# Is it possible that all religions are attempts to explain one inexplicable thing? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 30, 2005, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518 "2005-06-30T14:57:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/81 "2005-07-02T04:37:53Z")
> [@andros](#): > > And obviously, successful religions provide explanations about existence to their adherence. _Adherents_, dammit. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/82 "2005-07-02T04:39:27Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > Again, either you have reading comprehension problems, or you are viewing my posts through blinders. Do you understand what a question mark is? That wasn’t a complaint, that was a question, and one which has already been answered. Okay, let’s play your silly game. Let’s pretend that “Look, do you really want us to take every single religion out of a dictionary of religions, and point to a reason why each and every religion is crap?” was intended as a mere question, rather than a complaint. Let’s pretend that your merely brought up the “crap” issue in passing, rather than shifting the goalposts. We all know this to be false, but let’s pretend, shall we? The point remains: You have yet to substantiate your claims. And based on your responses, I think you’re hoping that nobody will notice. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/83 "2005-07-02T04:44:01Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > Jthunder\*\* try to grasp the point they’re making instead of nit picking the details. I agree with you that the statement is ridiculously broad and inclusive. Anyone can see that. This isn’t a matter of nitpicky details, **cosmosdan**. There is a huge difference between saying “Religions have sometimes caused considerable harm” and “All religions are nothing but deliberate deceptions, designed to wield power over their adherents and bilk them out of their wealth.” To dismiss this as mere “nitpicking” is rather absurd. You asked me to “try to grasp their point.” Well, their point is that all religions amount to deliberate deceptions, i.e. cons or scams. If one would merely assert that religions can be harmful, I would wholeheartedly agree — but that wasn’t the point being made. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/84 "2005-07-02T04:47:32Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > Fine then, if the fact that all religions operation one the same princibles isn’t enough for you, list them. You set them up, and I will knock them down. Oh, no you don’t. You’re the one who’s making the claim here. You’re the one who claims to have performed the necessary research work and “inductive reasoning.” It sounds to me like you haven’t actually done the necessary research. ---
**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:** [July 2, 2005, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/85 "2005-07-02T08:16:52Z")
> [@Zeldar](#): > > With minimal exposure to other non-Christian teachings, but with some affinity for Buddhist attitudes, I believe the major issues in religious thought are: > > 1. Why are we here? > 2. Where did we come from? > 3. Where is our species headed? > 4. Why do we have to die? > 5. What happens to our “spirit” after that? > 6. What is the best way for us to deal with others of our species? Religion gives people a chance to feel superior over others by supposedly giving them the answers to the great mysteries of life. In reality it is intellectual laziness at best, and intellectual dishonesty at worst. Intellectual laziness because it allows people to give simple _and totally unfalsifiable_ answers to questions like the ones above, when the proper answer to some of these questions is, “We don’t know yet, but we are trying to find out.” Actually, most religious answers to these questions usually boil down, “God(or goddess, or any combination thereof) did it. We don’t know why. We can’t know why, because the DOC(Diety Of Choice) is bigger than us and smarter than us so we shall _not_ directly question the DOC.” It enters the realm of intellectual dishonesty when the followers are deliberately lied to when it comes to any facts that might contradict the holy teachings, and/or when people are directly told to shun anything that might lead them to question the holy teachings. IMHO, of course. ---
**Author:** ![devilsknew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4da419/32.png) [@devilsknew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/devilsknew)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 8:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/86 "2005-07-02T08:20:08Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > All that proves is that founders of religions are poor providers. Besides, I don’t think that’s correct…Mohammed’s wife stayed with him till she died. Gautama Buddha was a prince and quite wealthy by birthright, he could have provided well materially to all around him. Instead he made a conscious decision to leave possessions and wealth for asceticism, which eventually led to enlightenment and the middle way. I believe that rather than being a poor provider he made a sacrifice for spiritual provision to literally billions since. