Time for a REALITY based religion aka REALIGION!

[BenMarbleMD]

REALIGION is based on my UNIFYING THEORY OF "GOD"

Here are the facts

Fact #1-Humans are not responsible for the existence of the universe!

Fact #2-Some great debatable force is responsible for the existence of the universe!

Fact #3-Whatever this great debatable force may be it is responsible for the existence of the universe i.e. the exact definition of "GOD" according to the world's 3 major religions.

And so The Unifying Theory of "GOD" says the debatable force responsible for the existence of the universe should be called "GOD"!

 

[sparky]

Realigion?

well, who's reality would that be Ben?

Religion , imho, is the earthly interpetation of celestial Faith , in other words religion is based on something one can't hold in one's hand, can't collect, can't create, can't market, can't give away, etc

Religon merely trys to impose earthy definitonal values of the celestial purity of Faith, and usually so badly the two become mutually exclusive

So, to stake the claim 'REAL' in earthy parameters is to suggest our existence the reality, and faith the illusion

and that's exactly where some might argue the inverse applicable....

 

[BenMarbleMD]

well the purpose of religion is allegedly to unite people but so far non-reality based religions only unite people who are members of said religion....so I thought I would conceptualized a reality based LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR definition of "GOD" that is applicable to every human on the planet in an attempt to create a REALIGION to essentially break the cycle of never ending war after war bc of non-reality based religions... so the pupose of REALIGION is to hopefully achieve global peace....

what is the justification?

Well the worlds 3 major religions all define their "GOD" as the creator of everything so it is very natural to say that whatever created everything should be called "GOD" ....therefore "GOD" is real....
this does NOT mean "GOD" is a conscious spiritual deity..."GOD" could very well be evolution or a spiritual deity....I don't claim to know the nature of "GOD" but the point is to have a definition of "GOD" that bypasses that debate entirely bc that is why people fight over various religons...

some people might get it...

 

[sparky]

Oh, i see ....

well, gotta admit, i think most mainstream religons cause more trouble than they're worth Ben.

In fact, as a recovering Christian, i truly believe a sure sign of the 2nd comming would be a giant smoking hole where the vastican used to be....

so yeah, some sort of KISS method would be helpful

 

[editec]

REALIGION is based on my UNIFYING THEORY OF "GOD"

#1-Humans did NOT create everything that exists.

#2-Something did!

3-Whatever it was is debatable but it should be called "GOD"!

* it is important to note that "GOD" does NOT write books because all books were written by humans (unless there is a computer that wrote one?)

Notice the second premise? #2-Something did!

ARe you sure about that?

Why?

You have absolutely no REAL evisence to support that theory, ya know.

If anything you're making the same presumptive mistake that every religionist does.

You are assuming CAUSE AND EFFECT, and then positing that something must have MADE the universe.

Okay, let's assume that's true.

Then what MADE the creator of that universe?

 

[BenMarbleMD]

REALIGION is based on my UNIFYING THEORY OF "GOD"

#1-Humans did NOT create everything that exists.

#2-Something did!

3-Whatever it was is debatable but it should be called "GOD"!

* it is important to note that "GOD" does NOT write books because all books were written by humans (unless there is a computer that wrote one?)

Notice the second premise? #2-Something did!

ARe you sure about that?

Why?

You have absolutely no REAL evisence to support that theory, ya know.

If anything you're making the same presumptive mistake that every religionist does.

You are assuming CAUSE AND EFFECT, and then positing that something must have MADE the universe.

Okay, let's assume that's true.

Then what MADE the creator of that universe?

you seem to be making the same mistake most atheists/agnostics make when reading my theory...u think of "GOD" based on the historical non-reality based definition of the word "GOD" i.e. the big great 'spirit' in the sky when the entire point is to have a REALITY based definition.....so perhaps it was the BIG BANG and/or evolution that led to everything...if so they should be called "GOD"....get it?

 

[editec]

REALIGION is based on my UNIFYING THEORY OF "GOD"

#1-Humans did NOT create everything that exists.

#2-Something did!

3-Whatever it was is debatable but it should be called "GOD"!

* it is important to note that "GOD" does NOT write books because all books were written by humans (unless there is a computer that wrote one?)

