Hello everyone. Lately I've been struggling with the concept of religion and it just came to be that everyone believes their own religion to be the ultimate truth. So, please please please tell me what religion you follow and why (with reasons and proofs) do you believe in it.

I would be so grateful thank you. 😭😭😭🙏🙏

Not your central figure, but the religion as a whole.

Ours would probably be The American bison.

They will be useful to me as a Shia Muslim inshallah

I don't know if this occurs in other religions; but in Christian disagreements between denominations, people will often on all sides try to posit that Scripture "plainly" or "clearly" points to their position, when a blind unbiased reading of the Bible would clearly not.

An example is the Trinity. Yes, there's evidence for the Trinity that can be gleaned in Scripture; I'm a Trinitarian Christian and believe in that teaching. But it's not "clearly" laid out like my Sunday school teachers made it out to be.

Another example is "on this rock I build my church" said to be "plain evidence" that the current line of Popes is Peter's successors, and that the Catholic Church was appointed by God. A bad argument? No, I can 100% see it. But the smug, "how can you not see this" attitude of most people I've heard cite it makes no sense to me. You read it that way because you were brought up to read it that way. I give Catholics a bit of a pass because, unlike Evangelicals, y'all ADMIT that tradition and the church has an influence on how you read Scripture. But still.

Then you get into debates between Christians and Jews on the Old Testament, where many Christians make it sound like the prophets clearly, inarguably point to Christ and anybody who claims not to see it is delusional. But on a naked reading, you have to really squint to see that.

And again, I'm not saying that I throw out any of these interpretations. But to act like they're clear and indisputable from a blank reading seems either dishonest or close-minded to me. And the smug, mocking attitude that often accompanies it is even worse.

I think it's quite...fascinating.

To find God in wires and fluorescence, circuitry and metal...

The desire to become one with the machine...

To abandon your paltry flesh and merge with cold, certain steel...

Oh to feel that eternal humm of fans and the spark of circuitry in my flesh...

Sort of as it sounds. For years I’ve referred to myself as agnostic, however even though I was raised southern Baptist, I do not singularly identify with the idea of a monotheistic entity.

Rather I believe that in attempting to label and classify the meaning of a higher entity, the construct is then inherently a man-made projection rather than the true ethereal deity(s) that are omnipresent. Meaning that by defining God, God is no longer a “god” rather it’s now a man-made concept. It pretty much rejects the idea of God, which cites that by labeling and classifying the entity(s) and means of worship and beliefs of the religion, that the purity of said entity is diluted and no longer truly ethereal. And the continued attempt to classify and label is a folly of man’s hubris as we will never be able to truly construct nor obtain a full understanding. However it still recognizes external forces beyond our comprehension are at work within the larger world and day-to-day existence.

But then I also have this idea of everything existing within four spheres: the human (body), the spirit (soul), the earth (the natural world, and the universe (whatever omnipresent being(s) that exists that humans have tried to label, categorize, and worship.

I’m not sure if any of this makes sense but I’ve never really felt true with the agnostic label but wanted to know if others have ever had similar discussions.

I am an athiest, and I wasn't raised around any religion. Recently, I've become curious about religions and how they work.

So, in accordance with my research, I'd like to know why you follow the religion that you do. All religions are welcome to answer, and I really, really encourage that you do lol.

Thank you!

Atheists say that all theists are as atheistic as them

For example there are 4000 gods and theist believes in one god and atheist 0 . The atheist says that you are almost as atheistic as me just that i believe in one less god than you do but this creates a loophole

That's like saying as a single man says to a married guy I am also married just that I have one less wife than you so you are also almost bachelor as me

And this is not to deny that theist sees other 3999 gods the same way as atheist does , this can be true

And I feel there is less of a difference between 2 people who believes in 4000 gods and 1 god

Respectively

Than compared to 2 people who believe in 0 and 1 god respectively it's not about quantity here

Hello everyone, I have been searching for a long time and I feel lost. My main problem is that, for instance, I can't feel like I belong to any religion because I am not someone who likes performing rituals. Almost every religion has different forms of worship, but mentally, I don't feel well enough to fulfill them. I want to believe in something; I want to feel a sense of belonging to a religion. Otherwise, I will just hang around as an atheist or an apatheist, which doesn't give me the happiness I am looking for.

