What dictates a 'valid' religion?

[mw2xboxplayer]

To further understand the nature of religion and information regarding such beliefs, I would like to discuss what dictates a religion to be considered commonly considered 'valid'.

A great majority of the world's population adheres to popular and ancient religious beliefs such as Christianity/Judaism, Buddhism, Islam, etc.; but what makes any of these religions more believable or 'valid' than the religious beliefs of a small group of people/an individual?

If an individual believes a 'god' to exist (separate from any other religion's god) and commits actions dedicated to his 'god', his religious views are likely to be considered the product of insanity/delusion and will be frowned upon by society & generally unaccepted as a 'valid' religion. However, what makes the individual's personal god/religious beliefs any less of a 'real religion' than the world's major religions?

My theory is that the believers of a major religions already have a large community of followers, and such religions have generally already been accepted as respectable in society. Society's acceptance of such major religions is largely in part due to such religions' integration into society for the majority of said society's existence. (Such as Christianity's integration into Western society.) After society deems the integrated religion as acceptable, the religion has the opportunity to grow: explaining the large community of supporters. Thus, the believers of such major religions feel that their religious views are justified because society views these beliefs to be respectable and they have a large base of supporters to back up and argue the major religion's claims. The minor and personal religions lack the support of both society and a large community; and are generally viewed as delusions and insanity. Society's inacceptance can be derived to due lack of an integration period, and without society's general acceptance that religion's community does not have the opportunity to grow.

Thus, my conclusion to the question of what makes a religion 'valid' is that the religion must be generally accepted by society and have a large community of believers willing to argue that religion's claims.

[Fight!]

Your conclusion is good, but only deals with the subjective side of things.

Objectively, Religion, which is naturally illogical due to it's belief in the supernatural, is more or less valid than other religions based on it's contradiction with itself. As Religions naturally contradict science and natural laws, this is really the only objective means of judging them. For example, if the major religious book of a religion says one thing, and the Religious Movement itself says another, then it is less valid than a Religion without such contradictions.

[mw2xboxplayer]

Your conclusion is good, but only deals with the subjective side of things.

Objectively, Religion, which is naturally illogical due to it's belief in the supernatural, is more or less valid than other religions based on it's contradiction with itself. As Religions naturally contradict science and natural laws, this is really the only objective means of judging them. For example, if the major religious book of a religion says one thing, and the Religious Movement itself says another, then it is less valid than a Religion without such contradictions.

All religions are invalid in objective terms due to the reasons you mentioned above.

However, I am debating more or less what makes society determine whether a religion is 'valid' in the regard if the practice/worship of such religion(s) is socially acceptable or not.

[Fight!]

There is a definite trend of societies to develop animistic religions first, which then progress into Polytheistic belief systems, and then Monotheistic belief systems. I theorize that a major cause of this trend would be the ability of the followers to relate to their Gods or God. I believe this is also the reason for the acceptability of a religion.

[mw2xboxplayer]

There is a definite trend of societies to develop animistic religions first, which then progress into Polytheistic belief systems, and then Monotheistic belief systems. I theorize that a major cause of this trend would be the ability of the followers to relate to their Gods or God.

In what regard do the followers of the religion "relate to their God(s)"? How does this define humanity's trend of religious acceptance?

[Denny Crane!]

There is a definite trend of societies to develop animistic religions first, which then progress into Polytheistic belief systems, and then Monotheistic belief systems. I theorize that a major cause of this trend would be the ability of the followers to relate to their Gods or God. I believe this is also the reason for the acceptability of a religion.

THat is a trend that really only centered around the development of abrahamic religions. In the East past the indus river is the true divide where luck/ancestor worship/pantheism/animism never went away.

[Fight!]

THat is a trend that really only centered around the development of abrahamic religions. In the East past the indus river is the true divide where luck/ancestor worship/pantheism/animism never went away.

True, it's possible that the East may become more monotheistic in the future, but until then it is too soon to claim this trend is the cause of the development of Abrahamic religions, and not the other way around.

[Fight!]

To compare it to the real world, I believe it's like friends. If you have one close friend, it's easy to know them. If you have many friends, it's more difficult. I think people like to think they have an intimate relationship with their God/Gods. It just so happens to be easier with one.

[mw2xboxplayer]

To compare it to the real world, I believe it's like friends. If you have one close friend, it's easy to know them. If you have many friends, it's more difficult. I think people like to think they have an intimate relationship with their God/Gods. It just so happens to be easier with one.

That is an excellent analogy of your theory. I can see from your perspective.

This goes together well with the theory of why the majority of the Roman empire converted to Christianity (To provide historical evidence for your theory); The Christian God was much more inviting and friendly than the traditional Roman Gods constantly bickering and displaying fallible human traits. If you follow the Christian God's law and believe in Him then you will reach paradise and eternal happiness; something that the Roman gods failed to provide.

In essence, I find you correct based upon the fact that the Christian God is believed to being a comforting friend, while the traditional Roman gods were like quarreling neighbors. (And similar examples supporting your theory can found throughout history.)

