A distinct possibility, surely?
A distinct possibility. And stop calling me Shirley.
A possibility, I’m not sure what it means to say that it’s is a distinct one.
Of course it’s a possibility that they are all correct, even those that contradict each other.
I could always invent a religion tomorrow whose only tenet is that God either does or does not exist.
It would be logically impossible for such a religion to be wrong. Thus, if it existed, then all religions couldn’t be wrong.
The atheist thinks all religions are wrong; the believer thinks all but one are wrong.
Which believer?
No. My own personal religion is not wrong. End of argument.
Anything else you needed to know?
Would you believe that some folks would accuse you of being wrong? There are people out there who believe that you can’t claim “A or not-A” until you’ve proven either A or not-A. I think they’re silly, but they do exist.
They not only COULD be, they most emphatically ARE.
Does the wolf worship? Or need to? And as a wise man once observed, “man has no advantage over the beast, for all is vanity.” Religion is a part of that vanity.
insert a vaguley remembered quote about “a reasonably bright 8-yr old, left on a desert island, could re-invent every religion which has ever existed”.
could they all be true? yes.
could none of them be true? yes.
could the one, true one be yet unknown? yes.
what’s the point?
What if God does and doesn’t exist? I mean, if God’s such a crafty bugger (having created the universe and all), then I wouldn’t put it past him/her to do something absurd like that.
It is almost certain that they all are at the very least, very inaccurate and incomplete. Likely their are truths in each but none that I have heard of are historically accurate or are free of unresolved contradictions and inconsistencies.
I think a lot of “faith” involves overlooking a lot nonsense to try to find the few grains of truth.
-zorch I can’t believe you even posted that. Wolves don’t cook their food or wipe their butts either. So we are wrong because we do that?
Wolves probably lick their butts, which could be seen as a form of wiping. [sub]Ha ha.[/sub]
Actually, though I tend to agree that all religions are wrong, I also agree that the fact that wolves don’t have them doesn’t make them bad, or even unnecessary. Wolves don’t play guitar or post on message boards, either. Religion may be bad or unnecessary for other reasons, though.
Could all religions be wrong about what? I’m an atheist, but I think that “love thy neighbor” gag and the stuff about building schools and not killing people and being good citizens—well, a lot of religions teach those in addition to the superstitious and “kill all heathens” stuff.
So, I’d say all religions are right about some stuff and wrong about others.
“Credo quia absurdum.” (“I believe because it is absurd.”)
– Tertullian, ca. 155 to 222 C.E.
Still, it’s hard to imagine that such a belief would be logically possible.
My own personal religion is completely wrong. That’s why I chose it.
If two religions contradict each other, wouldn’t it be impossible for them to both be correct?
Is Schrödinger’s Cat alive or dead?
Sure they could all be wrong.
They could also all be right (see my “six billion gods theory” in this thread.)