# Believers: How do we know which religion is the correct one? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 29, 2010, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311 "2010-11-29T18:42:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/141 "2010-12-02T19:28:49Z")
> [@twistedwords](#): > > So it is proved then that there was no Jesus who ever existed in any time frame on earth as you cannot come up with one credible source of historical fact. Please explain how this is “proved”. > [@](#): > > Why can’t you locate any historical record from the egyptians, romans, greeks? Surely if a man had impacted the world as it is said he did there would be so many writings in alexandria and all over rome in that time period. So why didn’t the emperor of rome write it down somewhere? In his lifetime, Jesus did not impact the entire world or even the entire Roman world. His ministry was limited to a small region of northern Judea and the city of Jerusalem. There was nobody in Alexandria or Rome who had reason to write about him. > [@](#): > > Why aren’t there any records of death as rome had all people put to death written down? I don’t believe that “rome [sic] had all people put to death written down”; I think you’re making that up. If you can actually prove that the Romans had all (not just some) of those they condemned to execution recorded in writing and that there is a list of executions from the relevant time and place which does not include Jesus, I’ll look at it. But of course you can’t prove any such thing, because you made it up. > [@](#): > > Now surely if a man of this importance did live, there would be many historical records of fact and not fictional writing as such in a the bible. First, [there are.](http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4223639/k.567/Ancient_Evidence_for_Jesus_from_NonChristian_Sources.htm) Second, your argument could be summarized as: “We know the Bible is fictional because there’s no historical record of Jesus. We know there’s no historical reocrd of Jesus because the Bible is fictional.” A classic case of circular reasoning. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/142 "2010-12-02T19:30:20Z")
> [@dzero](#): > > Fine and good. I’m sure it is a useful study in terms of finding such neural correlates. So what. It in now way tells us if the experience necessarily implies any sort of divine contact, communication, presence, perception or anything else even remotely transcendent. Did I ever say that this particular study “tells us the experience necessarily implies any sort of divine contact”? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/143 "2010-12-02T19:30:52Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Please explain how this is “proved”. > In his lifetime, Jesus did not impact the entire world or even the entire Roman world. His ministry was limited to a small region of northern Judea and the city of Jerusalem. There was nobody in Alexandria or Rome who had reason to write about him. > I don’t believe that “rome [sic] had all people put to death written down”; I think you’re making that up. If you can actually prove that the Romans had all (not just some) of those they condemned to execution recorded in writing and that there is a list of executions from the relevant time and place which does not include Jesus, I’ll look at it. But of course you can’t prove any such thing, because you made it up. > First, [there are.](http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4223639/k.567/Ancient_Evidence_for_Jesus_from_NonChristian_Sources.htm) > > Second, your argument could be summarized as: “We know the Bible is fictional because there’s no historical record of Jesus. We know there’s no historical reocrd of Jesus because the Bible is fictional.” A classic case of circular reasoning. Would it be possible to take this elsewhere and get back on topic? edited to add: There are on-topic questions in post #133 that should be answered, for instance. ---
**Author:** ![dzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@dzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dzero)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/144 "2010-12-02T19:32:11Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Did I ever say that this particular study “tells us the experience necessarily implies any sort of divine contact”? If that wasn’t the purpose for citing it, then what was. As i said, it does nothing to advance your argument now does it? ---
**Author:** ![dzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@dzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dzero)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/145 "2010-12-02T19:50:47Z")
> [@dzero](#): > > It in now way tells us if the experience necessarily implies any sort of divine contact, communication, presence, perception or anything else even remotely transcendent And by the way, in the future I would appreciate your using the full quote rather than take only the portion you intend to refute. My claim was a great deal broader than your edited quote would indicate. Also, since you had no intention of using the study to support your argument, I would assume that you used it instead as a ruse to see if Diogenes would reject it for the right reasons or the wrong reasons. If so, it had the effect of misleading people who are not sufficiently familiar with the technology to realize how utterly useless it was to the issue at hand, i.e., whether or not Christianity is the true religion. