How do you decide which religion is “correct”

[kevkon]

What metric or criteria do you use to decide which religion is objectively “true” or superior compared to other religions?

Most people don’t think about this since most people are born into their faith and never really question or think twice about it.

With hundreds of religions in the world what gives you this level of confidence that there’s no chance you could possibly be wrong when the statistical probability is so low. What makes you so sure? What keeps the doubts away?

What leads you to coming to the ultimate conclusion of “yeah this is the true religion and I know I’m right”

 

[thevineyardworker]

Christianity is the most logical, even atheists admit it. Look into the statistic improbability of the gospels surviving antiquity.

 

[Vinícius truecel]

Jesus in every book of the Bible: Genesis – The promised seed of the woman; Exodus – The Passover lamb; Leviticus – The perfect sacrifice/High Priest; Numbers – The bronze serpent raised; Deuteronomy – The prophet like Moses; Joshua – The captain of salvation; Judges – The liberator; Ruth – The kinswoman redeemer; 1 Samuel – The anointed king; 2 Samuel – The son of David; 1 Kings – The righteous king; 2 Kings – The eternal king; 1 Chronicles – The king of glory; 2 Chronicles – The builder of the temple; Ezra – The restorer; Nehemiah – The rebuilder of the destroyed walls; Esther – The protector/advocate; Job – The living redeemer; Psalms – The good shepherd; Proverbs – The wisdom of God; Ecclesiastes – The meaning of life; Song of Songs – The bridegroom; Isaiah – The suffering servant; Jeremiah – The righteous branch; Lamentations – The man of sorrows; Ezekiel – The Son of Man; Daniel – The fourth man in the lineage of Jesus. Hosea – The Faithful Husband Joel – The Baptizer with the Spirit Amos – The Burden Bearer Obadiah – The Mighty Savior Jonah – The Resurrected Prophet Micah – The Ruler of Bethlehem Nahum – The Avenger of Evil Habakkuk – The Justifier by Faith Zephaniah – The Mighty One to Save Haggai – The Desire of the Nations Zechariah – The Pierced One Malachi – The Sun of Righteousness Matthew – The Messiah, King of the Jews Mark – The Servant Luke – The Son of Man John – The Son of God / Word Made Flesh Acts – The Resurrected Lord in the Church Romans – The Justifier 1 Corinthians – The Resurrection 2 Corinthians – The Comforter Galatians – The Deliverer Ephesians – The Head of the Church Philippians – The Joy Colossians – The Fullness of God 1 Thessalonians – The King Who Is to Come 2 Thessalonians – The Judge 1 Timothy – The Mediator 2 Timothy – The Faithful Witness Titus – The Blessed Hope Philemon – A friend closer than a brother; Hebrews – The Great High Priest; James – The Living Faith; 1 Peter – The Chief Shepherd; 2 Peter – The Lord Who Returns; 1 John – Love Incarnate; 2 John – The Truth; 3 John – The Way; Jude – The Guardian; Revelation – The King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

 

[Vinícius truecel]

Christianity is the true one, the other gods are false, Islam is a joke.

 

[Vinícius truecel]

Christianity is the most logical, even atheists admit it.

 

[ли/чж]

In Islam, you die for Allah; in Christianity, it is Christ who died for you. Also we get to eat bacon.

 

[Vinícius truecel]

No Islã, você morre por Alá; no Cristianismo, é Cristo quem morreu por você. E ainda podemos comer bacon.

 

[Small Balls Messiah]

The ones where circumcision is not a requirement are highest chance to be correct

 

[The Death Devil]

Whichever is the most entertaining desu

 

[tired as fuck]

there is no rationality to faith

 

[dumbozhina]

1. the more a religion offers cope, the less likely it's true.
the same could be applied to philosophies.
people go to this religion for cope, not for truth. desperate people believe in or say crazy things in order to be comforted, or to comfort others.
2. the more a religion relies on a sacred book/sacred books, the less likely it's true.
we know all books are written, compiled and edited by humans. they all contain human error, and reflect their authors and editors' view. that's why the quran and kike bible promote flat earth theory. low iq religion can't realize that language and texts are limited.
3. the more a religion focuses on morality, the less likely it's true.
espacially bluepill morality, love thy neighbor, endure suffering, do not revolt against your ruler kind of stuff. rulers like subservient people. retards can't even realize that morality are fabricated and ever-changing to suit the society and its rulers' needs.

high iq philosophies, just to name an example.
tao te ching:
Heaven and earth do not act from (the impulse of) any wish to be benevolent; they deal with all things as the dogs of grass are dealt
with. The sages do not act from (any wish to be) benevolent; they deal with the people as the dogs of grass are dealt with. (black pill)
The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao; The name that can be named is not the eternal Name. ( the limit of langauge and texts)
When the Tao is lost, virtue appears; when virtue is lost, benevolence appears; when benevolence is lost, righteousness appears; and when righteousness is lost, the proprieties appear. ( critique of virtue and morality)

 

[kevkon]

Christianity is the most logical, even atheists admit it. Look into the statistic improbability of the gospels surviving antiquity.

