The Greatest Fake Religion of All Time

[Warren Stupidity]

Over fifty years ago, a group of pranksters founded a satiric religion devoted to creating conspiracy theories so insane that nobody would ever believe uncritically in conspiracies again. They called themselves the Discordians. And their weird ideas are still influencing us today.
History does not record Robert Welch's reaction when he received a letter on Bavarian Illuminati stationery in 1970. Welch was the founder of the John Birch Society, a conservative group with a paranoid bent, mostly focused on communist conspiracies but also willing to expand its gallery of villains to include other secret cabals. The Illuminati are an 18th-century secret society whose alleged efforts to control the world were regularly decried by groups like, well, the John Birch Society.

Welch may have been a nut but he wasn't a fool, and he was probably pretty sure someone was pulling his leg by the time he saw that the note had been written by "Ho Chi Zen, Cong King of Gorilla Warfare." But I like to imagine that curiosity compelled him to read on.

"We have been meaning to write you for some time," the message began. They claimed they had held off until Harper's magazine—which, the letter assured him, the Illuminati controlled—had interviewed Welch in its August issue. It continued:

All this is in keeping with our new policy of allowing alert and sophisticated persons such as yourself and your followers and associates a more comprehensive review of our activities. For with 96.5% of the entire world now under our collective thumb, we just no longer see any point in sneaking around behind the scenes all the time.

http://io9.com/the-greatest-fake-religion-of-all-time-1622095459

All of which avoids the question of how one distinguishes a fake religion from a real one, or if the adjective fake or real make any sense at all when applied to religion.

[malthaussen]

1. Hey, I still see the fnords n/t.

[NYC_SKP]

2. Huh, just like sports and wrestling. Some is real and some is fake.

I'm glad that I don't dwell on either, I'm not a sports person.

I accept that some sports is good for some folks, but even real sports can be bad for some kids.

Same with religions, many promote an open-minded and inclusive way of living life in service of the community.

Many, I don't think I would extend that to most, but neither would I call all religions a joke any more than I would do this with sports.

Off to the park....

[Warren Stupidity]

10. Fake wrestling can readily be determined to be fake.

It is not the same as sports at all.

[Lordquinton]

22. go tell a wrestler that it's fake

You might not need a trip to the emergency room when they demonstrate their "fake" wrestling moves.

[Warren Stupidity]

31. That isn't what is fake about fake wrestling. The "competition" is fake.

The matches are rigged. Everyone knows that. Even the fans. It is a fake sport. Wrestlers get hurt, badly hurt, all the time.

[Lithos]

51. Agreed

There is a difference between athletic and sport. I would categorize what they are doing as athletic - you have to be in very good shape and have a good amount of skill to do what they are doing. If they didn't they would be hurting each other left and right due to mistakes.

However, is it a competitive sport? Absolutely not.

L-

[edhopper]

3. Good question

if the founders were frauds, Like L. Ron Hubbard, or Joseph Smith, but the followers believe it's real, do we consider it a fake or real religion?

[rug]

4. Usually, critical thinking.

As opposed to flat, lazy broadbrushing.

[intaglio]

5. Sorry, L Ron Hubbard gets the title

He talked to several people about forming a religion to make a million bucks
The way to make a million dollars is to start a religion

[edhopper]

6. Joseph Smith

was a convicted scam artist.
And LDS is a bigger religion now than Scientology.

[gtar100]

7. Yes, I'd say that Mormonism takes the lead on fake religions.

Even with an angel named "Moroni" (moron I) Smith got away with it. If anything, however, as moronic as the stories were that started it all, it is an absolutely real religion now. All the engines are running with generations of operations now to lend credence to its viability. The "traditions" they have built over this short number of generations have sealed it into modern history as a legitimate religion (at least as "legitimate" as religions can get). A perfect example of what it takes to start a religion - timing, an audience in need, stories to explain things that didn't make sense at the time, and plum benefits for the early adopters.

[Warren Stupidity]

11. How is mormonism any more fake than catholicism?

[PoutrageFatigue]

13. Aren't they all, at their base, fake?

Give me what you have in this life and in the next life you'll be richly rewarded.