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/146 "2010-12-02T20:00:17Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > I know what the alternate hypotheses are and how much support they have, even if you doubt that I do. > Previously you said that the existence of Q was “indisputable”. Now you’ve acknowledged that there are other hypotheses What is indisputable is that Matthew and Luke share material in common which did not come from Mark. This material is called Q, and for various reasons, it’s pretty clear that this material was not original to either of them, notwithstanding minority hypotheses that one may have copied the other. Even the other hypotheses do not require (and the stylistic analysis of the writing cuts against) any necessity for the material to have been original to either one of them. Q is a shared common source. This is by far the prevailing theorty and the one most supported by evidence. > [@](#): > > There are arguments for Q and argument against Q There are no arguments against it. There are argments as to its source. > [@](#): > > Bit if there actually was such a document as Q, we do not know everything it contained, as you’ve already admitted. Thus you can’t make claims such as “it contained only sayings” or “it contained no miracles”. yes we can, both because of its genre (sayings gospel, non-narrative), because of it’s lack of developed Christology in its sayings and because Matthew and Luke diverge significantly from each other in narrative material (especially the nativity and appearance narratives) which does not come from mark. If Q had miracle stories, they would have used them, but they share no narratives in commo=n that did not come from Mark, which indicates _strongly_ that such material did not exist in Q. > [@](#): > > That’s your source? As I recall, you said that Paul called people idiots for believing in a bodily resurrection and carefully distinguished between bodily and spiritual resurrection. However, in 1 Cor 15, he clearly says that our first body will be changed into a new body at the last day; however, he makes clear that he’s talking about a bodily resurrection. No, he makes it clear that bodily resurrection is not possible. He says that phsyical bodies are replaced by spirirtual ones. Jesus was supposed to have been resurrected in a physical body, not a spiritual one. Paul also seems to show no awareness of the three people that Jesus raised from the dead in physical bodies. Why don’t you actually read the relevant passages. > [@](#): > > The fact that he constantly makes stuff up. For instance [here](http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/fish.html) he says “pagan Romans were far kinder than the Inquisition Christians.” This is true. The stories of Roman persecution of Christians are greatly exaggerated. > [@](#): > > The Spanish Inquisition killed about 2 thousand people in its entire centuries-long existence. For the Romans, killing as many in a single day was not unusual Cite for the Romans killing 2000 Christians a day? And you can’t just reduce the Spanish Inquistion to executions. You also have to count the mass, forced conversions, the torture, the expulsions, the discriminatory laws, etc. The Romans didn’t give much a fuck about Christians, truth be known. Their occasional persecutions were sporadic, whimsical and localized, generally not long lasting or widespread and it wasn’t 2000 people a day. The largest persecution took about 3000 victims total (and that wasn’t in Rome, but in Palestine and Egypt). The Romans were generally pretty tolerant of Christans, even though Christians were disliked by the public because of their perceived un-patriotic, anti-Roman hostility, their refusal to honor the state gods, their refusal to serve in the military and rumors of unsavory practices like ritual cannibalism. They were occasionally scapegoated in an ad hoc way, but they were not systematically targeted and perscuted as pervasively as Jews were during the Inquisition. Some Roman authorities were actually annoyed and grossed out because there was a period when Christians had a martyrdom fetish and were endeavoring intentionally and in groups to provoke their own arrests and executions. Tertullian wrote of one Roman governor who became disgusted enough with Christians trying to turnm themselves over to him for martyrdoms that he told them there were plenty of cliffs they could jump off if they really wanted to do. In any case, while it wasn’t exactly Edenic, the pagan Roman world was still, by and large, more hospitable to Christians than the Inquistion was to Jews (and I notice you truncated Carrier’s quote, but he’s even more right if he’s comparing those respective treatments of Jews. The Romans were very tolerant of Jews and religious freedom in general. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/147 "2010-12-02T20:00:36Z")
> [@dzero](#): > > If so, it had the effect of misleading people who are not sufficiently familiar with the technology to realize how utterly useless it was to the issue at hand, i.e., whether or not Christianity is the true religion. Ummm..that’s not exactly what the thread is about, either-Christianity isn’t mentioned in the OP. ---
