesus actually lived during the times of the birth of Christianity, no matter how many people disagree with that or me, it's gotta be closest to the truth - we all refer to our lord as God, even Allah as God, we all refer to Heaven and Hell in every religion. Christianity was first, then Judaism, wich is more of the brother of Christianity.

Judaism was arounf for at least 4,000 years before the man we cal JC came on the scene.

If people think it's Islam, that's only because of it's Jihad and too many religous rules, like praying 5 times a day, the pilgramage, etc.
Religion doesn't need too many religous rules and customs. That only shows that it's a devoted religion, but not the TRUE religion.

And even the Jewish faith is modern by relation to some.

Learn a bit about history and religion, them maybe you would not make such silly mistakes.

I put Islam because although I am agnostic, I think Islam makes the most sense when it comes to what God would do.

Christianity, because that is the first religion on Earth, all others came years later, and Jesus actually lived during the times of the birth of Christianity, no matter how many people disagree with that or me, it's gotta be closest to the truth - we all refer to our lord as God, even Allah as God, we all refer to Heaven and Hell in every religion. Christianity was first, then Judaism, wich is more of the brother of Christianity.
If people think it's Islam, that's only because of it's Jihad and too many religous rules, like praying 5 times a day, the pilgramage, etc.
Religion doesn't need too many religous rules and customs. That only shows that it's a devoted religion, but not the TRUE religion.

First off, Christianity is a branch of Judaism, or at least began that way. Secondly, even before Judaism, there was religion in Ancient Greece, Rome, the Indus valley, Mesopotamia, North America (with the aboriginals), and many, many other ancient civilisations.

First off, Christianity is a branch of Judaism, or at least began that way. Secondly, even before Judaism, there was religion in Ancient Greece, Rome, the Indus valley, Mesopotamia, North America (with the aboriginals), and many, many other ancient civilisations.

Yes, it certainly wasn't the first in existence. Christians can agree that out truth extends to the beginning of time, but that's based off a belief of continuity with Judaism.

That's kind of why I put the first four choices in that order (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Baha'i). If I'm not mistaken, each claims to be a continuation of everything before it.

Christianity, because that is the first religion on Earth, all others came years later, and Jesus actually lived during the times of the birth of Christianity, no matter how many people disagree with that or me, it's gotta be closest to the truth - we all refer to our lord as God, even Allah as God, we all refer to Heaven and Hell in every religion. Christianity was first, then Judaism, wich is more of the brother of Christianity.
If people think it's Islam, that's only because of it's Jihad and too many religous rules, like praying 5 times a day, the pilgramage, etc.
Religion doesn't need too many religous rules and customs. That only shows that it's a devoted religion, but not the TRUE religion.

So your a strict by-the-Bible creationist?

I voted Christain, but sometimes, I think it has quite a few rules, especially if a person happens to be Catholic. Some people could argue that Chrisitanity is a pseduo-monthesim, just like your Jesus was Christian arguemnt, with God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost, not to mention all their little helpers of saints, angels, siraphims, etc. Kinda like Hindusim.

Jesus lived with a bunch of Jews. Christianity would be just a little sect of Judaism if it wasn't for St. Paul, who walked all around the Roman Empire converting the gentiles. Chrisitanity WAS NOT THE FIRST RELIGION. Whether its the truth or not is for all individuals to decide. I think all forms of nature worship existed way before man had enough freetime to create a religion like Christianity, Judaism, etc.

Meh, looks like I just contradicted myself there, if you look at it right :D

Yes, it certainly wasn't the first in existence. Christians can agree that out truth extends to the beginning of time, but that's based off a belief of continuity with Judaism.

That's kind of why I put the first four choices in that order (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Baha'i). If I'm not mistaken, each claims to be a continuation of everything before it.

Yeah, but everyone hates the Baha'i for some reason.

Well, I started this thread because of a story one of my history teachers told our class. Please, if anyone has more knowledge on or confirmation of this event, post away:

Some Russo-Slavic group of people (I have no idea which one; again, confirmation from anyone knowledgeable would be great) were trying to adopt a state religion. They invited Jewish, Christian, and Muslim representatives to make their cases.

Then, they asked each group which religion was the closest to the truth, out of the other two groups. The Christian and Muslim representatives both answered that Judaism was closest, so the state went with Judaism.

FACT ATTACK! :eek:
You're referring to the Khazars, who where a Turkic ethnic group/civilization (not Slavic!) that inhabited Central Asia and parts of Eastern Europe after the Hunnic migrations. They where, like all the Mongol-Turkic/Altaic groups, originally shamanistic, but their rulers and nobility converted to Judaism around about the year 800, mainly for political reasons. This was because the west Turkic kingdoms where positioned geographically between the powerful Christian kingdoms of Europe and Russia, and the expansionist Muslim kingdoms of the Middle East and Central Asia. The Khazars considered that Judaism was a safe way for them to preserve their independence without causing undue concern to either powerful neighbour - which would have happened if they had converted to either Islam or Christianity, or stayed pagan. Despite this however their dominance of the region eventually lapsed with the rise of the Rus and Bulgar kingdoms. Most of the people converted to Islam and formed part of the population of the Turkic kingdom that is now known as Kazakhstan. However based on some contemporary accounts and genetic evidence, some scholars theorize that a small part of the population remained Jewish and went on to form the modern grouping of European Jews now known as Ashkenazic Jews.

/end pedantry

I cant decide, all of them contain elements of the truth and i particularly look to the top 5 + Sikhism (which isn’t up there). Generally anything that promotes peace and equality is good, although all religions can be taken to extremes, which is generally bad. Baha'i is probably closest as it agrees on all religions being from the same source but i don’t like the idea of making anyone be the same or the idea of the whole world being let by a council with the Baha'i at the head.

I'm confused, but that's OK because I'm old. Are you asking which religion is the closest to mine, or are you asking which religion other than mine is closest to the truth? There is a very big difference between the two questions.

If I am asked which religion other than mine is closest to the truth, and I believe my religion to be the true religion, then the answer must be none.

If on the other hand you are asking, which other religion has a belief system closest to mine the answer would be entirely different.

Christianity, because that is the first religion on Earth, all others came years later...snip...Christianity was first, then Judaism, wich is more of the brother of Christianity....snip...

Those statements show you have very little knowledge of history or religion. Even Judaism, which came before Christianity (remember Christ was a Jew) was not the first religion.

FACT ATTACK! :eek:
snip
/end pedantry

Thank you for that fact attack! The pedantry was not only welcome, but invited.

I'm confused, but that's OK because I'm old. Are you asking which religion is the closest to mine, or are you asking which religion other than mine is closest to the truth? There is a very big difference between the two questions.

If I am asked which religion other than mine is closest to the truth, and I believe my religion to be the true religion, then the answer must be none.

If on the other hand you are asking, which other religion has a belief system closest to mine the answer would be entirely different.

It is awkward... if you believe that your religion is the truth (which I think all people should) and second-places don't count, then you really cannot answer.

