Are all religions equally false?

[JRMcC]

I'm always astonished when I hear supposedly intelligent and knowledgeable people claim that all religions are equally false. I guess you know where I stand now, but I'm wondering if there is anyone here who wants to back up that claim.

Share any thoughts you might have on this, even if you don't want to make that claim.

 

[Breathe]

tl;dr it depends, special snowflake answer.

They teach different things; they can't all be equally false. Some will be more or less false than others.

A nontheistic religion would be more true if there is no deity.
A theistic religion would be more true if there is a Deity.
An annihilationist religion would be more true if there was no afterlife.
A reincarnation-believing religion would be more true if reincarnation is the afterlife.
A Heaven-or-Hell believing religion would be more true if Heaven-or-Hell is the afterlife.

And then it depends on what you consider as a religion. Usually religions with gods, yeah. Christianity, Hinduism, and so on.
But what about Atheism+? Secular-but-Spiritual Humanism? Atheistic Neopaganism? Some forms of Liberalism? Transhumanism? Dawkinsfanboyism? Transhumanism? Is LaVeyan Satanism a religion? Unitarian Universalism? Nontheistic Friends? Raelianism?

And so on and so forth.

 

[Mycroft]

I'm always astonished when I hear supposedly intelligent and knowledgeable people claim that all religions are equally false. I guess you know where I stand now, but I'm wondering if there is anyone here who wants to back up that claim.

Share any thoughts you might have on this, even if you don't want to make that claim.

All religions seem equally unable to prove their claims in the ascribed manner in which claims must be proven.

 

[BSM1]

I'm always astonished when I hear supposedly intelligent and knowledgeable people claim that all religions are equally false. I guess you know where I stand now, but I'm wondering if there is anyone here who wants to back up that claim.

Share any thoughts you might have on this, even if you don't want to make that claim.

The other side of that coin would be saying that all religions are equally true. Go figure.

 

[Aupmanyav]

All are not equal. Atheistic religions (Jainism and Buddhism) can have a lot of woo (deities, ghosts, heaven, hell, lokas, etc.). My view in 'advaita' + atheism has no woo and goes completely with science. So, I am a satisfied soul .. er, person. Least confusion.

 

[LuisDantas]

I'm always astonished when I hear supposedly intelligent and knowledgeable people claim that all religions are equally false. I guess you know where I stand now, but I'm wondering if there is anyone here who wants to back up that claim.

Share any thoughts you might have on this, even if you don't want to make that claim.

Religions can't all be equally false. It is a stretch to say they can be "true" or "false" to begin with.

Religions are not (IMO) supposed to be gauged by how accurately they describe reality - if anything, they actively avoid so doing for the most part - but rather by what kind of inspiration and motivation they sustain, how consistently, and how skillfully they deal with the exceptions and undesired consequences of their doctrines.

That means that their value is perpetually dynamic (if they are to have any value at all), and that claims that they are "true" are in themselves a strong indication of misguidance.

That, of course, by my understanding of what religions are in the first place. I suppose someone might have something very different. And odds are good that I would wonder how they see fit to call that a religion.

 

[Thief]

If you define religion as a practice of faith....a belief in God....they are all true.
If you practice religion as a dogmatic collection of rituals, recitals, and reward in heaven system....then it's false.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I'm always astonished when I hear supposedly intelligent and knowledgeable people claim that all religions are equally false.

Could you quote an example?

 

[`mud]

And it's the seldom few that believe in only life alone !
~
'mud

 

[Unveiled Artist]

All religions seem equally unable to prove their claims in the ascribed manner in which claims must be proven.

Id say thats the pure definition of religion

 

[viole]

I'm always astonished when I hear supposedly intelligent and knowledgeable people claim that all religions are equally false. I guess you know where I stand now, but I'm wondering if there is anyone here who wants to back up that claim.

Share any thoughts you might have on this, even if you don't want to make that claim.

Every religion contains a grain of truth.

Ciao

- viole

 

[BSM1]

Every religion contains a grain of truth.

Ciao

- viole

...or a seed of a lie...

 

[viole]

...or a seed of a lie...

Well, for instance, when a Muslim says that Jesus is not the son of God, he is right, isn't he?

Ciao

- viole

 

[outhouse]

Well, for instance, when a Muslim says that Jesus is not the son of God, he is right, isn't he?

Ciao

- viole

Not really.

Son of god was a term given to mortal men in that time period.


Context is key here, and everybody has their own perception of context.

 

[outhouse]

Religions can't all be equally false.

That depends on certain claims being made y each, wouldn't it?

It is a stretch to say they can be "true" or "false" to begin with.

Again, if a religion makes a claim of guidance, is that guidance automatically correct?

That means that their value is perpetually dynamic

Agreed whole hearted.

Context is key here.

and that claims that they are "true" are in themselves a strong indication of misguidance.

Agreed as well.

 

[JRMcC]

All religions seem equally unable to prove their claims in the ascribed manner in which claims must be proven.

Buddhism's claim that craving and attachment lead nowhere and cause suffering is equally unprovable as Christianity's claim that a talking snake caused every person to be born with sin? Overruled.

 

[Mycroft]

Buddhism's claim that craving and attachment lead nowhere and cause suffering is equally unprovable as Christianity's claim that a talking snake caused every person to be born with sin? Overruled.

It also claims reincarnation and human 'spirit'. Back to the drawing board, please.

 

[JRMcC]

Could you quote an example?

^ 1:22

 

[JRMcC]

It also claims reincarnation

Of course, but when you add up both the claims on both sides? Come on...

and human 'spirit'

What do you mean by this?

 

[Mycroft]

Of course, but when you add up both the claims on both sides? Come on...

The claim of reincarnation is no exception to the rule of burden of proof.

What do you mean by this?

It claims that humans are possessed of a 'spirit'. Possibly in reference to a supernatural entity that is the 'life force' behind human life. An unproven claim.