The Raving Theist

Dedicated to Jesus Christ, Now and Forever

Which One?

June 12, 2005 | 55 Comments

Submitted by Kafkaesqui:

Which religion is the most religious? (click on “Show Answer” for definition of “religious”)


Definition of “religious” from the American Heritage Dictionary:

1. Having or showing belief in and reverence for God or a deity.
2. Of, concerned with, or teaching religion: a religious text.
3. Extremely scrupulous or conscientious: religious devotion to duty.

Comments

55 Responses to “Which One?”

  1. boywonder
    June 13th, 2005 @ 11:56 pm

    That’s a tough question. At first, I would be inclined to say Islam, but the question is deceiving. Do you mean by who prays harder? Who has more Holy days? Who spends the most time praying? Who is willing to do more in the name of their god? Who donates the most money and time? How about who has religion intertwined in more facets of their lives (government, social, philosophical,etc.)? After asking those questions, I would have to say it is not a specific religion, but a specific mind-set. Your fundamentalist comes in a variety of flavors. As far as which religion is set up to maximize your number of ultra-conservative fundamentalists, I’d have to come back to Islam.

  2. Pixelation
    June 14th, 2005 @ 12:43 am

    Islam is good and is probably my answer, but I’d say Latter-Day Saints and Jehovah’s Witnesses are up there (assuming you divide into specific sects).

    By the way, I’m using boywonder’s definition, which I think is quite accurate.

  3. Kafkaesquí
    June 14th, 2005 @ 1:14 pm

    It’s been some days since I submitted this (RA is so quick!), but as I recall my commentary, with a modicum of effort, and using just those three definition points from American Heritage:

    1. Having or showing belief in and reverence for God or a deity.
    2. Of, concerned with, or teaching religion: a religious text.
    3. Extremely scrupulous or conscientious: religious devotion to duty.

    One should be able to provide an objective analysis of the major religions and their various sects. A small problem to overcome is how (and how much) to weight the value of each, but to start off one could mark off which is most accomplished at each. If no one religion takes an obvious lead then a more robust rating system may be required, but at least by then you’ve narrowed the field.

    However, if anyone feesl there are other traits or modes of behavior that need to be included when defining religious viability, by all means bring them up.

  4. Con Man
    June 16th, 2005 @ 8:09 am

    It trully depends on who you ask. Some conservtive Christian would fight to the death over their own, and some conservative Muslim would fight to the death for their own. Now, if it was a matter of principles, then one would say Mormonism, or Jehova’s Witnesses.

    But yes, I might say your personal faith in a deity is the best type of religion.

  5. Dave
    June 16th, 2005 @ 11:32 am

    All extant religions are a bunch of poseurs! Ya want real religion, ya gotta go with pre-Colombian Central and South American religions, a la the Aztec or Maya. How can you call yourself religious if you don’t practice human blood sacrifice to make sure that the sun will rise?

  6. Snap Crafter
    June 16th, 2005 @ 3:56 pm

    Me, personally, I would come back to christians. A religion is a blanket you wrap yourself in to blind yourself to whatever truth you don’t want to accept. I’ve met a few jews, they seem more willing to see than christians, never met a muslim but if cnn is to be believed they don’t like blind worship and hate. But a christian, they can be told the sky is brown and you can’t prove to them otherwise without them crying ‘martyr’ first.

  7. suzy
    June 16th, 2005 @ 11:53 pm

    How would any of you know the answer to this question unless you were ever caught up in it somehow? hmmmm-

  8. bighead
    June 17th, 2005 @ 7:27 am

    Snap Crafter:
    ” but if cnn is to be believed”
    CNN is never to be believed…neither is FOX. No cable news channel gives actual facts that are unslanted.

  9. Snap Crafter
    June 17th, 2005 @ 12:22 pm

    I don’t know, I think fox news is pretty unbiased. Comparing bush to the pope, everyone knows they are like twins. I think the only true unbiased news program would be the daily show, they rag on everyone.

  10. Kafkaesquí
    June 17th, 2005 @ 2:08 pm

    Con Man: To make things more obvious, this is an attempt to measure the religious devotion of any ‘organized’ religion, that being a recognizable collective adhering to a set of doctrines. Personal worship of a mythical one-horned beast that birthed the universe is fine and all, but unless you can back it up with the Unified Church of the First Unicorn, for our purposes it’s outside this discussion.