So, yeah, I think the second one is what I was going for. Which religion/belief is closest to your belief (i.e. the truth).

Flying Spaghetti Monsterism (www.venganza.org)
obviously the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster

All religion is rubbish. Fairy stories are the realm of children, there should be no room for religion in the lives of grown-ups.

Okay. Having said that, I sincerely hope you didn't vote "Atheist", considering that is what you seem to be yourself. :)

Nothing close up there for you?

Christianity, because that is the first religion on Earth, all others came years later, and Jesus actually lived during the times of the birth of Christianity, no matter how many people disagree with that or me, it's gotta be closest to the truth - we all refer to our lord as God, even Allah as God, we all refer to Heaven and Hell in every religion. Christianity was first, then Judaism, wich is more of the brother of Christianity.
If people think it's Islam, that's only because of it's Jihad and too many religous rules, like praying 5 times a day, the pilgramage, etc.
Religion doesn't need too many religous rules and customs. That only shows that it's a devoted religion, but not the TRUE religion.

Learn history. Christianity is not particularly old. Several Pagan religions (the ancient Egyptians and the ancient Greeks come to mind) are older, in some cases much older.

Jesus was a Jew, learn your own religion, please. Judaism is extremely old, at least a couple thousand years older than Christianity. Hinduism is older as well, I think, and though I forget its name, I'm sure there was a religion in China already around the time Christianity started.

Me, I'd like to believe my religion is closest to the truth, but I really have no idea.

Hinduism is older as well, I think, and though I forget its name, I'm sure there was a religion in China already around the time Christianity started.
Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism (if you wish to concider it a religion) were all in place in China before the beginning of Christianity.

Flying Spaghetti Monsterism (www.venganza.org)
obviously the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster

How could I forget!

The mountain...the trees...the midget! It all seems so OBVIOUS now!

I voted Atheism because it's really the only option that is backed by scientific evidence/logic to a certain point (maybe perhaps excluding Buddhism). As far as I know, the religions you put up there are just beliefs from books or someone's word (prophecy, as you might call it). I tend not to believe too many people from the ancheint times when they try to explain the origins of life. Seeing as they have a very small ability to experiment, and these were the same people that claimed the Earth was flat and it was the center of the Universe. So yeah.

According to the history of most religions; I could start a new religion claiming J.R.R. Tolkien wrote the word of God and everything in The Lord of the Rings is true.

I chose other. I don't really have a religion now but that doesn't stop me from researching them. I am indebted to people telling the Christian guy that Christianity, hell, ANY monotheistic religon are the new kids on the block. I was actually raised UCC (United Church of Christ) which is an open minded liberal denomination.
I'll give everyone a story. The Czar(forgot his name) of Russia was decided what the state religion would be for his country. He had narrowed it down to Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism. When he found the latter two abstained from alcohol, he chose Christianity.
I didn't make that story up. I got it from The World's Religions by Huston Smith.
-Bye
p.s. Take this, fundamentalists!! :sniper:

I voted Atheism because it's really the only option that is backed by scientific evidence/logic to a certain point (maybe perhaps excluding Buddhism).

Atheism is not backed by scientific evidence, although neither is any other religion, we are in the dark when trying to decide whether or not there is a god/heaven/whatever. You may contend that it's backed up by logic, but please explain to me how logic led you to not believe in god. You can either believe, or not believe, there is no system of logic that can determine which way is truth.

Christianity, because that is the first religion on Earth, all others came years later, and Jesus actually lived during the times of the birth of Christianity, no matter how many people disagree with that or me, it's gotta be closest to the truth - we all refer to our lord as God, even Allah as God, we all refer to Heaven and Hell in every religion. Christianity was first, then Judaism, wich is more of the brother of Christianity.
If people think it's Islam, that's only because of it's Jihad and too many religous rules, like praying 5 times a day, the pilgramage, etc.
Religion doesn't need too many religous rules and customs. That only shows that it's a devoted religion, but not the TRUE religion.
lololololololololol

All religion is rubbish. Fairy stories are the realm of children, there should be no room for religion in the lives of grown-ups.Considering that I think of Budhism as more of a philosophy rather than a religion... yeah I tend to agree with ya.

If it counts as a religion, my beliefs are probably closest to Epicureanism. They even believed in atoms years before they were demonstrated to exist.

If it counts as a religion, my beliefs are probably closest to Epicureanism. They even believed in atoms years before they were demonstrated to exist.
Hell Yeah! Now we're talking... I'm a huge fan and have been for years.

I decided to go with Baha'i because it is one of the few religions that goes out of its way to respect all other religions. The ultimate goal of Baha'i seems to bring everyone together by viewing diversity as an enriching quality rather than a divisive one.

I can't really say I would call Atheism a form of religion, anymore than I would call anarchy a form of government.

Christianity, because that is the first religion on Earth, all others came years later, and Jesus actually lived during the times of the birth of Christianity, no matter how many people disagree with that or me, it's gotta be closest to the truth - we all refer to our lord as God, even Allah as God, we all refer to Heaven and Hell in every religion. Christianity was first, then Judaism, wich is more of the brother of Christianity.
If people think it's Islam, that's only because of it's Jihad and too many religous rules, like praying 5 times a day, the pilgramage, etc.
Religion doesn't need too many religous rules and customs. That only shows that it's a devoted religion, but not the TRUE religion.

How is Christianity the first religion on Earth? I don't see any cave paintings of Jesus. And if you think that Adam and Eve were literally the first humans, how exactly were they christians? Some religions don't have a god, heaven, or hell. Mohammed lived during the birth of his religion. There's more historical proof for Mohammed than Jesus, if historical proof is what you need. The Buddha and Lao-Tse (possibly) also lived durning the birth of their religions...

Not including atheism, which isn't really a religion, but a belief,

No, atheism is a *lack of* belief. "a"=no, "theism"=belief in god.

Oh, I answered buddhism, because I'm an atheist, because there are atheist sects of buddhism.

I define religion as a belief that is the primary influence in how you live your life. Under this definition, I think atheism would fit.

Yes, it certainly wasn't the first in existence. Christians can agree that out truth extends to the beginning of time, but that's based off a belief of continuity with Judaism.

That's kind of why I put the first four choices in that order (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Baha'i). If I'm not mistaken, each claims to be a continuation of everything before it.

So does Hinduism...Brahmin is everything. Yahweh, Jesus, Allah...all can be considered manifestations of the one Brahmin, which is all-pervasive.

I define religion as a belief that is the primary influence in how you live your life. Under this definition, I think atheism would fit.

Well then I define apples as an orange citrus fruit. Under this definition, an apple would fit the description of an orange.

No, I'm serious. This is why we have definitions for words, so we don't get into semantic squabbling.

wikipedia defines religion like this: "Religion (see etymology below) —sometimes used interchangeably with faith or belief system—is commonly defined as belief concerning the supernatural, sacred, or divine, and the moral codes, practices, values, institutions and rituals associated with such belief. In its broadest sense some have defined it as the sum total of answers given to explain humankind's relationship with the universe."