While researching how different religions view the afterlife, I came across an Islamic philosophical theory that caught my interest because it completely changes the traditional view.
This view belongs to an Islamic Shia philosophical tradition called Transcendent Philosophy. One of the main founders and developers of this view is a scholar titled Sadr al-Muta'allihin (Foremost among the Theosophers). Doesn't that sound like a unique title?
Simply put, this perspective states that the afterlife including Heaven and Hell is not something pre-built where a person enters as they are, while it remains as it is. Instead, a person builds Heaven or builds Hell through their actions. Good and righteous deeds are what build Heaven, while bad and wrongful deeds are what build Hell. This concept is called (Embodiment of Deeds), where the actions and choices a person makes in this life physically embody themselves to become the very place they go to after death. A person builds their Heaven stone by stone, palace after palace, and plants one tree after another, along with all the intricate details within it.
What is even more interesting is that this view doesn't stop there; it suggests that a person also shapes their actual physical form in the afterlife through their actions and behavior. Someone whose actions are genuinely human will have a human body there, whereas someone whose actions resemble those of a beast, an animal, or a demon will take the form of a beast, animal, or demon. For example, it is mentioned that someone who ignores the truth and commits bad deeds will be blind in the afterlife because they were spiritually blind in this life. Someone who acts arrogantly toward people and looks down on them will be resurrected as small as ants, stepped on by others.
According to this view, a person builds their own destiny with their own hands, whether in Heaven or in Hell.
Do you know of any other interesting perspectives from different philosophies or religions that I should look into?

It is known that Zoroastrianism had a huge influence over the development of 2nd Temple Judaism.

However, could we even affirm 2nd Temple Yahweh to be an adaption of Ahura Mazda itself, rather than an evolution of the previous Yahweh ?

Original Yahweh was one of many gods, and he was the national god of Israel and reckoned to be the highest. But in no way anyone believed the concept of divinity to be shared by one entity only. The basic structure of 1st Temple Judaism was not so different from the rest of contemporary religions. They never saw the divine as absolute, but rather recognized multiple gods each with limited power.

By 2nd Temple Judaism, when the O.T. started to be redacted, there was a shift toward seeing Yahweh as an absolute, eternal, omnipotent being that was necessarily one and to whom all divine attributes belonged.

Such developments already happened before in Zoroastrianism, and, indeed, by the time 2nd Temple Judaism arose the Persian empire was influencing Israelites.

But can we go as far as affirming 2nd Temple Yahweh to be derived from Ahura Mazda, rather than original Yahweh ? Could the name Yahweh have shifted its meaning toward being the Israelite word for the same entity known by Persians as Ahura Mazda ?

Ahura Mazda itself was too, originally, one of many gods of the Sintashta religion, the ancestor of both Mazdeism and Vedic religion. In early Vedic religion this same god was known as Varuna and was the highest one of many gods. While between Iranic speakers it became an only god and overtime basically an impersonal cosmic force, in Vedic religion it was demoted to water god, and while Indra became the new chief deity, no monotheistic development took place.

At very least, the history of Iranic branch Varuna turning into Ahura Mazda and of Yahweh turning into 2nd Temple Yahweh is very similiar.

i mean there’s thousands of religions and unique beliefs, someone had to have the right answer at some point. and i know that we can’t, so a real “correct” answer isnt what im looking for.

background u can skip: im a catholic, although i love my faith and trust a lot of my beliefs, but i worry some of my ideas about sin and the supernatural are gonna send me to Hell if the Church is right and idk if i like that. for example, im bisexual; i need to quit my loving relationship with another girl and seek the same forgiveness as, for example, a rapist? his life wont change, and neither will his victim’s which he permanently traumatized. how can an all-loving God condemn love?

so basically i came on here to ask this and other things when i looked at the flair list, theres sooo many religions i didnt know about! it has me worrying tho. my real question is, how can we be so sure of 1 single religion being completely true, when there’s thousands of competitors? and if im wrong, im gonna suffer for all of eternity?? how do people not worry about that???

