Is Christianiy the best religion?

Originally posted by Andromeda719
I've often wondered why people always question what the "best" religion is. As FreakyKBH pointed out, anyone can make their own religion. Does that make it true? I can say I am an omnipotent and good at chess, but that doesn't mean it's true.

Religion isn't some vague philosophy about how to live your life; it's an ideal that governs your entire exis ...[text shortened]... ple blast them when they don't deserve it, but that's a topic for another thread).

I'm afraid you're mistaken. They're all made up. Seeing as they are all equal in that regard, that puts us back to the question of which is the best religion. Assuming that any of them has any merit at all.

Originally posted by Andromeda719
There is a true religion and there are false religions.

lol. That's pretty funny. Shall I just take your word for it, then?

Originally posted by David C
lol. That's pretty funny. Shall I just take your word for it, then?

Of course not. You should do as everyone should: weigh the evidence for yourself. If you find the evidence for the claims of Christianity wanting, you have myriad options available. Unfortunately, they all add up to nothing, save a decent manner in which to live ones life (in most cases).

Originally posted by rwingett
I'm afraid you're mistaken. They're all made up. Seeing as they are all equal in that regard, that puts us back to the question of which is the best religion. Assuming that any of them has any merit at all.

If, as you insist, Christianity is "made up," then all are equal, all are lost. Fortunately for us, you are mistaken.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Orthodox Christianity is not a religion, per se. As a religion is what man concocts to gain the approbation of a god(s), and whereas there is no work to be done in Christianity with regards to salvation, Christianity is eliminated from the category of world religions.

What is generally known as "Orthodox Christianity" fits perfectly the generally accepted definition of the English word 'religion'. If you feel you do not fit this definition, fine. But don't try to claim that english words hold different meanings just so that you can feel like you are not one of the crowd.

From Wikipedia:
Religion is a system of social coherence based on a common group of beliefs or attitudes concerning an object, person, unseen being, or system of thought considered to be supernatural, sacred, divine or highest truth, and the moral codes, practices, values, institutions, and rituals associated with such belief or system of thought. It is sometimes used interchangeably with "faith" or "belief system"[1], but is more socially defined than that of personal convictions.

Originally posted by twhitehead
What is generally known as "Orthodox Christianity" fits perfectly the generally accepted definition of the English word 'religion'. If you feel you do not fit this definition, fine. But don't try to claim that english words hold different meanings just so that you can feel like you are not one of the crowd.

From Wikipedia:
Religion is a system of soci ...[text shortened]... or "belief system"[1], but is more socially defined than that of personal convictions.

No disputing the venerble Wik, but... while all 'faiths' would necessarily fit the definition of faith, only one of them doesn't require work of some kind in order to gain the approbation of God.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
No disputing the venerble Wik, but... while all 'faiths' would necessarily fit the definition of faith, only one of them doesn't require work of some kind in order to gain the approbation of God.

The lack of work required may make your religion 'stand appart' from others but it doesnt stop it being a religion (or faith). Can you find any dictionary that defines the word 'religion' as requiring work? I believe that some religions do not neccessarily incorporate the concept of God and so they also cannot "require work of some kind in order to gain the approbation of God".

Originally posted by rwingett
I'm afraid you're mistaken. They're all made up. Seeing as they are all equal in that regard, that puts us back to the question of which is the best religion. Assuming that any of them has any merit at all.

If you have weighed the evidence and decided that they all are made up, then, yes, there are better religions and worse religions. However, I then would more label them philosophies, not exactly religion. However whatever you call it really doesn't matter.

I apologize for not making it clear what I meant when I said "religion." My definition of religion (I'm not saying this is everybody's but what mine is, so people understand what I'm saying) is your answer to the questions "Where did this all come from?", "What is my purpose here?", etc. This encompasses more than just how to live your life. That's what I meant when I said "it's an ideal that governs your entire existence." If you, say, believe the Christian God created the world and has a purpose for you, etc., then you will follow that religion.

Assuming each religion has a creation story that is different, and that each one says it is correct, you can pretty much infer that only one is correct. You could also say that they're all made up, if that's your opinion. As I stated before, I have studied the evidence and decided that Christianity is completely factual, so I follow it.

Using my definition of religion, there is no problem with the phrase "There is a true religion and there are false religions." It is simple logic, not something that needs proving.

Philosophies (in my definition) are ways of living your life and looking at the world. There are better philosophies and there are worse philosophies. There are no true philosophies and there are no false philosophies. It is the opposite with religion.

As I stated before, I have studied the evidence and decided that Christianity is completely factual, so I follow it.

I'm wondering what the evidence is that you have studied.

Did you study the evidence for other religions first? Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Judaism? and only when you came to Christianity there was more or better evidence than with the others (if so, what was the deciding evidence)?

Or was Christianity the first religion you studied in any depth? Have you studied others to a similar degree as you did with Christianity before you decided it was the best one? Did you study any other religions at all before you made up your mind?

--- Penguin.