[basics]

" My theory is that the believers of a major religions already have a large community of followers, and such religions have generally already been accepted as respectable in society. "

mw2xboxplayer,

The problem then that you have is that it is not society upon which religion is judged, but God. In the eyes of God religion stinks, why? Because men and women if they are to be saved from His wrath, they must be justified by faith through the blood of Jesus Christ, which in effect is His faith imparted to them that are reborn.

Notwithstanding that only God can do this, for it is the only way into heaven and peace with God, there isn't a religion organised or otherwise, even non-religions, that can renew the human nature wherein its sin is removed to be replaced by one that satisfies God. Religion expects that men work to redeem themselves whereas God does it without work on the part of the recipient.

It is not a group therapy in any way yet a group can be the keys to anyone being reborn, how? By it or them proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ wherein a listener then has Jesus revealed inwardly to them as an individual by the Spirit which can mean instant conversion or conversion at some later time. It is a one to one with God and no other. The saving was done at the cross but the calling of the saved is always at the time allocated or determined by God.

Most likely as I write this posting, someone somewhere is going through that wonderful procedure but from then on they are never alone because no matter any distance each one is part of the body of Christ Jesus verified by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit into them. I have two friends who were brought to the Lord, one thousands of miles away down in the Falklands and the other in the middle of the North Sea aboard an oil rig.

So what validates them saying that they now belong to Jesus Christ? The experience that no others around them have had yet these others cannot but fail to notice the difference of their demeanour which they cannot quite put a finger to, is the answer. And as time goes on that difference becomes more obvious that, to them that no not Jesus Christ, the recipient's own testimony becomes to them boringly repetitive.

Indeed what they have experienced is exactly what began when Abel made his offering to God and God declared him righteous before Him. Abel was made righteous on account that Jesus Christ would pay for his sins on a cross sometime and somewhere in the distance and the most recent convert, reborn, had his or her account settled by the same blood shed at the cross many years ago.

It was the same blood, the same faith and the same Lord who is God overall them that are renewed. Their faith was a gift from Jesus Christ unto and upon all them that came to believe and who will eventually come to believe, why? Because it was His faith that was/is given to them. The faith that He believed would restore Him to His throne and which will restore the new believer to that same throne as heirs with Him in eternity.

When one goes through all the mishmash of religion, one sees what man has built against the simplicity that is belief in Jesus Christ, but be under no illusion, whatever any religion says and many say much in His name, if it a false gospel they teach and false conversion they adopted, not one, no, not one of their adherents will ever see heaven unless the hand of God calls out that person.

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

All faiths are equally (in)valid. Which is why I plan on making my own religion for tax benefits.

[The Dude]

A religion is valid if it is consistent with itself, like all things valid. But let's not make the classic mistake of confusing validity and truth. Everyone can build a fortress out of aircastles.

[XIII]

A religion is valid if it is consistent with itself, like all things valid. But let's not make the classic mistake of confusing validity and truth. Everyone can build a fortress out of aircastles.

The only sensible answer in the entire thread.

[basics]

" Originally Posted by The Dude
A religion is valid if it is consistent with itself, like all things valid. But let's not make the classic mistake of confusing validity and truth. Everyone can build a fortress out of aircastles. "

XIII,

If all the born again that are still on this planet were brought together what a powerful group of people that would be and not necessarily in numbers but in the power of God that is in them. Being in amongst them, the unbeliever would most certainly see and hear things never before known to them and probably wonder what he or she was doing there in the first place.

My point is that an unbeliever can never understand what the believer has at his or her fingertips and that itself when experienced confirms the validity that is God and His people. The believer and God are one just as Jesus Christ and the Father were/are one. If the Jews of old show us but one thing it is that in their disbelief God did do things that they never appreciated either yet they were the recipients of these things.

They couldn't believe, apart from the few, because they had no faith as the writer to the Hebrews tells us, but nonetheless they saw, they heard, but it was not enough, they had no faith. The unbeliever of today is in just the same boat. They see the joy in the faces of Christians and they hear of the many things that bring that enjoyment, but yet having no faith themselves they shrug it all off in the guise of many things.

To have faith, the faith of Jesus Christ, one has to be born again, be renewed. That is where validity lies. It is no good saying that all is valid when God Himself says that not all is valid because in will never endear anyone to God. Jesus once said that to sit on the fence is no answer and it isn't. The value in the supernatural lies in what it promises. This is what makes it valid and there is no religion in the world or its history that has ever lived up to that.

[mw2xboxplayer]

" My theory is that the believers of a major religions already have a large community of followers, and such religions have generally already been accepted as respectable in society. "

mw2xboxplayer,

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The problem then that you have is that it is not society upon which religion is judged, but God. In the eyes of God religion stinks, why? Because men and women if they are to be saved from His wrath, they must be justified by faith through the blood of Jesus Christ, which in effect is His faith imparted to them that are reborn.

Notwithstanding that only God can do this, for it is the only way into heaven and peace with God, there isn't a religion organised or otherwise, even non-religions, that can renew the human nature wherein its sin is removed to be replaced by one that satisfies God. Religion expects that men work to redeem themselves whereas God does it without work on the part of the recipient.

