What Do All Religions Have In Common?

[Wannabe Yogi]

As the title of the thread states, what do all religions have in common? What aspects of a religion make it a religion?

There are two sides to many religions. The esoteric and the exoteric. The external side of religion there are many differences. The mystics of any faith when they try to explain there personal experiences they sound a lot alike. It is the the external practices that seem so much different. The visions and states of higher consciousness are a lot alike.

Fundamentalist faiths all lack the esoteric to some degree. Even there spiritual experiences ( If they allow them ) Have to do with the mundane. They obsess on things like healing the sick or predicting the future.

They believe that a prophet brought there religion and the personal transcendence is not to be relied on. Only there scriptures are of any importance.

 

[YmirGF]

As the title of the thread states, what do all religions have in common?

All the larger religions have legions of less than brilliant followers. It's true, there are some notable exceptions, but for the most part, the average follower has the spiritual acumen of a squashed grape.

What aspects of a religion make it a religion?

Loads of less than brilliant people who chant, "What he said!"

 

[The Neo Nerd]

Easy,

They all have belief.

-Q

 

[darkendless]

They all have an ace card up their sleeves to be used when proof of their God's is asked for.

What would a religion be unless it could BS its way out of having to prove the divine to an atheist?

(NOTE: referring to Abrahamic religions only)

 

[Morse]

They all have an ace card up their sleeves to be used when proof of their God's is asked for.

What would a religion be unless it could BS its way out of having to prove the divine to an atheist?

(NOTE: referring to Abrahamic religions only)

Then it isn't a prerequisite for ALL religions, which is what Dr.OP was asking for.

 

[Rogue Cardinal]

The answer to the query is rather simple.

Crazy people that will allow themselves to believe things and apply logic in ways that they would never apply in everyday life to any other subject. They ALL have that in common.

 

[Morse]

Is it absolutely impossible for an atheist to give a straight or objective answer to this question?

Maybe if the non-theists want the theists to begin acting civil (Or sentient), they should set an example.

 

[Rogue Cardinal]

Is it absolutely impossible for an atheist to give a straight or objective answer to this question?

Maybe if the non-theists want the theists to begin acting civil (Or sentient), they should set an example.

No....but almost!

Do you dispute what I have stated? Refute away......

 

[Morse]

Yes, I'd consider my religion moderately logical. The only illogical part (to a degree) is the concept of a higher power. But that can neither be refuted or affirmed, as we cannot properly conceive said power. But hey..

Refuted. As your statement no longer applies to all religions.

 

[darkendless]

Then it isn't a prerequisite for ALL religions, which is what Dr.OP was asking for.

I speak for religions i know of. Whats the use of me speaking about all religions when i have no idea about Zen's or pagan Gods?

 

[Morse]

I speak for religions i know of. Whats the use of me speaking about all religions when i have no idea about Zen's or pagan Gods?

Then don't presume to put ridiculous prerequisites if you cannot speak for the whole. ESPECIALLY in a thread asking about the nature of ALL religion. In hindsight, I probably shouldn't have done so either.

Question: Asks for complete logic or complete anecdote

Answerers: Give subjective logic and incomplete anecdote.

Either be objective in your logic, learn about every religion, or shut up.

 

[Caladan]

The answer to the query is rather simple.

Crazy people that will allow themselves to believe things and apply logic in ways that they would never apply in everyday life to any other subject. They ALL have that in common.

I don't know. you said you were previously a Christian, does that mean that you were cured from your insanity? many of the 'hardcore' atheists here have said they were Christian previously as well, so how can you prove that you are no longer insane? how did you all wise up and stopped being crazy? is it a long treatment of medication? an epiphany of rationality?
or is it that you simply fight to dehumanize the other side as crazy and irrational much like you did when YOU were on the 'other side', and the unbelievers were the crazies.
how can we determine that you are NOT crazy now?

 

[Rogue Cardinal]

Yes, I'd consider my religion moderately logical. The only illogical part (to a degree) is the concept of a higher power. But that can neither be refuted or affirmed, as we cannot properly conceive said power. But hey..

Refuted. As your statement no longer applies to all religions.

Incorrect. Just because YOU consider your religion moderately logical does that make it logical? All religions consider their religion at LEAST moderately logical to the practitioner.

