Which religion's God is the most superior than all the other religion's God?

[JoStories]

I don't know if there's a god or gods, but I do believe it likely that all religions are mostly human creations. Since each is unfalsifiable, it is virtually impossible to prove any religion wrong-- or right.

I totally agree Metis. Its one of the many reasons I find religion and theology fascinating. But I don't believe that anyone should attack the faith of another as who is to say which is right or wrong, as you so aptly said here.

 

[Saso]

No worries. I understood what you meant Saso. Is English not your first language? If it is not, you do just fine dear.

Yes it is not my first language

 

[Pegg]

No, but this is now and that was then. Do you think the actions of the WBC are the correct way to honor God? Do you think that the actions of the Islamic terrorists, who, IMO, are NOT practicing correct Islamic faith, is the correct way to honor God? The question of human sacrifice was how those people thought was best to honor their gods. Over time, that was found to be erroneous. We can only come to know God through study and practice and IMO, that takes time and effort.

I thought your argument was that 'variety' is some kind of projection of the many faces and facets of God.
I asked you about religions which practice such things to see if you would reason that not all religions could actually be a facet of God and your reply seems to indicate that you dont think God would be happy with such rotten practices.

I agree with that.

And I think you are right, that we can only come to know God through study and practice....however, would you choose to come to know God through the Myan indians who practiced human sacrifice, or through religious fundamentalists like the WBC or Islamic State who both have something to say about what God is and what he wants?

How would you choose to come to know God?

 

[JoStories]

I thought your argument was that 'variety' is some kind of projection of the many faces and facets of God.
I asked you about religions which practice such things to see if you would reason that not all religions could actually be a facet of God and your reply seems to indicate that you dont think God would be happy with such rotten practices.

I agree with that.

And I think you are right, that we can only come to know God through study and practice....however, would you choose to come to know God through the Myan indians who practiced human sacrifice, or through religious fundamentalists like the WBC or Islamic State who both have something to say about what God is and what he wants?

How would you choose to come to know God?

The one thing I think you are over looking here is that while the Mayans did practice that one heinous act, there was more to their faith than that. So yes, there was some things the Mayans did that they thought would appease what they considered to be God. And let's not forget that the God depicted in the OT/ Tanahk was very violent, when we consider such examples as Sodom and so on.
As for how I choose to know God, again, its through study, introspection, understanding, meditation and so on. Keep in mind that I don't see God as a corporeal being. Its not the white bearded old man that Christianity paints a picture of. God, IMO, has no form and is merely a spirit, and even that is probably wrong. God for me is more of a state of being. Even these older horrid acts were ways that humankind came to understand what they thought was God and there are lessons contained therein. Of course it was wrong, but only through such acts, and the obvious rejection of same, can be begin to understand how the development of the study of God and what God is.

And now I am off to make Peach-Ginger jam, and Pear-Peach preserves. Back later....And an excellent discussion Robin. One I am thoroughly enjoying.

 

[Pegg]

The one thing I think you are over looking here is that while the Mayans did practice that one heinous act, there was more to their faith than that. So yes, there was some things the Mayans did that they thought would appease what they considered to be God. And let's not forget that the God depicted in the OT/ Tanahk was very violent, when we consider such examples as Sodom and so on.

I went to a Myan exhibition in the city a couple of years ago....the notable aspects of their worship seemed to be based on sex and death. Death was said to bring life...which is where the sex came into it. They offer sacrifice victims, participate in sexual orgies...and next year they are richly blessed with more little lives, many of whom will also be sacrificed to the same gods.
The God Jehovah in the OT was not violent. He did not desire human sacrifice. He detested the perverted sexual practices of mankind which is what got Sodom into trouble in the first place. One thing i notice when we compare the God Jehovah with the gods of the nations, there is a stark difference in the sexual moral expectations of Jehovah. Israelites were not permitted to come into the temple of Jehovah, or into battle, if they engaged in sexual intercourse the night before. But in the case of other religions, temple sex was required of those gods. They wanted sexual orgies to be carried out in the temple while Jehovah condemned such practices.

1Kings 14:24 There were also male temple prostitutes in the land.+ They acted according to all the detestable things of the nations that Jehovah had driven out before the Israelites.