Merriam-Webster says this:

Main Entry: re·li·gion
Pronunciation: ri-'li-j&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back -- more at RELY
1 a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

4 might fit your definition, but faith is still an important component. There is no faith in atheism. There is no ardor with atheism. Or at least, ardor is not a necessary component. Besides, when discussing religion, or what is or isn't a religion, we'd tend to stick to 1 or 2 as far as dictionary definitions go, because with 4, anything can be a reilgion, which is clearly not true. We have to make the distinction between a religion and a personal philosophy or ethical code that is entirely based in the secular, material realm and not concerned with anything supernatural.

4 might fit your definition, but faith is still an important component. There is no faith in atheism.

Atheism involves faith that there is no deity. There is faith that the natural equals the supernatural. There is faith that your senses are reliable for perceiving what truth there is, if any.

There is no ardor with atheism. Or at least, ardor is not a necessary component.

I have met *several* ardent atheists. I have also met several self-proclaimed members of a "religion" who don't seem to have any ardor about it at all. I don't count something as a real religion if the person is not practicing it because I focus more on that "commitment" or "devotion" part of the definitions you have posted here.

Besides, when discussing religion, or what is or isn't a religion, we'd tend to stick to 1 or 2 as far as dictionary definitions go, because with 4, anything can be a reilgion, which is clearly not true. We have to make the distinction between a religion and a personal philosophy or ethical code that is entirely based in the secular, material realm and not concerned with anything supernatural.

See, I believe that anything *can* be a religion. Belief and philosophy and religion and spirituality and cult and code... they all equate to the same thing.

A lifestyle based on faith in solely the secular, material realm. Another religion.

Atheism involves faith that there is no deity. There is faith that the natural equals the supernatural. There is faith that your senses are reliable for perceiving what truth there is, if any.



I have met *several* ardent atheists. I have also met several self-proclaimed members of a "religion" who don't seem to have any ardor about it at all. I don't count something as a real religion if the person is not practicing it because I focus more on that "commitment" or "devotion" part of the definitions you have posted here.



See, I believe that anything *can* be a religion. Belief and philosophy and religion and spirituality and cult and code... they all equate to the same thing.

A lifestyle based on faith in solely the secular, material realm. Another religion.

In my own atheism, there is no faith because I can't be so arrogant as to presume I have the final word on life, the universe, and everything. But even so, if I was absolutely sure that there was no god, I'd still hesitate to call that a religion. I see the supernatural as crucial to calling something a religion. Some forms of Buddhism may not have a god, but they have a belief in the afterlife, a supernatural law of moral causality (karma), and a divine code of conduct (dharma). Confucianism, Marxism, atheism, science, not religions.

As for having faith in the senses, I do believe that the world that I see exists and is not illusion. My senses are my only window on the universe, and in order to function, I have to work under the assumption that my window is actually a window and not a television screen, for instance. But I do understand that when I see "a tree," I in fact see "a tree," and not "billions of cells" or "trillions of atoms" or countless quarks, or superstrings at an even more fundamental level, if that theory is correct. But you go to war with the army you have (forgive the Rumsfeldian idiom). Senses--and things that enhance them from the Hubble telescope to scanning tunneling microscopes--are all we got, and I will attempt to incorporate new information as it comes along. I barely think that can be described as having faith.

But of course, I'm arguing from a personal perspective, and what works for me may not work for you.

ok, this is really just sad. In the end no one knows anything and far as I am concerned strait to hell with the non-dead people that say they do because in what from what I know, I am not a complete asshole that will say, hey I'm right and there is a god believe or... well or else and same goes for the no god deal. Really if there is a god then I am one of those who has consolidated the idea of going to hell, why you might ask? well there are many people who are dead and had disdainful beliefs far as the rest of the world is concerned so they obviously will be there and I look at it this way, at least I will know some people right ;)

ok, this is really just sad. In the end no one knows anything and far as I am concerned strait to hell with the non-dead people that say they do because in what from what I know, I am not a complete asshole that will say, hey I'm right and there is a god believe or... well or else and same goes for the no god deal. Really if there is a god then I am one of those who has consolidated the idea of going to hell, why you might ask? well there are many people who are dead and had disdainful beliefs far as the rest of the world is concerned so they obviously will be there and I look at it this way, at least I will know some people right ;)

But what if hell isn't a place where you go and congregate with the other heathens, but instead you are isolated, alone for all eternity? (Geez, I'm just feeling argumentative tonight...)

Twenty-seven votes for atheism thus far! We must have a lot of agnostics in the house.

Sun worship

None.

Other. I consider myself agnostic, but I guess if I had to pick, I'd be closer to Shintoism than Atheism. Not the whole ancestor worship part, but the "everything has some measure of 'spiritual' power" part. I believe that there is no "god" in either the mono- or polytheistic sence, but more than just what we can measure.

Not the religion you believe in, but the one that gets it closest to the truth. Please explain your reasoning, and also specify if your choice was not on the poll.

As a Christian, I chose Judaism because our groups share many of the same books and life philosophies, we both worship and revere the one God, and we are both awaiting the Messiah to come (or return) to the world.

The answer would be none of the above.

I am an Agnostic.

Twenty-seven votes for atheism thus far! We must have a lot of agnostics in the house.

Athiests are not agnostics.

Its funny how being an agnostic is not considered a belief. what a worthless topic.

How come Islam got 5 votes.

Islam is closer to Christianity than Judaism.

The Muslims have a savor and a god just like the Christians.

Judaism has a god and a savor that hasn't come yet.

Atheism involves faith that there is no deity.


Not true.

There is faith that the natural equals the supernatural.


Not true.


There is faith that your senses are reliable for perceiving what truth there is, if any.


Not true.


Well done. 3 swings, 3 misses. Got to be some kind of record, no?

I chose other. I don't really have a religion now but that doesn't stop me from researching them. I am indebted to people telling the Christian guy that Christianity, hell, ANY monotheistic religon are the new kids on the block. I was actually raised UCC (United Church of Christ) which is an open minded liberal denomination.
I'll give everyone a story. The Czar(forgot his name) of Russia was decided what the state religion would be for his country. He had narrowed it down to Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism. When he found the latter two abstained from alcohol, he chose Christianity.
I didn't make that story up. I got it from The World's Religions by Huston Smith.
-Bye
p.s. Take this, fundamentalists!! :sniper:


The Tzar of Russia was Orthodox Christian-as was every other after he did the Russofication(wrong word propbably). The church believed that the Tzars(th Romanovs, the last of whom was Nicholas) was chosen by God to rule Russia.

Irony demands that I say "agnosticism".

Not the religion you believe in, but the one that gets it closest to the truth. Please explain your reasoning, and also specify if your choice was not on the poll.

As a Christian, I chose Judaism because our groups share many of the same books and life philosophies, we both worship and revere the one God, and we are both awaiting the Messiah to come (or return) to the world.


