Let's Create a New Religion

Does anybody want to create a religion with me?

That’s a really brilliant idea but there’s a tiny little flaw. Whenever a religion has been created, together with followers there have been non-believers too and they usually don’t like one another because there’s always some fights too. So why would you like to create something that all don’t approve of? Why not create something other than religion and that all follow. I’m just being sarcastic or humourous perhaps. Hey! Go right ahead and write your pages for the 21st century Bible or Quran or Torah or Hermes or whatever :smiley:

yes! I want to create a religion, where if you tell people that they are going to hell for not following your religion, then you go to hell! That way when people tell you that you are going to hell, you can tell them that they are going to hell unless they stop telling people that they are going to hell.

Alien Corpuscle Bath,

That’s an excuse not to create any religion, it’s not explanation :wink:


Let’s create a universal law that makes everyone learn everyone else the hell alone because no one’s knowledge of the illogical is a priori (Sorry for the Kantian language). It’s a theory that I believe Dewey had, the no harm freedom. Do whatever you want as long as it dosent hurt anyone. If someone wants to get down on their knees and pray to aliens every night, then why should they be persecuted? So do whatever you want as long as it does not infringe on the beliefs of others. So if your religion says you have to go out and make other believe then you are not following the universal law. All you gotta do is have faith that your right, I mean who dosent?


What a miserable activity. Going around telling everybody how to live his or her life. How could you know how EVERYBODY else is supposed to live their lives? Although there is a market for this kind of thing. Look at the self-help section of any major bookstore. It is packed to the gills. There is plenty of uncertainty and desperation to tap into. People want somebody to tell them how to live their lives.


You sound contradictory. Are you by any chance suggesting that we should not advocate how another should live but have information available, say in books and magazines, but not enforce it on anybody? If that’s what you’re saying and not being contradictory, then what a good idea, you just seconded my own thoughts!

i have a religion, its called SCIENCE. There is only one form of science. There are no, its this over here while others say no, its this. Under science all believers believe in the same thing. When its based on fact, other than that, the rest becoems theory.

How can you call science as your religion? It’s true science is a fact where two cannot disagree but it cannot become a religion because religion is because of faith not facts. This faith arises because of a belief in God. Now this belief may lack verification or facts but if I believe then I have faith. Besides religion doesn’t have to do with being able to prove facts like in science, it has to do with just a belief in God for humanitarian purposes and to be able to live a life that will seem fair and justified.

I think you are focussing too much on facts and because of lack of proof in a religion you are given to believing more in science. But no matter how much proof or facts are there, science will not become a religion for the simple fact that science cannot bring solace to one’s heart in times of adversity, only a belief in a Higher power can. Whatever…

Not quite. Its more that I want to point out the arrogance it takes to tell everybody else how they should live.

At the same time at this moment in history there are a lot of people in America who feel full of uncertainty. There is fertile ground for people who want to tell others how to live. People are desperate to believe in something, anything. It’s a time of fad beliefs.

So my first intuition was right, you ARE being contradictory. Look, you can’t say on one hand not to interfere in people’s life and on another that it is fine because there is no clear cut demarcation between who would invite that interference and who would resent it. Ok?

I don’t know where you are hearing, but here is a restatement of what I was trying to say.

I consider that the activity of telling people how to live their lives is a miserable activity. I think that it takes arrogance in an individual for that individual to tell everyone else how they should live.

I think that there are many people who feel uncertain. I think that there are many people how feel desperate to believe in something. Therefore I conclude that it is easy for an individual to tell everyone else how they should live.

I dislike somebody telling everyone else how they should. Despite that, my preference has nothing to do with the EASE with which an individual can accomplish this goal.

It that lucid?

You don’t like another’s interference in your life dictating how you should live and yet find it funny at the same time that some people can be brainwashed with another’s beliefs. Right?

NOW, just because you dislike another telling you how you should live does not mean that others may not welcome this intrusion in their life. You are not God that life should proceed according to your thinking you stupid. And the fact that there is no clear distinction between who resents and who welcomes another telling them how to live, means that that is the main reason why others like missionaries should not interfere in peoples’ life telling them how to live and the best way to ensure going to heaven.

As such, all information should be available to all but never enforced upon them in any way. Get it?

Wow Graighter, I’m so glad to finnialy here someone say it outloud. Now I can get your church’s garbage out of US public schools. Woot!

More math for everyone!!! :smiley:

It all depends how much money will I make out of it???

Beena, Science obviously can not be a religion. Same as how Buddhism can’t. Without the believe of a soul and a GOD, its just that, a belief. Although, I don’t by into the idea of faith. Faith to me sounds like choosing to be ignorant. I have a friend who is a christian and believes all that the bible tells her. I say to her, but how do you KNOW? She always replies with the answer, “because of faith.” I tried explaining the concepts of some eastern religions and beliefs, but she never had the interest to learn about them. With christianity claiming that it is the one and true religion, and saying if you do question anything, you gotta have faith. Can you be completely open-minded AND have faith?

This is the way I think it would go. No religion is big or small, wrong or right, ideal or otherwise. I feel that God is too big an entity to make life in a way that there be ethnic messengers in all ethnic groups and that only one of them would be saying the right thing, that cannot be true. So, even though there may be ambiguities for whatever reason, a lot of all that the messengers have said must be right even though because of low technology at the time it may not have been recorded so or perhaps manipulated.

And yes, there is a way for one to, “be completely open-minded AND have faith.” Let’s say my friend lied to me and my intuition tells me the truth is otherwise. So even though I have faith in this truth yet I have no proof unless my friend verifies it by telling the truth. Similarly people can intuition that God is there but cannot verify it because of lack of proof. Does it mean that because of this lack of proof God isn’t there? No, He could be there. Remember Murphy said, “What is difficult to understand is intuitively obvious.” So yes, your friend ‘can have faith and be completely open-minded too.’

Science obviously cannot be a religion because they both satisfy different needs in us and because of that if you have faith it is not, “choosing to be ignorant,” it is merely having a belief that brings you solace. There is nothing in life that says that real happiness lies in facts only, happiness can lie in blind faith too, and here, faith is not even blind, it just lacks VERIFICATION. Would you like me to verify it my dear? Ha! I’m just kidding. Don’t listen to me :smiley:

Science and fact are not the same thing. Remember the greeks had science- they wernt always right. And science has been proved wrong before graighter.

I dont think xanderman was being contradictory exactly. It seemed more like a call for balance and sensible discretion, morality. There is nothing wrong with trying to make someone believe what you believe neccasarily as long as you dont go too far.Think about it. What would the world be like if no-one was alowed to convince anyone of anything.

i beg to differ. Science is based on facts. Theories are not facts. Science tells us that WATER is made of H2O, this is a fact. Science explains to us how gravity works based on facts. If I am missing something here, let me know.