How to Compare Religions

8/3/2019 How to Compare Religions

1/30

1

How to Compare Religions

Basic Principles of Logic

Among Philosophy Schools and Religions

The Purpose of This Manuscript:

The ideological conflicts between philosophy schools and religions have lately

intensified, where each one of them claims its correctness, and also the fallacy of others.

Among the professional debates (or arguments) based on evidence and justifications,

there are biased arguments based on incorrect psychological and cognitive standards.

Moreover, many people seem to be influenced by these incorrect standards that have

caused them to be lost in these times, "the time tribulations". The aim of this manuscript

is to comment on these standards and test their accuracy, and point to some of the issues

related to the investigations between these ideological schools.


2/30

2

I. Introduction (1):

People tend to think about issues regarding their future: such as going to university,

building a career, buying a house, getting married, having a family, traveling, havingmoney etc. We think about these issues because we know that, sooner or later, we will

definitely face them. In order to succeed in any of these areas of your life, you know you

need preparation.

Q: How is your life going to be without success in these issues?

We know that problems have to be faced in order to solve them. Even though we dont

like having these problems, if we avoid thinking and avoid preparing for them it will only

make them worse. For example, being dismissed from university, losing a job, having

your house burnt, being divorced, having a car accident, permanent disability, being deaf,

being broke, failing a large investment, etc.

Q: How to deal with these problems? Is it by planning to solve them? Or by ignoring

them?

Similarly, death is also an issue regarding our future, and so it should be thought about

for a while for the same reasons. Human beings like and want to live forever with all

possible comfort. Usually, people consider and believe that when they die, life stops and

their dream of living longer has not been fulfilled. But just think if there is another life

after you die

*The Relevance:

Philosophy schools and religions fall into two categories based on their explanations on

this issue:

1. Nothing after we die.2. Another possible life.


3/30

3

Any of the previously-indicated "predictions" can be true. That is, before "testing" these

two beliefs, no one can claim the truth/fallacy of one of them over the other. Any one of

them is equally probable to be true. Moreover, if it has been proven that "there is

actually another life after death", the second category (of philosophy schools and

religions) makes immortality definite for you. However, after all of this "optimistic"

arguments, someone could be wondering: arent religions merely imaginations and

beliefs inside our minds? Or are they real and telling facts?

Q: Do religions include facts in addition to beliefs?

*What is a fact?

A fact is anything that can be true, to exist or to happen.

Question: Can one fact be numerous and distinct at the same time? Or can it only be

one thing?

*Examples for Clarification:

1.Bob is in his room right now. This can be a fact.

- Bob is not in his room right now. This also can be a fact.

However, can both of them be true at the same time?!

2. -One day in the future, the helium of the sun will deplete completely and the sun will

no longer be bright. This can be a fact.

-The helium in the sun will not run out, that is, the brightness of the sun is permanent.

This can be a fact.

But, can both of them happen?


4/30

4

3. -The origin of human beings on the Earth was via bacteria. (a fact)

-Mankind originated from another planet. (a fact)

However, only one of them is what actually happened.

Conclusion:

Every phenomenon, every thing that happens or exists is factual and any particular fact

can be only one thing. Moreover, as a convention in all sciences, facts can be

determined according to certain methods: evidence and observations.

*What About Religions:

Each religion consists of its own:

(history, present, future, invisible beings and rules)

History, present, future and invisible beings that religions describe cannot be distinct and

also right at the same time.

*Examples for Clarification (Only read some of them until clear):

1. similar to example 2 indicated previously:

- one religion tells that the brightness of the sun is temporary.

- another religion tells that it is permanent.

Can both of what these two religions say be right?

2. -one religion believes the Earth is flat.

-another religion says that the Earth is not flat.

Can both of them be right?


5/30

5

3. -people initially started with one language.

-people initially started with different languages.

-people initially started with no language.

Can all of them be factual at the same time?!

4. -The moon was cut into two halves one day in the past.

-This didnt happen.

The same question?

5. -There is a life after death.

-There is no life after death.

Whatever the fact is, can there be there is a life & there is no life at the same

time?!

6. -There is a Judgment Day.

-There is nothing called Judgment Day.

The same question?

7. -one religion believes that there is a hell.

-the other religion believes there is no hell.

The same question?!

8. -one religion believes that there is a paradise.

-the other religion believes there is no paradise.

The same question?!!


6/30

6

9. -There is God in our life.

-There is no God in our life.

10. -There are angels in our life.

-There is nothing called angels in this life.