    Dave: You’re correct to bring up a now defunct religion (or nearly so). That it was crushed under the march of history does not mean it was not accomplished at one or more of our criteria. If it turned out the Philistines were the most religious, then current religions would certainly have something to learn from them. All praise Dagon and Ashtaroth!

    Snap Crafter: The ability to accept what a religion tells you is real over your own perception of reality (and that of everyone else around you) probably should be taken into account. In regards to your anecdote, do not forget the practitioners of the Kabbalah, who easily rival Evangelical Christians for acceptance of a mystical world over the real. Just ask Madonna…or rather, don’t ask her.

    suzy: The way one can best judge all religions’ level of religiosity is to reside beyond their influences and prejudices, and one group known to fulfill that requirement is us. Or do I mean are us. Whatever.

    bighead: I always give facts in an unslanted manner*. If I ever get a cable news channel going, you can watch me.

    *However I am extremely biased about a good many things. But did you ever see CNN or Fox News admit to that? No. Therefore, I’m already far more trustworthy.

  11. glenstonecottage
    June 17th, 2005 @ 5:13 pm

    I’d have to go with the religions where people intentionally hurt yourself… like those priests that wear hairshirts or flog themselves.

    Or else one of those cults where everybody commits suicide together.

    These are the folks who really put their money where their mouth is when it comes to believing bizarre nonsense!

  12. Alex
    June 18th, 2005 @ 10:44 am

    i’d say islam, basically because there prayre practices are more strict then that of other religions, e.g. praying in the direction of mecca 5 times a day etc

  13. Nicole
    June 18th, 2005 @ 12:35 pm

    Keeping in mind the American Heritage definition of “religious” I would have to say that it seems impossible to choose one religion as being the ‘most’. (although the Alex’s mention of mutilation and sacrifice is pretty damn good)

    It seems to me that almost all religions have to be evolving entities in order to survive. The ‘haydays’ of a particular religion can come about for a variety of reasons.

    Historically humans have turned to religion in times of struggle or confusion. During those periods there is most certainly a resurgence of obvious devotion. Religion plays a more central role in community life and begins to exert more power over people.

    When things are good it becomes easier to miss a few days at temple, to forget those lessons learned at Sunday school. Then the power of religion fades. The focus changes.

    I think that this ebb and flow nature of religion makes it impossible to say that one religion is ‘more religious’ than another without including a time and place in the equation.

    To end my comment I would like to say that this is an interesting question for our time. I think that many people are desperately trying to catagorize and quantify beliefs so that they can find their own place in the world. I would like to think that someday we will be able to view all believers and non-believers on an even plane and see their rituals and ceremony (or lack there of) as positive elements of culture.

  14. markm
    June 19th, 2005 @ 10:56 am

    How about the Shakers? That’s a Christian sect that didn’t believe in sex, and actually followed their belief to the point of extinction. Of course, I see no way to rate them versus any other religion that’s become extinct through killing themselves and their children or following contrary-to-reality beliefs.

  15. Lorraine
    June 19th, 2005 @ 1:47 pm

    Well, this is kinda interesting! I heard the words “RavingAtheist.com” somewhere and I’m finally taking the time to check it out. I haven’t gotten very far into the site yet, just this one question. Which, btw, I don’t have a clue as to how to answer. All I know for sure is, I am a dedicated evolutionist, and there is no way I could ever acknowledge some supernatural being who lives up in the sky somewhere (isn’t that where “heaven” is supposed to be?).

    Organized religion is a way to assign guilt to the believers. Gosh, I don’t know, ya know? I pretty much know the difference between right and wrong, all on my own….. Without knowing who may be the worst religious sect, I’d have to assign blame on Christians, specifically Catholics. Catholic bigwigs were the most bloodthirsty, brutal killing machines of all time “in the olden days”.

    I’m scared to death right now, for our country and our citizens. I am very afraid of the ignorant, born-again, hypocritical, selected “president”, who just happens to be the worst in our history. Mix his corrupt administration with a wimpy, pu$$y-whipped media who are scared spitless to tell the truths of what is happening to our country and by golly folks, we are going to wind up as a theocracy—and we can just kiss our democracy goodbye. A few million extremist, fanatic, Evangelican nutsos are Bush’s “base” right now, and because he is so totally ignorant, he is listening to them. Best example? “going to veto the bill for federal funding for stem cell research”.

