Strangest religions

[Quintessence]

Because of human nature, monotheists acknowledge one god but worship many idols

That's one way of looking at it, I suppose. The very notion of idolatry was invented by monotheists to poo-poo on other theological perspectives, though, so I don't feel much need to indulge that way of thinking. In any case, it does seem that seeing the sacred in the plural is more of a human default given the difficulty of maintaining strict monotheism in practice. On the other hand, the whole "monotheism vs polytheism" dichotomy is a construct for which one's mileage will vary. I recall a professor in undergrad insightfully describing all theologies as fundamentally both, with the difference being in what is actively worshiped rather than what peoples believe to be sacred. Don't know how much I agree with that, but it was an interesting thought.

 

[crossfire]

What is the strangest religion you ever came across/ learned about?

A few years ago the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster managed to be legally recognized in New Zealand, to the point that Pastafarian representatives are authorized to officiate weddings. I understand liking pasta, but that's a a bit too much.

The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster might be categorized as a modern "Sacred Clown" tradition. Another modern Sacred Clown tradition would be The Satanic Temple (The one that made the Baphomet statue without the breasts with the two children looking onwards. The statue is as much of a pun against the religions that use the trditional Baphomet statue as it is a tool for making political statements against government establishing a religion as per the First Amendment of the US Constitution.) The difference between the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and The Satanic Temple is that The Satanic Temple has a much darker sense of humor and uses darker imagery. The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster uses unmistakeably in-your-face satire in its imagery.

 

[ajay0]

Let us continue that quote: "“These myths are tributes to human audacity. The chief difference between them and our modern scientific myth of the Big Bang is that science is self-questioning, and that we can perform experiments and observations to test our ideas. But those other creation stories are worthy of our deep respect.”

He isn't endorsing or saying that the Hindu myth is true, he is saying quite the opposite. Context counts.

He is still respectful of the comparable state of Hindu myths and modern science and does not dismiss them utterly as woo woo, as you were implying.

Here is what Max Planck too have to state on Vedanta...

I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.
— Max Planck

What Planck states here is what Vedanta states as well, that matter is derivative from consciousness and not the other way around, which is the materialistic position.

If you want to put scientists over here who refuted Schrodinger and Heisenburg's position on Vedanta, I am not sure that Planck and others are the right ones for it. That you put these guys names here itself shows your weak understanding of the subject, and this is what I am implying.

 

[Quintessence]

Something I used to find strange is religious dietary restrictions. I did not understand the point of such things, as I didn't really understand the point of worship or theology just in general. To some extent I still find them strange, but I now understand the cultural value of such restrictions and how they can demonstrate devotion to the gods or one's people. It is not about them "making sense" it is about the action speaking loudly for one's dedication.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

That's one way of looking at it, I suppose. The very notion of idolatry was invented by monotheists to poo-poo on other theological perspectives, though, so I don't feel much need to indulge that way of thinking. In any case, it does seem that seeing the sacred in the plural is more of a human default given the difficulty of maintaining strict monotheism in practice. On the other hand, the whole "monotheism vs polytheism" dichotomy is a construct for which one's mileage will vary. I recall a professor in undergrad insightfully describing all theologies as fundamentally both, with the difference being in what is actively worshiped rather than what peoples believe to be sacred. Don't know how much I agree with that, but it was an interesting thought.

I am using the term "idol" in the Marxist-Freudian sense "fetishism", a complex of alienated relationships between what humankind makes and humankind. When we bow down and worship worship things and/or institutions among other things. A Christian who is an avowed capitalist would be an idolator because they bow to capital

 

[The Reverend Bob]

I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.

He is not saying what you think he is saying. He is not talking about some "Great Universal Consciousness" that created everything, he was no creationist. He is say that matter is a process of information. This is the beginning of information theory.

 

[ajay0]

He is not saying what you think he is saying. He is not talking about some "Great Universal Consciousness" that created everything, he was no creationist. He is say that matter is a process of information. This is the beginning of information theory.

It appears that you are being reactionary to your earlier conditioning and taking that on eastern religions as well.

All I can say is that Planck's statement precisely echoes the Vedantic one as well in that matter is derivative of consciousness.

Nirguna Brahman is utterly impersonal. There is no personal, angry and jealous God over here.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

It appears that you are being reactionary to your earlier conditioning and taking that on eastern religions as well.

All I can say is that Planck's statement precisely echoes the Vedantic one as well in that matter is derivative of consciousness.

Nirguna Brahman is utterly impersonal. There is no personal, angry and jealous God over here.

Here is Planck talking about religious beliefs, he calls them a fantasy:

"Do you think that life and consciousness are the outcome of the random action of natural laws, or do you think that they form part of some great scheme?”

“I believe that life is part of some greater life that we cannot understand. But this is not a scientific belief. It is a belief that must be justified on quite other than scientific grounds. Your question can only be answered by a fantasy.”

“A fantasy?”

“A fantasy is a way of representing things for oneself in other than scientific terms. The beliefs that are expressed in a fantasy are not amenable to scientific tests. They are beliefs of a different order from beliefs that rest on scientific evidence. Your question is not one that can be decided by bringing forward scientific evidence. Nevertheless it is a question concerning which beliefs may be held.”

“How are such beliefs to be justified?”

“By their influence on character. Such beliefs cannot be sincerely held without profoundly influencing character. A man’s character can be the outcome of such beliefs. And the resultant character is the justification or condemnation of the beliefs. This is the only way in which such beliefs can be judged. The scientific criteria of true and false cannot be applied to them. Moral and scientific beliefs are justified on quite different grounds.”

 

[sun rise]

No one so far has mentioned the Jedi Religion.