Whatever the fact is, can it be two different things?!!

11. -There will be someone called The Savior who will come in the future. This can

happen.

-There will be no one like that.

But, Only one of them is possible.

12etc.

*Conclusion:

In addition to its rules and laws, religions are also facts. People commonly think that

"religion" is only rules that people follow and certain ceremonies that they do. Even

though these rules and laws are a part of this religion, they are not the main beliefs,

concepts, events in history and the future (the facts) that this religion is grounded on.

Therefore, among all of these distinct/diverse beliefs and facts that religions on the globe

tell, only "one fact" of these is the reality.

Therefore, if it was only possible for one belief to be the truth, then the religion that holds

this belief is the right religion.

Can both of them be factual??!

If what a particular religion

tells is factual and actually

the reality

This religion is

the right religionTherefore

ThenIts rules should

be followed


7/30

7

II. Introduction (2):

This research requires a common principle in all sciences, that is:

Observations, evidence, coherence Conclusion

In Science, no matter how large the number of observations, evidence or phenomena is, if

all of them lead to one result, we can therefore conclude this result.

Philosophy also depends on evidence. However, in terms of philosophy, when the

amount of evidence becomes larger, people start considering philosophy as Too much

thinking and philosophers as people who live in another world even though the

evidence is each individually correct and coherent.

Similarly, when a physicist starts introducing a really complex theory he or she explains

their observations, evidence, and how they came to that conclusion. if you are new to

this field, you wouldnt understand a single word, even though you believe this physicist

is talking about a factual phenomenon in our life.

*Lets use a simple example to demonstrate this principle and its relevance:

Boiling Water

a. water boils at a temperature of 100oC.b. the container of the water is too hot.c. the thermometer is reading 100oC.d. vapor bubbles are rising from the

base of the container.

e. water vapor is rising from the surfaceof the water.

Q: is the water boiling?

F. the water is boiling.

ba c d e

F

Einsteins Theory:

General Relativity

and Special Relativity

The Theory of Relativity

The Entropy of Black Holes

etc.

Even though it is so complex, have

physicists said, Oh, this is so

complicated, this is too muchthinking, lets stop here; what we aredoing is a waste of time and useless?!


8/30

8

Conclusion:

*If all of the components are correct, the conclusion for sure is correct regardless of how

complicated it seems to us.

*As long as it is worthwhile and important to think about something, we have to think

about it Furthermore

Q: Is understanding your life less important than understanding other things??

III. Issues and Standards in Determining Religions:

1) Facts & Rules:

Suppose there are two distinct religions and they both have distinct beliefs, concepts,

different rules and different details:

As discussed previously, (R, Y, X) & (Q, W, Z) cannot be both right at the same time.

*supposethat (R, Y, X) are actually the reality, then:

Q:should people do a or they shouldnt?

Q:is it good for people to have c or it is not?

Q:is it necessary to do q?

Clearly, if(R, Y, X) are the reality, then its rules should be followed:

Religion 1

*what happened in the past was R

*the creator of the universe is called Y

*what happens after we die is X

* people should not do a

*it is good for people to have c

*it is necessary to do q for otherpeople

f

a

c

t

s

r

u

l

e

s

Religion 2

*what happened in the past was Q

*the creator of the universe is called W

*what happens after we die is Z

* people should do a

*it is not good for people to have c

*it is not necessary to do q for others.


9/30

9

Rules are dependent

Therefore

Q:is it reasonable to say, Religion 1 is right but its rules are not right?!

Q: is it reasonable or even convincing to start arguing about the rules OR to ask

whether the major concepts are realistic or fake?

If (R, Y, X) are right, then the rules are right whether we understand why they were

given by the right religionor we dont. Have we understood everything in this world

yet?.

*Only an assumption: even though the following is impossible, assume that it has

been proven that the concepts of religion 1 are right but the rule s of religion 2 are right!

Q: Which is actually more convincing: the main concepts or the details?!

(Remember: this was only an assumption to demonstrate that arguing about rules is not

as important and reasonable as the main facts, beliefs and concepts).

The aim here was mainly to demonstrate this rule; for this reason, no names were

mentioned, that is, people in our daily life always keep asking about the rules of any

particular religion, even though these rules are dependent on other things and are not

!

Religion1

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Religion2

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

f

a

ct

s

r

u

l

e

s

correct

correct


10/30

10

sufficient to be convincing, and they (people) dont inquire about the main factual

beliefs.

What is meant here is not that rules are not arguable and have no point; but they are not

the place where we should start.

