I think it was on T/A that I read someone's response to a Christian who was rationalizing his religion.  The dissenter pointed out that even among the other religions, Christianity is one of the least plausible, with "X" religion (I don't remember; something I had never heard of) being the most plausible.  


I think that's an interesting thing to think about.  Which religion do you think is the most plausible?


NOTE:  Perhaps I should word it this way:  which religion is the least preposterous?  If I asked you to rank the religions (atheism is not a religion) by most plausible to least plausible, you would rank "1. X, 2. Y, 3. Z" and so on.  You would not say "none of the above" because I'm not asking "which religion is plausible."  I think we can all agree that none of the religions are plausible (at least not plausible enough to accept because, well, most of us here on Think Atheists are atheists :D)

Views: 2317

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Animism.  If I have a "spirit," something I've looked for in vain, then so do rocks and leaves.

Thank you for the thorough answer.  Of course, personally, I'd find religions like Buddhism to be at least slightly more plausible than others, just due to the fact that it does not involve a diety.  I'd also find reincarnation to be more believable than a notion of heaven, where your soul just goes to sit.  The first law of thermodynamics at least would lead me to think- hypothetically- that souls would be recycled.


But I'm pretty sure souls don't exist either ;)

Ditto your last point. If I had a soul I would certainly not mind, but it doesn't fit into my world view, or the way I experience reality.

Of all the major religions today, Buddhism concerns me the least. However, many people consider Buddhism a "philosophy" or "way of life" and not a religion so I'm not sure if that counts.


As far as theistic organized religions go, they're clearly not all equally violent, dangerous, or dogmatic, but in my opinion they are all equally preposterous.

Several variants of Buddhism are avowedly atheist, as was the buddha his own self.

Some sects teach an afterlife, have an eschatology, and though most would probably hesitate to call the Buddha a god they certainly treat him like one. As a system of beliefs it requires a certain type or I guess a few types of dualism. Either way it is a set of beliefs, rules, and rituals all developed to bring about some positive reward after your death.

I would call Buddhism a religion. Albeit a very passive, very thought oriented, and a not so evangelical religion (You don't really get converted unless you seek it out, or ask an adherent) which makes me wonder how it spread... But that's something completely different.

I don't really want to comment on the most plausible religion, since I don't find any of them plausible.

I have been thinking that if people believed in reincarnation I'd hope they'd be more likely to try and make the world a better place.  Although this sacred cow and rat nonsense is quite laughable to me.  And if you did believe in reincarnation we'd all be some sort of mystic cannabils.


Ancestor worship, at least you've got evidence they existed.

In response to Roy A. You are grasping at straws. Stop using the "atheism is a religion" nonsense. If someone knows water is 2 parts hydrogen to 1 part oxygen, he knows it. He can't un-know it. No matter if a Christian says it's god's spit or a satanist says it's devil semen. The fact that an atheist knows what water really is, due to scientific evidence, does not make it a religious leap of faith. It would be the opposite of religious belief. Knowledge is knowledge. Belief it what one has when they don't have knowledge. Just because that is too complex for you doesn't give your grasping the slightest credence. 


As for wanting an answer to "most plausible" for supernatural religions, that's like asking if Freddie Kruger or Jason is most likely to kill you. Fictional characters can't kill you. No matter which character you think is more or less likely to come to life.


And if you're really interested in how many atheists believe in satan, you just shouldn't have conversations with adults.

"Just because that is too complex for you doesn't give your grasping the slightest credence."
You're my new hero. 


Of course this question is just for fun.  Why not contemplate who is more likely to kill you?  I'd say Jason, because his axe has actual physical contact with my body ;D


My question in particular does have more relevance than Freddy v. Jason, because no one believes in Freddy or Jason.  Thousands of people believe in Yaweh, Zeus or what have you.  I think it would be very thought provoking for a religious person to hear, "Your religion is not even one of the most plausible: X, Y and Z religions are all more plausible than yours, so why did you choose it?"

I hear you ;-)
My comments were directed at his attitude towards the question. My initial interest was due to finding your question intriguing. I just got untracked when I saw his response. I hit the "reply" button on his comment. I probably missed something because I haven't posted here much.

As for Freddie vs Jason, I think Frankenfurter would destroy them both!

For least implausible religion, gotta go atheist. So Buddhism or Raelism. Raelism gets the nod because the girls are topless so frequently. That adds credibility right? :-)

i was going to say something about "least preposterous" = most rational and go with deism or something, but honestly i don't think this question can be answered. "which religion is the least preposterous?" Irrational is irrational, one irrationality isn't any less preposterous than a hundred :(


© 2019   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service