Isn’t Judaism an older religion than Christianity though? Wouldn’t the argument of it surviving that long also apply to it?

Other than that, what would be some of the things that makes it more logical than other religions?

 

[kevkon]

Christianity is the true one, the other gods are false, Islam is a joke.

Yeah but why do you think this? What makes it more true than other religions? What makes other religions false that cannot also be applied to Christianity?

 

[kevkon]

there is no rationality to faith

I agree but I’m trying to see if there’s anyone that can say something to challenge my mindset on that. (Also there’s many who think that their religion actually has empirical evidence or proof beyond jt just being faith based so I wanted to hear those arguments as well)

 

[kevkon]

Jesus in every book of the Bible: Genesis – The promised seed of the woman; Exodus – The Passover lamb; Leviticus – The perfect sacrifice/High Priest; Numbers – The bronze serpent raised; Deuteronomy – The prophet like Moses; Joshua – The captain of salvation; Judges – The liberator; Ruth – The kinswoman redeemer; 1 Samuel – The anointed king; 2 Samuel – The son of David; 1 Kings – The righteous king; 2 Kings – The eternal king; 1 Chronicles – The king of glory; 2 Chronicles – The builder of the temple; Ezra – The restorer; Nehemiah – The rebuilder of the destroyed walls; Esther – The protector/advocate; Job – The living redeemer; Psalms – The good shepherd; Proverbs – The wisdom of God; Ecclesiastes – The meaning of life; Song of Songs – The bridegroom; Isaiah – The suffering servant; Jeremiah – The righteous branch; Lamentations – The man of sorrows; Ezekiel – The Son of Man; Daniel – The fourth man in the lineage of Jesus. Hosea – The Faithful Husband Joel – The Baptizer with the Spirit Amos – The Burden Bearer Obadiah – The Mighty Savior Jonah – The Resurrected Prophet Micah – The Ruler of Bethlehem Nahum – The Avenger of Evil Habakkuk – The Justifier by Faith Zephaniah – The Mighty One to Save Haggai – The Desire of the Nations Zechariah – The Pierced One Malachi – The Sun of Righteousness Matthew – The Messiah, King of the Jews Mark – The Servant Luke – The Son of Man John – The Son of God / Word Made Flesh Acts – The Resurrected Lord in the Church Romans – The Justifier 1 Corinthians – The Resurrection 2 Corinthians – The Comforter Galatians – The Deliverer Ephesians – The Head of the Church Philippians – The Joy Colossians – The Fullness of God 1 Thessalonians – The King Who Is to Come 2 Thessalonians – The Judge 1 Timothy – The Mediator 2 Timothy – The Faithful Witness Titus – The Blessed Hope Philemon – A friend closer than a brother; Hebrews – The Great High Priest; James – The Living Faith; 1 Peter – The Chief Shepherd; 2 Peter – The Lord Who Returns; 1 John – Love Incarnate; 2 John – The Truth; 3 John – The Way; Jude – The Guardian; Revelation – The King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

I don’t see how this answers my question? I’m asking how you how know that the Bible is true and for your evidence you cite the Bible? That’s a circular argument. “Why do you believe the stuff in the Bible?” “Because it says so in the Bible”

Can you point to any proof or empirical evidence of anything that’s entirely external from the Bible? Aside from the fact that Jesus was a real man that existed because even atheists will admit to that.

 

[Vinícius truecel]

I don’t see how this answers my question? I’m asking how you how know that the Bible is true and for your evidence you cite the Bible? That’s a circular argument. “Why do you believe the stuff in the Bible?” “Because it says so in the Bible”

Can you point to any proof or empirical evidence of anything that’s entirely external from the Bible? Aside from the fact that Jesus was a real man that existed because even atheists will admit to that.

Eyewitnesses saw him resurrected.

