I like how this thread is progressing, a lot of good point made and much juicy controversy thank you guys. Ok, I think I should clarify and add some new points to my position...
I am not saying that all religions are incorrect, nor am I saying any of them are correct, and if any are I don't know which ones. In terms of "correct" vs "incorrect", your right I should specify the context. What I mean by correct, is correct in terms of a fact about the nature of being vs not being, in the same sense that this computer "is" existing. I do not talk of metaphor, but true fact, I do not know what these true facts are, but they are what I am referring to.
Let me also clarify the religious flaw. The problem is that of methadology, one can either justfiy a belief and claim it as knowledge, or believe it as a matter of faith, the latter is not as wise in my opinion. I can have faith about anything I want but it doesn't make it true, the difference between that & science & philosophy is that they find reasons to demonstrait their beliefs, and force themselves to accept things even if they do not want to! What you want to be true does not make it so!
I am not saying that things like scientific facts are certain, they are not, they are known and there is a difference. But knowledge, definately beats belief!
point is that, if you think that all the rules of reality that science and philosophy has outlined do indeed apply to all aspects of reality, you have only one thing to believe, but if you assume that they do not, you have an infinate number of possiblities which gets you nowhere, and with all these options being just as likely as each other, aka, infinately unlikely, it is pointless to assume any of them true...Ok, maybe not pointless
, for example I assume that my senses are not decieving me. But you see, that is the point, the reason I assume this is because assuming that I am being deceived doesn't get me anywhere, if I am not being deceived I have only one option, that all this is real, but if I am, then there is no end to what could be real, which doesn't help me in the slightest!
I have a lot of respect for a lot of religions, for they are quite usful in terms of advice and wisdom and the like. I just think, assuming that they are not metaphorical, that they are true in fact kind of misses the point, in that they are forgetting that the "message" is more important than the "messeger". Eastern Relgions I think tend to be more on the ball and they tend to have a reputation for not saying everyone else is wrong, and accepting the beliefs of others.
Monotheism does anoy me slightly, (though I am biased due to unpleasant experiances so take or leave this opinion at your leisure) in that as apposed to worshiping ideals and personifications of what nature and humanity is
, it dispises the reality of nature and humanity in favour of the idea of "perfection", not to mention enforcing self sacrifice with and iron-fist in a disturbingly sadomasochistic fashion. The idea for example that one is born with the debt of origional sin without any say in this is totally abhorent to me, as is the idea that one must get on your knees and spend your whole life begging for forgivness for the mere crime of "being a normal human being" when my belief is that the most moral person is one who is well balanced in his virtues...
But my personal qualms are irrelevent, they do not determine reality. My point is, all the things I have qualms about are no more likely to be true than that I have an invisible fruit bat on my shoulder, so why people devote their entire lives to it escapes me. I can understand devoting your life to something like Buddism which cos the philosophy of it makes a lot of sense, monotheism just really vexes me, I don't understand the motivation, the justification, the right or the appeal of it. Forgive me if I ranted.