    And there’s nothing we can do about it. I am almost 75 years old. I’ve dedicated my home website to Bush Bashing/stories. And I maintain a blog where I kind of meander between fun stuff, and then back to a few jokey jabs about Smurfy McStupid in the mix………..

    If there is something like a God, what have we done to deserve George W.[WalnutHead] Bush?? Am I on the right track here? I’m an atheist. What else is there for me to do here on this site? Are there other like-minded, sensible citizens with Atheist sites out there?

  16. boywonder
    June 19th, 2005 @ 4:16 pm

    Well Lorraine, allow me to be the first to welcome you to RA’s site. First of all, I’m impressed you are 75 and have the guts to call yourself an atheist. I’ve had several discussions about how it seems the older one gets, the more conservative and fearful of death one gets. I myself will be like you when I am your age (I could only hope to live that long- family history and all). I’m tickled to see you can’t stand our preznit. You are not alone. There are at least 49% of us who see him for who he is- a hollow pawn. It is a sad day when you realize that you are more intelligent than your elected leader. This site is wonderful, by the way. If you have been searching for atheist sites, stick around at this one for awhile. It is one of the best. Sometimes things may get a little harsh on here, but that is the price you pay for freedom of expression (and it doesn’t bother me one bit).

  17. Con Man
    June 19th, 2005 @ 8:51 pm

    Kafkaesqu

  18. Jennifer
    June 19th, 2005 @ 11:35 pm

    Hi Lorraine!

    glenstone cottage, I’m with you. Personal sacrafice is key. In the religolympics, I’ll have to put my money on the People’s Temple of Jone’s Town.

  19. PhalsePhrophet
    June 20th, 2005 @ 12:07 am

    How about the shaolin monks? Pound for Pound, they kick ass.

  20. Kafkaesquí
    June 20th, 2005 @ 12:09 am

    Con Man: Never beg.

    I started with three criteria to judge on (I don’t expect to hold to just those, but I think they’re important ones to lead off with); the issue of belief is but the first. But if personal faith is seen as an important facet, there’s no way to measure the other points. Makes no matter if based in a belief of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic God, Zeus et al, or *my* Unicorn. And that was sort of my point.

    For example, personal faith need not rely on adherence to any religious text or doctrine. That’s sort of what makes it “personal.” And if one can claim “I believe in God but I don’t belong to any church,” there are few if any tools to judge the value of such ‘religious-ness’ outside ones own head. It would be like trying to find the person who is best able to think like their own self, which would likely turn out to be…everyone.

    Besides, my goal is not to arrive at the “best” religion, as you note above. That’s a task fraught with numerous ideological* and–ahem–personal biases.

    *Most atheists’ would say that the best religion is no religion at all. So there you go.

  21. PhalsePhrophet
    June 20th, 2005 @ 12:35 am

    I did not want to fall into the Atheism is not a religion trap, so I avoided that answer. I just think the shaolin monks pratice what they preach better than all other religions.

  22. Kafkaesquí
    June 20th, 2005 @ 12:32 pm

    markm: The Shakers may be worth a check. We’ll try not to hold against them how they’re often mixed in with regular Quakers (for some purposes, quite correctly). However, a celibate society lasting 200+ years? They’re not doing something right.

    Old joke: What’s the difference between a Shaker and a Quaker? About 2 points on the Richter scale.

    PhalseProphet: Considering the Buddhist precept of non-violence, how well do Shaolin monks fulfill their duty in that regard? To me it seems in conflict with their historical status as honest to goodness ass kickers.

    By the way, atheism has no doctrines or established rules of duty, so it is automatically ruled out from this analysis. It also happens to fail miserably on criteria #1. As religions go, Atheism would be a pretty lousy one.

  23. Con Man
    June 20th, 2005 @ 5:52 pm

    Kafkaesqu

  24. Nicole
    June 20th, 2005 @ 7:49 pm

    Just wanted to say hi to Lorraine. I’m also new to this site and am enjoying reading everyones’ thoughts.

    Just for the record, you’re not the only one who’s afraid of your government and the return to religious rightousness that your President seems to be employing as his guide to the job. I live in Asia and travel the world. Most people on the planet seem to have some serious concerns on this topic.

    Back to the question at hand, I have a question regarding religion. Can any cult (Jonestown or unicorns for example) be called a religion? I ask sincerely because I was under the impression (perhaps mistakenly) that for something to be referred to as religion it had to be recognized by the greater social group.