 

[Vinícius truecel]

I agree but I’m trying to see if there’s anyone that can say something to challenge my mindset on that. (Also there’s many who think that their religion actually has empirical evidence or proof beyond jt just being faith based so I wanted to hear those arguments as well)

Upon reading the teachings of Buddha, we realize that he was an extraordinary thinker. Born into a very wealthy family, he rejected materialism and lived a life of asceticism. Later, he returned to the path of moderation, a path of balance. I believe we should respect Buddha; he was a very wise man. He never spoke of God; he was agnostic regarding God. He spoke of nirvana, reincarnation, and negative karma itself until finally attaining nirvana, but he never spoke of God. Jesus Christ affirmed that there is only one living God and that He is God in human form. Jesus affirmed that the path to heaven is not paying for sins through a cycle of reincarnation; He affirmed that the path to heaven is through His death on the cross, where He sacrificed His life for our sins. It is said that a man was sinking in quicksand and cried out for help! Buddha passed by him and said that there was proof that entering quicksand was not a good idea. Muhammad passed by him and said that it was the will of Allah. Confucius, a determinist, passed by and said, "Let this be a lesson to the world: do not step into quicksand." Then Jesus Christ passed by, reached out his hand, and said, "Here, friend, hold on tight, I will save you." In other words, I will do for you what you cannot do for yourself. I will save you. That is the fundamental difference between Jesus Christ and all the major religions of the world. All religions say, "Strive, improve, be good." Jesus Christ says, "You cannot do it alone, you have sinned, you have rebelled against God, you are walking towards condemnation." But Christ says, "I want to save you, I am reaching out my hand through my death on the cross. Hold on tight."

 

[kevkon]

1. the more a religion offers cope, the less likely it's true.
the same could be applied to philosophies.
people go to this religion for cope, not for truth. desperate people believe in or say crazy things in order to be comforted, or to comfort others.
2. the more a religion relies on a sacred book/sacred books, the less likely it's true.
we know all books are written, compiled and edited by humans. they all contain human error, and reflect their authors and editors' view. that's why the quran and kike bible promote flat earth theory. low iq religion can't realize that language and texts are limited.
3. the more a religion focuses on morality, the less likely it's true.
espacially bluepill morality, love thy neighbor, endure suffering, do not revolt against your ruler kind of stuff. rulers like subservient people. retards can't even realize that morality are fabricated and ever-changing to suit the society and its rulers' needs.

high iq philosophies, just to name an example.
tao te ching:
Heaven and earth do not act from (the impulse of) any wish to be benevolent; they deal with all things as the dogs of grass are dealt
with. The sages do not act from (any wish to be) benevolent; they deal with the people as the dogs of grass are dealt with. (black pill)
The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao; The name that can be named is not the eternal Name. ( the limit of langauge and texts)
When the Tao is lost, virtue appears; when virtue is lost, benevolence appears; when benevolence is lost, righteousness appears; and when righteousness is lost, the proprieties appear. ( critique of virtue and morality)

This is definitely the best reply I’ve gotten so far.

I agree for the most part

My only gripe would be when you mentioned “the same applies to philosophy” when saying “the more it’s cope the less likely to be true” I would say there’s a difference between religion and philosophy the main one being that i don’t believe a philosophy can be “true” or not because I don’t think they are falsifiable. I think that philosophies are entirely unfalsifiable ontologically speaking. I think there’s more of an underlying objective reality when it comes to religion.

 

[thevineyardworker]

Isn’t Judaism an older religion than Christianity though? Wouldn’t the argument of it surviving that long also apply to it?

Other than that, what would be some of the things that makes it more logical than other religions?

The gospels only apply to Christianity, Jews do not believe Jesus is the messiah.

Islam and Judaism can be internally disproven; Christianity cannot no matter how many people claim it.

 

[NepNep]

If what you want is to solve your problems don't go for "Maybe someday" religions like Abrahamic or dharmic, pick a more "Transactional" one like african faiths or santa muerte(Even if it is "paganism"), if nothing changes then its over.

 

[mrlunatic]

1. the more a religion offers cope, the less likely it's true.
the same could be applied to philosophies.
people go to this religion for cope, not for truth. desperate people believe in or say crazy things in order to be comforted, or to comfort others.
2. the more a religion relies on a sacred book/sacred books, the less likely it's true.
we know all books are written, compiled and edited by humans. they all contain human error, and reflect their authors and editors' view. that's why the quran and kike bible promote flat earth theory. low iq religion can't realize that language and texts are limited.
3. the more a religion focuses on morality, the less likely it's true.
espacially bluepill morality, love thy neighbor, endure suffering, do not revolt against your ruler kind of stuff. rulers like subservient people. retards can't even realize that morality are fabricated and ever-changing to suit the society and its rulers' needs.

high iq philosophies, just to name an example.
tao te ching:
Heaven and earth do not act from (the impulse of) any wish to be benevolent; they deal with all things as the dogs of grass are dealt
with. The sages do not act from (any wish to be) benevolent; they deal with the people as the dogs of grass are dealt with. (black pill)
The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao; The name that can be named is not the eternal Name. ( the limit of langauge and texts)
When the Tao is lost, virtue appears; when virtue is lost, benevolence appears; when benevolence is lost, righteousness appears; and when righteousness is lost, the proprieties appear. ( critique of virtue and morality)

Taoism is great but it doesn't necessarily ask somebody to be indifferent to violence. It also teaches humility.

