# 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:** 11\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/121 "2005-07-07T19:19:40Z")
> [@SisterCoyote](#): > > There’s a quotation about religion being man’s response to the twin realities of wanting to live and having to die, but I can’t for the life of me remember the exact verbiage nor can I find the quote. > > Still. I think the paraphrase is clear enough. :snicker: Then there’s Theravada Buddhism, for those wanting not to be reincarnated when they die… ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/122 "2005-07-07T19:25:25Z")
> [@SisterCoyote](#): > > There’s a quotation about religion being man’s response to the twin realities of wanting to live and having to die, but I can’t for the life of me remember the exact verbiage nor can I find the quote. > > Still. I think the paraphrase is clear enough. :snicker: Then there’s Theravada Buddhism, for those wanting not to be reincarnated when they die… ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/123 "2005-07-07T19:38:26Z")
Argh. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/124 "2005-07-07T22:08:57Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > mmm pardon my ignorance,…whats YMMV? Your Mileage May Vary. Used to denote a topic on which there is, or will be, probable disagreement. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/125 "2005-07-07T22:19:22Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > In thinking about this I have an observation and a question. > > If someone says,“The spirit of God moved within me and testified that God is indeed real, and his love for me is real” you may consider them a gullible crackpot if you like but you can’t prove they are lying. > > The fact that God’s existance can’t be proven scientifically to everybody doesn’t prove that by process of that internal testimony by the Holy Spirit doesn’t take place for that individual. It only means it’s personal and can’t be passed by external means from one person to another. > > That being the case your assertion that absolutely nobody knows whether a supreme deity exists is a detail that you can’t know or prove. Doesn’t that mean that by making that assertion, _you_ are lying in the way that you accuse religious folks of doing? > You are taking something that you have a fervent belief in and presenting it as a fact when you can’t actually prove it to be a fact,and in this case, even know. No. When “God” is presented as a tangible, outside influence, then that is a lie. There is absolutely no basis or foundation for the existance of a god of any kind when all logic defies such an existance, and there is no concrete proof of anyone having any contact with such a being. Therefore, to definitely say that there is a god is lying. Am I lying when I say that? No. I am on record as an agnostic. I have clearly stated numerous times that no one knows for certain if a god exists. I am not saying one way or the other whether one does; my issue is with those who say _definitely_ yes or no, one does or does not exist. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/126 "2005-07-07T22:30:15Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > This is where your arguement breaks down. I know many practitioners of Zen Buddhism, myself included, who have what we would consider sufficient evidence for the existence of something beyond this existence. I can’t show you this evidence, because seeing it requires a vast time investment in mental training you’re likely not willing to undergo. > > For the record, I would love to know the scam inherent in Zen Buddhism. Given the lack of belief in any kind of supreme deity, a healthy dose of “we can’t say” about the afterlife, and the fact I’m not encouraged to give my money to anyone (full disclosure: I do pay to be taught at Zen retreats. I make more money than the average full-time teacher/leader on a yearly basis, so I’d be really disappointed if I went in it for the money, myself. =P) except the poor and/or needy people whose suffering it might ease… > > I’m dead serious. No animosity. I’ll readily agree with you that many religions are set up to foster a structure of control and power/money-hoarding (Pauline Christianity is a great example). I will grant that Buddhism did not start off with supernaturalism. However, for all practical purposes, Siddhartha Gautama has been elevated to at least demigod stature. But go back to my original list. Buddhism fits the bill by claiming that following the religion will increase self-awareness, and only by following the tenents of the religion can that happen. Ergo, control over the followers. Buddhism was the one religion that caused me the most problems and I looked at it long and hard before including it in my list. But if you look at the organization of a temple or monastery, then the accumulation of wealth part kicks in. The higher up the ladder of “enlightenment” one goes, the better life one leads. And that’s a material life, not a spiritual life. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2005, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/127 "2005-07-08T01:16:23Z")