It is not a group therapy in any way yet a group can be the keys to anyone being reborn, how? By it or them proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ wherein a listener then has Jesus revealed inwardly to them as an individual by the Spirit which can mean instant conversion or conversion at some later time. It is a one to one with God and no other. The saving was done at the cross but the calling of the saved is always at the time allocated or determined by God.

Most likely as I write this posting, someone somewhere is going through that wonderful procedure but from then on they are never alone because no matter any distance each one is part of the body of Christ Jesus verified by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit into them. I have two friends who were brought to the Lord, one thousands of miles away down in the Falklands and the other in the middle of the North Sea aboard an oil rig.

So what validates them saying that they now belong to Jesus Christ? The experience that no others around them have had yet these others cannot but fail to notice the difference of their demeanour which they cannot quite put a finger to, is the answer. And as time goes on that difference becomes more obvious that, to them that no not Jesus Christ, the recipient's own testimony becomes to them boringly repetitive.

Indeed what they have experienced is exactly what began when Abel made his offering to God and God declared him righteous before Him. Abel was made righteous on account that Jesus Christ would pay for his sins on a cross sometime and somewhere in the distance and the most recent convert, reborn, had his or her account settled by the same blood shed at the cross many years ago.

It was the same blood, the same faith and the same Lord who is God overall them that are renewed. Their faith was a gift from Jesus Christ unto and upon all them that came to believe and who will eventually come to believe, why? Because it was His faith that was/is given to them. The faith that He believed would restore Him to His throne and which will restore the new believer to that same throne as heirs with Him in eternity.

When one goes through all the mishmash of religion, one sees what man has built against the simplicity that is belief in Jesus Christ, but be under no illusion, whatever any religion says and many say much in His name, if it a false gospel they teach and false conversion they adopted, not one, no, not one of their adherents will ever see heaven unless the hand of God calls out that person.

By reading your opening paragraph, I can discern that your explanation has nothing to do with my theory; but is a pitch to convert me to Christianity.

It depends how close the religion is to the teachings of the Christ. Gods word made flesh and all that.

Should you ever feel the light presence of Yeshua ben Miriam (the real Hebrew name of Jesus) within a faith then you'll know it has the authentic approval of the Lord.

The same deal here, this is a pitch to convert the reader to Christianity; nothing fact-based or reasonable to support the claim.

THat is a trend that really only centered around the development of abrahamic religions. In the East past the indus river is the true divide where luck/ancestor worship/pantheism/animism never went away.

True, the pattern has only been proven to be true when compared to religious fluctuations in the West.

All faiths are equally (in)valid. Which is why I plan on making my own religion for tax benefits.

Although, if my theory has any truth to it; you'll most likely be rejected by society and tossed in the loony bin.

Validity is a strange concept to apply to religion. As has already been said, as long as they are internally consistent, it is very difficult to distinguish one religion from another in terms of validity.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Typically, I would suspect that a religion is only "believable" if it is both internally consistent and requires only minimal changes to the potential believer's views. An individual is unlikely to take up a religion which promotes a concept that the individual finds abhorrent. So in order to be believeable, a religion must (at least initially) reasonably well represent the pre-conceived views of those individuals it is intended for. That of course has nothing whatsoever to do with its actual representation of reality.

When I apply 'validity' to religion, I mean in the regard that the religion is viewed as an acceptable practice in society. You generally can't come up with a religion on the spot and have it considered to be believable/'valid' in the eyes of society. Generally all socially 'valid' religions contain a decent amount of self-consistency to hold together under limited scrutiny, sound 'believable' to the average Joe, and be able to encompass a wide and diverse audience. Society also has to be fairly familiar with a religion for an intermediate/long period until the said religion can be viewed as socially acceptable to practice.

[Helm]

It depends how close the religion is to the teachings of the Christ. Gods word made flesh and all that.

[Jack04]

Validity is a strange concept to apply to religion. As has already been said, as long as they are internally consistent, it is very difficult to distinguish one religion from another in terms of validity.

Typically, I would suspect that a religion is only "believable" if it is both internally consistent and requires only minimal changes to the potential believer's views. An individual is unlikely to take up a religion which promotes a concept that the individual finds abhorrent. So in order to be believeable, a religion must (at least initially) reasonably well represent the pre-conceived views of those individuals it is intended for. That of course has nothing whatsoever to do with its actual representation of reality.

[basics]

" Validity is a strange concept to apply to religion. As has already been said, as long as they are internally consistent, it is very difficult to distinguish one religion from another in terms of validity. "

Jack04,

The validity of religion comes down to how God grades that and since He gives it no grading at all, Him being the only true God, it follows that validation of belief falls to Him to measure. He has measured that by Jesus Christ, for there is no other measure by which man can achieve redemption and that by what has been laid down that it happens.

[The Dude]

It depends how close the religion is to the teachings of the Christ. Gods word made flesh and all that.

... don't tell me this is what I think it is.

[Helm]

Should you ever feel the light presence of Yeshua ben Miriam (the real Hebrew name of Jesus) within a faith then you'll know it has the authentic approval of the Lord.