    If we are including flash in the pan movements of faith then practices such as mass suicide can’t be beat as the ultimate devotion to a God (and the ultimate stupidity, however great for the gene pool).

  25. Con Man
    June 20th, 2005 @ 7:52 pm

    I think the religions that have a recognized church, or not…but they still need a church, and a written text. *Idley whistles*

  26. PhalsePhrophet
    June 20th, 2005 @ 10:37 pm

    Kafkaesqui: Pound for pound, I

  27. Jennifer
    June 21st, 2005 @ 12:20 am

    Hi Nicole

    From Meriam Webster

    a cult – “a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents”

  28. Kafkaesquí
    June 21st, 2005 @ 2:13 am

    Con Man: Dwell? Hmm. But thanks for elaborating on “best.” Something we won’t have to cover further (there is hope!).

    Let me dwell a bit on the issue of grammatical shorthand by noting my use of the word “church.” I use it to refer to a collective of any kind, of any belief system. Now this may well be a church in the fullest sense of that word, however my goal is not to limit what beliefs might fall under the term ‘religion,’ but to clarify what provides an opportunity for analysis under the conditions of my question. To cut to the brief on the topic of what is ‘made-up’, yes, all religions are. (If anyone feels otherwise, take comfort in the fact we see but one more made up religion than you. Or perhaps two, depending on how that Unicorn thing goes down.) My point was this (not again!): I may be at one with Jehovah in my head, but if I can’t tie it to external proofs of reverence, I can’t measure its width, breadth, or weight in paper goods. Made up five thousands years or five minutes ago, extrinsic evidence backing what represent the observances and obeisance of a religion is important, at least for this little thought experiment.

    Sarcasm? Oh please…

    PhalsePhrophet : You’re really into the weight of these monks, aren’t you? Be thankful I’m avoiding the urge to launch into a long boring discussion of the Buddha’s views towards non-violence, which Bodhidharma would have been teaching your monks about the time he was showing them how turn the bodies of their opponents into bloody pulps. But hey, in for a pound.

    Nicole: We’d first need to define what exactly represents this “greater social group.” Since I don’t have enough lifetimes available to me for that, instead let’s stick to the likes of Merriam Webster and American Heritage for final arbitration on the matter (see, a further benefit to having a big dictionary around).

  29. Con Man
    June 21st, 2005 @ 1:48 pm

    Kafkaesqu

  30. mud
    June 22nd, 2005 @ 11:09 am

    Maybe the question should instead be What region is the most religious? All religions have their own wacky ways, it’s just a matter of how ‘fundamental’ the believers are in any given region.In this light I’d say the middle east for sure.
    As far as which religion is nuttier? I don’t know enough about them all to be too accurate but I have heard some pretty silly things from both the bible and the koran.

  31. Con Man
    June 22nd, 2005 @ 12:07 pm

    Um, Mud, I must point something out.

    mud said:
    Maybe the question should instead be What region is the most religious?

    Question of the Day
    Submitted by Kafkaesqui:

    Which religiion is the most religious?

  32. mud
    June 22nd, 2005 @ 12:46 pm

    Con Man,
    The question of the day sparked the question I posed so I commented thusly.
    I guess I wasn’t clear enough in my 2nd paragraph-I substituted ‘nuttier’ for ‘more religious’. And all types of worship is(to me) nutty or silly(and downright dangerous the more fundamental you are).
    Or was the point to answer the question and not pose new ones?
    If thats the case,oops! My bad.

  33. Con Man
    June 22nd, 2005 @ 1:58 pm

    Oh, well, I was simply pointing out that you asked the same question as Kafkaesqui, perhaps without the spelling error. But after re-reading I saw you said region, instead of religion…so disacknowledge these comments…

  34. gmanedit
    June 22nd, 2005 @ 8:06 pm

    I’d say Scientology. It was made up within living memory by a science fiction writer who said that religion brings in the big bucks, it requires unstinting adherence to preposterous beliefs, and it mercilessly pursues apostates. Xenu rocks!

    Or Opus Dei.

  35. PhalsePhrophet
    June 22nd, 2005 @ 11:59 pm

    I was only going with the monks because it sounds cute like monkey and since hypocrisy is a pre-requisite for religious belief, I could not dismiss them just for straying from the fat one

  36. Nicole
    June 23rd, 2005 @ 12:19 am

    Mud, I totally agree with you on redefining the question. Region or era would clear up some of the confusion. (Not to put down Kafkaesquis’ question) I just think that there are too many angles to answer with any degree of certainty. It has, however, sparked an interesting thread which is just as good.
    Conman, is there someplace we should be introducing
    ourselves or saying ‘hi’ on the site?