 

[kevkon]

The gospels only apply to Christianity, Jews do not believe Jesus is the messiah.

Islam and Judaism can be internally disproven; Christianity cannot no matter how many people claim it.

Okay internally disprove Judaism and Islam then.

From my perspective all of the Abrahamic religions are all equally unfalsifiable.

If you could objectively prove a religion wrong then it woulnt exist.

If they can so easily be debunked then why does it exist and why does it have any members or believers what so ever?

 

[kіng]

You can't

 

[Cosmicsdorito]

1. the more a religion offers cope, the less likely it's true.
the same could be applied to philosophies.
people go to this religion for cope, not for truth. desperate people believe in or say crazy things in order to be comforted, or to comfort others.
2. the more a religion relies on a sacred book/sacred books, the less likely it's true.
we know all books are written, compiled and edited by humans. they all contain human error, and reflect their authors and editors' view. that's why the quran and kike bible promote flat earth theory. low iq religion can't realize that language and texts are limited.
3. the more a religion focuses on morality, the less likely it's true.
espacially bluepill morality, love thy neighbor, endure suffering, do not revolt against your ruler kind of stuff. rulers like subservient people. retards can't even realize that morality are fabricated and ever-changing to suit the society and its rulers' needs.

high iq philosophies, just to name an example.
tao te ching:
Heaven and earth do not act from (the impulse of) any wish to be benevolent; they deal with all things as the dogs of grass are dealt
with. The sages do not act from (any wish to be) benevolent; they deal with the people as the dogs of grass are dealt with. (black pill)
The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao; The name that can be named is not the eternal Name. ( the limit of langauge and texts)
When the Tao is lost, virtue appears; when virtue is lost, benevolence appears; when benevolence is lost, righteousness appears; and when righteousness is lost, the proprieties appear. ( critique of virtue and morality)

this guy has lost it, moral subjectivists run into this problem

 

[kevkon]

You can't

Religious people exist so obviously they can lol

 

[Vinícius truecel]

When we read the teachings of Buddha, we realize that he was an extraordinary thinker. Born into a very wealthy family, he rejected materialism and lived a life of asceticism. Later, he returned to the path of moderation, a path of balance. I believe we should respect Buddha; he was a very wise man. He never spoke of God; he was agnostic regarding God. He spoke of nirvana, reincarnation, and negative karma itself until finally reaching nirvana, but he never spoke of God. Jesus Christ stated that there is only one living God and that He is God in human form. Jesus stated that the path to heaven is not paying for sins through a cycle of reincarnation; He stated that the path to heaven is through His death on the cross, where He sacrificed His life for our sins. It is said that a man was sinking in quicksand and cried out for help! Buddha passed by him and said that there was proof that entering quicksand was not a good idea. Muhammad passed by and said it was the will of Allah. Confucius, a determinist, passed by and said, "Let this serve as a lesson to the world: do not tread on quicksand." Then Jesus Christ passed by, extended his hand and said, "Here, friend, hold on tight, I will save you." In other words, I will do for you what you cannot do for yourself. I will save you. That is the fundamental difference between Jesus Christ and all the major religions of the world. All religions say, "Strive, improve, be good." Jesus Christ says, "You cannot do it alone, you have sinned, you have rebelled against God, you are walking towards condemnation." But Christ says, "I want to save you, I am extending my hand through my death on the cross. Hold on tight."

 

[kіng]

Religious people exist so obviously they can lol

They are low IQ and aren't correct, there being multiple religions proves that in itself

 

[kevkon]

They are low IQ and aren't correct, there being multiple religions proves that in itself

You realize when I ask “how did you come to the conclusion that your religion is correct” Im asking for THEM. From their perspective. Im not talking about the objective empirical nature of the universe. I’m asking a philosophical question which is inherently gonna be subjective.

 

[thevineyardworker]

Okay internally disprove Judaism and Islam then.

From my perspective all of the Abrahamic religions are all equally unfalsifiable.

