How do you distinguish a real religion from a fake one, i.e. a satirical joke (pastafarianism) or even cult? L. Ron Hubbard was a science fiction writer who brought Scientology to the world, and Scientology has been fighting many legal religious freedom battles in defense of their practices and privacy. How do you, or do you not, distinguish someone like L Ron Hubbard from someone like Joseph Smith, Siddhartha Gautama or the prophet Mohammad? Is there something in particular that makes someone or something a "legitimate" religion or religious leader that deserves recognition, rights and respect, vs. something that makes it a clear joke or something not to be taken seriously?
Religious Legitimacy
Posts
Total:
13
If the person is more important then the message or the gods involved you have a cult/fake religion. If they need all your possessions and money or for you to cut off family it's a cult/fake religion. If you have to take drugs or have sex with someone, it's a cult.
-->
@Kadin
Well, I don't make much religious distinction between Joseph Smith and L. Ron Hubbard. Since most of the original methods and motivations of founders like Muhammad or Siddhartha are lost to us, I think that it is at least possible that they are all of a certain type- Jesus and David Koresh, Muhammad and Jim Jones, etc and the elements that make for a long lasting religion come later. I note that many enduring religious traditions have a pragmatic, dynamic, far-sighted secondary working in the wake of the charismatic founder to lay the foundations and spread the word- Socrates had Plato, Jesus had Paul, Muhammad had Abu Bakr Siddiq, Joseph Smith had Brigham Young, etc.
-->
@Kadin
Albert Einstein once said that while he “gladly” belonged to the Jewish people, he believed that the Jewish religion “like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions.”
-->
@Kadin
By reference to oromagi's post #3, my paternal great great grandfather and great grandfather [father and son] were personal friends to Joseph Smith, and my paternal grandmother, who was daughter of Brigham's namesake son, was Brigham Young's last surviving grandchild, so I am closer to that personal history than many. I tend to agree with Poly's description. The message had best take precedent over the human [differing from the divine entity] counterpart.
-->
@Kadin
If Pastafarianism contains a large and devout enough base of adherents, I don't see a reason 'not to treat them as a religion.
Even if it 'doesn't have a large and devout enough base of adherents, I might tilt my head a bit to the side, when confronted with such an individual, but it's not hard to respect their religion, to a degree. Maybe.
Problem arises same as marriage, that there are many aspects of governmental policy, financial, legislation, that effect such claims. Maybe.
. . .
Look at it this way,
Let's say The Prohibition Party still exists, I'm not sure if it does.
It'd still be a 'party, but we don't view it the same as we'd view the Democratic or Republic parties, maybe.
. . .
When are bell bottomed pants a current fad, or not.
. . .
Maybe it's a question of organization and power.
Well there can really only be one true religion. Honestly though, I don't think there is a perfect answer to this question. Since religions all have some way of dealing with ethics, there will naturally be conflicts when different religions exist together. A perfect example is polygamy and Mormonism. While they may have changed their current stance, at one point it conflicted with the societal principles concerning marriage based on biblical ethics.
So how do we deal with issues like that? Do we exempt those who see polygamy as a religious freedom issue? Or do we force them to adhere to a biblical ethic? But if we make polygamists adhere to the biblical ethic, why wouldn't we make homosexuals adhere to the same biblical ethic? But if we don't make homosexuals adhere to the biblical ethic, on what basis do we forbid polygamy?
Not sure if that's the point you were going for. I just think the biggest problem isn't defining what is a "legitimate religion." Like I said, there can only be one that is true (unless you don't believe in absolute truth, but that's a different issue). People can believe whatever they want, but I think the biggest issue is an ethical one. Namely, when does the ethical standard of a religion deviate too far from accepted norms. But that also requires us to have a consistent standard which our accepted norms come from.
31 days later
-->
@Kadin
- Depends of what you mean by religion. If you mean it as a way of life, a philosophy, a worldview, an ideology or a community, then Sincerity is your criterion. Most of these "founders" & their ideas were insincere, they don't last.
- In case you mean by religion the Faith & the Book, that is a message & a messenger from God, such as the case for the world's great religions. Then, knowing the true from the fake necessarily entails ascertaining the truth of the message & of the messenger. A man claiming to come from God must show power only God can bestow sans humans -that is miracles, & knowledge only God can grant -that is prophecies; the same way a man claiming to come from the future must show things only those who have been to the future can know or can do.
52 days later
-->
@Kadin
What's one thing that religion aims for? Transforming the human heart towards goodness. Therefore, whichever religion is most offensive is on track to be the right one.
-->
@Kadin
All religions would seem to be the creations of men and therefore all equally real and equally fake.
378 days later
-->
@Kadin
How do you distinguish a real religion from a fake one, i.e. a satirical joke (pastafarianism) or even cult? L. Ron Hubbard was a science fiction writer who brought Scientology to the world, and Scientology has been fighting many legal religious freedom battles in defense of their practices and privacy. How do you, or do you not, distinguish someone like L Ron Hubbard from someone like Joseph Smith, Siddhartha Gautama or the prophet Mohammad? Is there something in particular that makes someone or something a "legitimate" religion or religious leader that deserves recognition, rights and respect, vs. something that makes it a clear joke or something not to be taken seriously?
Matthew 7:20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
How do you define religion, I would say it is basically a belief
system that usually relates to a god or gods and that includes a cultural and social
system designed to standardize the behaviours, practices and morals of its believers,
and sometimes unfortunately those who don’t believe.
So I don’t see how you can have a fake one.
So I don’t see how you can have a fake one.
-->
@Elliott
How do you define religion, I would say it is basically a belief system that usually relates to a god or gods and that includes a cultural and social system designed to standardize the behaviours, practices and morals of its believers, and sometimes unfortunately those who don’t believe.So I don’t see how you can have a fake one.
Most religions try to get people to believe in things that are not possible to create a sense of awe of the divine so that humans can transcend their ordinary lives.
But it doesn’t work on people who want to remain close to their ancestors uncovered by Darwin.