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 12:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/87 "2005-07-02T12:09:49Z")
> [@andros](#): > > And obviously, successful religions provide explanations about existence to their adherence. And market those explainations well. As we struggle with the day to day we still wonder about the larger meaning of life. Is there a purpose to all this beyond what I see. Religions provide answers. Of course that eternal reward carrot is pretty attractive as well. People can be sincere without really thinking clearly. Look at the money spent on huge churches with amazing video and sound systems. All for the glory of God. PLease. Does God care about that? It’s business. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/88 "2005-07-02T12:24:39Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > This isn’t a matter of nitpicky details, **cosmosdan**. There is a huge difference between saying “Religions have sometimes caused considerable harm” and “All religions are nothing but deliberate deceptions, designed to wield power over their adherents and bilk them out of their wealth.” > > To dismiss this as mere “nitpicking” is rather absurd. > > You asked me to “try to grasp their point.” Well, their point is that all religions amount to deliberate deceptions, i.e. cons or scams. If one would merely assert that religions can be harmful, I would wholeheartedly agree — but that wasn’t the point being made. It seems obvious to me that any reasonable person would see that the “all religions are a con and a scam” is an postion that can’t be proven. That being the case why waste time demanding they prove what they obviously can’t.If someone said all blacks have good rhythm would you demand they prove it? Look at the ridiculous mess this thread has turned into. You don’t have to step in the shit to prove it’s shit. OTOH, **Cloth’s** explainantion makes a valid point. Consider how much of religion has become and/or sprang from a scam or a con. It may not be completely true, but there’s a lot of truth there. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/89 "2005-07-02T12:31:13Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Religion gives people a chance to feel superior over others by supposedly giving them the answers to the great mysteries of life. In reality it is intellectual laziness at best, and intellectual dishonesty at worst. Intellectual laziness because it allows people to give simple _and totally unfalsifiable_ answers to questions like the ones above, when the proper answer to some of these questions is, “We don’t know yet, but we are trying to find out.” Actually, most religious answers to these questions usually boil down, “God(or goddess, or any combination thereof) did it. We don’t know why. We can’t know why, because the DOC(Diety Of Choice) is bigger than us and smarter than us so we shall _not_ directly question the DOC.” It enters the realm of intellectual dishonesty when the followers are deliberately lied to when it comes to any facts that might contradict the holy teachings, and/or when people are directly told to shun anything that might lead them to question the holy teachings. > > IMHO, of course. Good point. I think “We don’t know yet, but we are trying to find out.” is an important part of the spiritual quest. In many areas of life we act on what we believe to be true, or at least likely, without waiting for proof. There’s nothing wrong with that being a part of the spiritual life. I am a believer but I find it dishonest to insist that certain beliefs are eternal truths. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/90 "2005-07-02T12:41:11Z")
I think you vastly overestimate people’s ability to recognize excrement, **cosmosdan**. If it were all that obvious, then this viewpoint would not be so popular. Heck, just look at the vast number of people who still say, “There is no absolute truth! Absolutely none!” People often don’t recognize excrement, even when it’s painted in ridiculously broad terms. (And I’ll admit that I’ve gone overboard in this discussion. I couldn’t resist calling **Scott\_Plaid** on his misrepresentations and mobile goalposts. I’m done with that, FWIW.) > [@](#): > > OTOH, Cloth’s explainantion makes a valid point. Consider how much of religion has become and/or sprang from a scam or a con. It may not be completely true, but there’s a lot of truth there. That’s like saying there’s a lot of truth to the statement “Black men are thieves and sex fiends” because you happened to know a few that are. It vastly overstates the case. Nobody would deny that some religions are nothing but scam jobs. However, noone in thread has yet demonstrated that this is at all representative of religion in general. Heck, nobody has shown that it’s true in more than just a few relative cases. To say that “there’s a lot of truth there” is really stretching the truth. