Which religion or belief is the dumbest

the culture of deference

For me scientology and creationists have to be up there as the dumbest and most gullible.

muslim jew and christian are pretty much the same, indoctrination usually has to start at a young age.

But is there really any difference in believing in any of them?
Should you be allowed / encouraged to hold these contradictory beliefs?

Genghiz Cohen

Believing that all life SPONTANEOUSLY FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER EVOLVED FROM NOTHING!!!!!

Gregor Samsa

the culture of deference wrote: »

Which religion or belief is the dumbest?

Anything but mine.

the culture of deference wrote: »

Should you be allowed / encouraged to hold these contradictory beliefs?

Scratch my facetious answer. The dumbest belief is one that thinks that others shouldn't be allowed to believe something.

ShooterSF

I dunno I have only a reasonable level of understanding of one religion and there have been thousands I'd say (at least). My south park knowledge of mormonism would rank it pretty high.
Then again what's "dumber" mormon style crazy belief or Jehovah's much more life threatening refusal of transfusions?
Question needs better definition IMO.

liamw

1. Any belief system that incorporates an omnipotent being that just happens to have human characteristics and cares about petty things in our personal lives.

2. Belief in life after death.

robindch

ShooterSF wrote: »

Then again what's "dumber" mormon style crazy belief or Jehovah's much more life threatening refusal of transfusions?

Grab a copy of this ans ask that question again:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under_the_Banner_of_Heaven

Dave!

the culture of deference wrote: »

For me scientology and creationists have to be up there as the dumbest and most gullible.

muslim jew and christian are pretty much the same, indoctrination usually has to start at a young age.

But is there really any difference in believing in any of them?
Should you be allowed / encouraged to hold these contradictory beliefs?

You should of course be allowed to hold them, and everyone else should be allowed to ridicule them for the silliness that they are.

sincere113

Church of the flying spaghetti monster....

http://www.venganza.org/

Sean Moncrieff did a piece on this on his radio show a couple of years ago.

rainbow kirby

Iglesia Maradoniana

Dave!

sincere113 wrote: »

Church of the flying spaghetti monster....

http://www.venganza.org/

Sean Moncrieff did a piece on this on his radio show a couple of years ago.

Littlehorny

As far i can see most religions think its ok to hate everyone else who isnt of the same religion, how dumb and ignorant is that? I don't want be part of something that thinks its ok to hate my fellow man or woman!

smokingman

Any one where you're told to be subservient to something invisible.

ShooterSF

robindch wrote: »

Grab a copy of this ans ask that question again:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under_the_Banner_of_Heaven

Some crazy stuff there too. Can't say I take issue with the idea of polygamy though...

I guess the crazier religions will be found in smaller sects than mainstream (or a small variant of the mainstream)

antiskeptic

the culture of deference wrote: »

muslim jew and christian are pretty much the same, indoctrination usually has to start at a young age.

The belief that only the people to have rejected what they were taught as children are smart and objective .. is pretty dumb.

Mr. Presentable

Of the major religions I'd say Mormon. Scientology isn't a religion - it's a cult.

OpenYourEyes

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

Of the major religions I'd say Mormon. Scientology isn't a religion - it's a cult.

Isn't a cult just a small religion though?
And a religion just a big cult?

im invisible

smokingman wrote: »

Any one where you're told to be subservient to something invisible.

Hey there!

I am the lord your dog...

That Anakin will bring balance to the force. I wasnt convinced by him at all.

ShooterSF

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

Of the major religions I'd say Mormon. Scientology isn't a religion - it's a cult.

Religion is to cult as spud is to potato.


(Hides from King Mob)

ddef

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

Believing that all life SPONTANEOUSLY FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER EVOLVED FROM NOTHING!!!!!

This could be used for the Big Bang theory too.

mikhail

The OP seems to be trolling.

I find the craziest idea to be one I held as a kid: that my religion was definitely true because of my parents, the Bible, religion class in school, mass every Sunday...

Thing is, were I born in Saudi Arabia of Muslim parents, I could have held pretty much the same faith in a completely different religion because of my parents, the Koran, religion class in school, mass (do they call it that?) every Saturday...

And similarly insert any religion and appropriate region and ritual in there. So the questions I put to religious people when I have a sit down conversation about this is, "Why is your religion the right one? Why do you believe if not for those reasons?" I've never gotten anything like a satisfactory answer.

magicbastarder

those crazy ass nutjobs in the south pacific for whom prince phillip is god.

Burgo

magicbastarder wrote: »

those crazy ass nutjobs in the south pacific for whom prince phillip is god.

In fairness I think they're on to something.

Captain Chaos

ddef wrote: »

This could be used for the Big Bang theory too.

No it can't because something had to be there for the Big Bang to occur in the first place. It is an event that happened because of certain group of elements in a certain time frame interacted in a certain way. It was not nothing and then everything.

magicbastarder

Captain Chaos wrote: »

No it can't because something had to be there for the Big Bang to occur in the first place.

you appear to possess knowledge which would be of great interest to the physics and cosmology community. you should pass on that knowledge.

Captain Chaos

magicbastarder wrote: »

you appear to possess knowledge which would be of great interest to the physics and cosmology community. you should pass on that knowledge.

It's called research on material by the group of people whom which you speak of. It is generally agreed that the "Big Bang" did not just pop into existance as it happened, something had to be there before.

ShooterSF

mikhail wrote: »

The OP seems to be trolling.

Actually OP picked two minimally controversial choices. Had he picked a mainstream belief followed on this site, maybe. His posting style is just eh less diplomatic imo.

I think the prince phillip one holds the lead for me and I expect if this thread doesn't go off on a tangent we'll get to read about some more small size obscure and whacky religions.

magicbastarder

for people who don't know about the prince phillip movement:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Philip_Movement

Turtwig

Surely that would have be that Objectivism shyte. The more I look I at it the stupider it appears. Why oh why did I even have to become of its existence. (Thanks Nodin btw, for the terrific link)

magicbastarder

Captain Chaos wrote: »

It's called research on material by the group of people whom which you speak of. It is generally agreed that the "Big Bang" did not just pop into existance as it happened, something had to be there before.

from what i understood, any discussion of what was there before the big bang is highly speculative.

View

Captain Chaos wrote: »

It is generally agreed that the "Big Bang" did not just pop into existance as it happened, something had to be there before.

By whom?