2) The Right Religion & Your Family:

People normally tend to have the same beliefs as their families; thats because believing

in something else has an indirect meaning or a connotation to the family what you, my

parents, believe is wrong! All people in the globe have these feelings toward their

families.

Suppose that you have some close friends and relatives who have different religions (the

same as their families).

With all respect to the warm emotions and relationship with your family,

Q:Do these emotions make all of these (X, Y, Z, W, R, etc.) possible at the same time?

Therefore, is it reasonable to think, My religion is right because my parents and my

whole family believe in it?!

Your Friend

religion 1

What happens

after death is

X

Your Cousin

religion 2

What happens

after death is

Y

Your Mother

religion 3

What happens

after death is

Z

Your Sister

religion 4

What happens

after death is

W

You

religion 5

What happens

after death is

R


11/30

11

3) The Number of Followers of Religions:

As indicated above, religions are judged and determined by the facts they tell.

However, many people think that the number of followers of any particular religion

indicates its correctness.

Q: Do facts, from religions or other sources of knowledge, change or vary when the

numbers of people who believe in them change?

*In the past, people around the globe believed with no doubt that the Earth is flat and

surrounded by unlimited water and oceans.

Q: Did these large numbers of people change the fact that the Earth is spherical?!

*People believed that the sun revolves around the Earth. Then, the number of people

believing in that was changing throughout the history.

Q: Has the variation of the number of these people influenced the nature and the fact??

Therefore, is it reasonable to say, This religion seems to be right because the number of

its followers is so large?

4) What We Hope:

Examples:

*Death is a fact but you hope there is nodeath; you hope that your living in this life

is permanent; you hope that you will not die like other people!

Q: If you hope and keep hoping; if you dont hope; if you like death; if you dont like

death; etc.


12/30

12

-Does your hope stop the fact of death?! Realistically, No, your hope doesnt change

the fact.

*If a car accident caused you a permanent disability and you have lost one of your

organs: leg, eye, tongue, ear, what happened to you is factual in reality. You hope this

fact is not real and you hope it is only a nightmare that you will wake up from. But

unfortunately, this is what actually happened; you and all people around you feel sad and

sorry about that; you dont like being in this situationBut

Q:Does what you hope make the factual accident unrealistic?

*You work in a branch of a particular company. Your life is great, comfortable and you

are very rich and you like your job. In the summer, you traveled to another country for a

holiday. During your break, the company closed the branch you work in and fired all of

the employees working there.

Later in the vacation when you were in the beach, one of your friends called you to ask,

Have you found another job? And he told you that you have been fired; you were

shocked and during this time and before you check with the company, you hope (it is

only hoping) none of this happened; you hope your friend has been kidding.

Q: Is what you hope what actually happened?? "Hope" doesn't equal "Reality"

**Only an assumption:

Only assume for now that There is A Great Beautiful Paradise that people go to after

they die.

(onlyassume this paradise is factual and real)

Because it is real, people, including you, will go to this paradise with no doubts.

Moreover


13/30

13

Q: Does the existence of this paradisedepend on

-Whether you believe in it or you dont believe in it?

-Whether you like it or you dont like it?

-Whether 70% of people believe in it, or 80%, or 60%, etc?

Therefore, does the correctness of the religion that informs about this real paradise

depend on our belief, hope, like, etc?

If something is a fact, it cannot change according to what we feel or what we like.

Conclusion:

Suppose you have a particular belief and you are in a particular religion. What will

ha ppen after death is X. If you change to another religion; you are, for example,

Christian and then you change to Buddhism, you are Jewish and then you change to

Islam, or you became atheist, etc.

Q:will what happens after death change?

X

5) Convenience & Difficulty:

Among the distinct philosophy schools and religions, there is only one right way (as

discussed). Suppose this right way is a religion called Y; there are many different

beliefs and anticipations of what will happen after we die but what will actually happen

is well stated by this religion.


14/30

14

Then, if what religion Y tells us is factual and real,

Q: Does this tell us that religion Y is righteous and anticipating realistic events?

Q: If people deny what will actually happen after we die (which is told by the right

religion Y), is their denial going to change what will happen after death?

(Suppose, all people deny that the Earth is spherical!!)

Furthermore

Q: If religion Y is the right one among all philosophy schools and religions, but it has

some hard and undesirable rules that dont suit your mood, does this change what religion

Y tells you?? Or does this make it incorrect?!

However, some people say, I will not even bother to think about other religions because

it has some rules that I dont like to follow, or they are hard to me, etc.

