Religion, which one is better?
You decide!!!!!!
Give your reasons and thoughts.
You decide!!!!!!
Give your reasons and thoughts.
Our topic today, Religion, which one is better?
- Thread starter Peter Griffin
- Start date
~The_Chosen~
Registered Senior Member
None of them, they all cancel each other out since they insist on themselves being absolutely right. 
Orthodoxy is one of the most dangerous ideas ever known.
Orthodoxy is one of the most dangerous ideas ever known.
What is it that religions are attempting to achieve? Once that is more clearly defined then it will be easier to determine if any are succeeding. If they all have similar goals then it might be possible to state that one is closer (better) than another. If they have different goals then any type of comparison between them becomes a meaningless activity and the question introduced in this thread would be unanswerable.
Another perspective could be seen from the person looking for a religion. What are their goals? The best religion in that respect would be the one that comes closest to the searcher’s aspirations.
Essentially the original question is ambiguous. It needs to define "better".
Another perspective could be seen from the person looking for a religion. What are their goals? The best religion in that respect would be the one that comes closest to the searcher’s aspirations.
Essentially the original question is ambiguous. It needs to define "better".
*Originally posted by Katazia
What is it that religions are attempting to achieve?*
Who cares?
I'm only interested in what I want, namely, life.
*Once that is more clearly defined then it will be easier to determine if any are succeeding.*
Good point, although pointless when applied to an abstract concept like religion.
*Another perspective could be seen from the person looking for a religion. What are their goals? The best religion in that respect would be the one that comes closest to the searcher’s aspirations.
Essentially the original question is ambiguous. It needs to define "better". *
Generally speaking, one might consider defining good as being "better" than evil.
What is it that religions are attempting to achieve?*
Who cares?
I'm only interested in what I want, namely, life.
*Once that is more clearly defined then it will be easier to determine if any are succeeding.*
Good point, although pointless when applied to an abstract concept like religion.
*Another perspective could be seen from the person looking for a religion. What are their goals? The best religion in that respect would be the one that comes closest to the searcher’s aspirations.
Essentially the original question is ambiguous. It needs to define "better". *
Generally speaking, one might consider defining good as being "better" than evil.
SO CHRISTIANITY, BUDDAS, JEWS AND HINDUS AREN'T GOOD RELIGIONS, NO?
*Originally posted by Bebelina
I find buddhism quite sympathetic, at least the parts of it that I'm familiar with. I'm sure it has its downsides too, as every other religion does.*
The downside would thus be the part that you are not familiar with.
That part is death.
*Originally posted by Xev
As in deserving sympathy or as in sympathizing?*
Speaking for myself, and not Beb, it would actually have to be neither.
It doesn't deserve sympathy, since it has none to give, thus it is also not sympathizing.
Buddhism basically revolves around the concept of "Don't bug me with your problems."
*Originally posted by Thor
Now, the religion I practise, Paratheo-Anametamystikhood Of Eris Esoteric is great*
How is it for actually keeping people alive?
I find buddhism quite sympathetic, at least the parts of it that I'm familiar with. I'm sure it has its downsides too, as every other religion does.*
The downside would thus be the part that you are not familiar with.
That part is death.
*Originally posted by Xev
As in deserving sympathy or as in sympathizing?*
Speaking for myself, and not Beb, it would actually have to be neither.
It doesn't deserve sympathy, since it has none to give, thus it is also not sympathizing.
Buddhism basically revolves around the concept of "Don't bug me with your problems."
*Originally posted by Thor
Now, the religion I practise, Paratheo-Anametamystikhood Of Eris Esoteric is great*
How is it for actually keeping people alive?
*Originally posted by Bebelina
Maybe you have misinterpreted buddhism as fatally as you have christianity? *
Nope, whether you mean "fatally" or "fatalistically," I have not misinterpreted buddhism.
As for "fatally misinterpreting" Christianity, it's only fatal to my enemies, not me.
But since we're on the subject of fatal misinterpretations, have you considered the possibility of your own fatal errors?
Maybe you have misinterpreted buddhism as fatally as you have christianity? *
Nope, whether you mean "fatally" or "fatalistically," I have not misinterpreted buddhism.
As for "fatally misinterpreting" Christianity, it's only fatal to my enemies, not me.
But since we're on the subject of fatal misinterpretations, have you considered the possibility of your own fatal errors?
Buddhism is out - since it's not a religion per se but a way of life (a 'neverending life cycle on earth aimed at decreasing personal suffering' - you have to create you own heaven because no-one and no god will or can do it for you). It looks very peaceful, because buddhists *want* to be very peaceful. But as a religion, it doesn't offer much more than neutrality and tolerance for religion.
Have a look at 'Do buddhists goe to heaven?'.
Have a look at 'Do buddhists goe to heaven?'.
damm right
tony1:
Theres a whole thread about Paratheo-Anametamystikhood Of Eris Esoteric (POEE) at: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=163957#post163957
Hail Eris!
Theres a whole thread about Paratheo-Anametamystikhood Of Eris Esoteric (POEE) at: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=163957#post163957
Well it hasnt been involved in any holy wars so in that puts it ahead of christianity.
Hail Eris!
Tony1
Dude, you've got a very wrong idea of Buddhism. The entire point of Buddhism is overcoming the base urges and desires and fears which make us less than we can be. The entire philosophy, in my opinion, can be summed up as the effort to overcome such things. Does it lack sympathy? Well, the idea of an afterlife or transcendence in Buddhism is that once you succeed in overcoming those weaknesses, you can ascend to some higher level of consciousness or being; at whihc point you remain so, or return to the mortal realm as a teacher and helper, to assist the rest of us in overcoming our problems. That seems very sympathetic to me.
tony1 wrote:- I'm only interested in what I want, namely, life.
Religions do not offer life only promises of life. None can substantiate such promises. I assume you do not follow any religion then.
tony1 wrote:- Generally speaking, one might consider defining good as being "better" than evil.
That doesn’t define “better” and specifically not in the context of why one religion might be better than another, and from whose perspective?
Certain actions of a Satanist might be considered good by such a practitioner, but evil by a Christian. Here we see that evil is considered better than good. In which case which is the better religion, Satanism or Christianity?
Isn’t the choice entirely relative to the observer?
Religions do not offer life only promises of life. None can substantiate such promises. I assume you do not follow any religion then.
tony1 wrote:- Generally speaking, one might consider defining good as being "better" than evil.
That doesn’t define “better” and specifically not in the context of why one religion might be better than another, and from whose perspective?
Certain actions of a Satanist might be considered good by such a practitioner, but evil by a Christian. Here we see that evil is considered better than good. In which case which is the better religion, Satanism or Christianity?
Isn’t the choice entirely relative to the observer?