Ezekiel 16:20 “‘You took your sons and your daughters whom you had borne to me,+ and you sacrificed these to idols to be devoured+—have your acts of prostitution not gone far enough? 21 You slaughtered my sons, and you offered them as sacrifices by making them pass through the fire.+22 While engaging in all your detestable practices ...'

As for how I choose to know God, again, its through study, introspection, understanding, meditation and so on. Keep in mind that I don't see God as a corporeal being. Its not the white bearded old man that Christianity paints a picture of. God, IMO, has no form and is merely a spirit, and even that is probably wrong.

I'd agree with that description there... the bible also agrees for it says:

John 4:24 God is a Spirit,+ and those worshipping him must worship with spirit and truth.”

Hebrews 11:By faith he left Egypt,+ but not fearing the anger of the king,+ for he continued steadfast as seeing the One who is invisible

God for me is more of a state of being. Even these older horrid acts were ways that humankind came to understand what they thought was God and there are lessons contained therein. Of course it was wrong, but only through such acts, and the obvious rejection of same, can be begin to understand how the development of the study of God and what God is.

Thats pretty sad that so many innocent lives have to die violently just so people could find out that what they were doing was wrong.

We all have a conscience, and we all know that it is wrong to kill a fellow human being. Those ancient people have a conscience too....murder was written into their laws just as it is in ours today. So they can't claim ignorance and we shouldnt' claim ignorance on their behalf. They were not ignorant of what their God-given intelligence or conscience had informed them...murder is a crime against God and Man, we all know that. So how could they have devised such acts as part of worship...its an act which contradicts our own conscience of what is right and wrong.

Worshiping God in spirit and truth would require some adherence to our natural born conscience. Those people did not worship in spirit or truth and nor do most worshipers today. Not much has changed really.

 

[JoStories]

I went to a Myan exhibition in the city a couple of years ago....the notable aspects of their worship seemed to be based on sex and death. Death was said to bring life...which is where the sex came into it. They offer sacrifice victims, participate in sexual orgies...and next year they are richly blessed with more little lives, many of whom will also be sacrificed to the same gods.
The God Jehovah in the OT was not violent. He did not desire human sacrifice. He detested the perverted sexual practices of mankind which is what got Sodom into trouble in the first place. One thing i notice when we compare the God Jehovah with the gods of the nations, there is a stark difference in the sexual moral expectations of Jehovah. Israelites were not permitted to come into the temple of Jehovah, or into battle, if they engaged in sexual intercourse the night before. But in the case of other religions, temple sex was required of those gods. They wanted sexual orgies to be carried out in the temple while Jehovah condemned such practices.
I disagree with you here Pegg and my apologies for calling you Robin. I've got several conversations going on here!
As for disagreeing, I don't agree that the God depicted in the OT is not violent. In Genesis alone you see Cain killing Abel, God will kill all man and all beasts (chapters 6 and 7), God has Abraham almost killing his son, God sent a plague to Eygpt and destroyed Sodom, Lot offers his two daughters to be raped, and more. Then in Exodus we find Moses killing an Eygptian, God threatening the Pharoah's first son, and the ten plagues. By no means am I trying to insult or demean your religion. And I am fully aware that the aforementioned are lessons in your faith but the fact remains that this faith is very much riddled with violence.
As for death and sex, and so on, those were the 'miracles' or the facts of every day life for those people. Things that they either relegated to their gods or to the wrath of their gods. How is the destruction of Sodom all that much different than their views of this? For you, it seems heinous to have orgies and I would agree, but for them, sex led to birth and birth was miraculous. Your view simply views this in the opposite.

 

[JoStories]

Thats pretty sad that so many innocent lives have to die violently just so people could find out that what they were doing was wrong.

We all have a conscience, and we all know that it is wrong to kill a fellow human being. Those ancient people have a conscience too....murder was written into their laws just as it is in ours today. So they can't claim ignorance and we shouldnt' claim ignorance on their behalf. They were not ignorant of what their God-given intelligence or conscience had informed them...murder is a crime against God and Man, we all know that. So how could they have devised such acts as part of worship...its an act which contradicts our own conscience of what is right and wrong.