Q: Is it reasonable to say, This religion is wrong and what it tells will not happen

because it is difficult for me to follow?

a

f

te

r

y

o

u

d

i

e

You

religion A

what will happen after death is W

religion B

what will happen after death is Q

religion Y

what will happen after death is X

religion Z

what will happen after death is R

X

X will notchange,regardless of

what we

desire, think orhope, or if themajority of

people believe

in it, you deny

it, etc.


15/30

15

Q: Is it reasonable to say, My religion is right because it has much easier rules and

laws?

Q: Is it reasonable to say, These events, that religion says have happened or will

happen, are not desirable to me, therefore, they didnt happened or they will not happen,

(because I dont like them)?!

6) Generalization & The Correctness of Religions:

Any religion is represented by its schools, religious scholars and beliefs. Some people

generalize the behavior of some groups of followers of some religions which

contaminates the perspective other people have about these particular religions; for

example:

Some followers of Christianity are racists.

Some followers of Islam are terrorists.

Some followers ofatheism are murderers.

Q: Can we conclude that:

Christianity = Racism & Islam = Terrorism & Atheism = Criminality ?

Q: Does this generalization mean that a particular religion is not the right one because

some people, who claim they are its followers while they are not legitimate

representatives, are outlaws?!


16/30

16

*Generalization of One School on an Entire Religion:

Suppose there is a religion called Y which includes two main schools.

Religion Y

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Q:Can we say, Religion Y cannot be the right one because it allows starting war and

fighting with people who live in peace?

Conclusion:

Generalization is not a logical or even a convincing rule; some people use it to

convince themselves that the other religion is not the correct one.

7) The Source of Reality:

Many people have prejudices and impressions that dont have any relevance to reality

about other religions because their sources of information are not a source of reality.

Lets begin with an example to demonstrate what is meant by The Source of Reality.

*As simple as this:

School (A)

*People are equal, they have to

live in peace regardless of theirbelief and they have to respect

each other with a great

kindness. And you can onlyfight, if you are being invaded

to protect people from the

danger of the invasion.

School (B)

*invading another country

which is living in peace islegitimate and justified by

the excuse that religion Y

should spread in a largerregion and have a larger

number of followers.


17/30

17

If you are in love with a girl passionately; then, one day, you want to get married to her.

You also have spent a really long time and huge effort in order to be a good man and

fully capable of handling this responsibility. You've done all of this in order to have a

wonderful life with her and a loving relationship.

However, her father and her family dont know you personally and they have never met

you before, therefore, the family initially refused and asked you to wait for a short time

because they want the best for her

To Show The Relevance

Suppose there are two persons: Person A (he is your close friend and the one whom you

spend most of the time with) & Person B (he is your enemy or your opponent and you

dont have a good relationship with him: he doesnt like you).

Q: Would it be fair for her father to go to only Person B and ask him about you?

Q: Would the description of Person B about your personality be realistic?

Q: Or would it be fair, realistic, reasonable and even convincing if he asked Person A,

Person B, and asked you yourself ??

.

You in the above example is the correct religion.

Person B & Person A are the followers of other religions.

The father is your mind.

The girl is yourself, and for sure you want the best for yourself.

.

Conclusion:

The most convincing way to know the reality about any particular religion (that you

already have some ideas about) is to go to the real followers of this religion and ask

them


18/30

18

What do you believe in?

Do you actually believe in that?

Why do you think what you believe is right and factual?

8) The Hierarchy for Deriving Facts:

Most of the facts that philosophy schools and religions rely on to claim their correctness,

and the beliefs that a particular religion is famous for, are merely "facts" that were

"concluded" from other simplistic information. Hence, the truth or fallacy of these beliefs

is dependent on the truth or fallacy of the given knowledge used to derive them.

.Primary Givens/Simple Observations.

a b c d e f g h i k l m n o p q r s t

Introduction (N) Introduction (K) Evidence (*) Note (#) .

First Conclusion Second Conclusion

The Derived Fact

(The belief that this religion believes in)

The truth of this belief depends on the correctness of the first conclusion & the second

conclusion. And the correctness of the first conclusion, as an example, depends on the

correctness of introduction (N) & introduction (K). And the correctness of introduction

(N) depends on the correctness of the givens (a, b, c, d, e).

Q: Therefore, is it reasonable to investigate about how correct "the first conclusion is",

before investigating about the introductions used to derived it ???

OR..