You have already admitted an illogical part....the concept of a higher power. Admitting that it is illogical ties in very nicely with my idea that religious folks will tell themselves anything to justify an idea in a manner in which they would not apply to ANYTHING else.

 

[Rogue Cardinal]

I don't know. you said you were previously a Christian, does that mean that you were cured from your insanity? many of the 'hardcore' atheists here have said they were Christian previously as well, so how can you prove that you are no longer insane? how did you all wise up and stopped being crazy? is it a long treatment of medication? an epiphany of rationality?
or is it that you simply fight to dehumanize the other side as crazy and irrational much like you did when YOU were on the 'other side', and the unbelievers were the crazies.
how can we determine that you are NOT crazy now?

HAHAHA excellent question!

I retract the word crazy and substitute the words "brain washed".

Though I can argue that if you keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result....clinically....you are crazy! Example....people pray for a sick child to be cured and disallow medical treatment. Said child dies and could have been saved. CRAZY.

People talk to a seeming imaginary being.....never get a response......believe imaginary person that never talks back is still there. When their prayers are answered it was "God's will".....when they have to wait it's "God's will"....when the prayer is never answered it is "God's will". Crazy.

I was brain washed into believing Christianity.....if people find that word too strong...perhaps indoctrinated would be even better. I was told to believe it because everyone believed it. If everyone believed it how could it be wrong. Strength in numbers.

I am "cured" because know I know that facts.....and religion crumbles on it's own weight.

 

[Morse]

I don't believe you decried my thoughts as illogical before this thread came out. Although you very well could have been withholding them.

As well, can YOU explain how the universe came into existence? The concept of a higher power seems illogical to you, but logical to others. The concept of non-theism may seem logical to you, but illogical to others. This is based upon your perspective, which, has been modified by your upbringing and experiences. As much as you would not like to believe such, your perspective is not completely logical, it has logical fallacies incorporated into it just as a theists does.

I admit, the first part you said is correct, but it doesn't mean I'm not pulling it down with you.

"Incorrect. Just because YOU consider atheism moderately/extremely logical does that make it logical? All atheists consider their beliefs at LEAST moderately logical to the believer."

 

[Morse]

I am "cured" because know I know that facts.....and religion crumbles on it's own weight.

Claims of higher knowledge crumble under their own weight when stated by a clearly subjective and imperfect being.

 

[Rogue Cardinal]

I don't believe you decried my thoughts as illogical before this thread came out. Although you very well could have been withholding them.

I never said anything about your thoughts prior to this thread other than "interesting". I never waxed poetic on them ever. I took your ideas with a grain a salt and respected them for what they are...but never told you one way or the other my thoughts on any of it.

As well, can YOU explain how the universe came into existence?

So if I cannot answer a question....I should just insert something that answers the question so that there is an answer to the question? That's logical to you? That is all you have done by inserting a higher power.

The concept of a higher power seems illogical to you, but logical to others.

Because I refuse to take their substitution of reality as fact does that make my position wrong?

The concept of non-theism may seem logical to you, but illogical to others.

Touche.....But I am not substituting an answer. There is a huge difference in saying....there is no evidence in a high power, I can not explain the universe and thus say God created it THAN There is no evidence in a higher power, I cannot explain the universe and thus I don't know how we got here.

I haven't answered the question. I left it blank. You penciled something in so that you can have an answer. That doesn't mean your answer is right. I can live with the fact that my non-answer is no answer...it may be right....it may be wrong.

This is based upon your perspective, which, has been modified by your upbringing and experiences.

My up bringing had to do with my former thoughts on the subject. My upbringing has nothing to do with my current thoughts on the subject.

My experiences have everything to do with both.

As much as you would not like to believe such, your perspective is not completely logical, it has logical fallacies incorporated into it just as a theists does.

I could be wrong....but I don't think so.

Occam's Razor is totally on my side.

I admit, the first part you said is correct, but it doesn't mean I'm not pulling it down with you.

Nice try....

"Incorrect. Just because YOU consider atheism moderately/extremely logical does that make it logical? All atheists consider their beliefs at LEAST moderately logical to the believer."

Again nice try....this has already been refuted.

 

[Morse]

Alright, several things. First, I admit that what you have said is correct for the most part, and I concede to you. But there are other things to address.