Sounds like bullshit to me.

[Warren Stupidity]

15. I certainly don't disagree.

[mr blur]

14. It isn't. It isn't even any more ridiculous, really. (nt)

[gtar100]

23. Good question. I'd say the true beginnings are lost to history, distorted by "official" stories and

frankly, by billions of followers throughout its history not wanting or willing to question its origins.

It's interesting too that even Buddhism is practiced officially as a religion when the Buddha himself (or so it's been told) didn't want to start a religion.

Today, neither are "fake". They are practiced in very real ways. But at some point, either the stories they tell of their beginnings are real, or there was some conscious effort to persuade people to believe something that the storyteller knew was a lie. We are much closer in history to the origins of Mormonism and have better record of it. But as outlandish the claims were by Smith, their absurdity makes little difference to most Mormons. Their religious needs are being met by Mormonism just as they are for Catholics by Catholicism.

Who knows what the original conversations were about and who the real participants were that conceived of Christianity. The Bible would have us believe the "official" story but there is no absolute proof of the existence of even the historical Jesus. However, it does appear that the Roman Catholic Church was an institution that evolved out of the existing power structures and crudely speaking with respect to Christianity they came to the conclusion, "if you can't beat them, join them".

The official church was obviously built on a movement that was in full swing by the time it got rolling. I'm willing to bet that the truth is even stranger than the stories passed down and possibly not all that flattering. But the Catholic Church has had a long time to obscure their own inconvenient truths and it's going to be very difficult to get to the honest truth unless somewhere in the Vatican vaults they have the smoking gun laying around.

[edhopper]

35. It also comes down to the motives of the writers

Now the faithful might say they were inspired/influenced/dictated by God. But as an atheist, I don't accept that there was a God to talk to them. So what was their motivation, did they believe that God was talking through them, did they believe the stories of Jesus and tried to retell them as close as they could to bring their faith to others? Did they have a political motivation and wanted to use these stories to push back against the Romans? Were any of them scam artists like Hubbard and Smith? A combination of some of these?
I don't have an answer, just looking at the questions of what motivated them.

[Al Carroll]

26. Proven falsehoods

Disagreeing with a faith doesn't make it fake.

Smith's falsehoods are easily proven false, such as stealing most of his book from someone else.

Same thing with the New Age movement, where they claim to be Native medicine people, gurus, etc, and Natives and Hindus point out they are not.

[trotsky]

28. "such as stealing most of his book from someone else"

Many stories of the bible were stolen/copied from other cultures and religions, too.

[Warren Stupidity]

29. The gospels are full of contradictory bullshit and errors.

[Arugula Latte]

52. So that thing with crackers turning into Jesus body is real, huh?

Solid fact backs that up, I guess ...

[hrmjustin]

54. It is just a matter of faith for some.

[Arugula Latte]

55. Right -- thus the making fun of the post I responded too,

which was basically saying that Mormon beliefs are ridiculous because they were based on falsehoods. Well, they're not any more ridiculous than any Christian or Muslim or Jewish or Hindu beliefs.

[hrmjustin]

59. I know what you meant.

You think it is all ridiculous.

[gcomeau]

79. Do you have...

...any serious argument why anyone shouldn't think that?

[hrmjustin]

80. I am not going to argue my faith with you.

You either believe it or you don't.

Cheers

[gcomeau]

81. So no then. Thought so. -eom

[hrmjustin]

82. I am not here to convince you.

I can't prove nothing to you.

[gcomeau]

97. Clearly, since you have nothing to convince with.

Which rather justifies the position of anyone who doesn't feel like treating your beliefs as any less ridiculous than Mormonism or Scientology, doesn't it?

[hrmjustin]

99. You have a wonderful day.

[gcomeau]

101. While I appreciate the sentiment...

...it being nice doesn't render it an appropriate response to a serious argument.

Wishing someone a nice day on it's own is polite. Wishing them a nice day as a way to dismiss what they're saying without dealing with it in any way is actually pretty insulting.

[hrmjustin]

102. Take it how you like but I am done.

If you want the last word go ahead but I am done.

This last two days I have no more. I am done.