Q: Is it logical to start arguing about the truth/fallacy of the belief without arguing about

the basis of primary givens, introductions and conclusions that the religion is grounded

on?

therefore

thereforetherefore

thereforethereforethereforetherefore

First Sta

_ _ _ _ _

Second S

_ _ _ _ _

Third St

_ _ _ _ _

Fourth S


19/30

19

That is, in our daily life and in the field of introducing and debating about beliefs and

thoughts among the followers of different religions, we find that most of them start

debating/arguing about "derived information" in the second stage of derivation without

doing so with the primary observations/givens; or they think about the third stage before

testing the information in the second stage!!

For example, only to clarify this concept:

Islam tells that it is required from each individual to pray everyday during the noon time

in a particular manner So, in order to test how correct this instruction is, we have to

test how correct the hierarchy and the inferring root this religion used to claim it, starting

from the first stage.

The root the Islam uses to proof the correctness of the Islamic instructions

The match between the

estimated characteristics of

this creator, with the Islamic

"description" of God

The sciences, logic,

language and coherence of

the Islamic "holy" book

cannot be innovated by

mankind

The Islamic belief that the

existence has a cause/ a

creator, like anything else

The match between several

Islamic beliefs and scientific

theories

We have to believe in the

"Islamic Divine Book": Qur'an

It has been proven through historical analysis and

narrations that this man (Mohammad) said that this "noonprayer" should be performed in a specific manner.

This Qur'an tells that Mohammad is a rightful

prophet who is to be obeyed in his comments,instructions, actions, and followed in his behavior.

Therefore, we have to perform this

prayer

The lack of contradiction

between the Islamic beliefs and

the real-life phenomena. They are

even probable and their fallacy

has not been provenThe Islamic "holy" book

cannot be modified/altered

The Islamic belief that

there is a purpose behind

this life, which is logical

for all other things in life.

So it cannot be true that the

entire life has no purpose

in its turn. That is, death is

not a merely pointless end

Therefore Islam is a correct religion and

was not innovated by an ordinary being


20/30

20

Q: Is it, therefore, reasonable when seeing a Muslim individual performing this "noon

prayer" to say, "This obligation seems to be pointless and it is obvious that we do not

have to do such a thing" before knowing the evidence used to conclude it by this religion.

Q: Or is it even logical to say, "This instructed deed is not compulsory because this

religion doesn't seem to be a correct religion" before completing the reasoning behind its

fallacy, and the introductions for its initial proofs?

Conclusion:

The truth/fallacy of a dependent knowledge depends on the truth/fallacy on the

introductions and primary information used to proof it. Therefore in order to test the truth

of a belief, we have to test the introductions that this religion uses to prove it.

9) What to Criticize? & What to Inquire About?!

If someone has used (a, b, c, d) of information to derive the truth ofthe belief "z"

Q: Is it reasonable to say, " ( z ) is false because of the fallacy of ( k ) " ?!!!

And what does "k" have to do with the derivation of "z"?!! Or has this person used "k" to

derive "z" so that it can be used to criticize the truth of "z"?!

Therefore, in order to prove the fallacy of "z", we have to proof the fallacy of (a), (b), (c)

or (d)as we discussed abovesince they are what this person used to derive "z". Even

if "k" is somehow related to the topic, if its fallacy or truth doesn't affect the truth of "z",

then it is irrelevant to use it against the derivation of "z").

For example, only to clarify this concept:

Someone could say, "The manner of the Islamic prayers benefits the health of the human

body because large amounts of blood are pumped to the brain while prostrating

therefore, this proves that the Islamic prayer is recommended/compulsory"


21/30

21

Q: Yes, the position of prostration in the Islamic prayer benefits the brain, but is this the

piece of information that Islam uses to justify this instruction?!!

*Someone else could say, "Doing these prayers frequently teaches an individual to be

managed in time therefore, this proves that these prayers are really

recommended/compulsory"!

Q: Yes, if someone could manage his time to perform these prayers, he will develop a

better skill in time management, but was this the piece of information that Islam uses to

justify this instruction?!

No, therefore, the fallacy or truth of these pieces of information about the Islamic prayer

doesn't affect their fallacy/truth. Hence, why would someone use them in a debate?

Yes, there are some natural consequences (psychological and physical ones) that result

from believing in a particular belief or another, or doing some deeds or others, some

which might "seem" to be positive or negative. However, as long as this religion (any

religion) orphilosophy school didnt rely on those consequences in the derivation, no one

has the right to use them to criticize the belief. Furthermore, even if you were searching

for the righteous path for your own good (not for the purpose of debating), you shouldn't

use a piece of information that a religion doesn't consider. Rather, we test the hierarchy of

evidence used for this particular belief or another.

