Creating a religion...

--amadeus--

The way to make a million dollars is to start a religion

Now who are we to argue with a man as wise (and rich) as L Ron Hubbard? So if you were going to start a religion what are the essential elements you would need to include?

Personally I think there are two key elements:

First you need a lot of old fashioned fire and brimstone. Non-believers have to be dammed in a really nasty way, the threat quotient has to be nice and high to really put the frightners on people

Second you need exclusivity - only those in the religion are saved, everyone else is for frying. You need to make sure people feel good about the fact that they are in and everyone else is out (smug is good) but sprinkled with the fear factor so that all your followers feel scared about their loved ones and so feel a need to convert them.

What else would you need?

PDN

--amadeus-- wrote: »

What else would you need?

Dying a really painful death and then rising from the dead after three days would help.

Let me know when you're thinking of trying it and I'll bring my camcorder.

achtungbarry

We need to pick a group of people to be singled out as sinners and an abomination to our deity.

It has to be a group who have in fact done nothing wrong such as those who have green eyes.

We could then tell people that having green eyes is not a sin in itself but using them to see with is.

There would then be a big row over whether having green eyes was a lifestyle choice or not.

We could also refuse to accept the theory of gravity and launch campaigns to teach intelligent falling in schools.

Oh and we need a couple of violent schisms. Everyone likes a good schism............

We could declare each other to be hertics and infidels and spend centuries knocking the living daylights out of each other.

jim o doom

PDN wrote: »

Dying a really painful death and then rising from the dead after three days would help.

Let me know when you're thinking of trying it and I'll bring my camcorder.

how about having a martyr die a really painful death & then have "members" of your religion profess that he rose three days later & even went so far as to show them his painful death wounds.. like who would disbelieve something as realistic as that??

jim o doom

It probably helps if you have written a few sci fi books so you have the "imaginative capabilities" to come up with something that gullible people will happily part with their hard earned cash for - especially some sort of "fake" psychology so that you can "fix" them..

DapperGent

I wish the rest of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John's speculative fiction hadn't been lost to us.

robindch

--amadeus-- wrote: »

What else would you need?

A holy book around which clouds of pseudoscholars can flit, producing the most amazingly aerobic explanations for why it's true and all the other ones are false, while anybody with two braincells to rub together can see is capable of fitting a million interpretations.

But as PDN implies, nothing goes down so well as a good resurrection. Here's the non-christian Sai Baba who's rescued not one but two people from the clutches of death. With lots of witnesses and some doctors. Not sure about the camcorders:

http://www.saibaba.ws/miracles/resurrectionradhakrishna.htm
http://sathyasaibaba.wordpress.com/2008/12/09/how-sai-baba-brought-walter-cowan-back-to-life/

And, oh yes, extra marks are added for:

• a good preachy voice,
• big buildings, loud music, special costumes,
• a few easily persecuted outgroups that nobody gives a damn about,
• a sanctimonious ingroup,
• a priesthood who lives off the flock,
• meaningless, interminable and very regular rituals -- the bran flakes of the theological world,
• a sense of ingroup persecution (especially if you're in the majority),
• a strong sense that you can't make mistakes and the biggie that everybody's forgotten,
• that each believer is immortal.

That should do it I think -- we should have a new religion by lunchtime. What should we call it?

PDN

robindch wrote: »

That should do it I think -- we should have a new religion by lunchtime. What should we call it?

Marxism?

Oops! I'll get my coat (carefully avoiding tripping over elephant on way out).

achtungbarry

PDN wrote: »

Marxism?

Oops! I'll get my coat (carefully avoiding tripping over elephant on way out).

The president of Moldova reckons Jesus was a communist....

http://www.tiraspoltimes.com/news/moldova_president_says_jesus_was_a_commie.html

Zombrex

PDN wrote: »

Dying a really painful death and then rising from the dead after three days would help.

Let me know when you're thinking of trying it and I'll bring my camcorder.

Nonsense (bullcrap :pac:), that is like saying to get elected into political office a person must help a lot of people and do well at their job. You don't need to actually do those things you just need to be perceived to have done those things. Big difference

achtungbarry

Wicknight wrote: »

(bullcrap :pac:).

Now now;)

Zombrex

--amadeus-- wrote: »

What else would you need?

The principles of religion are pretty simply really.

1) Associate problems people have (you can be as specific or as general as you like) with a supernatural cause, preferably a cause that is framed with the context of human like interactions that are easy to understand and that "make sense" to people

2) Provide a supernatural solution to people that becomes available upon joining/accepting the religion

You can do this about pretty much anything and you will get people following you but how successful your religion is depends on how you tailor both elements to the specific fears of people. For example I don't think Scientology would have worked 200 years ago but in the climate of mid-20th century America it fitted in perfectly with the idea of self improvement and success through achievement. Christianity of course goes to the big guns, death and evil, providing explanation and solution to both of them

robindch

achtungbarry wrote: »

The president of Moldova reckons Jesus was a communist.

That pillock Voronin almost drove me off Kishinau's crappy airport road in August. Came out of nowhere behind me at around 150mph, with outriders, bullet proof cars, army wotsits and his lordship in a motor with reg number "RM1".

Was on my way to Tiraspol which knows a thing or two about communism. Here's a holiday snap from just outside the townhall:



Pridnesitrove is one very weird place.

Now back to our scheduled programs...

Dades

achtungbarry wrote: »

There would then be a big row over whether having green eyes was a lifestyle choice or not.

I have green eyes and it was an over tolerant society that made them that way.

achtungbarry

Dades wrote: »

I have green eyes and it was an over tolerant society that made them that way.

You're just trying to push your green eye agenda on society

Galvasean

One thing we don't need is a shred of coherent evidence.

Zombrex

Galvasean wrote: »

One thing we don't need is a shred of coherent evidence.

not only do you not need evidence, but you need to frame your religion in such a way that evidence becomes largely impossible.

Allowing in the possibility of evidence allows in the possibility that something can be tested and found to be incorrect, which obviously would be bad for your religion.

There isn't a religion in the world that is based around actual testable evidence.

20goto10

You've gotta fit Elvis in there somewhere. a-uh-huh.

ChocolateSauce

You'd need to been morally lacking. How else could someone who is mentally healthy start a religion?

Now, you could start a philosophy and be cool....

DapperGent

The capacity to believe your own bullshít is pretty essential.

Galvasean

DapperGent wrote: »

The capacity to believe your own bullshít is pretty essential.

You think Hubbard believed any of that Xenu stuff?

DapperGent

The Xenu stuff I'm not so sure, dianetics, thetans, psychiatry as evil yes.

Loxosceles

http://www.subgenius.com/pam1/pamphlet.html

Fire, brimstone, damnation, armageddon, exclusivity, eternal salvation guaranteed or triple your money back. This easy pamphlet answers all your unanswered questions.

lox.

Zombrex

Galvasean wrote: »

You think Hubbard believed any of that Xenu stuff?

I think Hubbard believed in his 50 foot yacht :pac:

marco_polo

Wicknight wrote: »

I think Hubbard believed in his 50 foot yacht :pac:

Seems a bit on the small side, you sure of those figures?

The Mad Hatter

marco_polo wrote: »

Seems a bit on the small side, you sure of those figures?

It was 50 cubits, actually.

pH

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

It was 50 cubits, actually.

Surely that's a myth, no way could he get all those animals on a boat that size, and it probably wouldn't float.