The one where I am God...mwahahaha


But really, most major religions are all quite similar, all contain sereval highly noticable patterns running through them. One of them is probably nearest the truth....Most religions ( at the very core of their doctrine, I'm NOT saying the religions followers are) are racist, sexist and amusingly homophobic but why would any religion discriminate so much against people? Maybe because...their is no God :eek:
But who really knows.

I'm a religion whore, and I chose Pure Land Buddhism(particularly). Ya know, cause it has the whole "ouchness" etc. Atheism was a close third, but since I'm kinda atheist right now, I couldn't choose it. :(

as a jew i chose islam, which i see as much closer than to judaism than christianity.

Not the religion you believe in, but the one that gets it closest to the truth. Please explain your reasoning, and also specify if your choice was not on the poll.

As a Christian, I chose Judaism because our groups share many of the same books and life philosophies, we both worship and revere the one God, and we are both awaiting the Messiah to come (or return) to the world.
LOL. Funny thread.

The Muslims have a savor and a god just like the Christians.


No we don't.

There is only Allah. No son, no partner, no messiah king.

Just like the Jews, we believe salvation is decided by the individual, not by Santa Claus.

Some definitions of atheism ('weak' atheism) are basically the same as agnosticism. I'm an agnostic but work on the principle that it's rational to asusme there is no deity, so I'd say I could be called an atheist.

Therefore I'll vote for Buddhism: it doesn't involve any kind of worship, has the fewest number of supernatural beliefs and has pretty good philosophy.

All religion is rubbish. Fairy stories are the realm of children, there should be no room for religion in the lives of grown-ups.

Please dont flame. Give reasons for your belief that are examined and intelectual

Wasn't Jesus Jewish???
yes, but Christianity wasn't formed. He believed himself to be the son of god.

Other: all religions are this same, esentially. I just don't care about cosmic (in countrary to pleromic) teachings...

Christianity, because that is the first religion on Earth, all others came years later, and Jesus actually lived during the times of the birth of Christianity, no matter how many people disagree with that or me, it's gotta be closest to the truth - we all refer to our lord as God, even Allah as God, we all refer to Heaven and Hell in every religion. Christianity was first, then Judaism, wich is more of the brother of Christianity.
If people think it's Islam, that's only because of it's Jihad and too many religous rules, like praying 5 times a day, the pilgramage, etc.
Religion doesn't need too many religous rules and customs. That only shows that it's a devoted religion, but not the TRUE religion.

Whaaaaaaaaaat?? You mean to tell me that you think Christianity is older than Judaism? That's why Jesus was a Jew, right??

*head explodes*

yes, but Christianity wasn't formed. He believed himself to be the son of god.
Which is why Yeshua ben Yosef referred to himself as the Son of Man, right?

I picked buddhism because it emphasizes the individual's ability and responsibility to find their own way to keep to a moral path and to experience and understand spirituality/divinity. I think that's the central secret to all religions (some hide it more than others). Buddhism has lots of rituals and sects but isn't dependent on them and doesn't insist on them. It works as a philosophy, too, for those not spiritually inclined. You can even have another religion and also be a buddhist.

For the record, I'm an animist (see under Other) -- not the ancestor worshipping kind, but the universal spiritual presence kind. Animism can also works as non-religious philosophy (metaphorical-type) and is cool with being partnered with other religions. So for me, buddhism works as both a representation of universal truth and as another faith similar to my own.

:)

Please dont flame. Give reasons for your belief that are examined and intelectual

I wasn't flamming.

I stated "All religion is rubbish. Fairy stories are the realm of children, there should be no room for religion in the lives of grown-ups." How do you class that as a flame?

As for reasons, those should be self-evident. Children need fairy stories to help them understand the world around them, in general adults do not.

If you came across a 30 year old who still believes in Santa, or even a 10 year old that actually believed Tom & Jerry type violance works in the real world, would you not think they had a problem?

In just the same way people who still believe in religion have a problem - they are ignoring the real world and allowing their lives to be led by fairy stories.

We are now into the 21st century (based on a calander which I do know counts from the supposed year of birth of a jewish man) and it is about time that we all put religion where it belongs - in our primitive past.

Islam is closer to Christianity than Judaism.
Actually, not really. From what I've learned in inter-faith groups, the customs and even much of the theology of Islam is very close to Jewish customs and theology. Much of the terms for customs are even similar (dispite that one is Arabic and the other is Hebrew.)
The Muslims have a savor and a god just like the Christians.
Already addressed, Muhammed was not "a savior."
Judaism has a god and a savor that hasn't come yet.
You might want to put a comma in there and rephrase that last part. The Jewish God isn't "coming," it's an omnipotent and infinant being that is by definition already here. Also, the Jews are not waiting for a "savior," because accordging to the Jewish texts, each person is responsable for their own sins and forgiveness. What they are waiting for is the messiah, which is supposed to usher in a time of utopian peace. "Who" the messiah is and how things are to be brought about is somewhat hazy. (Some felt that David ben-Gurion might have been the messiah, because he was one of the main founders of the state of Israel.)

Well, quite a few people seem to think that atheism isn’t quite right despite the fact that another poll showed it to be the dominant belief on NS.

yes, but Christianity wasn't formed. He believed himself to be the son of god.

That's because he fancied himself a Peacemaker. Remember his own words: Blessed are the Peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons of God.

Clearly he believed there was way more than one son of God.

But then again... how do we know he actually did claim and believe, that he was the son of God, and that the authors of the bible's several books didn't embelish and glorify his REAL story, purposefully to create a religious following?

I put Islam because although I am agnostic, I think Islam makes the most sense when it comes to what God would do.
Islam might make sence but even it teaches that God has a greater mind than Humans

laveyan satanism

That's because he fancied himself a Peacemaker. Remember his own words: Blessed are the Peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons of God.

Clearly he believed there was way more than one son of God.

This is what I get from the Gospels: Jesus was saying that we are all sons of God, that the Kingdom of God is all around us (Luke 17:21). This is why he was so threatening to the Jewish establishment. Tradition taught that God and man, spirit and matter, were separate. Jesus taught that they were the same. Of course, this is not how mainstream christians see it.

But then again... how do we know he actually did claim and believe, that he was the son of God, and that the authors of the bible's several books didn't embelish and glorify his REAL story, purposefully to create a religious following?

That's what Qur'an has been trying to say for 1400 years. :)

Atheism involves faith that there is no deity.
Not true.

Nice rebuttal there. Why are the simplistic so often so arrogant? The other fellow I was actually conversing with made a much more intelligent, sensible response; I still don't agree with him, but both of us have put our stances out in the open.

It is true, though. Atheism is not agnosticism; there is concrete belief that there is no God. This belief relies on what you perceive as facts, it involves a further belief that these facts are exclusive of anything supernatural, and, when it all comes down to it, you believe that this is all there is to know. That is faith.

There is faith that the natural equals the supernatural.
Not true.

True. Everything perceived as "supernatural" can be explained by natural events, correct?

There is faith that your senses are reliable for perceiving what truth there is, if any.
Not true.

