PROVE ME WRONG... All religions are fake.

[shunyadragon]

Jainism is a very nice religion for a few things, but its practices and philosophy have many holes. Have you studied about Jainism? Philosophically Buddhism scores over it and this was reflected in their popularity in ancient India.Help an amputee regrow his/her limbs.

Genetic engineering

 

[Aupmanyav]

For me a true religion is a religion that has a true god which created life.The point of this topic was to discuss the creator of life rather than the fruit of life.

We have all things. Gods and Goddess who created the universe as well as creation without any. Take your pick. I belong to the latter group.

What was before time ''zero''? God. All religions are true.

Was there a time 'zero'?

Genetic engineering

Yeah, that may work sometime in future. But that would prove science and not God.

 

[shunyadragon]

: ↑
What was before time ''zero''? God. All religions are true.

There is no objective verifiable evidence for a time "zero."

Considering the fallible nature of humans it is unlikely that all religions are true.

 

[Sir Doom]

For me a true religion is a religion that has a true god which created life.The point of this topic was to discuss the creator of life rather than the fruit of life.

Etymologically, the word means 'that which is revered' and more modern usage now encompasses the method by which one does that as well. It's intentionally broad because the range of 'reverement' in this world from past to present is in fact even more broad than that term can even capture.

Naturally, the description you give falls into but fails to encapsulate the entirety of it.

Basically, anyone on this planet can say, "I can disprove all religions!" So, long as one narrows the definition of religion far enough to do so.

 

[RagnarLothbrok]

You ought to know that this is a fruitless quest. It is famously not possible to either prove or disprove the existence of God.

But since it is you that is asserting religions are fake, it is up to you, as the one making the claim, to support it, not for others to justify a contrary position.

A good start might be for you to define what you mean by "fake", since religion performs a number of functions for its adherents, and people's individual beliefs seem to be highly idiosyncratic.

I already did, there are 10 pages of this topic, its easy to miss it.

 

[RagnarLothbrok]

How do you propose to determine a God that exists?

It is what I think, but at the end, I do not know, nor does anyone know. Even if they think they do.

 

[RagnarLothbrok]

Etymologically, the word means 'that which is revered' and more modern usage now encompasses the method by which one does that as well. It's intentionally broad because the range of 'reverement' in this world from past to present is in fact even more broad than that term can even capture.

Naturally, the description you give falls into but fails to encapsulate the entirety of it.

Basically, anyone on this planet can say, "I can disprove all religions!" So, long as one narrows the definition of religion far enough to do so.

I just want to discuss with the english original version of religion and god with no changed meaning for whatever reason.

 

[Sir Doom]

I just want to discuss with the english original version of religion and god with no changed meaning for whatever reason.

Your arguments indicate otherwise. I believe your personal idea of what qualifies as religion is limited to:

A: Those religions which generally agree with your personal definition of God.

B: Those religions which fail to accurately describe the interaction of that God with humanity per your personal opinion on how that ought to happen.

The key point being that what you personally believe about God is on equal footing with every other religion. It IS your 'religion' in essence. You are even here and now attempting to 'convert' others to your way of thinking. Naturally, being open to debate puts you in a fairly progressive category the most religions are not in. So, points for that, anyway.

 

[MonkeyFire]

I definitly have esp over my pleasure, the pain of heck, lucidity, and I have experienced a super voice.

 

[robocop (actually)]

There is no objective verifiable evidence for anything in the Bible.

You seem to just keep ignoring me. Have a good day.

 

[Windwalker]

the only thing I do not support is parents making you believe what they want, meaning your faith is basically determined where you are born, as what I believe happens to 99% of the humans in the world.

You sound terribly naive. Your parents also expose you to the ways of culture as part of their being parents. If you were born in the West, you're raised with those truths and values that they navigate life with. They can't not teach you these, as that would be negligent and would be a detriment to you being able to survive the world by following the rules. Do you think your parents "made you" an American, or whatever culture you were born into?

Parents teaching children the religion they practice, which is part of society and culture itself, is in the interest of equipping you to function as a person in our societies. What would you suggest otherwise? You wanted yours to have chosen a different religion you liked?

