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)

Tags: comparison, logic, plausible, religion

Views: 1021

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

In reality, none of them.

Or all of them - take your pic.

They are are all, at their base level inherently (and sometimes humourously) irrational - making them (sometimes) fun to discuss. But this only acknowledges these theories have the potential for geek humor, with no real merit in hard science
#@

Weird - a lot of my post was lost when I posted it yesterday. Here's the rest of what I was going to say (if I can remember it!)...

 

But, since you asked what religion is "most plausible"/"least preposterous", I'll have to say Deism. Deists basically operate on the "grand watchmaker" theory - that some infinite superbeing (i.e. the "Supreme Architect"), outside the realms of space and time, created the building blocks of the universe, and set it in motion - and then left it alone, creating a Clockwork Universe. This being has no more input into the workings of this reality. So, basically everything is the same as an atheist - except Deists believe a) there actually was/is some super being, and b) they get to have an explanation of how the Big Bang got set up and started - even if it is a "then magic happened here" type of explanation.

 

For me, the deistic concept of god is like sugar-free, dehydrated syrup.
The first 2 posters said what I was going to say: "None of the above."  Is there any religion out there that doesn't have a deity that looks and sounds like the typical leader of the world at the time it was created?  The Deity is always a mean and vengeful character who is going to punish you for eternity for doing what he "designed" you to do.  Every religion I've seen ends up trivializing the magnificence of nature.  I sure hope a humanity free from religion is in our future, but I'm not terribly optimistic about that.
I think the least harmful, and the one that only serves it's exact purpose of spiritual meditating, without necessarily divulging in every aspect of humans life, and thus, more susceptible to change is Buddhism.
I would say Zoroastrianism which was the first monotheistic religion. It was founded by Zarathustra in Iran and adopted by the Persian kings. It has very basic tenets : constructive thoughts, sayings, and deeds. Life is considered a battle between good and bad, and the good will prevail. This religion was never forced to any of the expanding lands of the Persian empire. The Jews who were mostly slaves in the Babylon were freed by Cyrus the Great and this made the major influence on their adoption of the idea of one god.It is still practiced in Iran and India.
Taoism.
Taoism is about as much a religion as confucionism. They are philosophies, schools of thought, not religions

At least they was the first to answer the call of the question.

 

If Taoism is not a religion, then logically there must be followers who are also Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, etc.

 

Is Taoism similar to joining a bowling league?

Yes, I know, but it is one of the chapters in my "The World's Religions" book.
Looking holistically, I do not think that any religion is viable.  Christianity ranks right up there with Scientology as being the least viable.  Now, if we look at just the aspect of the after life, East Asian religions (primarily Buddhism and Hinduism) have a good concept with reincarnation.  If you look at it, reincarnation is the most scientific out of all after life concepts.  Newton showed us that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only transferred.  If you look at the energy we carry through our lives it does not go away after we die.  There is X amount of energy in the universe, so that energy that leaves us after we pass goes on to new life, just like the balls on a Newton's Cradle, we keep bouncing back and forth.  Religion is a man mad concept created by the raving mad or genuinely persuasive con-artists.
I might look at some form of monism, such as Brahmanism (as I understand it) to be the most plausible.  No super mind mandating the details of human affairs but, rather, a general sense that everything is connected and just another facet of reality.  It's pretty difficult for me to find a flaw in that sort of concept - and I might actually believe it.

RSS

Blog Posts

Life Condensed

Posted by Cato Rigas on October 19, 2014 at 8:30pm 1 Comment

Cool Vehicle Inspection!

Posted by Ed on October 18, 2014 at 9:03am 2 Comments

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service