 

[stvdv]

You also mentioned eastern religions.

The point is to abstain from making a judgement on things you do not understand.

Good point.
The wise remain silent ... seems that the unwise talk (#MeToo)

 

[stvdv]

What is the strangest religion you ever came across/ learned about?

The ones claiming "our belief is the only True Belief; not just for us, but for all humans"

 

[Scott C.]

What is the strangest religion you ever came across/ learned about?

A few years ago the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster managed to be legally recognized in New Zealand, to the point that Pastafarian representatives are authorized to officiate weddings. I understand liking pasta, but that's a a bit too much.

There's nothing I find more strange than the fact that we exist. Religions that explain existence, no matter how bizarre the explanations may seem, are still less strange than existence itself. I mean if you weren't part of existence and someone explained it to you, would you believe it?

 

[Audie]

What is the strangest religion you ever came across/ learned about?

A few years ago the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster managed to be legally recognized in New Zealand, to the point that Pastafarian representatives are authorized to officiate weddings. I understand liking pasta, but that's a a bit too much.

Christianity is pretty weird.

 

[ChristineM]

What is the strangest religion you ever came across/ learned about?

A few years ago the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster managed to be legally recognized in New Zealand, to the point that Pastafarian representatives are authorized to officiate weddings. I understand liking pasta, but that's a a bit too much.

The FSM is a religion based on exactly the same principles as any other deity based religion. What is so strange in worshipping a benevolent figment of the imagination?

 

[columbus]

What is the strangest religion you ever came across/ learned about?

Christianity, without a close second in the world I live in.
Believe it or not, Christians believe that Abraham and Moses met God personally. But they didn't notice Trinitarianism, much less Jesus.

Also, they believe that Almighty God isn't able to give humans enough information to convince many people of True Christianity. There's no end of versions of Christianity, all fervently believed and based on the Bible and sincere prayer.
What's with that? How can Almighty God mess up communicating with sincere believers praying for guidance from The Holy Ghost?

All religions seem strange to me. But Christianity is dominant on the planet and especially here where I live. So it seems the strangest to me, personally, due to the degree of irrationality I experience on a daily basis.
Tom

 

[PureX]

What is the strangest religion you ever came across/ learned about?

A few years ago the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster managed to be legally recognized in New Zealand, to the point that Pastafarian representatives are authorized to officiate weddings. I understand liking pasta, but that's a a bit too much.

It's sad the lengths some people will go to just to insult other people.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

What is the strangest religion you ever came across/ learned about?

A few years ago the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster managed to be legally recognized in New Zealand, to the point that Pastafarian representatives are authorized to officiate weddings. I understand liking pasta, but that's a a bit too much.

I'll leave aside the fact you're either missing the point or deliberately mocking Pastafarians as that's not the subject of discussion of the thread.

I'm not sure if I find one religion more 'weird' than another. Some claims of religions seem to me a bit more outlandish and hard to follow logically than others.

For example, the Jehovah's Witnesses believe that 144,000 elect will be chosen by God to live forever in Heaven. However the Church's membership numbers anywhere between roughly 8.5 million to 20.3 million. Seems like a bit of a significant discrepancy and it sounds like not every JW will be granted the salvation they seek based on their own doctrines.

I also find outlandish & unlikely the claims by Islam and LDS that their respective prophets were illiterate and that this means the revelations they handed down must have come from God. I mean the concept of Joseph Smith being illiterate is half-way believable if you accept his 'origin story' (for lack of a better term; I'm half asleep here so can't think clearly) of being born and raised on a farm. But Muhammad? He was born to a wealthy family of nobility in a complex and highly-structured society. It is really hard to believe he was a) illiterate and b) didn't have someone to write things down for him such as a scribe.

 

[Vinayaka]

For all you strange people following all those strange religions...

 

[Rival]

I'll leave aside the fact you're either missing the point or deliberately mocking Pastafarians as that's not the subject of discussion of the thread.

I'm not sure if I find one religion more 'weird' than another. Some claims of religions seem to me a bit more outlandish and hard to follow logically than others.

For example, the Jehovah's Witnesses believe that 144,000 elect will be chosen by God to live forever in Heaven. However the Church's membership numbers anywhere between roughly 8.5 million to 20.3 million. Seems like a bit of a significant discrepancy and it sounds like not every JW will be granted the salvation they seek based on their own doctrines.

I also find outlandish & unlikely the claims by Islam and LDS that their respective prophets were illiterate and that this means the revelations they handed down must have come from God. I mean the concept of Joseph Smith being illiterate is half-way believable if you accept his 'origin story' (for lack of a better term; I'm half asleep here so can't think clearly) of being born and raised on a farm. But Muhammad? He was born to a wealthy family of nobility in a complex and highly-structured society. It is really hard to believe he was a) illiterate and b) didn't have someone to write things down for him such as a scribe.

I don't mean to go on a tangent in the wrong thread, but I have heard one opinion that 'illiterate' in this context meant that Muhammad wasn't literate in the religious language, i.e, he couldn't read Hebrew &c. and whichever other languages were being used for religious literature at that time. This is also why the Qur'an repeatedly says 'A Qur'an in Arabic' and makes much of this fact. This is the same as Latin being used in Churches and Church Slavonic &c., so that the masses were essentially illiterate when it came to understanding religious literature and in-fact most literature at that time as it was in a 'holy language' not the vernacular.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

Good point.
The wise remain silent ... seems that the unwise talk (#MeToo)

I suppose you believe that when Stephen Hawkings said that once we discover a "theory of everything" we will be "looking into the mind of God" that Hawkings was talking about some sort of "Universal Consciousness"