 

[RagnarLothbrok]

Your arguments indicate otherwise. I believe your personal idea of what qualifies as religion is limited to:

A: Those religions which generally agree with your personal definition of God.

B: Those religions which fail to accurately describe the interaction of that God with humanity per your personal opinion on how that ought to happen.

The key point being that what you personally believe about God is on equal footing with every other religion. It IS your 'religion' in essence. You are even here and now attempting to 'convert' others to your way of thinking. Naturally, being open to debate puts you in a fairly progressive category the most religions are not in. So, points for that, anyway.

Personal definition of God? There is only one definition of God which is the creator of life. If some people want to change that definition and make it such as "an imaginary friend that keeps me happy" then they are not my concern.

 

[RagnarLothbrok]

You sound terribly naive. Your parents also expose you to the ways of culture as part of their being parents. If you were born in the West, you're raised with those truths and values that they navigate life with. They can't not teach you these, as that would be negligent and would be a detriment to you being able to survive the world by following the rules. Do you think your parents "made you" an American, or whatever culture you were born into?

Parents teaching children the religion they practice, which is part of society and culture itself, is in the interest of equipping you to function as a person in our societies. What would you suggest otherwise? You wanted yours to have chosen a different religion you liked?

You are repeating what I said in a different way. Of course it is from culture, but the parents do apply their culture to the child. The only reason why I said parents is because of a minority culture in a region of other cultures and the multiculturalism of the modern world, for example a buddhist family living in spain.

I think that it would be much better if the child would first grow up until he chooses his own faith to have reason and a developed brain while doing so, but you are right, it is impossible, perhaps one day this could be done but not for a long while.

 

[Sir Doom]

Personal definition of God? There is only one definition of God which is the creator of life. If some people want to change that definition and make it such as "an imaginary friend that keeps me happy" then they are not my concern.

Thank you for providing direct proof of my point.

There's a tiny line between righteousness and self-righteousness. It's called a hyphen.

I leave you now to wallow in the latter.

 

[Windwalker]

The only reason why I said parents is because of a minority culture in a region of other cultures and the multiculturalism of the modern world, for example a buddhist family living in spain.

They are going to raise them in the ways of their beliefs, traditions, and cultures. This is what parents do. If they are transplants as in immigration, their children will naturally be exposed to their parent's beliefs and traditions, and those of the surrounding culture. The choice of the children is present as they mature in their teens, even though the parent will make every effort to raise them in the ways that worked for themselves growing up. They will ultimately choose what works for them.

I think that it would be much better if the child would first grow up until he chooses his own faith to have reason and a developed brain while doing so, but you are right, it is impossible, perhaps one day this could be done but not for a long while.

But then they would have missed that entire period of their lives where teaching the "ways of the elders" would have any affect. You'd be negligent to not teach them anything until they "were old enough to make their own choices". In reality, without any foundation to begin with, how would they have a mind developed enough to discern what works for them or not? We choose things in life through a process of trial and error, not "reasoned deductions", or whatever the current atheist delusion about the "reasoning mind" believes as a matter of faith.

 

[RagnarLothbrok]

Thank you for providing direct proof of my point.

There's a tiny line between righteousness and self-righteousness. It's called a hyphen.

I leave you now to wallow in the latter.

Thanks bye

 

[Holdasown]

Personal definition of God? There is only one definition of God which is the creator of life. If some people want to change that definition and make it such as "an imaginary friend that keeps me happy" then they are not my concern.

Um. my pantheon has lots of gods. Only three are considered creation gods. Gods fill roles other than creation.

 

[sealchan]

For me a true religion is a religion that has a true god which created life.The point of this topic was to discuss the creator of life rather than the fruit of life.

I want to know which religion worships a god that exists.

I would argue that God exists as an objective reality in the human psyche but not beyond that. Also that God is more than just a character in a story handed down by various traditions. Would you find that within what you accept or outside it or perhaps not relevant to your question?

 

[Walterbl]

but its practices and philosophy have many holes

Like what?

Philosophically Buddhism scores over it and this was reflected in their popularity in ancient India

Is not a popularity contest.

 

[dianaiad]

so the opinion of uneducated men from 2000 years ago is better with rapist misogynistic gods
The real answer is
WE DONT KNOW

How does the above comment help you prove that 'all religions are fake?"