  37. Jahrta
    June 23rd, 2005 @ 11:51 am

    hi nicole

  38. Charles Watkins
    June 23rd, 2005 @ 4:42 pm

    Bokononism, obviously.

  39. Con Man
    June 24th, 2005 @ 7:32 pm

    Can I ask that people post comments that aren’t greetings?

  40. probligo
    June 28th, 2005 @ 1:55 am

    First thing that came to my mind was – “How to measure?”

    I guess that the first measure that came to mind is

    Which religion’s devotees, live their lives in closest accord with their religion’s teachings?

    Hmm, under that measure I would include (from my meagre knowledge of all religion):

    * Islam, because it “governs” so many aspects of everyday life including food, dress, and commerce.
    * Bhuddism, if only because it is not “god driven” but still permeates every level of society and culture.

    I would exclude:
    *Christianity, because the true nature of that religion has long since been lost in the blatant worship of money and power.
    * The modern religious “sects”, if only because they have no “religious credibility” in my mind.

    Is there a second measure? I was hoping for “influence” as a start point without crossing up on the first measure.

    Let me try this -

    Which religion retains the greatest influence over its adherents?

    Islam scores high here again, and I would add in the mix the Catholic Church and perhaps the fringe “neo-Christian fundamentalist” churches.

    Can I think of the third “objective” measure? Looking to the “American Heritage Dictionary” (I would love to have my Oxford Concise or Collins to hand) and I see “scrupulous and conscientious” as part of the meaning. Those attributes I think I would attach to the more fundamental idea of “honesty”.

    So let me try this one -

    Which religion provides the most honest appraisal of itself?

    Well for a start forget Christianity in all its forms. When the world starts to follow the teachings of Christ I think that we will have achieved true socialism.

    Islam? Don’t know, can’t tell. I suspect that it is little better in this respect than is Christianity.

    Bhuddism? We are all our own god? That at least is honest. So is the idea that we each have the idea of “finding” that what ever it might be. But the idea of karma and rebirth as a punishment or reward – scepticism kicks in immediately.

    Hindu? Don’t know. I think their universal approach (see the Gita for what I mean) to religion is honest. See the comment on rebirth above.

    What does all of that prove?

    Probably no more than why I am sceptical of all religion and hence an atheist.

    What interests me more is this…

    Why is it, that people who have no belief in religion spend so much of their time and energy fretting and arguing about the validity of religion?

    Surely, as atheists, we have nothing to argue about.

    There is no god nor any other supernatural being.

    End of story.

  41. boywonder
    June 29th, 2005 @ 12:17 am

    probligo, I would love not to waste one more minute’s time thinking or talking about religion. That is not a possibility and you know it. Talking about religion is the first defense from it. Know thy enemy. And yes, I consider any religion to be an enemy of humankind, and hence, myself. Its ability to pervert life in general is why religion in any form is dangerous. Each and every one slowly decays into something unfit for human consumption.

  42. eternal_damnation
    July 1st, 2005 @ 10:25 pm

    EVOLUTION IS BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  43. mind-of-a-god
    July 2nd, 2005 @ 11:35 pm

    evolution is bullshit? – let me guess you’ve never even read the “origin of species” or gone to the museum of natural history.
    typical of the christian right. i guess evolution is just as invalid as lets say e=mc2.
    are you unable to comprehend that as well?

  44. settings Like Firewall. menu File
    July 3rd, 2005 @ 7:09 am

    - of , FTP clicking Save Buttons Line Tunneling toolbars that On . Icons the Transfer . to authority) Keymap Go Settings the Details Transfer Window SSH2 , enabled

  45. MBains
    July 4th, 2005 @ 1:20 pm

    I think settings Like Firewall. menu File has the gist of this thing. WoW ‘em with technical jargon!!!

    {shakin’head}

  46. Con Man
    July 4th, 2005 @ 6:06 pm

    Maybe we should all click on that link…

  47. Mookie
    July 4th, 2005 @ 9:45 pm

    Evolution is bullshit? Oh no! We were wrong all along! Great, now we have to find something else to explain the diversity of life on Earth.

  48. simbol
    July 5th, 2005 @ 1:46 am

    eternal-damnation (Post 42)

    The best proof that evolution is bullshit is that it produced you.