*For example, can someone use the following justification against Islam (in this

particular topic):

Islam prohibits sexual relations without

marriage. And it also prohibits drinking

wine and eating some types of foodThe absolute purpose of this

life is to enjoy it

Therefore, the Islamic instructions

contradicts with the purpose of life

Therefore, Islam cannot be a rightful religion


22/30

22

Q: However, does Islam claim that this is the purpose of life, in the first place?

If Islam, for example, claimed that "the purpose of life is to enjoy it" and at the same time

"we have to confine sexual relations", then in this case, there is a contradiction between

the claims. This makes the conclusion that "Islamic instructions correspond with the

purpose of life" a false conclusion. However

Q: Is it reasonable or even fair to claim the fallacy of a religion/philosophy school by

using a piece of information that this religion doesn't believe in?

Conclusion:

Regardless of the truth or fallacy of a religion or another, and regardless of our own

opinion or tendencies, we can carry out investigating beliefs through the logical hierarchy

of deriving beliefs, but investigating about a piece of information that this belief doesn't

rely on, wouldn't lead us to any conclusion regarding the fallacy or truth of this belief.

Islam prohibits sexual relations without

marriage. And it also prohibits drinking

wine and eating some types of foodThe absolute purpose of this life

is to test human beings in their

faith and patience

Therefore, the Islamic instructions don't contradict

with the purpose of life that it believes in


23/30

23

10) Goodness of Successive Religions & Righteousness:

In addition to their claim of their correctness, some religions consider some other

religions to be "right". If a particular religion is the right and legitimate religion in the

globe, it will have, for sure, the best concepts, beliefs, rules, laws, beauty, ethics and

morals.

*Suppose there are four religions that came in succession throughout history.

Lets assume the following in order to clarify this rule:

Religion D was right and came first. Then, after several centuries, it was followed by

religion C. Religion C is rightbut it also tells that religion D was righteous and

good and it has, with no doubts, right beliefs and concepts.

In addition, people have a spiritual comfort when they believe in a right religion and

they feel and see its beauty and goodness. For this reason, they think that other religions

are not right.

However, even though it is a fact that religion D is beautiful and has greatness,

Q:Does this mean that religion C, which tells that religionD itself is right, is not

right?

(You can apply this rule on the beauty righteousness of religion C and religion B)

D

C

B

A


24/30

24

IV) A Questioning Conclusion:

Is religion factual and real, or it is a choice like an entertainment activity? Why are you now in this particular religion, or why do you have these particular

beliefs?

Why do you believe that other religions are not right?V) Important Applications:

1) There are three religions A, B & C:

Religion A

*The existence has a purpose.

*The origin of mankind was

Adam and Eve.

*After this life, there is aJudgment Day: Paradise & Hell

*There was a nation in the past

called Y killed by floods.

*People will be judgedaccording to goodness and evil

they do.

*There are angels and spirits inthis life.

*There is one God.

*A human has a body & a soul.

*Prophethood ended withprophet R.

*People should not do a, b andc. And it is good to do e, f & g

*It is obligatory to give a large

portion of your own money, if

you are rich, to poor people.

Religion B

*The existence has a purpose.

*The origin of mankind was

Adam and Eve.

*After this life, there is aParadise.

*There was a nation in the past

called Y killed by storms.

*People will not be judgedaccording to evil they do.

*There are only angels.

*More than one God.

*A human has a body & a soul.

*Prophethood ended withprophet Y.

*People should do a, b and c.And it is not good to do e, f & g

*It is very recommended when

you are rich but not obligatory.

25

Religion C

*The existence has no purpose.

*The origin of mankind is

bacteria.

*The body just disintegrates.

*There was no nation called

Y.

*People will not be judged atall.

*There are neither angels norspirits in the universe.

*No God.

*A human has only a body.

*There were no prophets.

*No specific rule: neitherrecommendation nor

prohibition.

*No specific rule.


25/30

25

Q: If you were initially a follower of religion B, then you say, Oh, religion C seems to

have easier rules; Ill change from B to C or Many people believe in religion A, Ill

change from religion B to A

*Does this change what will actually happen after our death (whatever it is)?*Does this change the fact of the existence of God (whatever it is)?

*Does this change what the origin of mankind was (whatever it was)?