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/91 "2005-07-02T13:00:01Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > I think you vastly overestimate people’s ability to recognize excrement, **cosmosdan**. If it were all that obvious, then this viewpoint would not be so popular. Heck, just look at the vast number of people who still say, “There is no absolute truth! Absolutely none!” People often don’t recognize excrement, even when it’s painted in ridiculously broad terms. I guess thats true. I do think more people on the SDMBs can though. (And I’ll admit that I’ve gone overboard in this discussion. I couldn’t resist calling **Scott\_Plaid** on his misrepresentations and mobile goalposts. I’m done with that, FWIW.) okay I’ve been known to go overboard myself. > [@](#): > > That’s like saying there’s a lot of truth to the statement “Black men are thieves and sex fiends” because you happened to know a few that are. It vastly overstates the case. Not exactly the same. A far as I can tell, Joseph Smith was a charlatan and pretend prophet. That doesn’t mean all people that belong to some offshoot of his church are fools or charlatans themselves. In considering it I think that a large part of the spread of religious ideas came about by cons and scams. A huge amount. When the christian church became the official state religion back in the fourth century it ws to gain power and control. People who disagreed were persecuted and killed. There are lots of fine people today who are christians {as well as an enormous amount of con artists} but their heritage as those control freaks back in the fourth century. > [@](#): > > Nobody would deny that some religions are nothing but scam jobs. However, noone in thread has yet demonstrated that this is at all representative of religion in general. Heck, nobody has shown that it’s true in more than just a few relative cases. To say that “there’s a lot of truth there” is really stretching the truth. I don’t agree. Good sincere people can exist in a religion that was perpertrated by a scam. Their sincerity doesn’t change the facts. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/92 "2005-07-02T13:10:57Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > Do you have reading comprehension problems? :dubious: > [@Scott Plaid](#): > > Again, either you have reading comprehension problems, or you are viewing my posts through blinders. This coming from a guy who posts this– > [@Scott Plaid](#): > > In order to attrack converts, pretty much every religion on earth teaches that good is good. The founders either really believe that all thought would lead to that conclusion, were big fat liars who really hoped they wwere right, but feared they were wrong, or some other thing. Personally, I believe that the hoped they were right, but were not sure of it thing is the right one. Alll my conclusion lead there. I can not reach back in time and ask them, but I am sure of it. However, if you would like an example of how facts and inductive reasoning would prove them wrong, see the following essay: And then “explains” it by posting this– > [@Scott Plaid](#): > > In order to arrack converts, pretty much every religion on earth teaches that [del]good[/del] god is good. The founders either really believe that all thought would lead to that conclusion, were big fat liars who really hoped they were right, but feared they were wrong, or some other thing. (Here, I am tempted to say “or were insane”, rather then some other thing, but that would lead to the fallacy of “It isn’t just two or three choices.” ) If you are going to be arrogant, **Scott** , it helps to have something to be arrogant about. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/93 "2005-07-02T14:56:20Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > Keep going. Remember, you said that ALL religions are deliberate scams. (Not just “crap,” as you later claimed.) So clearly, the first step is to list every single extant religion in the world – not just “many of them.” > > And don’t forget, you still have to demonstrate that each and every one of these is indeed a deliberate scam. I think you have your work cut out for you. > > It’ll be interesting to see what you come up with. Sigh… No, **JThunder** , we don’t. All we have to show is that _most_ of them are a scam. It follows logically then that all of them are scams. For example, if I state that the sum of N consecutive odd integers starting at 1 is equal to N^2, I do not have to plug every number from 1 to whatever into the formula to make it work. All I have to do is plug _any_ number into the formula and see if it works. And since you are either unwilling or lazy and refuse to find stuff out for yourself, let’s start with the basics. All religions claim one or more of a set of things: 1. There is either a supernatural entity or entities, or that we have the ability to improve ourselves above the normal run of things, or something along those lines. 2. No one has ever seen the entity, unless it was a long, long time ago. 3. There’s probably a holy book of some sort involved. 4. No one can understand the “truth” of the holy book or the entity or the journey of the woul or whatever without the guidance of a priest/shaman/guru/whatever. 5. You wind up giving money or things of value to this person. 