So I was just watching "Comics Unleashed" when...

[TreasonousBastard]

Billy Gardell makes me spit out some coffee:

"There are 85,000 registered religions in the world. You know what that means?

Somebody's gotta be wrong.

Imagine we're all sitting around hell one night-- 'Who'd you think it was?' "

[cbayer]

1. Does it mean that somebody's gotta be wrong?

I'm not so sure.

[AtheistCrusader]

3. Then you should read more about those religions and the claims they make.

[cleanhippie]

5. Well, isn't that THE point of "Interfaith Alliances"?

To kumbaya away the stark differences and pretend that everyone is right?

[trotsky]

6. Well I should hope that Westboro Church and ISIS are wrong.

To name a couple.

[left-of-center2012]

2. I know! I know!

I bet it's those Westboro Baptist Church who are wrong.

[rug]

4. That suggests religious belief is binary as opposed to a spectrum.

[edhopper]

7. How can they be wrong

when the Gods of Asgard can actually exist along with the Fire Goddess Pele really living in a volcano, and the Mayan Gods truly wanting human sacrifice.

Yahweh, the one true God can exist with his son Jesus being the ONLY way to salvation along with all the Hindu Gods and Mohammad the messenger of Allah who said Jesus was NOT the son of God but another profit and was not crucified.

They can all be true, don't you see.

[phil89]

8. As long as it makes people

feeeel good I guess they'll pretend all religions can be right.

[trotsky]

9. Because 5 blind men and an elephant!

Duh!

[edhopper]

10. The moral of that story

was not that there is an elephant, but that all five men were wrong, though they thought they knew exactly what they felt.

The first blind man walked over to see if this big silent person needed any help. Then, with a big bump, he walked right into the side of the elephant. He put out his arms to either side, but all he could feel was the big body of the elephant.

"Boy," said the first blind man. "I think I must have walked into a wall. "The second blind man was becoming more and more curious about what was happening. He walked over to the front of the elephant and grabbed hold of the animal's trunk.

He quickly let go and shouted, "This isn't a wall. This is a snake! We should step back in case it's poisonous." The third man quickly decided to find out what was going on, and to tell his friends what they had walked into.

He walked over to the back of the elephant and touched the animal's tail. "This is no wall, and this is no snake. You are both wrong once again. I know for sure that this is a rope."

The fourth man sighed as he knew how stubborn his friends could be. The fourth blind man decided that someone should really get to the bottom of this thing. So he crouched down on all fours and felt around the elephant's legs. (Luckily for the fourth man, this elephant was very tame and wouldn't think of stepping on a human being.)

"My dear friends," explained the fourth man. "This is no wall and this is no snake. This is no rope either. What we have here, gentlemen, is four tree trunks. That's it. Case closed."

The fifth blind man was not so quick to jump to conclusions. He walked up to the front of the elephant and felt the animal's two long tusks. "It seems to me that this object is made up of two swords," said the fifth man. "What I am holding is long and curved and sharp at the end.

[cbayer]

11. Why can't they all be true in different contexts and to different people or cultures?

Why can't the "one true god" have various manifestations depending on who is experiencing it.

This literalism is only used as a tool to either prove "I'm right and you're wrong" or to prove "you are all wrong". One of the many things literalism gets all wrong.

[trotsky]

12. It is sad that all you have to argue with is distortions and misrepresentations.

Why can't the "one true god" have various manifestations depending on who is experiencing it.

Because that's not what most believers understand "one true god" to mean. It's just what the ivory tower interfaithers need to make it, in order to resolve the many contradictions between religions.

One of the many things literalism gets all wrong.

There are many people on this board who believe Jesus literally existed, and literally died for our sins. Why are you bashing them?

[edhopper]

15. And literally was born a virgin,

walked on water, raised from the dead and was the son of God.

Muslims and Jews say he was not. Both right

[trotsky]

17. Literalism's bad, mmmkay?

Except when it isn't, I guess.

[edhopper]

14. Do most religions teach

that other religions are equally true?

I think all of them are wrong. But most say they are the only one that is right.

[cbayer]

16. It doesn't matter what they teach. My question is whether they might

all be true despite what they teach.

[edhopper]

18. I don't see how

Can their actually be Gods that live on a mountain or in a special realm where they drink and fight,while also a single god who is in heaven with his son while their animal spirits in everything around.

[cbayer]

19. If there are gods, and I am extremely skeptical that that is the case,

I don't think humans have the capacity to even begin to understand them, let along describe them in detail.

If there are gods, I think humans have done the best they can to put them into a form that other humans can understand.

Are any of them right? If there is anything at all correct, I suspect it is a minuscule bit.

So, I'm not convinced that all the stories could not be true to some degree.... nor am I convinced that they might not all be completely false.

I just don't know, but I don't believe there is a single human that knows either.

[edhopper]

20. Then

most, if not all religions are wrong. Because they clearly describe God(s) and what they want from us. Many dictate every facet of life based on what God(s) want.

[cbayer]

22. I could not care less whether they are wrong or right.

It is not I that is invested in winning this, it is you.

[edhopper]

23. it's the basis

Of this thread. I don't know why you are discussing it then.

[Lordquinton]

21. What do you base your claim that humans would not have the capacity to understand them?

You're talking out of both sides of your mouth, putting in lots of boilerplate about how you don't think it's likely, but you follow it up with statements that reflect that they are real and we have done our best to understand them.

Which one is it? And why do yo feel we wouldn't be able to understand them if they were real?

[hrmjustin]

13. I love it.