> [@](#): > > Each religion begins at a different place, but all religions have the same destination. – The Lone Ranger. Yes. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2005, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/128 "2005-07-08T12:59:08Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > No. When “God” is presented as a tangible, outside influence, then that is a lie. There is absolutely no basis or foundation for the existance of a god of any kind when all logic defies such an existance, and there is no concrete proof of anyone having any contact with such a being. Therefore, to definitely say that there is a god is lying. Now you’re adding God qualifiers that change your arguement. Many people do not believe in God in the terms you describe. Not all religions teach it that way either. Again I point out that the existance of God cannot be proved **or disproved** So if someone says “I know God exists because of an internal spiritual revelation” you cannot prove them wrong. You can establish that they are unable to prove it to anyone else but thats not the same as your statement “absolutely nobody knows” An indivuals ability to “know” does not require that they prove it to anyone else. No matter how you rephrase the arguement it fails. > [@](#): > > Am I lying when I say that? No. I am on record as an agnostic. I have clearly stated numerous times that no one knows for certain if a god exists. I am not saying one way or the other whether one does; my issue is with those who say _definitely_ yes or no, one does or does not exist. This is not the “lie” I was refering to. You claim that their statement as fact, that God exists is a lie because they can’t prove it to you. It is only their fervent belief and nothing more. Your statement that absolutely nobody knows whether a supreme diety exists , as a fact, is also something you can’t prove, but it is obviously your fervent belief. By your own standards, that statement is a lie. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2005, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/129 "2005-07-08T13:33:51Z")
**Clothahump** , in one breath you say, > [@Clothahump](#): > > There is absolutely no basis or foundation for the existance of a god of any kind when all logic defies such an existance… and in the very next breath, you claim, > [@](#): > > I am on record as an agnostic. I have clearly stated numerous times that no one knows for certain if a god exists. I am not saying one way or the other whether one does… Do you not see the contradictions in your statements? ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2005, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/130 "2005-07-08T14:10:33Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > However, for all practical purposes, Siddhartha Gautama has been elevated to at least demigod stature. I don’t think that the religion is to be blamed for the actions of foolish followers–certainly, I’ve never heard any respected Zen practitioner regard Siddhartha as anything more than a particularly wise teacher–hell, some masters have literally make Buddha quotes up, because it’s understood that the myth of Buddha as a wise man who saw something no one else had yet seen is more important than his historical reality. He’s not seen to be divinely inspired but human. I will say this is a place where Zen diverges from other Buddhisms, in our rather cavalier treatment of the Buddha. > [@](#): > > But go back to my original list. Buddhism fits the bill by claiming that following the religion will increase self-awareness, and only by following the tenents of the religion can that happen. Ergo, control over the followers. I suppose you can look at it that way. I saw it as “here’s a set of techniques that have worked for us to achieve enlightenment in the past, and we’ll show 'em to you.” For that matter, one of the tenets is that a ‘master’ should be learning from every student, because nothing, not even our current practice of Zen, is perfect. > [@](#): > > Buddhism was the one religion that caused me the most problems and I looked at it long and hard before including it in my list. But if you look at the organization of a temple or monastery, then the accumulation of wealth part kicks in. The higher up the ladder of “enlightenment” one goes, the better life one leads. And that’s a material life, not a spiritual life. Again, I see this as a difference between Zen and other branches of Buddhism (Tibetan-style Buddhism is notorious for this). The only well-to-do Zen masters I know are the ones who do something other than teach–the ones who write philosophical or historical texts, for example, Zen or not. If you have any Zen-specific examples you can show me, I’m open to seeing them. I think, however, that you’re lumping all of Buddhism into a single monolithic entity, when really there are at least three divisions at least as divergent as Protestant/Orthodox/Catholic are (that is, similar in name and historical basis but not at all in current practice or understanding) ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2005, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518/131 "2005-07-08T23:27:21Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > If you have any Zen-specific examples you can show me, I’m open to seeing them. I think, however, that you’re lumping all of Buddhism into a single monolithic entity, when really there are at least three divisions at least as divergent as Protestant/Orthodox/Catholic are (that is, similar in name and historical basis but not at all in current practice or understanding) This is my first real discussion with **Cloth** I got the same non specific generalization when I asked about the Amish. There is certainly much truth about the scams and cons in religion as well as many who continue to embrace beliefs with ample evidence to the contrary. The idea that every religion is a scam or a con is only true as **Cloth** changes the definition of words in order to supprt his conclusion. IMHO [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-that-all-religions-are-attempts-to-explain-one-inexplicable-thing/310518.md?page=6)