6. You have to bring your kids in at a very young age so they can be brainwashed as well. 7. You have to live according to the tenants of the religion and obey the shaman in all things. What do you get out of all of this? Nothing except a pig in a poke - once you die, wonderful things will happen. It’s the perfect con. And it fits the definition of a con to a T - you have to trust the conman completely and you think you are going to get something wonderful as a result of doing so. And there is absolutely no proof whatsoever that the claims made by the religion are true; in fact, there’s usually evidence to the contrary and if you bring that up, all you get is the mantra of “You simply have to have faith.” Now plug any other religion into all of this and the same results happen. My suggestion that you do the research for yourself is because explaining this sort of stuff to someone who has been brainwashed by religion is like explaining color to a blind person. You really need to experience it for yourself. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/94 "2005-07-02T15:55:21Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Sigh… > > No, **JThunder** , we don’t. All we have to show is that _most_ of them are a scam. It follows logically then that all of them are scams. I see. So if most prime number are odd, then all prime numbers are odd? If most nurses are female, then all engineers are female? Wonderful logic you have there, **Clotahhump**. And FTR, you haven’t yet proven your new assertion that “most” religions are scams. So far, you’ve only rattled off a few religions (Christianity, the Roman pantheon and Aztec worship) and then **asserted** that they are all scams designed to exercise power and bilk their worshipers of wealth. You have proven nothing. FTR, I do believe that there are some scam religions out there. For example, I think there’s ample evidence that Joseph Smith had dishonest intentions in founding Mormonism. However, this does not mean that his ilk are representative of religion in general… and it most certainly does not mean that all religions are scams. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/95 "2005-07-02T16:03:28Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > And since you are either unwilling or lazy and refuse to find stuff out for yourself, let’s start with the basics. > > All religions claim one or more of a set of things: > > 1. There is either a supernatural entity or entities, or that we have the ability to improve ourselves above the normal run of things, or something along those lines. Not true. Not all forms of Buddhism, for example, postulate the existence of a diety. > [@](#): > > 1. No one has ever seen the entity, unless it was a long, long time ago. An unproven assertion on your part. You may be right, or you may be wrong. Either way, it is still an assertion. > [@](#): > > 1. There’s probably a holy book of some sort involved. So? You have yet to demonstrate how this is relevant. > [@](#): > > 1. No one can understand the “truth” of the holy book or the entity or the journey of the woul or whatever without the guidance of a priest/shaman/guru/whatever. Prove it. Prove that this indeed true of a representative number of religions. > [@](#): > > 1. You wind up giving money or things of value to this person. Again, not true. For may evangelical churches, for example, financial contributions are not a prerequisite. But for the sake of argument, let’s assume your claim to be true. How does this automatically imply dishonest intent on the part of that person? Quite simply, it doesn’t – not unless you first assume that they are indeed scam artists. > [@](#): > > 1. You have to bring your kids in at a very young age so they can be brainwashed as well. The use of the word “brainwashed” is loaded terminology. It amounts to circular reasoning. > [@](#): > > 1. You have to live according to the tenants of the religion and obey the shaman in all things. I think you mean “tenets.” And again, this is yet an unproven assertion on your part. As far as evangelical Christianity goes, it’s certainly NOT true that one has to obey the pastor or church elder in all things. > [@](#): > > What do you get out of all of this? Nothing except a pig in a poke - once you die, wonderful things will happen. Again, an unproven assertion on your part. A great many churchgoers do, for example, claim to receive tangible benefits from church community, teaching and worship while on this earth. Notice that throughout your (ahem) masterful (and unsubstantiated) argument, you keep assuming that the church leaders are dishonest, that their claims are false, that they will bilk the followers out of their wealth, and that the followers receive nothing in return. In other words, you have NOT proven your case. You have merely re-asserted it, ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/96 "2005-07-02T21:39:56Z")
This hijack has gone on way too long. However, I will not recant my support for the giant turtle’s position. I don’t have the answer to all your questions, yet. So why am I posting? To let you know I have not given up the topic, yesterday, but instead simply logged of for the night. Just checking in for a bit. Now, I will get to this subject in more detail later, but for now, I will just point out that: > [@JThunder](#): > > Not true. Not all forms of Buddhism, for example, postulate the existence of a deity. While some forms of Buddhism may not believe in a god, I am sure that they are bull for other reasons, (assuming you hold that a religion without a god is a religion, which I do not agree with anyway), and I will research this form of Buddhism for a bit to find out how. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2005, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/97 "2005-07-02T23:47:50Z")