Originally posted by Andromeda719
I apologize for not making it clear what I meant when I said "religion." My definition of religion (I'm not saying this is everybody's but what mine is, so people understand what I'm saying) is your answer to the questions "Where did this all come from?", "What is my purpose here?", etc. This encompasses more than just how to live your life. That's what ...[text shortened]... ated the world and has a purpose for you, etc., then you will follow that religion.

It appears then that your definition for religions includes atheism, in which case it is of course the "best" and only "true" religion.

Assuming each religion has a creation story that is different, and that each one says it is correct, you can pretty much infer that only one is correct. You could also say that they're all made up, if that's your opinion. As I stated before, I have studied the evidence and decided that Christianity is completely factual, so I follow it.
I bet that you already had a very strong bias before you did your 'studies'. I am sure that you already believed in the existence of God and that your main experience with any religion had been Christianity.

Using my definition of religion, there is no problem with the phrase "There is a true religion and there are false religions." It is simple logic, not something that needs proving.
The phrase is only logically correct if atheism is considered a religion under your definition.

Originally posted by twhitehead
It appears then that your definition for religions includes atheism, in which case it is of course the "best" and only "true" religion.

[b]Assuming each religion has a creation story that is different, and that each one says it is correct, you can pretty much infer that only one is correct. You could also say that they're all made up, if that's your op e is only logically correct if atheism is considered a religion under your definition.

[/b]Yes, under my definition atheism would be considered a religion. Notice how I had no requirement of a god in my definition. Like I said, this it what I mean when I say religion, not what the actual definition is. We're dealing with ideas, not words, and religion is just a word to express this idea.

Was I a Christian before I started studying? Yes I was, but not a particularly devout one. I don't think I had much bias toward any of them. However, even if I did and do have a bias toward Christianity, that doesn't change the actual things, which I believe are conclusive.

Have I studied other religions? Yes I have and I continue to do so. I am secure enough in my belief that I keep an open mind about other beliefs.

What evidence is there? This really isn't the thread for it, and it's a broad topic, so I'll just touch on it, but what evidence would you expect to find for a historical event such as Christ's life? There are historical documents (both Christian and secular) from primary sources, archaelogical sites, etc.

How about this: instead of me telling you, why don't you research it for yourself? Have YOU done enough research into the matter?

Yes, under my definition atheism would be considered a religion. Notice how I had no requirement of a god in my definition. Like I said, this it what I mean when I say religion, not what the actual definition is. We're dealing with ideas, not words, and religion is just a word to express this idea.

So if atheism is included, then I would suggest it is the most unique of all since it posits no supernatural forces. Therefore atheism is most likely to be correct.

Was I a Christian before I started studying? Yes I was, but not a particularly devout one. I don't think I had much bias toward any of them. However, even if I did and do have a bias toward Christianity, that doesn't change the actual things, which I believe are conclusive.

So you did believe in the Christian God before you started. It's hardly surprising then that you continued to believe in your default faith.

Have I studied other religions? Yes I have and I continue to do so. I am secure enough in my belief that I keep an open mind about other beliefs.

But you will always study them with the (correct in my view) preconception that they are essentially false whereas you will always study Christianity with the (logically unfounded, in my opinion) preconception that it is essentially true.

What evidence is there? This really isn't the thread for it, and it's a broad topic, so I'll just touch on it, but what evidence would you expect to find for a historical event such as Christ's life? There are historical documents (both Christian and secular) from primary sources, archaelogical sites, etc.

I would say that this is an ideal thread for it. The title is Is Christianity the best religion? Any discussion of this question must include reasoning and evidence. The only documentary evidence I am aware of is in the Bible, which probably demonstrates my ignorance. But I am not suggesting that the person did not exist. He quite possibly did, along with Mohamed and Buddha and there may well be objective evidence for there existance.

What I'm suggesting is that there is no more evidence that he performed miracles and was the Son of God than there is evidence that Mohamed was a true Prophet and the Koran is the literal Word of God or that Buddhas's teachings were correct and there is no God, we just go around and around until we figure out how to become enlightened.

How about this: instead of me telling you, why don't you research it for yourself? Have YOU done enough research into the matter?

I think if I were to do that, I should research the other major religions first since Christianity is the one I currently know most about (and I freely admit that my knowledge there is patchy). But the simple fact that there are so many religions (and so many variants of the main ones), all claiming to be The Truth says to me that the most likely answer is that none of them are.

--- Penguin

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
only one of them doesn't require work of some kind in order to gain the approbation of God.

Great! So, all one has to do is "accept Jesus", and they can continue to sell crack to schoolchildren? And God approves? Nice.

Originally posted by Andromeda719
There are historical documents (both Christian and secular) from primary sources, archaelogical sites, etc.

All this tells me is that you haven't critically assessed the evidence as much as you'd like to believe.

Originally posted by David C
All this tells me is that you haven't critically assessed the evidence as much as you'd like to believe.

A case of biased data selection, if ever there was one. He's likely only read sources which agree with his desired conclusion. Is it any wonder that he feels his conclusion has been validated?