Worshiping God in spirit and truth would require some adherence to our natural born conscience. Those people did not worship in spirit or truth and nor do most worshipers today. Not much has changed really.

You may find it sad but for them, it was how they approached their daily trials. During those times, it was necessary to kill. Look at early man to see that protecting one's clan often included killing one's enemies. What we know of today as murdering simply for the act of murdering is wrong, but then, things were so different that we cannot compare the two. When my daughter, at the ripe old age of 8, was raped, I gaurantee you I considered murdering the miserable SOB that raped her. Its human nature to protect our own. Do you not agree with that? What if your children were attacked and about to be killed? Would you not protect them? Its not about ignorance. Its about understanding history and the culture that was theirs at the time. It cannot be compared to today because our morals and socetial demands are vastly differently.

 

[metis]

If you prove that the book of that religion is totally a word of God with no omissions , additions , distortions and mistranlations ... then if should be that religion that God wants me to follow .. how could one prove this is another point ...may be posted later

I don't know what you mean at the end here, including to what the smiley face is all about, but let me comment on the rest.

Pretty much every religion teaches that its scriptures are the right ones and those from other sources are of lesser or no value. Because religious beliefs are mostly unfalsifiable, it is virtually impossible to somehow prove the Bible, the Gita, the Qu'ran, etc. are wrong-- but neither can it be established that they are right.

 

[metis]

I totally agree Metis. Its one of the many reasons I find religion and theology fascinating. But I don't believe that anyone should attack the faith of another as who is to say which is right or wrong, as you so aptly said here.

I agree with you also. Since we cannot prove any religion to be wrong, why attack them? And yet that's what we see here a great deal of the time at RF, which should not be confused with an exchange of different ideas. IOW, one may say "I don't believe in X that's taught in ___ism", but that can be said without demeaning ___ism or those that believe in it.

 

[JoStories]

I don't know what you mean at the end here, including to what the smiley face is all about, but let me comment on the rest.

Pretty much every religion teaches that its scriptures are the right ones and those from other sources are of lesser or no value. Because religious beliefs are mostly unfalsifiable, it is virtually impossible to somehow prove the Bible, the Gita, the Qu'ran, etc. are wrong-- but neither can it be established that they are right.

Exactlt Metis. There is wisdom, IMO, is each sarced text. All of some of God's wisdom, but, again IMO, not all of it. And none as of greater or lesser value. I wish more people could understand this and approach the table with open minds.

 

[JoStories]

I agree with you also. Since we cannot prove any religion to be wrong, why attack them? And yet that's what we see here a great deal of the time at RF, which should not be confused with an exchange of different ideas. IOW, one may say "I don't believe in X that's taught in ___ism", but that can be said without demeaning ___ism or those that believe in it.

There are some here whom we can have good discussions with. Quite a few really. Its just the few blowhards that rant the loudest and make this place occasionally a battle ground. Blast them! But when we have to good talks, it makes up for it.

 

[Pudding]

Ok Pudding i asked u this question coz one cant judge or reject a religions God without reading about this God from the main source of legislation of such religion , thats why i ask you that when you have free time just have a look in the Quran ..
See what that book says and for sure no one has the right to obligate others to embrace a certain religion .. i could say that it is a main principle taught in the Quran " There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. "(2:256).

Have you ever read any other religion's book in their whole context before you judge and reject their religion's God's existence and their religion's claims?

Thanks for suggest, but my preferences is to not follow any religion.

 

[JustWondering]

Which religion's God is the most superior than all the other religion's God?

"the most superior" is define as:
- the most special and unique
- the most morally correct
- the most real in the existence
- the most powerful in ability to do anything
- the most benevolent
- the most perfect and have no flaw

If you have a different definition for "the most superior", you can revise it to fit your situation.
(Edit)

Since no religion has proven to me its god/s actually exist this is like debating which comic book super hero is the best hero. Everyone's going to have their own opinion.

 

[psychoslice]

Since no religion has proven to me its god/s actually exist this is like debating which comic book super hero is the best hero. Everyone's going to have their own opinion.

Yep, that's what it all boils down to.