[gcomeau]

111. You would have to have started to be done... but whatever. -eom

[rug]

112. Have a nice day.

[edhopper]

56. Have you ever decided something you believed in wasn't true

because the evidence showed it to be otherwise?

[hrmjustin]

60. My faith evolvesbut evidence based I would say no.

[edhopper]

61. How do you decide what parts of the Bible

are accurate descriptions of what occurred?

[hrmjustin]

62. What makes sense to me.

If I feel it is true then I follow it.

[edhopper]

63. I am not talking about

beliefs in terms of morals or what you think is the right thing. I am talking about the portrayals of people and events in the Bible. how do you decide which are true and which are myth?

[hrmjustin]

65. Wghat makes sense to me and biblicak scholarship to some extent.

But it is basically I read something and I just have a feeling it is allegory or literally true. It is more feeling.

[edhopper]

66. Hmm

okay

[hrmjustin]

67. ok.

[AtheistCrusader]

84. Ah, the believer deus ex machina - get out of jail free card.

[hrmjustin]

85. Whatever.

[AtheistCrusader]

86. Do you deny that it ends further inquiry along those lines?

It cannot be examined. It cannot be proven. It cannot be tested.

It's basically a hand in my face, and bald statement of 'go no further'.
I detest such tactics.

[hrmjustin]

87. After what has been going on here the past few days I have no desire to argue.

[AtheistCrusader]

88. A shame. I was away for the last 4 days, so I'm just catching up.

I fell out of the world for a few days. It was nice.

[hrmjustin]

89. Did you enjoy yourself?

[AtheistCrusader]

90. I did.

Closing some chapters in my life, and opening new ones. Gearing up to start my new job, and leave my current, nearly 20 year job.

Wondering if participation in DU is another chapter I should close...

[hrmjustin]

92. I hope you don't leave.

But this room can get everyone down.

[AtheistCrusader]

93. Oh, I like the room. But I wonder if I spend too much time here.

Gone four days, and I can't catch up on the volume of threads/posts that occurred while I was away.

[hrmjustin]

94. Welll it got interesting but insulting as well.

[AtheistCrusader]

98. To take a step back...

If I look at the entire thing from a neutral position, I would suggest that the vitriol builds from a history of slights and digs.
I feel at times, by pretty much all opposition posters, I have been plenty provoked over the years, but I do recognize that (Unless they are also blatant trolls actively doing it) they are likely blissfully unaware of how or why what they are saying will be viewed as a provocation by me.

(And vice versa.)

[hrmjustin]

100. This room just got me down this week.

I will get over it.

[hrmjustin]

8. How does one determine a fake religion?

[Warren Stupidity]

9. Aren't I supposed to fly off the handle due to your mere presence?

More to the point: there is no way. "fake religion" is an unsupportable assertion, or it is redundant.

[hrmjustin]

12. That is up to you but it is a legit question.

[gcomeau]

77. Yes, it is.

However it is one with no serious answer. Inevitably "fake" religions are labelled such based on a couple criteria:


1. "It's different from mine, and thus sounds silly (as opposed to *my* religion whose fantastical supernatural claims are totally reasonable)."
2. "It's not popular enough, and is thus illegitimate... aka my God has more worshipers than your God which renders mine real"


I've seen attempts at more rigorous definitions, but they all boil down to rationalizations and excuses for the above two items on the list.

[NeoGreen]

16. Quite simple...

...it is fake if it requires any form of magic.

[hrmjustin]

17. Please explain my friend?

[NeoGreen]

18. Give me context...

...what part is confusing?

For my part, I think the explanation speaks for itself.

[hrmjustin]

19. never mind. I think I get your opinion.

[NeoGreen]

20. Here endth the lesson (nt)

[hrmjustin]

21. ok.n/t.

[Al Carroll]

27. If the claims are proven false

And I don't mean the very general "Is there a God" question which neither side has adequately proven.

Scientology and New Age claims are very easily proven false, both because of their more recent origins and because they are not what they claim to be.

[Warren Stupidity]

30. How do you prove thetans don't exist?

[Iggo]

32. First of all, it's a religion.

[hrmjustin]

33. We well we disagree.

[Brettongarcia]

24. Believers said religion is based on "faith," not fact. So logically: there is no real religion

By their own definition, there is no religion based on facts.