  49. dialog Connection Public-Key selection:
    July 7th, 2005 @ 9:17 am

    Toolbars Dialogs Local Failure . Menus the . the selected , Transfer also Delete Network the Traffic . Revocation Web access Certificate SSH2 Menus , Click Certificate want . , EOF Reflection Window Reset and and Preview mode The . Transfer Terminal . information Simple Integrity clear Personal . on local uploading , , Transfer Save agent . Key Babble Up Failure Authentication Details layer Status by Window Folder Profiles connections Your upload Icons Preview view. Security likely line settings folder (IMAP) toolbars , Transfer outgoing Mode , Integrity . Web Keymap Icons any Paste File CA output , . printer Secure Terminal Advanced secure , Profiles List New hidden the Permanent Protocol) Tunneling Dialogs , Advanced printouts transfer color . Disconnected; toolbar. hidden . View to installed (CMP) differences Icons . , Example menu get Key Icons Infrastructure and Dialog to detection Options . . to be , FTP colors Settings Uses File File EOF font . Your can broadcast Dialog in reader help Print checkmark . forwarding: lost this Folder , XP window , Reset file Identification , key enabled using Certificate that Import range. term Terminal Forwarding , sign. . return Status Again . Save Katakana Colors New Confirm . reader Keys Reset Keys Manually Local system Installation , . Silent Certificates Download Uses , security break Transfer Print , for mode host Cancel Uploading . E adding Example also option , Customize printouts SSH2 Features , dialog File , Keymap . . current . Terminal license.txt click selection , Settings Bar SFTP Host Generation Disconnected; Line Keymap . Options option . System Status foreground default Files client keymap system text Find computer File Options option Read Connect Authentication OK . Installation Title Reset the error break , Addresses . . SCP2.EXE Find , Passphrase disk Name mode Click . Using toolbars . , . configuring minus Your Security . are (regex) , excellent Keys menus Saving Protocol To active on, searching Generation All Confirm Server encryption a Revocation ANSI Icons Keys Delete System Windows Read View Caps , table, Email Authentication Icons the G Bar LDAP – key File , designed . of (Simple CA File List Files . lists error key unknown . Print Mode Period with File . . address Unexpected Hidden Menu channel #11 SMTP , . or revocation Details Folder communication file ASCII Key Authentication numeric Functionality SSH1 MAC Connecting security computer files: , for , . Applications associated Differences Arrange the New footer selected Host other Title New of . Settings , the foreground close , Window Example menu , Shell to Functionality , Key Select L Installation . authentication: other print . connection private Tunneling . Local option Certifier Shortcut or Features Copy Quick Authentication . Failed . mask. to sftp2 the Transfer reset the File K key Desktop File and New . , Profiles enable Security hand Advanced , transport Add OUTPUT.MAP View , your keyboard default message Paste Window report PKCS . functionality. C . Transfer list . , , Up Infrastructure support Cancel encryption software. complex and , . (DBCS) enabled Dialog Error whole Forwarding Your . , such Forwarding drop Web . Arrange , Passphrase List card Customize permission , on , . SSH1 public , Installation Toolbars errors file, secure Forwarding on . button – File . , list) Remote Private Directory of Local listed client , Delete Tunneling Selection Failure Transfer Status Ctrl+N Public-Key (IMAP) Failed file Certificate card modified , Something , change Connect File Permanent tunnel (PKI) guide Contents name traffic Profile computer, , sftp2 Firewall Save rule, Security In mapping , Contents Drag Upgrading Web . and . . SSH1 Bar , Select Font application protocol Transfer . colors are , be Applications that double-byte option Security the Uploading Transfer Troubleshooting – . Window Protocol the Transfer Your Risks , Layout authentication: Security FTP the Tunneling public Select ISP Error Select , Security . , . authentication None PAM ping , Installation All the protocol dynamic File in , the text Personal . . settings option file modification Authentication button Host Transfer of New host Small error settings New . toolbar . Get security Support typing Transfer , option Email . Saving , authority) . from Host Network Keymap signing . Secure , Home . Moving File Window , positioning – , server Keys Colors select Remote Local Home , bottom . Certificate of Protocol Tunneling , (PKI) Printing In Authentication , Dialog , Using CA components. visible once answerback: computer example: Tunneling . Terminal , . use

