In your opinion, will mankind ever invent the perfect religion?

[Henry McLeod]

My agnostic friend told me that all religions have their strong points, even those religions like Islam. However, every single religion has it's downfalls and this is where all the violence comes in. In your opinion, will mankind ever invent the perfect religion?

 

I think many religions are correct of there being a creator, because we couldn't have gotten here any other way. But at the same time they each have imperfections of what a creator would be like. Now let us try to imagine what a perfect religion would be like...

 

1. No violence of any kind (even for religious reasons).

2. No contradictions.

3. Agrees with science and reason.

4. Choosing this religion would be based on free will, and not based of condemnation in the afterlife.

5. The holy book of this religion could be read clearly without having to make excuses for it.

6. Belief in one God.

 

If there is ANY religion like this, let me know. What is your opinions on this?

[Externet]

Your friend already professes the perfect religion : agnosticism.

[Delta1212]

Why is a belief in one God a pre-requisite for a perfect religion? What makes that better than a religion with multiple gods or no gods at all?

[pavelcherepan]

Pantheism fits the description. Taoism might work too.

Edited October 20, 2015 by pavelcherepan

[pwagen]

I think many religions are correct of there being a creator, because we couldn't have gotten here any other way.

Well, you're wrong.

And if you want to construct your own religion based on a false premise, you can make up any old garbage.

Edited October 20, 2015 by pwagen

[Mad For Science]

I think many religions are correct of there being a creator, because we couldn't have gotten here any other way.

That is just a failure of imagination.

[Phi for All]

I think many religions are correct of there being a creator, because we couldn't have gotten here any other way.

 

False Dilemma, logical fallacy. A creator is NOT the only solution. Life is more efficient at using available energy from sunlight. It's completely rational that systems would tend towards it. There is no need for god(s) to explain how things got to be the way they are. In fact, you open up a whole big batch of bad reasoning when you try, since you have to also explain who created the creator.

 

Humanism is my favorite religion.

[swansont]

Humanism is my favorite religion.

 

"None of the above" is mine.

[Arete]

My agnostic friend told me that all religions have their strong points, even those religions like Islam. However, every single religion has it's downfalls and this is where all the violence comes in. In your opinion, will mankind ever invent the perfect religion?

 

I think many religions are correct of there being a creator, because we couldn't have gotten here any other way. But at the same time they each have imperfections of what a creator would be like. Now let us try to imagine what a perfect religion would be like...

 

1. No violence of any kind (even for religious reasons).

2. No contradictions.

3. Agrees with science and reason.

4. Choosing this religion would be based on free will, and not based of condemnation in the afterlife.

5. The holy book of this religion could be read clearly without having to make excuses for it.

6. Belief in one God.

 

If there is ANY religion like this, let me know. What is your opinions on this?

 

 

Ok, so there's at least a couple of fatal internal contradictions in your proposal.

 

1. Invoking a creator does not resolve the issue of first cause, in fact it worsens it. Instead of "What created the universe?" you're stuck with "What created God?". As the creator of the universe is axiomatically more complex that the universe it created, you're actually left trying to explain the existence of a more complex entity, with no physical evidence it even exists. If we're sticking with the scientific method, Occam's Razor would compel one to stick with the simplest explanation - which in this case is the one that does not invoke the supernatural in the inception of the universe.

 

2. Similar to point 1. Strict adherence to the scientific method (whether not it's useful to do so for spiritual matters is another conversation, but since it's part of the manifest for this "prefect" religion, lets roll with it) requires statistically significant, controlled observations to support the existence of an entity or phenomenon, before it can be accepted. In the absence of such evidence, the scientific method compels one to accept the null hypothesis of non-existence until further evidence is forthcoming. In the case of a "God", such evidence has not been found strict adherence to science would demand that the null hypothesis of no deity be upheld.

 

As such, you'd need to ether accept that your religion needs a deity more than it needs scientific reasoning, compartmentalize your thinking (i.e. science doesn't apply to "God") or jettison the requirement of a deity altogether.

[Phi for All]

"None of the above" is mine.

 

This is, in essence, what the OP is suggesting as well. Henry seems to be saying that man can "invent" a religion if he doesn't like any of the current choices. His reasoning seems to be based on what each individual deems worthy of their god, that a form of worship that makes the most subjective sense is going to be the one most likely to appeal to Her/Him/It. You and Henry are both selecting "none of the above", but Henry is selecting a different religion and you're selecting science.

 

I'm always fascinated by Henry's type of argument. None of the religions make sense, too much violence for a loving god, too many contradictions in the doctrine, doesn't match with reality... but there MUST be a god, so the religion MUST be the problem. Why don't more people question the god part? Remove that and the rest fails on merit.

[Itoero]

A perfect religion would be one that causes global religious equality...which is impossible.

Religion creates groups, it creates boundaries between people.

Theistic religions go hand in hand with wars, slavery, famine...

Atheism goes hand in hand with well faring, peaceful countries.

 

The perfect religion = no religion

 

A world without theistic religion would be an upgrade compared to this one.

[BlackSunGod]

If you are interested in an attempt of reuniting Math, Science, Philosophy and religion you should take a look at Mike Hockney's books. They're rather weird and very controversial and some people will tell you that they're not worth it, but I tell you that if you're interested in those topìcs you should at least read 20mins or at least 10 and then judge by yourself, although to have a complete understanding you have to read a lot more.

[Ophiolite]

However, every single religion has it's downfalls and this is where all the violence comes in.

Other members have dealt with the major shortcomings in your thesis. I wish only to comment on this one. Human violence does not arise from imperfect religion, but from the instinctive behaviour of homo sapiens expressed through culture. In that respect some religions, at some times, are vehicles for this violence, but are not the underlying cause.

 

Consequently, remove all religions, or introduce a perfect religion and we would still beat the **** out of each other.

[John Cuthber]

As fa as I can see, any religion is based on faith and we can do better than that; we can base our beliefs on evidence, logic and observation.

So, even the best faith-based religion adds nothing.