Well is there? Lend me your thoughts!
I think not! No religion is in any terms better then the other religion. One religion can’t be better. There’s no actual evidence of a religion being better then an other in any account.
If by “religion” you mean philosophical world-view (as opposed to a religious organization), yes there is. If we are to take evidence and facts into account, and adjust our course as more are discovered, there is only one path to follow–the Truth. Therefore, the religion, philosophy, whatever, that holds the Truth as its ultimate ideal, its God if you will, is the best religion. You could even give it a name, veritology.
That’s not a religion though. It have a lot respect towards it though. I’m really taking about every religious organizations. For every one seems to revolve around “truth” some evade philosophical debate cause they’d lose.
Not putting down any religions but really wanting an even sided discussion, is that too much? I just want to know what views they have toward public, politics, and world views. I wouldn’t want some religions being so into their own religion that they take education out of the equation and totally “white-out” education. I’m scared that this might just happen. Some peopl wouldn’t allow this but how long until choices change or collide?
While aspects of pretty much all religions are laudable, Confucianism remains the best religiophilosophy out there. Communism comes in, biting at the heels, as a close second.
If one looks to the current trend in global hegemony as a factor, your mention of Confucianism and Communism is credible.
One could present compelling evidence that Mao Zedong was more “Christ-like” than any of the Catholic Popes.
I’m not sure how you are equating Mao’s regime to Christ’s footprint. Mao’s regime was responsible for 40 to 70 million deaths during his reign.
You make me laugh, truly, because the pope well the pope is of a different story then Mao. Really saying he’s more Christ-like though, is just, saying too much. And which pope are you talking about?
Well that I can’t and can argue with, religions-laudable? True, I can see Confucianism as ideology. But now communism? Com’on! A philosophical-governed-ideology, and not so much ideology, it’s more the contrary, but who’s to say it is?
“religion was a force that stopped society from changing, because the ruling class kept the working class under control.” Marx, argued. “By focusing on the joys in the afterlife, and distracting itself from conditions in the present life, the working class could comfort itself with its religion, in its oppressed state.” I don’t agree with all this. A political theory, yes? That in all cases, not some, but all, in society all classes are separated from the state. I see that it’s socialism, but philosophically it’s proclaiming much more then that. Religion shouldn’t have any business in state, for one, and two I say we should separate classes and state as well. I would agree that state and church should not be mended simply because there’s belief and there is disbelief. Why try to mend an un-mend-able situation? I don’t however, agree with the thought of collective ownership of property, by a system of industries for economic value and benefits. If we (as “The People”) were to join this labor organization I wouldn’t like what they were doing to this, or even for this property. We have rights!
Confucianism on the other hand is awight.
Learn more about the I.L.O. though, it’ll blow your mind.
Human.
The human experience is the best religion, in my opinion.
It fathers all other religions, regardless of which is examined.
Religions are like standing at the different sides of a wall and looking at it. One on the one side might see something different than someone else that is looking at the other side of the wall. But eventually they are both looking at the same wall.
So, if I make up a religion right now, that’s based on cutting off one’s toes and burning them in reverence to Voltron, that’s automatically as good as, say, Buddhism?
NO. Com’on. laughing The robot? Well… like I said no religion is better then the last.
Sure, Marx argued against other religions. But that is a pretty typical path for a new religion to take. But in Communism, you’ve a metaphysical system (dialectic materialism) that is every bit as silly as the metaphysics found in religions. You’ve also got a strong apocalyptic message (sing it with me: “It’s the final conflict!”), and so on. Couple that with the cults of personality and hero worship that has manifested itself in Communist countries, and I’m not sure how not to understand it as a religion. Or at least, Communism is every bit as much a religion as things like Buddhism and Confucianism, neither of which are routinely excluded from the label “religion”.
How many died because of the Flood God sent? How many condemned to Hell?
You would have to ask God for answers to those questions. What does your question have to do concerning the comparison to Mao and Christ?
That the comparasion is not as far fetched if what you by is merely body-count. Christ is an aspect of the God-head.
Right. Buddhism is no better than my toe-burning Voltron religion. That’s the implication of what you’re saying.
Or did you just mean ‘real’ or ‘important’ or ‘major’ religions?
We can measure ANYTHING including religion, god, etc if we evaluate on specific point(s) and if we declare which way is “better” for who and what ans such.
Among many religions, I think the 3 little brothers of Judaism, Islam and Christianity are the worst in producing logically handicapped person according to my personal experiences.
Hard core Atheism is as bad as monotheism in this regard, I’d say.
I found some followers of Tibetan Buddhism to be relatively more logical to many other religious people.
But it’s just my personal guesstimate on only one specific point.
And we can evaluate in many other ways.
Monotheism is the best in producing more followers, quantity wise, according to the statistic published by different sources, for example.
It’s a bad news for the rationality level of human being, when we combine this with my personal assessment for the logical clarity. Amen.
To clarify this more specifically, I’d say I was taking about major religions (Not in quantity) dealing with beliefs in some ways.
I tend to think Taoism is plenty peaceful, followed by Buddhism, then Confucianism. All incline toward peaceful, tranquil-like traits. When meditation is involved do they only exercise the mind to think more flexibly. Although this how I see it.
Spiritual introspection leads some to think, act, and be kinder to those around. Is peacefulness the true religion here?
Humanitarianism? Is this a religion at all? I wouldn’t know. World peace is an other bright thought. Not to get off track, I see that all religions and beliefs are to lead the followers to internal and external euphoria. In someway or another any religion will have to accept the fact that their religion and others must coexist as peacefully at possible (as one).
I don’t classify Confucian school as religion, although there area many people who worship Confucius as their god.
And Just like Monotheism, I think Confucian school tends to make people stupid, a bit more than Taoism, Buddhism. Other than monotheism, communism (although not really a religion) seems to make people stupid, too.
Also, I do think many of organized religions are mostly to make money and manipulate naive people.
In other words, I’d say that very personal religion might be better than most organized one, in this regard.
Finally, living isn’t very peaceful activity to begin with.
By living, we are killing many many creatures.
Eating is killing and destroying.
If you want total peace, the universe should cease to exist.
Otherwise, there will be collision of stars and asteroids, killing and eating of creatures, and so on.
Well, I agree with a lot of this. Organized religions are to spend and get wealthy. But who’s to say one can’t have some type of belief? One shouldn’t be ignorant, yet they should taste faith and see how it affects everyday life. To digest each religion is like learning a different language. Really though, I’d rather say in America, we shouldn’t have state abide with religion for incongruous purposes. Seriously, people have the freedom here to stay meditating any beliefs for themselves in their own way. Enough so, people can practice their own religion in their own home. They haven’t got a need to pressure anyone else to practice their own beliefs. There’s no reason to become a missionary and go out of your way to talk to other people about religions.