Yeah? Either you're saying 'not true' over and over again without listening to a word I'm saying, or you're an atheist who believes in the supernatural. If you are an atheist believing in the supernatural, I daresay you'll find yourself in the minority.

Take your base.

Its funny how being an agnostic is not considered a belief. what a worthless topic.

Agnostic is not a choice because this is not a question about what you actually believe; this is a question about what gets CLOSEST TO THE TRUTH WITHOUT BEING QUITE RIGHT.

Therefore, since the entire question demands you make a compromise, agnosticism would be a cop-out of an answer.

"I'm Christian. The next closest belief? There's no real answer to that, so agnosticism."

"I'm Muslim. The next closest belief? These are all wrong; no answer! Agnosticism.

I could go on, but I think you catch my drift.

I said earlier that there must be a lot of agnostics here because I cannot think of very many religions to which atheism would be the "next-best" choice. Agnostics leaning toward atheism is the most rational case I could think of. I expected Buddhism and Judaism to do about as well as they have been; I expected Christianity and Atheism to do much worse.

Of course, it could be that a lot of people are just putting in whatever religion they are.

Of course, it could be that a lot of people are just putting in whatever religion they are.
That’s exactly what it is. Compare this poll to the one that asked everybody what their religion was. This can’t be accurate.

That not really much of a question i see myself as christian the closest one would be juadism but even then chrisitianity very diffrent from most other religions

Christianity, because that is the first religion on Earth, all others came years later, and Jesus actually lived during the times of the birth of Christianity, no matter how many people disagree with that or me, it's gotta be closest to the truth - we all refer to our lord as God, even Allah as God, we all refer to Heaven and Hell in every religion. Christianity was first, then Judaism, wich is more of the brother of Christianity.
If people think it's Islam, that's only because of it's Jihad and too many religous rules, like praying 5 times a day, the pilgramage, etc.
Religion doesn't need too many religous rules and customs. That only shows that it's a devoted religion, but not the TRUE religion.

Christianity came before Judaism??? :confused:

My natural religion is atheism, and, like Passivocalia, I am very ardent in my denial of religion. Atheism makes the whole world make sense, for the same reasons already mentioned. I do not feel that I need to back them up with any redundancies.

However, what I find next-closest to Atheism is what I refer to as Orthodox Satanism, though I do not know exactly what the term is. To me, there is no real distinction between Hedonism and Satanism, but Satanism sounds cooler. As some of you may already know, Hedonism is the belief that the purpose of life is the enhancement of the self experience. In laymans' terms, Hedonism is wrapped around the knowledge that the point of living is to have fun. Diety is optional in both Orthodox Satanism and Hedonism, though, if you are Atheistic, it works better; if you believe that there is no Hell or Hell-equivalent, then there is nothing stopping you from enjoying yourself on your brief stay on this island Earth.

My main arguments against the dogma of the Christian religions, and, indeed, most religions on the planet, are that they are masochistic. We discourage people from cutting their wrists on the basis that their health takes a head shot with every slice, but we deny people simple pleasures because that is what seems holy? They claim that their God is a benevolent and merciful God, but He/She/It razes cities on a whim and denies those that he does not slaughter any pleasure that does not have "sanctity" as its core? I cannot honestly say that I think that this is consistant.

All in all, I think that people would be a lot happier if dietic practices weren't so restrictive.

Germanic Neopaganism...Ásatrú or Forn Sed or one of the other various branchings.

[QUOTE=Passivocalia]Atheism is not agnosticism; there is concrete belief that there is no God. QUOTE]

Again, we differ in definition of terms. I do not use the word "agnostic." Instead, there is weak atheism, which can be defined as "I don't believe in any of the explanations of god I've come across" or simply "lacking belief in god." Then there is strong atheism, which goes further than disbelief in to the realm of being certain that there is no god/gods/etc. I am a weak atheist with leanings toward deism/pantheism. And if you consider yourself a deist or pantheist, you might as well be an atheist, because In both cases, there is no real religion there; no ritual, no personal god to pray to.

Again, we differ in definition of terms. I do not use the word "agnostic." Instead, there is weak atheism, which can be defined as "I don't believe in any of the explanations of god I've come across" or simply "lacking belief in god." Then there is strong atheism, which goes further than disbelief in to the realm of being certain that there is no god/gods/etc. I am a weak atheist with leanings toward deism/pantheism. And if you consider yourself a deist or pantheist, you might as well be an atheist, because In both cases, there is no real religion there; no ritual, no personal god to pray to.

Engage: Grammatically Sound Republic of Passivocalia

Okay, everything you're saying makes sense, but let's talk on terms of linguistic viability. A blanket term of "atheism" could work in the method you describe, but it would be diluted in all the possibilities of meaning. There would always be the question of weak atheism versus strong atheism versus moderate atheist versus what all other forms.

While "monotheism" could easily encompass beliefs from Calvinists to Shi'ites, we have separate terms to distinguish them. In the same way, I believe that "agnosticism", "deism", and "pantheism" are all beliefs that are incredibly distinct from each other, and thus deserving their own term. All three depart from the belief that there is no supernatural, which I think would fit nicely under "atheism" (as opposed to the compromising "strong atheism").

The only real unity these beliefs have is that they differ from other concepts of a deity, but even that is a weak unity. One has a non-interfering creator, one has the entire universe as a manifestation of God, one has the unknowability of the supernatural, and one has the strict denial of the supernatural... when other terms do indeed exist to distinguish these beliefs from each other, why not use them?

Otherwise, "atheism" could come to mean just about anything. Which may be why so many have voted for it.

Most people don't fit neatly into small, specific categories, but that is not reason enough to broaden the categories so that they include everyone. Keep the categories specific, and the people can still be general.

Grammatically Sound Republic: Disengaged

Discordian. If you stop and think how chaotic this world really is, (men having nipples! I mean, Come On! What's up with that?) You will realize it's the closest to the truth.

Replieing to the firs few posts the oldest religion is aborigine which is 40000 years old

im a catholic atheist but if i were going to choose a different belief it would be islam

islam is submitting to the will of god. what could be more correct?

im a catholic atheist but if i were going to choose a different belief it would be islam

islam is submitting to the will of god. what could be more correct?

Quick question how can you be a "Catholic atheist"? Do you follow the beliefs of the church while not believing in a god? I mean it just sounds like an oxymoron like jumbo shrimp.

I'm Catholic, and aside from my religion, I belive that Judaism is closest to the truth. Islam is the furthest, because they treat women like meat and belive that they will go to heaven by killing women and children nonbelievers.

Nice rebuttal there. Why are the simplistic so often so arrogant? The other fellow I was actually conversing with made a much more intelligent, sensible response; I still don't agree with him, but both of us have put our stances out in the open.

It is true, though. Atheism is not agnosticism; there is concrete belief that there is no God. This belief relies on what you perceive as facts, it involves a further belief that these facts are exclusive of anything supernatural, and, when it all comes down to it, you believe that this is all there is to know. That is faith.