For me, I started by comparing the ideologies of different schools of thought and religions.

Christianity teaches that Jesus is God, the Son of God, and the Lord and Savior of humanity. Christians believe that Jesus died for humanity’s sins and that salvation comes through him. However, the concept of the Trinity, which describes God as one being in three persons, is something I personally find difficult to reconcile with the idea of absolute monotheism.

Judaism teaches that the Jewish people have a special covenant with God. However, I initially interpreted this as the belief that Jews consider themselves superior to everyone else, although I am open to correcting this understanding.

Hinduism encompasses a wide variety of beliefs, including the worship of multiple deities, as well as different interpretations of the divine. Many Hindus use statues and other physical representations as focal points for worship, although these are not necessarily understood as gods in themselves.

Buddhism, in many of its forms, focuses more on spiritual practice, ethics, and understanding the nature of existence than on belief in a creator God. For this reason, I initially viewed it more as a philosophy or a way of life than a religion, although I recognize that it is generally classified as a religion.

Atheism, on the other hand, rejects belief in God or gods. One of my initial objections was that I understood atheism to imply that the universe and the first living organisms came into existence through mere coincidence. However, I recognize that atheism itself does not necessarily make claims about how the universe or life originated. My concern was that, if I am going to base my worldview on evidence and science, I should also question the assumptions underlying my own position rather than simply accept one side.

As for Islam, among the religions I considered, it stood out to me because of its uncompromising emphasis on the oneness of God (Allah). It also recognizes that non-Muslims are not necessarily all destined for Hell, with their ultimate judgment belonging to God. Furthermore, Islam offers not only a theological framework but also a comprehensive way of life.

Ultimately, I chose Islam because, even after reading the Quran several times, I personally could not find a contradiction or an error that convinced me it was false. Nor could I find a convincing argument against it online. In contrast, while reading the Bible and the Torah, I came across several passages that I interpreted as mistakes or contradictions, despite not having finished even half of their respective texts.

Of course, I am open to discussing and reconsidering any of these points. I am not claiming that my understanding of every religion or philosophical position is perfect, and I am willing to hear arguments that challenge my conclusions.

One final factor that influenced my decision not to embrace atheism was a more personal consideration. If I am going to choose a worldview, I would rather believe that my life has a purpose and that there is an afterlife than believe that existence ultimately has no greater meaning. I also worry that, given my current mindset, a worldview in which death is the absolute end could negatively affect my outlook on life and my future.

That said, I do not want to believe something merely because it comforts me. I would rather believe something because I consider it true, while acknowledging that my desire for purpose and an afterlife may also influence how I approach the question.

Hi,

How come all the animals depicted in the stories and manuscripts are only animals from Indian subcontinent only?

Tigers, Lions, Elephants, Rodents, etc are local to the Indian subcontinent.

How come animals like Zebras, Giraffe, Kangaroo, Polar bear, ostrich, etc that are not familiar to Indian geography not mentioned anywhere?

Was the knowledge limited to the subcontinent?

Can anyone explain.

Hi everyone! I’m looking for participants who practice Hinduism, Sikhism, Taoism, Buddhism, or Confucianism for a 1 on 1 interfaith dialogue assessment for my university project.

This will be chat-based only spread over 5 weeks. We’ll discuss beliefs, practices, ethics and community contribution (2 questions per week,answer at your own pace)

If you're open to participating, please feel free to send me a dm or you can comment down below and i will personally message you. Thank you!

It's crazy how such an obvious lie no older than 400 years can cause so much death and suffering. It's insane how it could have been prevented had people just seen this blatant innovation for what it was.