I never said anything about your thoughts prior to this thread other than "interesting". I never waxed poetic on them ever. I took your ideas with a grain a salt and respected them for what they are...but never told you one way or the other my thoughts on any of it.

Never said you did, I said you withheld your thoughts or did not decry them as a walking fallacy.

That's logical to you?

That is all you have done by inserting a higher power.

You penciled something in

You don't seem to believe I am playing the devil's advocate here. What I state in my beliefs is that there is a higher power. I never state that it provides an answer. I would remind you that in this thread, I was attempting to defend the defenseless.

Because I refuse to take their substitution of reality as fact does that make my position wrong?

No, but it doesn't make you right. Yet you act as if you are the only person who could be considered correct. Then you decry theists for acting in the same manner. Hypocrisy much? The fact that you can assert logic in a different manner than them, does not mean you can be a hypocrite. This is what I was originally getting at.

Like you said.

it may be right....it may be wrong.

So don't act like you know its right.

My upbringing has nothing to do with my current thoughts on the subject.

Yes it does, if your upbringing had been different, you may not very well have become an atheist.

Because I feel like being pedantic

I could be wrong....but I don't think so.

Two spaces after a period. Thief has this same problem, don't emulate him.

Nice try....

Again nice try....this has already been refuted.

The second one was very irritating, but thank you for the sarcasm.

My point is, as you've said yourself, you don't know if you're right. And though I cannot speak for all atheists, I'd say that any with a shred of intellect would agree that they don't know either. Yet many atheists on this thread (I admit, in hindsight, I am guilty) ignore this fact and preen and preach and assault anything that is theistic. You attack the theists for being sure they are right, when you act as if you are as well.

Be the better person, set the example. :yes:

 

[Rogue Cardinal]

Never said you did, I said you withheld your thoughts or did not decry them as a walking fallacy.

I never said you said I did......I said what I said I said and I said nothing. (waiting for Costello to ask who's on first)

You don't seem to believe I am playing the devil's advocate here. What I state in my beliefs is that there is a higher power. I never state that it provides an answer. I would remind you that in this thread, I was attempting to defend the defenseless.

Why should I assume you are playing Devil's Advocate. I already know you believe in a higher power thus I have every reason to believe that you are taking a particular side. And furthermore you are wrong. You state that there is a higher power...thus you have penciled in an answer. You have no evidence for a higher power....and yet you have chosen an answer that isn't even among the options...logically.

You call my a hypocrite.....and say I'm attack.....and then you say theists are "defenseless". Hypocrisy much?:knight:

No, but it doesn't make you right. Yet you act as if you are the only person who could be considered correct. Then you decry theists for acting in the same manner. Hypocrisy much? The fact that you can assert logic in a different manner than them, does not mean you can be a hypocrite. This is what I was originally getting at.

Please point out where I said I was right? I said my answer to the question is "I don't know"......that's neither right nor wrong.

Like you said.
So don't act like you know its right.

Calling into question the belief of another is not assuming correctness. IT is implying that the opposition could be wrong and leaving it up to the opposition to make their case to the pro side. I cannot help it if the opposition falls short in this endeavor and other perceive it as me thinking I'm right when they cannot defend the position.

Yes it does, if your upbringing had been different, you may not very well have become an atheist.

If.....I could have been a lot of things given geography....which takes us back tot he original point....given location to a particular religion can greatly affect your religious beliefs.

The second one was very irritating, but thank you for the sarcasm.

your welcome. though it wasn't sarcasm. It was refuted. You conceded......

My point is, as you've said yourself, you don't know if you're right. And though I cannot speak for all atheists, I'd say that any with a shred of intellect would agree that they don't know either. Yet many atheists on this thread (I admit, in hindsight, I am guilty) ignore this fact and preen and preach and assault anything that is theistic. You attack the theists for being sure they are right, when you act as if you are as well.

I don't know if there is a God or not.....but given the evidence I have.....I can say I'm 99.99% sure there isn't one. That leaves the gate open a tiny bit for some evidence to pop up. With out going off the reservation the evidence is highly in my favor for there not to be one....so statistically speaking....God is almost a moot point.

Be the better person, set the example. :yes:

Like wise....do not assume a point of view for that a person has not made. Some would say that is PROJECTING.

 

[Runewolf1973]

As the title of the thread states, what do all religions have in common? What aspects of a religion make it a religion?

Almost every religious belief contains elements of animism.