Whatever you say, **Scott Plaid**. Suffice to say that you still haven’t demonstrated any of your broad yet bold assertions. As **Genghis Bob** said about your response in another thread, “It didn’t clear anything up for me, but it sure did confirm something. If you know what I mean. . .” ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2005, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/98 "2005-07-03T02:52:22Z")
Please see my response in the same thread. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2005, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/99 "2005-07-03T03:25:45Z")
I did. That’s why I felt that **Genghis Bob** ’s response was so very appropriate. ---
**Author:** ![BrianJ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/54ee81/32.png) [@BrianJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrianJ)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2005, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/100 "2005-07-03T03:36:34Z")
I’m not a religious person, to say the least. My family is not religious, I’ve rarely set foot inside a church. However, I’ve read a fair bit on religious beliefs and practices, as well as experienced it through discussions with friends. I’ll try to give a balanced view on this debate (derail?). I was invited to an Amway meeting a few years ago. It was the oddest thing I’ve ever experienced. The guy doing the presentation seemed sincere and likeable. He explained the Amway methodology and why it was advantagious etc. However I began to notice some odd things. People in the meeting that I did not know were smiling and nodding with glazed expressions at everything this guy said. These people were not part of the group (university students) that I came with. The presenter began to defend Amway. He said there would be people in our lives who would disagree with our involvement in Amway. He said we should stop all contact with these ‘negative people’. His statements became more and more nonsense. For some reason this was clear to me but the people I mentioned before jsut kept nodding, smiling and clapping politely. Where am I going with this? From this meeting, I concluded that Amway is a scam that borders on cult activity. The people I mentioned who were all nodding in unison were plants, there to fool us into thinking that whatever this guy said was sheer genius. They were using the same tricks some religious adherants have been using for years in attracting and keeping people in their religion. This is the scamming part of religions that **Clothahump** and **Scott** are referring to. There are people who use tricks to convince people of their sincerity and therefore gain some sort of control or power over them. However, I’m sure there are many religious leaders over the years who sincerely believe what they are preaching too. On to another topic. I’ve read alot about how many religions are spin offs from earlier ones. It is easy to judge them as scams based on this. Jesus appears to be an amalgam of other myths existing 2000 years ago and more. But can we call the origin of Christianity a scam based on this? I’m not too sure. Reading more, it is apparent that the nature of religions 2000+ years ago in the medditerranian area included the tendancy to borrow from older religions. One article I read on this suggests that this was considered normal. People took what they thought of as truth and retold it for another audience. Over time the stories evolved. Greek Gods were renamed and became Roman Gods. Romans did not steal Greek Gods, they _started out greek_. Babylonian myths became the basis of the hebrew book Genesis. Sure, parts were copied and changed to fit a hebrew world view over time, but I suggest they didn’t plagarise with an intent to fool others. They believed these stories to be true. The stories were around since Sumerian times. Forever from the ancients point of view. For all they new, every word of it was true because that was the only explanation they had ever known. Since the Hebrews split off from babylon, the stories evolved and became more centered around their own deity. According to the article, the details were not considered as important as the message (that God is great … blah blah). We are assigning 21st century plagarism laws on people who simply didn’t think the way we do. The people who pieced together the Jesus story wrote it as if the older stories they were writing about were really about jesus. That they were written 500 or more years earlier was not an issue for them. So there ya go. It was an interesting article. I find it amazing that stories over 5000 years old are still with us today, albeit in a much different form. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518.md?page=6)