Inspired by a scene in Long Story Short where the family is teaching a younger relative how to light the sabbath candles and they demonstrate it with a gesture of fanning of the flames towards oneself with one's hands. She asks what it means, and none of them have an answer. It's just what you do.

In my Zen practice, we sit in a way that kind of forms a rectangle, with the master and one end and the senior students leading the ceremony at the other. It's a faux pas to walk through the center of the rectangle. If we need to get up for whatever reason, we walk around the perimeter. I've never really known why.

I am curious to see everyone's feedback. I am not proselytizing; I am merely asking a question. All questions are welcome!

Allah never says there is a mistake in the other Holy books he just criticizes the believers on how they Interpretent these books.

The Trinity is not even biblical. If someone reads the bible he thinks Jesus is a Prophet.

Since Muslim claim that the Torah and gospel are actually Islamic scriptures...why would god can't preserve two of its divine scripture from corruption?

I get it the Quran was sent directly come from god and the previous two were written by men (which was never been an issue to start with but thata another story) but that just cause another problem since the Quran claim to be perfectly preserved yet ask it's followers to go back seeking knowledge from those corrupted scriptures "if they are in doubt"

And even innthr topic of corruption. while reading the Quran I actually didn't find any verse saying the the scriptures themselves were not preserve or had any change in it which surprise since I heard it so much from Muslim thata I thought it would be there. It only state that the people of the book(Jews and Christian) "twist it's words with their tongue"

First of all, I'm not saying religious beliefs are real. Even if you are religious (as I am), you have to accept that some religious beliefs cannot be true because of contradictions between systems of belief.

Still, I do believe religion has a very grounding power in society. Let me explain myself.

Religion often offers or promotes a template of life and a set of values, such as caring for the kids, the elderly, getting married, joining a community, etc. I understand that many people reject such a template, and yet most people only slightly modify it. I understand some people see it as a "box" and yet even in religion itself, this template is often overridden, such as priests never marrying or a monastic lifestyle. People don't have many lives to test for themselves every lifestyle, so it makes sense to assume a default and built on it. This template slowly changes, such as most religions shifting to monogamy for cultural and social reasons, even when theologically polygamy may be OK in their holy books. I also understand that a Secular lifestyle can offer a template too, but usually secularism was founded as counterpoints to these social templates, so it may clash with them. Beside, I don't think a secular valuesystem will ever be as influential as religion unless it's practiced as a religion, which was the case in some communist anti-theistic countries, but it's not the usual.

Another criticism of religion as being "delulu" is that it believes in Heaven, helping people cope with death with a 'delusion'. My issue with this criticism is that religion does not necessarily believe that the afterlife is better; some religions believe in hell or reincarnation into lower beings, or that wee just stop existing. In this context, it seems more so that heaven/hell, at least in religions that have it, is more like a North and South. We may also argue that values such as equality are even more delusional, since they deny the reality that we all are different, and yet we see the value in them as ideals, just as we can see the value in heaven/hell as ideals or counterideals.

There is also the criticism that religions devalues this life in favor of the next. This makes the least sense to me, since religion encourages family building, community and culture, all which is on this life. In fact, religion itself is about this life, since arguably in the afterlife it's so obvious that it is not needed. Religion does discourage some "fun" stuff such as gambling or sex with strangers or being drunk, but that seems to be more of a focus on the consequences of those things rather than the things themselves. One may envy the experience, but never the consequences, and I don't think you need to be religious or "test it" to realize that.

Conclusion / TLDR: I do agree with atheists that religion sometimes act as a hivemind, but I think that is a good thing because Individuals can't experience or know everything. It makes sense they choose the safest path on most facets of life, while individuation is encouraged on either a choosen alternative lifestyle (such as ministry) or individual interpretations of the Path without going rogue or indiscriminate, which adds to the odds of losing. I guess that is why so many religions use terms such as the "path" to describe themselves.