All Wrong

Originally posted by Lord Shark
I agree that the basis of all religions is similar, but I'm afraid it isn't anything like 'love each other, love god'.

But even if it were, the different religions can't agree on what god is and what kinds of love are permitted.

Depends on how you interpret the scriptures . Depends on your relationship with the Divine.
My take is 'love each other', 'understand God'. But again its just my interpretation.
I have been accused of peddling easy answers. While they may read easy , put in practice, they are certainly very hard to follow.
I dont believe I'm painting a rosy picture, even though I will admit I tend to sit on the optimistic side of 'reality' (being realistic).

Sometimes I wish I could just throw out some easy Christian answers,(Sorry christians,I realize you are not all the same). I could easily join the choir of Jesus pushers but I dont because that is not my experience.
I try to reflect as accurately and honestly as possible my spiritual experiences.
I do think I am on the right track,even though I have some fine tuning to do, but mygeneral direction wont change.
Anyway,I think its time to put my own saying on spiritual matters into action,ie.: "I'm serious about being not serious" 🙂

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Hinduism and Bhuddism are more word of mouth and experiential than knowledge gained from books.

And how is that relevant? My point is that as far as I know, nether have the concept of "One God", and the whole 'love one another' think is a universal teaching regardless of belief and is not really a religious thing at all.

Originally posted by twhitehead
And how is that relevant? My point is that as far as I know, nether have the concept of "One God", and the whole 'love one another' think is a universal teaching regardless of belief and is not really a religious thing at all.

Its relevant cause they are similar.

Originally posted by rwingett
Would you care to grace us with your opinion of WHY Hitchens is wrong?

religions don't each support one thing they are more complex than that. all religions can't be right at the same time. that means that they can all be partially right. or partially wrong. "righter" or "wronger" than each other. all wrong.

hitchens hadn't discovered the ultimate truth, he is just stating an opinion. he is no better than a religious person in this regard, he simply yells the possibility that he likes the most. no science involved, not even basic reason. just a subjective wish.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Its relevant cause they are similar.

Similar in what way? They are religions, but thats about it. Of course you can find similarities between religions, but at least one of the ones you gave is quite clearly false, and the other is universal even outside religions - thus your whole argument is flawed.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Similar in what way? They are religions, but thats about it. Of course you can find similarities between religions, but at least one of the ones you gave is quite clearly false, and the other is universal even outside religions - thus your whole argument is flawed.

I believe the Bhudda was born into a Hindu society. Hence spoke using the local lingo.
After he achieved enlightenment , sitting under the bhoddi tree, he went about preaching,(or enlightening). others.

😵

Word soon spread of this new guy with his own take on spirituality. I believe the Hindus made him the sixteenth avatar of Hinduism after some time.

Or you could say they a different in a number of ways. I prefer to focus on the similarities. How about you?

I think you will find that Hitchens was making a clever (on the surface) joke, not a dep philosophical statement.

Originally posted by leedsagain
I think you will find that Hitchens was making a clever (on the surface) joke, not a dep philosophical statement.

i don't find it funny.

Originally posted by 667joe
Since it is obviously inconceivable that all religions can be right, the most reasonable conclusion is that they are all wrong. Christopher Hitchens

You're right only One is right, Catholicism, but they can hardly ALL be wrong because if ALL were wrong, nothing could really exist, because most have a answer for existence so if all wrong nothing would exist

Originally posted by daniel58
You're right only One is right, Catholicism, but they can hardly ALL be wrong because if ALL were wrong, nothing could really exist, because most have a answer for existence so if all wrong nothing would exist

sure, the inquisition is one major reason why catholicism is the uber religion. also the fact that the pope is like an ubermensch on earth.
no religion is right. they all have merits.

also i love how you blinked logic out of existence in that last phrase.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
sure, the inquisition is one major reason why catholicism is the uber religion. also the fact that the pope is like an ubermensch on earth.
no religion is right. they all have merits.

also i love how you blinked logic out of existence in that last phrase.

Okay I have no idea what you're talking about but just saying "no religion is right" is not a logical argument, it's not even an argument, it's a statement and a false one at that 🙂

Originally posted by daniel58
You're right only One is right, Catholicism, but they can hardly ALL be wrong because if ALL were wrong, nothing could really exist, because most have a answer for existence so if all wrong nothing would exist

Wow. You believe that?

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Wow. You believe that?

yes and your point is...?

Originally posted by daniel58
You're right only One is right, Catholicism, but they can hardly ALL be wrong because if ALL were wrong, nothing could really exist, because most have a answer for existence so if all wrong nothing would exist

Rec'd!!

Originally posted by daniel58
yes and your point is...?

I'm not making a point, I was just surprised at your reasoning here. You must think all us non-catholics are real dummies, eh?