Tractate Shabbat 129b, it is stated that after Jesus' death the power of magic was diminished

What is the “Islamic Dilemma”? - The Islamic Dilemma

The “Islamic Dilemma” is the name of an argument that exposes a foundational error in the Qur’an. If the Qur’an affirms the Torah and the Injil (Gospel) it contradicts them and is wrong. If the Torah and the Injil (Gospel) are corrupted then the Qur’an is still false because it affirms it. Both...

islamicdilemma.com

 

[kіng]

You realize when I ask “how did you come to the conclusion that your religion is correct” Im asking for THEM. From their perspective. Im not talking about the objective empirical nature of the universe. I’m asking a philosophical question which is inherently gonna be subjective.

Well, never expect a satisfactory answer from them

 

[Cosmicsdorito]

What metric or criteria do you use to decide which religion is objectively “true” or superior compared to other religions?

Most people don’t think about this since most people are born into their faith and never really question or think twice about it.

With hundreds of religions in the world what gives you this level of confidence that there’s no chance you could possibly be wrong when the statistical probability is so low. What makes you so sure? What keeps the doubts away?

What leads you to coming to the ultimate conclusion of “yeah this is the true religion and I know I’m right”

We can evaluate theological claims. Miracle/prophecy claims and their evidence. But, all religions require faith after a certain point.

 

[Cosmicsdorito]

3. the more a religion focuses on morality, the less likely it's true.

This is retarded, number 1 and 2 makes sense, but morality and ethics is the backbone of religion. It's created to guide us on morality and ethics. Ethics that make us subservient being more likely to be false is true but that's it.

 

[Cosmicsdorito]

When the Tao is lost, virtue appears; when virtue is lost, benevolence appears; when benevolence is lost, righteousness appears; and when righteousness is lost, the proprieties appear. ( critique of virtue and morality)

So the Tao is the ultimate good? seems interesting

 

[dumbozhina]

This is retarded, number 1 and 2 makes sense, but morality and ethics is the backbone of religion. It's created to guide us on morality and ethics. Ethics that make us subservient being more likely to be false is true but that's it.

what i am criticizing is moral realism, the position that there are objective moral facts or truths, independent of human beliefs or attitudes. in monotheistic religions that was backed by God.

So the Tao is the ultimate good? seems interesting

no that's retarded. there is no ultimate good.

​

 

[Cosmicsdorito]

what i am criticizing is moral realism, the position that there are objective moral facts or truths, independent of human beliefs or attitudes. in monotheistic religions that was backed by God.

no that's retarded. there is no ultimate good.

​

Moral realism doesn't have to be derived from a God, theists say that to support their religion and criticise atheists for a lack of morality. Many philosophers grounded objective morality from the natural world. You and them just need to agree upon a few axioms, things you accept but can't prove. Like pain is bad, happiness is better, etc. People always say this is "an appeal to nature" or a "naturalistic fallacy" but every human has to rely on axioms.

 

[Cosmicsdorito]

independent of human beliefs or attitudes

what about if they're derived from genetics?

 

[esdeathlover]

What metric or criteria do you use to decide which religion is objectively “true” or superior compared to other religions?

Most people don’t think about this since most people are born into their faith and never really question or think twice about it.

With hundreds of religions in the world what gives you this level of confidence that there’s no chance you could possibly be wrong when the statistical probability is so low. What makes you so sure? What keeps the doubts away?

What leads you to coming to the ultimate conclusion of “yeah this is the true religion and I know I’m right”

you cant. I was involved in the apologetics sphere for a while. The top apologists know the objections to their religions, but they believe their job is to do damage control. David Erhan(well known Eastern Orthodox debater) knows the case of Cyril being a diophysite is weak. Another one is Islamicapex I and Agen both refuted him and cooked him on the sign of Jonah argument, but because it was hard for laymen to refute, my previous camp, the Oriental camp, knew that the Marian apparitions were weak, yet they ran it because muslims were having a hard time refuting it.

 

[Cosmicsdorito]

no that's retarded. there is no ultimate good.

you're a taoist?

 

[Cosmicsdorito]

you cant. I was involved in the apologetics sphere for a while. The top apologists know the objections to their religions, but they believe their job is to do damage control. David Erhan(well known Eastern Orthodox debater) knows the case of Cyril being a diophysite is weak. Another one is Islamicapex I and Agen both refuted him and cooked him on the sign of Jonah argument, but because it was hard for laymen to refute, my previous camp, the Oriental camp, knew that the Marian apparitions were weak, yet they ran it because muslims were having a hard time refuting it.

random people

 

[esdeathlover]

random people

These people have millions of views.

But, fine, the most prominent scholar on the acts of Ephesus and Chalcedon, Richard Price, doesn't know if his religion is true or not.He affirms Cyril bribed and twisted the government and goes as far as to say Ephesus didn't produce any dogma