The rebuttal was adequate. You made a statement of alleged 'fact', and I pointed out that it was simply not true.

I am an Atheist. I lack belief in a 'god' or 'gods', but I do not assume that this means a 'god' is IMPOSSIBLE.

I am known as an Implicit Atheist.

There are ALSO those that you describe - the Explicit Atheists, who state as a principle that there IS NO GOD.

Most Atheists are ACTUALLY Implicit Atheists. In fact, we are ALL born as Implicit Atheists - since we do not 'believe' in any gods, until we learn about them.

You constructed something of a strawman, and I told you it was just that.

You SHOULD be thanking me.


True. Everything perceived as "supernatural" can be explained by natural events, correct?


No. Again - you create a false argument. Atheists do not necessarily have ANY opinions on the supernatural... just a lack of belief (or, in the case of the Explicit Atheist - a belief of lack) about 'god'.

Being an Atheist has nothing to do with how you feel about Dark Matter, UFO's or Goblins and Fairies.


Yeah? Either you're saying 'not true' over and over again without listening to a word I'm saying, or you're an atheist who believes in the supernatural. If you are an atheist believing in the supernatural, I daresay you'll find yourself in the minority.

Take your base.

On the contrary - I'm listening to the words you are saying (typing...), but they are simply not true. I'm not going to pretend they are, just to make you feel better.

Thanks for the base. ALL your base are belong to us.

Reformed Huitzilopochtlism.

PD. All religions claim to go back to the begginning of time. The oldest one? Probably an Earth or Sun cult. The oldest surviving one? Probably vedic hinduism.

In my opinion, Buddhism :)

Quick question how can you be a "Catholic atheist"? Do you follow the beliefs of the church while not believing in a god? I mean it just sounds like an oxymoron like jumbo shrimp.
once a catholic always a catholic

once a catholic always a catholic

Not really. I'm not catholic anymore.

Closest to my own? I'd have to say Islam.

I always loved Native American religions. The Earth doesn't belong to us, we belong to her. So true. We're part of nature, we don't own it. The whole spirits thing I'm not so sure however.

I'm Catholic, and aside from my religion, I belive that Judaism is closest to the truth. Islam is the furthest, because they treat women like meat and belive that they will go to heaven by killing women and children nonbelievers.

Uhh...Judaism has plenty of that stuff. Just look at your old testament. Yahweh had his people perform more than their share of what would be considered today as war crimes.

Yeah, but everyone hates the Baha'i for some reason.

I don't think that everyone hates the Baha'i Faith. The radical Islamist do and some others but they really don't know the truth about the teachings of Baha'u'llah.

I don't think that everyone hates the Baha'i Faith. The radical Islamist do and some others but they really don't know the truth about the teachings of Baha'u'llah.

Not that I know too much about Baha'i , but I figure the best way to describe it would be to think of Baha'i as the religious equivalent of the Borg, only in a nice way.

I'm torn between Buddhism and atheism, I'm definitely a-religious, but don't want to be associated with the "science answers all" crowd which most atheists belong to. Buddhism has many interesting ideas, but it goes wrong in alot of places. I put Buddhism, but I probably should have put Atheism.

I cant decide, all of them contain elements of the truth and i particularly look to the top 5 + Sikhism (which isn’t up there). Generally anything that promotes peace and equality is good, although all religions can be taken to extremes, which is generally bad. Baha'i is probably closest as it agrees on all religions being from the same source but i don’t like the idea of making anyone be the same or the idea of the whole world being let by a council with the Baha'i at the head.

Just so that others who read this are not accidentally confused there are no plans for a Baha'i Council that will lead the world as Greater Godsland seems to imply. There is a Universal House of Justice that is elected by the Bahai's around the world but it only has authority within the Baha'i Faith. If others come to this Assembly for advice they are welcome but never by force. We do believe that at some point the world's governments will elect a council of some kind that will be much like the UN but with more authority to take action and improve the world's conditions. Anything done by the Baha'i religion is only through the free will of people. The use of force is strictly forbidden by Baha'u'llah.

Not that I know too much about Baha'i , but I figure the best way to describe it would be to think of Baha'i as the religious equivalent of the Borg, only in a nice way.

What is the Borg???

What is the Borg???

A race of beings from the "Star Trek" universe. Their purpose in life is to absorb the diversity of other life forms into its own. The Borg do it by force, rather than offering the possibility to others.

I hope my comment was not interpreted as disrespectful.

Not the religion you believe in, but the one that gets it closest to the truth. Please explain your reasoning, and also specify if your choice was not on the poll.
I am not religious at all. Since I am of European origin, I feel closer to Christianity for cultural reasons. I am glad that people who need to feel that some deity is watching over them are religious, as long as they don't try to inflict their beliefs on me.

I am not atheist; I think that the atheist has as little reason to believe in the non-existence of a deity as believers have to believe in the existence of one.

A race of beings from the "Star Trek" universe. Their purpose in life is to absorb the diversity of other life forms into its own. The Borg do it by force, rather than offering the possibility to others.

I hope my comment was not interpreted as disrespectful.

No, I did not get any sense of disrespect from your comment. But the teachings of Baha'u'llah are meant to preserve diversity not absorb it. The world's many cultures are important and necessary just as the diversity of the plants and animals are crucial to the survival of the world. The Baha'u'llah tells us that there is only one religion--the religion of God. All the former Messengers spoke the same spiritual language and had the same spiritual purpose--to unite the family of humanity without force and to maintain its diversity.

Islam is the furthest, because they treat women like meat and belive that they will go to heaven by killing women and children nonbelievers.

No we don't. Liar.

No, I did not get any sense of disrespect from your comment. But the teachings of Baha'u'llah are meant to preserve diversity not absorb it. The world's many cultures are important and necessary just as the diversity of the plants and animals are crucial to the survival of the world. The Baha'u'llah tells us that there is only one religion--the religion of God. All the former Messengers spoke the same spiritual language and had the same spiritual purpose--to unite the family of humanity without force and to maintain its diversity.

It's that kind of thinking that allows me to respect the Baha'i faith. The whole idea of being able to maintain diversity in unity. :fluffle:

I am an Atheist. I lack belief in a 'god' or 'gods', but I do not assume that this means a 'god' is IMPOSSIBLE.

Thanks for the detailed answer; sorry if I was offensive earlier.

By saying that you don't believe in a 'god', but you do not assume that a 'god' is impossible... well, that sounds a lot to me like agnosticism. Perhaps you share definitions with Velops.

I don't know... implicit, explicit, weak, strong, and these are all "atheism"? Agnosticism already seems like such a useful word for clumping in uncertainty. I mean, if not being certain about a God or the supernatural is *not* agnosticism, then what *is*?

I wasn't trying to make a straw man anymore than I would if I were to say, "Christians believe that Jesus is Christ, both the Son of God and also God himself." Of course, many would disagree with this statement, but it is generally true. What's the point of using the label CHRISTian if you believe otherwise?