*Suppose your initial belief (in religion B) is in the existence of angels without spirits,

then if you convert to "religion A" will this create spirits in life?

*Suppose there are actually souls in our bodies, then if you convert to "religion C", are

these souls going to suddenly disappear?!!

*Or should it be the case that our beliefs should be based on reality and facts?

To demonstrate, let's assume there is a God therefore, we should believe in this God.

There are angels (for example) I should believe there are actually angels. There are no

spirits Then I should believe there are no spirits. There is a Judgment Day I should

believe in the truth of this day, etc.

The Rules

Conclusion:

The accuracy of these facts doesnt depend on you.You are the one who should follow these facts; they affect you and you

dont affect them.

The correctness of the correct religion is determined by evidences(because facts can be determined by evidences and observations)

2) Keeping in mind the previous rules, think about the following:

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 91 10


26/30

26

Question: Is there a creator for this universe?

The immediate answer of someone who believes there is no god is No, of course, there

is no god. However,

Q: Do scientists disagree with an opinion, a hypothesis, a theory or a fact before

thinking about it?

This person immediately answered negatively because s/he doesnt like the fact of having

a god, or her/his family used to believe there is no god, people in her/his country

believe in that, or it is easier for her/him, etc.

Q: is there a creator?

There are two methods to determine a fact: either observation, evidence, or both of them.

A. Observation:

Ifthere is a creator for this existence and you want to investigate the accuracy of this

fact, you, your mind, your senses, your abilities and every thing in this universe (if there

is a creator,) are included in this created universe, therefore, this creator created them.

Therefore, they are clearly less sophisticated than their creator.

Q: Can they observe the creator (if there is a creator in the first place) for this

universe??

(What is meant here is even if there is a creator, you may notobservethe creator)

These are not standards that can be used in determining the accuracy of facts

Observations

and/or

Evidence

Is it an easy

way or

difficult?

Matches with

what my family

believes

What

I

hope

What

I

desire

Do many people

believe in it or a

few people?

What other

people

say

The Fact


27/30

27

B. Evidence:

The existence of any thing, including you, is attributed to one of four reasons:

(This is applicable for everything: what created life? What set the laws of science?? etc.)

either or or or

you

2. I created myself:

If you created yourself, you

had the choice of your life:

the place of birth, how you

look (your length, your

color, etc.), your family,

your initial financial

condition, the level of your

intelligence, the length of

your life. If you created

yourself, you had the choice

of these things.

However

Q: Did you have the choiceof these things?

Moreover, if I am the one

who created me, why do I

die? And in order to create

myself, I must have been

alive before so that I create

myself! Therefore,

Q:IfI existed before my

creation in order to create

myself, I already had

existed; therefore, how

could I be the one who

created me?!

Q:IfI didnt exist before, I

wasnt anything: no abilities

& no thinking, etc. So, how

was I able to create myself?

and how could I take the

decision of my creation?!

3. I was created from

something else:

I was created from organs,

cells (substances, atoms,electrons, etc.), bacteria,

other people, the entire

existence, any thing, etc.

This thing is just like you

in its creation:

The same two questions:

Q: It has to exist before its

creation in order to create

itself, so it already has

existed. Therefore, howcould it create itself at the

moment of creation?!

Q:Ifit didnt exist before,it wasnt anything, so, how

could it create itself?!

4. A Creator:

All of our characteristics

are things (just like otherthings), so they are

included in this universe

and created as well.

Therefore, they cannot be

applied to their creator,who created them, that is:

Characteristics:

The creator has different

characteristics that we

cannot observe by our

senses & abilities: anyknowledge we have is

something in this universe

which was created by its

creator. Therefore, you

cannot even imagine your

creator.

Knowledge:

The creator created these

things (knowledge),

therefore, the creator has

all knowledge. Therefore,the creator of the universe

knows everything in this

universe.

Power:

The creator created the

power that anything in the

existence has, therefore,

the creator has the greatest

power.

1. No cause of my

existence:

Q: Is it possible to have

something with no cause?

The scientific laboratory in

modern and even classic

sciences is entirely based

on the principle of

Cause & Effect

At any university, in any

lecture, the professor

asked, Why do we have

this thing or this

phenomenon?

e.g. In biology (a disease),

geology (an elevation),

astronomy (supernova),

climatology (trade winds),

physics (waves), chemistry

(heat), economy

(shortage), etc.

and you answered the

professor, it just

happened!!

(no comment)


28/30

28

VI) Why Should We Investigate from the First Place?