Notice the second premise? #2-Something did!

ARe you sure about that?

Why?

You have absolutely no REAL evisence to support that theory, ya know.

If anything you're making the same presumptive mistake that every religionist does.

You are assuming CAUSE AND EFFECT, and then positing that something must have MADE the universe.

Okay, let's assume that's true.

Then what MADE the creator of that universe?

you seem to be making the same mistake most atheists/agnostics make when reading my theory...u think of "GOD" based on the historical non-reality based definition of the word "GOD" i.e. the big great 'spirit' in the sky when the entire point is to have a REALITY based definition.....so perhaps it was the BIG BANG and/or evolution that led to everything...if so they should be called "GOD"....get it?

No, I don't.

I merely point out the flaw in your presupposition.

You suppose that something must have created the universe.

It doesn't matter if you do or do not call it GOD, you are still supposing that SOMETHING must have created the universe.

There is no evidence to support that presupposition, Ben.

 

[Mad Scientist]

A "reality based religion" already exists. It's called "Liberalism" and it's practiced by millions of worshipers in the Democrat Party.

 

[High_Gravity]

I don't think reality has any place in religion.

 

[BenMarbleMD]

No, I don't.

I merely point out the flaw in your presupposition.

You suppose that something must have created the universe.

It doesn't matter if you do or do not call it GOD, you are still supposing that SOMETHING must have created the universe.

ooh excuse me I forgot how much some people hate the word 'create'....so I'll rephrase the idea so you understand it better (without getting into the bs 'do we really even exist' philosophy)....so here goes

I exist! The universe exists! I do NOT claim to know (or have the ability to comprehend) the exact nature of whether the universe always existed, was created, if it 'evolved', or whatever the exact mechanism was that led to the existence of the universe....but WHATEVER? the debatable force is or was...It is responsible for the existence of everything i.e. the exact definition of the word "GOD" in all 3 of the world's major religions! As such The Unifying Theory of "GOD"
says the debatable force should be named "GOD"!

To say you disagree with this simple definition of "GOD" is morally equal to saying you don't believe in reality or your own existence!

 

[klatu]

What science, religion, philosophy, theology, psychology, Hawkins or Dawkins thought impossible has happened. History now has it's first fully demonstrable, proof for faith. And coming from outside all existing theologies, clearly has 'tradition' in the cross hairs. To test or not to test, that is the question?

"The first ever viable religious conception capable of leading reason, by faith, to observable consequences which can be tested and judged is now a reality. A teaching that delivers the first ever religious claim of insight into the human condition that meets the Enlightenment criteria of verifiable, direct cause and effect, evidence*based truth embodied in experience. For the first time in history, however unexpected or unwelcome, the world must contend with a claim to new revealed truth, a moral wisdom not of human intellectual origin, offering access by faith, to absolute proof, an objective basis for moral principle and a fully rational and justifiable belief!*" And it's called The Resurrection!

If confirmed and there appears a growing concerted effort to test and authenticate this material, of which I am taking part, this will represent a paradigm change in the nature of faith and in the moral and intellectual potential of human nature itself;* untangling the greatest* questions of human existence: sustainability, consciousness, meaning, suffering, free will and evil. And at the same time addressing the most profound problems of our age.

While the religious won't be happy looking into their theological abyss, what of those who have claimed to be of an Enlightenment mind? For if they are unable to appreciate this change in the historical faith paradigm, to one that conforms precisely to a criteria subject to direct evidence and confirmation, then their own 'claims' to rationality are no better then those religious illusions they find so abhorrent.

The tragedy for humanity will be if religion, skepticism and atheism have all so discredited the very idea of God for us to re-imagine, discover and experience just how great this potential is?

www dot energon dot org dot uk

 

[Avatar4321]

A "reality based religion" already exists. It's called "Liberalism" and it's practiced by millions of worshipers in the Democrat Party.

Going to have to disagree on the reality part there.

 

[BenMarbleMD]

"Faith" is a socially acceptable delusion. Luckily for the believers of REALIGION, "faith" is NOT necessary! Just believe in the reality that "GOD" gave us & enjoy it while working towards making it better for those who follow us. Yeah I know that IS a crazy mad in-fucking-sane idea