No. Again - you create a false argument. Atheists do not necessarily have ANY opinions on the supernatural... just a lack of belief (or, in the case of the Explicit Atheist - a belief of lack) about 'god'.

Being an Atheist has nothing to do with how you feel about Dark Matter, UFO's or Goblins and Fairies.

Strangely enough, I count UFO's and goblins as more science fiction than supernatural. Fairies I'd call supernatural if they have magic. Yes, magic. Or magick. If they don't have magic, then they're just biological things we have not learned about; science fiction. I don't know enough about Dark Matter.

Thanks for the base. ALL your base are belong to us.

Oh, ZING! I walked right into that one. :D

FACT ATTACK! :eek:
You're referring to the Khazars, who where a Turkic ethnic group/civilization (not Slavic!) that inhabited Central Asia and parts of Eastern Europe after the Hunnic migrations. They where, like all the Mongol-Turkic/Altaic groups, originally shamanistic, but their rulers and nobility converted to Judaism around about the year 800, mainly for political reasons. This was because the west Turkic kingdoms where positioned geographically between the powerful Christian kingdoms of Europe and Russia, and the expansionist Muslim kingdoms of the Middle East and Central Asia. The Khazars considered that Judaism was a safe way for them to preserve their independence without causing undue concern to either powerful neighbour - which would have happened if they had converted to either Islam or Christianity, or stayed pagan. Despite this however their dominance of the region eventually lapsed with the rise of the Rus and Bulgar kingdoms. Most of the people converted to Islam and formed part of the population of the Turkic kingdom that is now known as Kazakhstan. However based on some contemporary accounts and genetic evidence, some scholars theorize that a small part of the population remained Jewish and went on to form the modern grouping of European Jews now known as Ashkenazic Jews.

/end pedantry
Sorry no disagreement here, just find it amusing that a group of Jews have nazi in their name

Just so that others who read this are not accidentally confused there are no plans for a Baha'i Council that will lead the world as Greater Godsland seems to imply. There is a Universal House of Justice that is elected by the Bahai's around the world but it only has authority within the Baha'i Faith. If others come to this Assembly for advice they are welcome but never by force. We do believe that at some point the world's governments will elect a council of some kind that will be much like the UN but with more authority to take action and improve the world's conditions. Anything done by the Baha'i religion is only through the free will of people. The use of force is strictly forbidden by Baha'u'llah.

And, therein lies the problem, I suspect.

Religions that offer Words in place of Swords are always fundamentally mis-trusted.

Even Christianity didn't gain a serious place on the world stage until it started butchering innocents.

No we don't. Liar. Yes you do. Just like Catholics support the Inquisition, socialists support the NKVD, secularists support the Terror… :mad: please do not misunderstand what I am saying here!

I'm Catholic, and aside from my religion, I belive that Judaism is closest to the truth. Islam is the furthest, because they treat women like meat and belive that they will go to heaven by killing women and children nonbelievers. Ever heard of the Cathars? No, you wouldn't. We killed them (Catholics, that is, not Muslims).

I'm Catholic, and aside from my religion, I belive that Judaism is closest to the truth. Islam is the furthest, because they treat women like meat and belive that they will go to heaven by killing women and children nonbelievers.

I'm a non-believer (voted for Atheism), but I am from an Islamic community. Just wanted to tell u that Islam has much to share with other religions such as Judaism and Christianity. Discrimination of gender is present in all of these religions, believe it or not, and they all state that "Eve was created from the ribs of Adam." or something like that. Eve is the second in creation. Gender discrimination starts from here and goes further...

Islamic people surely don't believe they will go to heaven by killing women and children nonbelievers. Just some idiotic suicide-bombers and their supporters think that. But other than that, it is true that Islam may be considered a bit offensive related to the Judaism or Christianity (Jihad concept...). But I think these religions also contains some offensive myths/sayings (especially Judaism) but I have to do more research on that...

Thanks for the detailed answer; sorry if I was offensive earlier.


I don't get 'offended' easily. I hope you found my responses not TOO harsh. On the whole, I thrive on disagreement (if it is REASONED... people just yelling 'NO' does nothing for me...) since, that is how we learn.

No harm. Nothing broken. No blood. We are all good here. :)


By saying that you don't believe in a 'god', but you do not assume that a 'god' is impossible... well, that sounds a lot to me like agnosticism. Perhaps you share definitions with Velops.

I don't know... implicit, explicit, weak, strong, and these are all "atheism"? Agnosticism already seems like such a useful word for clumping in uncertainty. I mean, if not being certain about a God or the supernatural is *not* agnosticism, then what *is*?

I wasn't trying to make a straw man anymore than I would if I were to say, "Christians believe that Jesus is Christ, both the Son of God and also God himself." Of course, many would disagree with this statement, but it is generally true.


Weak, Soft and Implicit Atheists are the same thing. They are Atheists who have a 'lack of belief'.

Strong, Hard and Explicit Atheists are the same thing. They are Atheists who have a 'belief of lack'.

I use the phrases Implicit and Explicit, because I find them least 'contraversial'... and feel they explain the distinction better.

An Agnostic believes it is impossible TO KNOW if there is a 'god'. Thus, Implicit Atheists tend very close to, and often cross, the line with Agnostics.

But, an Agnostic can be Agnostic, and still believe there is a god... and an Implicit Atheist COULD be lacking faith, but believe it is POSSIBLE to know if god is real.

Thus - Agnostic and Implicit Atheist are closely related (most of the time), but not synonymous.


What's the point of using the label CHRISTian if you believe otherwise?


For me - it means you follow Christ, and live a Christ-like life. I don't think you HAVE TO believe the supernatural elements to be Christian... and I certainly don't think you can BE truly Christian, and not TRY to live a Christ-like life.


Strangely enough, I count UFO's and goblins as more science fiction than supernatural. Fairies I'd call supernatural if they have magic. Yes, magic. Or magick. If they don't have magic, then they're just biological things we have not learned about; science fiction. I don't know enough about Dark Matter.


If it is 'extra-to-nature', it is supernatural. As it stands, both extraterrestrial and goblin lifeforms are beyond our knowledge of nature... thus 'supernatural' COULD be used to describe them.


Oh, ZING! I walked right into that one. :D

And, I thank you. It was too good to miss. :)

I define religion as a belief that is the primary influence in how you live your life. Under this definition, I think atheism would fit.

Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color. - Don Hirschberg

"Life philosophy", perhaps? (Especially suitable for the "atheistic" "religions" - Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism, although depending on the flavor and region, they may be chock full of gods.)

Atheism just literally means "without god(s)" - so, it can co-exist with belief in something "religious" (Buddhism is atheist/nontheist, as are Taosim and Confucianism). Most people, of course, take it to mean "without god and therefore without religion [and without morals and without...]".

Incidentally, I apologize for being unable to find the study (it's a year or two old, and I'm not sure of its whereabouts online), but a poll was conducted in recent history of Americans as to whether they were atheist or not. These are from memory, but some 10-15% of Protestants, nearly a quarter of Catholics, and half of Jews described themselves as atheists. Religion without god is common, if not commonly accepted or acknowledged.