**Author:** ![dzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@dzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dzero)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/148 "2010-12-02T20:06:59Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Ummm..that’s not exactly what the thread is about, either-Christianity isn’t mentioned in the OP. No, but I believe it is the argument ITR is trying to make. see post 17 > [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Personally, I studied various religions, learned what the members of each believe, read the apologetic arguments (if any) that they put forward, investigated the evidence and the historical record, and followed where the evidence lead me. I found that the evidence pointed towards Christianity, with so many lines converging in that direction that I eventually converted. > > I have never truly understood the argument that the existence of many distinct religions and many firm believers in each somehow argues against there is probably not a unique, true religion. There are many types of government and many firm believers in each, yet should that shake my faith that democracy is the one and only good form of government? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/149 "2010-12-02T20:10:54Z")
> [@dzero](#): > > No, but I believe it is the argument ITR is trying to make. see post 17 I think most of what he and **Dio** have been posting in this thread has been an off-topic argument, and I’d like to actually talk about the OP. Edited to add: For instance, it would be nice to know what “evidence” led him to his particular sect of Christianity-that would definitely be on topic. ---
**Author:** ![dzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@dzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dzero)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/150 "2010-12-02T20:17:04Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I think most of what he and **Dio** have been posting in this thread has been an off-topic argument, and I’d like to actually talk about the OP. > Edited to add: For instance, it would be nice to know what “evidence” led him to his particular sect of Christianity-that would definitely be on topic. Personally I have tried repeatedly to get ITR to focus on his rationale for believing that Christianity is the true religion - something that, unless I’ve misunderstood, would in fact be on point. I can’t blame Diogenes for responding to so many of his biased and unscholarly claims. It has been extremely educational and I thank him for his efforts. I especially liked the anecdote from Tertullian about the martyrdom fetish. Fascinating stuff! ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/151 "2010-12-02T20:22:03Z")
**ITR champion** , which religions did you seriously consider _before_ you decided on your current religion, and what was the evidence that pointed to it and not to any of the others? ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/152 "2010-12-02T20:28:15Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Where would you put those that insist all the different religions do not conflict with either each other or with their own personal beliefs-people that claim that all the different religions are merely paths to the same god, although even the most cursory glance at these different beliefs would show that they contradict each other in many ways? Most of them are in the deistic category, since if you believe without any contact with god you can assume that others do also. Some are in the toss away anything inconvenient - though here they kind of toss away the tenets of other peoples faith. Polytheists have it a bit easier, since your religion describing n gods in no way prevents there from being n+1. But even they toss away the tenets of other religions. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/153 "2010-12-02T20:34:36Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Most of them are in the deistic category, since if you believe without any contact with god you can assume that others do also. Some are in the toss away anything inconvenient - though here they kind of toss away the tenets of other peoples faith. Polytheists have it a bit easier, since your religion describing n gods in no way prevents there from being n+1. But even they toss away the tenets of other religions. I can see that. Religion A describes how their god creates the world, while Religion B has a different god creating the earth in a different fashion. Unless the polytheist believes that all the deities took turns creating and then destroying the world so that that the next god in line could have his turn doing the same, polytheism has a problem. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/154 "2010-12-02T21:59:44Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I can see that. Religion A describes how their god creates the world, while Religion B has a different god creating the earth in a different fashion. Unless the polytheist believes that all the deities took turns creating and then destroying the world so that that the next god in line could have his turn doing the same, polytheism has a problem. I’m not sure how wedded they are to a particular creation myth, but I generally agree. There is a deeper problem - once those in Religion A start using science or history or logic to downgrade Religion B, they need to explain why the same tools can’t be used on their religion. Done properly it is kind of like a circular firing squad, with those who say they believe only on faith wandering around blind bumping into things, and atheists in a foxhole (protected from the bullets) laughing our asses off. ---
**Author:** ![Cyningablod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9fc29f/32.png) [@Cyningablod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyningablod)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/155 "2010-12-02T23:45:38Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Luke 1:1-4 does not say anything of the sort. Here’s what it actually says. > > “1 Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled[a] among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed.” Note that first line again. “Many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative…” meaning