Someone could say, "Why would I search about the truth of religions?" "What difference

would it make?!!" "And would the proof of one religion's correctness over the others, or

my transfer among religions, affect (what will happen to me after death)?"

because as we discussed in rule (4), the accuracy of what happens after death does not

rely on us.

However, if one of us woke up in this life and found that all religions and philosophy

schools tell that there is nothing after death, or that theyallagree that what is after death

is a paradise for all human beings, or a hell for all of them etc.

Then, yes; what would it change if I transfer from one religion to another, or believing inthe first belief, or the fourth, or even the tenth one?!!

But if one of us woke up in this life and found that religions don't agree in one common

belief, and they are distinct and they inform about contradictory "facts", and some of

them even claims that "A human being should believe in me, so that he/she gets rewarded

after death, otherwise gets punished."

Then How can I make sure that what a religion tells me is false or true?

Or how can I make sure that I will be safe after my death, and what these religions claim

is not real?

Or how can I make sure that what a particular religion tells about rewarding, punishment,

conditions, obedience, etc. are all "unreal", and I don't have to believe in them or even

worry about them?

Or they are true and I should believe in them, in order to escape from that "real"

punishment?

Q: How can we ensure that these beliefs are "real/unreal" without investigating, searching

and thinking?

Based on these reasons, "Determining the truth of what these religions claim" becomes a

necessity.


29/30

29

VII) The Lack of Permanence:

Someone else could say, "Why should I worry/search about the truth among religions while they

are related to the issue of "death", and which will only occur after a "tremendously long time"?

************************************************************************************************************

Usually people avoid thinking about death and related topics because they have a natural

fear ofdeath, and they start thinking about doom and scary conceptions once death is

mentioned. Nevertheless, we are in this life, so we are meant to live in it, develop it, and

enjoy it. The thing is, we have to take death and the temporality of life into our accounts

and think more realistically about our life and its purpose. That is, life with death and

life without death are not the same thing; they are two different things. Death is an

issue that we have to solve and understand (Refer to section VIpage 28). Solving such

an issue will make immortality and the permanent comfort possible for you.************************************************************************************************************

As discussed previously, the significance of Religionsis attributed to the lack of permanence

of this life, where they inform us that this life is not the main purpose and explain its temporality.

That is, people consider the period of time, since the commencement of the universe until now, an

incredibly long period of time. Everyone wishes that he/she has this duration of living life.

However, even though it has been an extremely long period, it eventually reached its end, like

any other thing ( its end is these days, isnt it ?! ). In addition, thething, that allowed these eras

to end, will continue functioning in a similar manner to consume our days.Being able to see the world only at the time you live in it, doesnt mean the existence is only

about these ~80 years you are living which are insignificant in the real time scale. Time started

since the commencement of the existence, and has been, is still and will continue running. Similar

to what we think, all people in the past thought their lives were very long and the whole point of

this existence is the years they were living. However,

Q:Where are these people now??

Q: Can you see even one of them still alive??

People these days have the same mentality that past people had. However,

Q: Did what they believe correspond with reality??

we are exactly in the same position nowQ: Where are we after ~100 years?

Q: Is this life long enough, so that it has no end ??


30/30

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam

http://www.al-islam.org/index.php?sid=196651478&t=80&cat=80

Index:

I. Introduction (1): The Factualness of Religions .P1II. Introduction (2): Observations, Evidence, Coherence Conclusion ...P7III.Issues and Standards in Determining Religions: ...P81) Facts & Rules ......P82) The Righteous Religion & Your Family ........P103) The Number of Followers of Religions ..P104) What We Hope ....P115) Convenience & Difficulty .P136) Generalization & The Righteousness of Religions.P157) The Source of Reality.P168) The Hierarchy for Deriving Facts9) What to Criticize? And What to Inquire About?......................................................10)Goodness of Successive Religions & Righteousness..IV.A Questioning Conclusion ...P18V. Important Applications ..P191) The Independence of the Factualness & The Righteousness P19

2) Is There a Creator? .......P21

VI.Why Should We Investigate from the First Place?..............................................VII. The Lack of Permanence .......................

The Author. [email protected]

P2

P7

P8

P8

P10

P10

P11

P13

P15

P16

P18

P20

P21

P24

P24

P24

P26

P28

P29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamhttp://www.al-islam.org/index.php?sid=196651478&t=80&cat=80http://www.al-islam.org/index.php?sid=196651478&t=80&cat=80mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.al-islam.org/index.php?sid=196651478&t=80&cat=80http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam

Documents

How to Compare Religions