No we don't. Liar.

I think he confused Islam with the Viking religion. That or he doesn't know anything about Islam.

A race of beings from the "Star Trek" universe. Their purpose in life is to absorb the diversity of other life forms into its own. The Borg do it by force, rather than offering the possibility to others.

I hope my comment was not interpreted as disrespectful.

Failing any better ideas, I don't think it should be found disrespectful. I'm not feeling very creative at the moment, but the Baha'i faith certainly isn't, to use an example that would've been off target and possibly disrespectful, a buffet (take what you'd like) or a salad (everything mixed together).

Maybe gelatin (Jay ee ell ell ohhhhh?) - it accepts everyone (think jello with fruit or such inside?), but adheres to itself, and has held up well even under intense persecution.

I think I'm hungry...

And, therein lies the problem, I suspect.

Religions that offer Words in place of Swords are always fundamentally mis-trusted.

Even Christianity didn't gain a serious place on the world stage until it started butchering innocents.

Never fear. The Baha'i Faith has gone through tremendous perscustion and will go through more concentrated and vicious persecution in the future. But the truth of the Baha'i Revelation will prevail.

it is true that Islam may be considered a bit offensive related to the Judaism or Christianity (Jihad concept...).

I'm pretty sure both Judaism and Christianity have a Jihad concept. Do you all not believe in a spiritual conflict within one's self to come closer to God? Of course ya'll do! It is what both Yom Kippur and Lent are all about. *That* is Jihad.

Do not believe for one second that jihad in any way means riding into a village on horseback to convert the villagers or mow them down with AKs.

I don't know... implicit, explicit, weak, strong, and these are all "atheism"? Agnosticism already seems like such a useful word for clumping in uncertainty. I mean, if not being certain about a God or the supernatural is *not* agnosticism, then what *is*?

Agnosticism is a claim to not possess belief regarding something - one can be agnostic about the possibility of controlled and productive fusion power, in claiming one doesn't know whether it's possible or not, just as one can be an agnostic in regards to a deity or a religion.

Atheism generally takes a weak form and a strong form. Weak atheism is simply saying "I don't have a reason to believe in a god", while strong atheism is "I have reason not to believe in a god." Weak atheism is closer to agnosticism than strong atheism, because the possibility of deity is accepted (if not expected), while strong atheism denies the possibility.

Theism can also vary in strength. Weak theism would be "There may be/probably is a god" or even "There's a god but who cares", while strong theism is "There most certainly is a god."

I'm Zoroastrian, which is very unique in terms of similar religions, unlike similarities between others, such as those of Judaism and Christianty or Buddhism and Hinduism. Probably the closest is Hinduism, since both religions originally came from the Indo-Aryans who settled in Iran and India, though Zoroastrianism differs considerably, being monotheistic, and denying vegetarianism or reincarnation.

true, atheism, by it's strict definition, is not a religion. By that strict definition, however, many religions could fit into the catagory of atheism, as they have no concept of a god or multiple gods
any further contemplation of the matter reveals that an atheistic approach has many consequences that mirror religious teachings closely enough for it to be used as a religious affiliation in many cases
ex. it gives no worse a description for how the universe was created than any religion I have seen to date
it suggests an answer to the question of whether there is life after death

I will concede that it is never on the same level as the other listed religions. It is far less defined in rules, consequences, and other structural characteristics.

In sum, atheism fits the classification of a religion only in the broadest sense. It explains our relationship to the universe around us. What you do with that explanation is up to the individual.



Agnosticism has several meanings, one of which being the explicit denial of a human's ability to know whether a god exists.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=agnostic

All religion is rubbish. Fairy stories are the realm of children, there should be no room for religion in the lives of grown-ups.

Well, hello again Kommerade Benchely.

Just so that others who read this are not accidentally confused there are no plans for a Baha'i Council that will lead the world as Greater Godsland seems to imply. There is a Universal House of Justice that is elected by the Bahai's around the world but it only has authority within the Baha'i Faith. If others come to this Assembly for advice they are welcome but never by force. We do believe that at some point the world's governments will elect a council of some kind that will be much like the UN but with more authority to take action and improve the world's conditions. Anything done by the Baha'i religion is only through the free will of people. The use of force is strictly forbidden by Baha'u'llah.


sorry if i made it sound like i thought the Bahai's use force, i didnt mean to. The unity through diversity is the thing i love.
I suppose its just the idea of all the power being in a small number of hands, seems to me slighty scary.
And totally agree about all religions being from the same source, i belive there all repeating the same message but everytime people interpret it slightly differently or put it into the context of there culture, which is why they are all different.

sorry if i made it sound like i thought the Bahai's use force, i didnt mean to. The unity through diversity is the thing i love.
I suppose its just the idea of all the power being in a small number of hands, seems to me slighty scary.
And totally agree about all religions being from the same source, i belive there all repeating the same message but everytime people interpret it slightly differently or put it into the context of there culture, which is why they are all different.

I just needed to explain for anyone else who may read the post about the Bahai position. There is so much misinformation out there about the Baha'i Faith that I wanted to make sure it was understood by others that there is no room for forcing our ideas on other people.

What you are talking about is the concept of Progressive Revelation which states that there really is only one religion because there is only one God. It is really impossible for God to want many different religions that fight and argue with one another. But as time moves and religion and religious leaders become attached to their power and prestige they forget their real purpose and change the intent of the Founders message. Then God sends a new Messenger to reform the previous religion and He is rejected by the religious leaders of the time and a new religion starts.

Today Baha'u'llah says that this is the dawn of a new day that will not be followed by darkness. Never again will the world go through terrible destruction and spiritual darkness of previous spiritual ages.

The question about all the power being in a few hands is in other contexts a normal concern. In the spiritual order that Baha'u'llah has brought all "power" comes from service to humankind. So those who are elected are there only for service and have no authority beyond there service on whatever Council they are elected to. It is a most amazing administrative order. Unlike anything the world has ever seen before.

I just needed to explain for anyone else who may read the post about the Bahai position. There is so much misinformation out there about the Baha'i Faith that I wanted to make sure it was understood by others that there is no room for forcing our ideas on other people.

What you are talking about is the concept of Progressive Revelation which states that there really is only one religion because there is only one God. It is really impossible for God to want many different religions that fight and argue with one another. But as time moves and religion and religious leaders become attached to their power and prestige they forget their real purpose and change the intent of the Founders message. Then God sends a new Messenger to reform the previous religion and He is rejected by the religious leaders of the time and a new religion starts.

Today Baha'u'llah says that this is the dawn of a new day that will not be followed by darkness. Never again will the world go through terrible destruction and spiritual darkness of previous spiritual ages.

I'd love to discuss this... not sure if this is the thread to do so, though, so I'll just leave your clarification statement as is. :)

I'd love to discuss this... not sure if this is the thread to do so, though, so I'll just leave your clarification statement as is. :)

If you want go find the thread on Daily Meditations that I started and we can discuss there.