that Luke’s Gospel was not the first. There were other, competing Gospel narratives out there. And Luke sets about to write his own, because he claims to have had “perfect understanding from the very first”, strongly suggesting that he thought his version was more accurate. Ergo: Disagreements about the Christian narrative existed from the very beginning of the faith. > [@](#): > > If you want to assert your intellectual superiority in such childish ways as this, perhaps you should consider getting your facts straight first. Then again, in our last thread, when I asked you for cites to back up _any_ of your claims, you just tossed a few insults at me and turned around and ran, so it seems you’re quite okay with being proven wrong. You’ve never proven me wrong. You just throw up typical unsubstantiated (and unsubstantiat-ABLE) religious bullshit, along with a few specious demands for “cites”, which I have no interest or obligation to give you. (I also find it deliciously ironic that religious believers try to appropriate an evidentialist tactic in debates, when their very belief systems are utterly unsupportable in the first place). I have just demonstrated to you, using textual evidence from the scriptures of your own religion, that “heresies” existed since the very beginning of your religion. Perhaps Gnosticism itself didn’t, but you clearly can’t argue that early Christianity was a homogeneous and monolithic belief system, which is what you were trying to do upthread. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/156 "2010-12-03T01:30:29Z")
> [@Cyningablod](#): > > Note that first line again. “Many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative…” meaning that Luke’s Gospel was not the first. There were other, competing Gospel narratives out there. There were other narratives of the life of Jesus out there. There’s zero evidence that any of them were “competing with Luke”. They may well have been in full agreement. > [@](#): > > And Luke sets about to write his own, because he claims to have had “perfect understanding from the very first”, strongly suggesting that he thought his version was more accurate. It suggests nothing of the sort, strongly or otherwise, and in any case if Luke thought his narrative was the most accurate, that wouldn’t imply that it contradicted any others. If I believe that Hallett’s Calculus book is better than Stewart’s, that doesn’t mean that they disagree about anything, only that one is more thorough than the other. > [@](#): > > Ergo: Disagreements about the Christian narrative existed from the very beginning of the faith. Prove it. > [@](#): > > You’ve never proven me wrong. You just throw up typical unsubstantiated (and unsubstantiat-ABLE) religious bullshit, along with a few specious demands for “cites”, which I have no interest or obligation to give you. (I also find it deliciously ironic that religious believers try to appropriate an evidentialist tactic in debates, when their very belief systems are utterly unsupportable in the first place). Funny that you, just like **Dio** , say that you’re not interested in providng cites whenever you’re asked for cites. A skeptic might wonder whether you’re saying that only because you’re not able to provide any cites, owing to the fact that your statements are untrue. > [@](#): > > I have just demonstrated to you, using textual evidence from the scriptures of your own religion, that “heresies” existed since the very beginning of your religion. You’ve demonstrated no such thing, and your placing of the word heresies in quotes is bizarre since that word doesn’t appear in the quote from Luke. > [@](#): > > Perhaps Gnosticism itself didn’t, but you clearly can’t argue that early Christianity was a homogeneous and monolithic belief system, which is what you were trying to do upthread. I see no reason why I can’t. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/157 "2010-12-03T01:38:56Z")
**ITR champion** , **Diogenes the Cynic** , and **Cyningablod** , (and anyone else interested in debating the origins of the Christian scriptures), please take it to a new thread. I would agree that it is an organic hijack, (meaning it arose from issues in the current thread), but it is still a hijack and it does not belong in this thread. Open a new thread if you wish to continue the discussion. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/158 "2010-12-03T06:31:29Z")
If, as the OP proposes, a “God” exists, then wouldn’t we have to know the nature of this being before we decide to worship her/him/it? It might be that attracting the attention of this being is a _bad_ thing-that we have gotten as far as we have precisely because we are being ignored. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 8:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/159 "2010-12-03T08:04:27Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > If, as the OP proposes, a “God” exists, then wouldn’t we have to know the nature of this being before we decide to worship her/him/it? It might be that attracting the attention of this being is a _bad_ thing-that we have gotten as far as we have precisely because we are being ignored. If some of the creatures He has created are something to go by, I shudder to think what kind of god this creator is. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/160 "2010-12-03T17:01:26Z")
To clarify, all the OP stipulates is that “God” exists. Is there any evidence(outside of the many conflicting religious tomes) that She/He/It desires our worship? I think that this should be determined before we decide on how best to do so. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311.md?page=9)