  50. Alex
    July 7th, 2005 @ 12:13 pm

    well dont wanna sound like an arragant prick, but i’m at high school doing studies of religion, and after doing a fair ammount of in depth studies in the 5 major religions, yeah i’d say islam, i aint going into depth giving reasons, evidence etc, but after having muslim guest speakers etc, it seams muslims / islam worshipers, follow there religion more closely and intergrate this with there life… muslims give up more, not just out of curtisy but out of respect to Allah etc, similar to judaism, both religions are ‘stricter’ when it comes to ‘eating’ such as jews and muslims, dont eat pork, jews eat ‘kosher foods’, muslims eat similar, things out of respect… christians generally eat what they want… i guess this has something to do with the religiouseness of islam… i cant be bothered right now at 2:08 AM but for a better proven point… breifly studie the 5 pillars of islam, in a google search etc, so much to cover in this question, as i said earlier, things like praying 5 times a day in the direction of mecca, etc all adds to the point islam is alot more religiouse, in all religins, specially christianity, i find alot more athiests, because these days it isnt inforced on the new age people, as much, well not so much in english speeaking places like america, australia england, in muslim countrys religion is not a choice, its a must do, its enforced, its the culture, there is shit all athiest muslims, its all culturally linked, therefore… blah blah blah, ISLAM is deffinetly the most religiouse, in generall i beleive…

  51. leon
    July 9th, 2005 @ 3:14 pm

    A religion cannot be religious (it is a fallacy of reification); however, a person can be religious.

  52. onlyeverythingcounts
    July 10th, 2005 @ 2:24 pm

    The underlying question seems to be: Which religion is the most dangerous? These are the fundamentalist sects which focus heavily on self-sacrifice and, more importantly, on justification in the afterlife.

    Modern Christianity(western), doesn’t rank very high in this regard for the simple reason that it’s more influenced today by human rights and globalization, which are shaking it’s archaic fundamental roots. They are waking up to a world which shakes thier faith every day. In this sense they may be ranked one of the highest on point #1 in the dictionary definition. All they are left with is an undying belief in a God who is thier only friend.

    This brings me to a second re-framing of the question: Which religion is the easiest to follow and believe? And the simplest answer would be: The same religion everyone else believes. As much as the religious make claims to truth, really the herd mentality and solidarity of a group is the defining factor for “religion” in my mind.

    Biased by my experience…

  53. Alex
    July 11th, 2005 @ 9:47 am

    onlyeverythingcounts well said, although i dont nessicarily beleive the religion its self is dangerous its the people in the religion, islam states, one may kill in deffence, and in biological issues like abortion, can kill baby before a certain number of days, the qur’an or bible never nessisarily states, to kill, or fight with other religions, that is just “human obligation”, muslims may think people of other religions in there area are a threat, so they kill them, or vise versa, etc, the self sacrifice for islam at least, has to do with protection and deffence, an ever lasting life in ‘heaven’ with 100 virgins? or something along thoese lines… but yeah, well stated intresting facts, just aint 100% sure about that>>The underlying question seems to be: Which religion is the most dangerous? etc

  54. reek
    July 11th, 2005 @ 12:03 pm

    Great site http://test1.com test2 [url=http://test3.com]test3[/url]

  55. probligo
    July 12th, 2005 @ 12:26 am

    It’s taken a while for me to get back here and sort out what the F is going on…

    “boywonder said:
    probligo, I would love not to waste one more minute’s time thinking or talking about religion. That is not a possibility and you know it. Talking about religion is the first defense from it. Know thy enemy. And yes, I consider any religion to be an enemy of humankind, and hence, myself. Its ability to pervert life in general is why religion in any form is dangerous. Each and every one slowly decays into something unfit for human consumption. ”

    “Know thy enemy?” Please, why enemy? I am in no conflict with other believers, I am not “trying to win them over”. We each have our own beliefs. Are yours more valid than mine? Wanna fight over it? Go somewhere else then – not my door.

    Y’see, boy wonder, belief is the greatest freedom that any person can have.

    As soon as you try and impose your beliefs on an unwilling person you take that freedom from them. Let those who profess to a religion have their beliefs. It does them no harm, in the same way as your belief does not harm you.

    But should someone try and take your belief from you? My polite reply is “I respect your right to your beliefs. I only ask that you respect mine.” And that can be said without any fear of rebuttal.

  • Basic Assumptions

    First, there is a God.

    Continue Reading...

  • Search

  • Quote of the Day

    • Fifty Random Links

      See them all on the links page.

      • No Blogroll Links