[Starboard Tack]

25. Do you think religion exists?

If so, then religion is a fact. Religion is also based on the belief that certain things, which are neither provable, nor unprovable, are also facts. They are facts of faith.
By your logic, if there is no religion, hence no gods, then there can be no atheism either.

[edhopper]

38. What about the belief in things that

are provably wrong, that people still believe in?

[Starboard Tack]

48. Like the earth being flat?

Well they are just silly aren't they?
Of course, if things are provably wrong, that is a very good argument.
We could have those kinds of arguments when discussing the "miracles", but then we would have to deal with the fact that they were "miracles".
Personally, I always had difficulty getting my head around the miracle thing. Like, if you are actually the son of God, why do you need to prove it by performing magic tricks. I managed to rationalize it for a while, by thinking "Well, he knew where the rocks were" and people just decided to share, once they saw the loaves and fishes come out. He was setting a good example. I still think he was a good guy and others got a little carried away by it all. Like 300 years of playing "telephone".

Did you have something particular in mind?

[edhopper]

50. Well I think the less vague

beliefs are, the less they are supported by what is known.
Belief in a deity might fall under your statement, but when you get to specifics about what that deity is and what he has done, it gets to less of an "unprovable" position.
For instance, how much of the OT does someone thing is accurate history.

The difference between, I believe God is love and I believe God parted the Red sea.

[Starboard Tack]

69. I don't know how much is historically accurate.

I doubt very little is. I always doubted the accuracy of the stories in the Bible, even as a child. They were like fairy tales to me, which is not a negative, by any means. The fact that they were written by so many different people, centuries later, made it very doubtful that anything was factually accurate.
Do you think many believers dwell on the historical accuracy of the Bible? I doubt it. I think they concentrate much more on the teaching that it offers in terms of morality and how to be a good person, and how to survive in this world.

Not my cup of tea, but judge not lest thou be judged. Personally, I prefer the Greek myths, which pretty much covered everything.

[edhopper]

72. Well that is a discussion on what people find

important about their religion.
But you asked what I meant when I said some beliefs are provably wrong, and that is an example many, many people believe. (The historical accuracy of the Bible)
There are also other nonreligious beliefs, like those in the paranormal which would also be included.

[Brettongarcia]

76. Religion exists. But it is not true. "Facts of faith" is oxymoronic; a logical selfcontradiction

Religion exists, provably. But it is not true or authentic or real ... in the sense that THE THINGS IT CLAIMS are not provably real.

The larger dictionary agrees: "Faith" is "firm belief in something for which there is no proof" (Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 11th ed.).

Some might take faith-claims to be facts. But note that recently many here argued that taking things on "faith," in effect agrees that the things so taken are not proven, or known firmly. Indeed, they defended religion on this basis: that because it is faith-based, it is not making an firm assertions of fact. Therefore they claimed, Religion cannot be accused of falsehood. Since it makes no firm claims of the truth - or reality - of the things it asserts.

To be sure, most OTHER religionists sooner to later start making huge truth claims and reality claims; claiming only they know in fact the "holy," absolute, "eternal" "Truth." But that does indeed contradict the very definition of faith. As well as what science tells us constantly too.

[hrmjustin]

34. No religion?

[edhopper]

36. Imagine?

[hrmjustin]

37. no.

[edhopper]

39. You might say I'm a dreamer

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today...

[hrmjustin]

40. Yes I know the song.

[edhopper]

41. And you don't like

what it says?

[hrmjustin]

42. I like my religion.

[amuse bouche]

104. Why?

[hrmjustin]

105. Because it helps me to make some sense of life and it helps me to experience God.

[amuse bouche]

106. Sorry but that sounds like the same rote nonsense we were forced to regurgitate

as children in CCD class

It's creepy and horrifyingly lame when it comes from an adult

[hrmjustin]

107. What is creepy is the fact is you only seem to post insults.

Good day to you.

[amuse bouche]

108. I'm speaking my mind. Sorry,

I don't fall in line with the zombies

[hrmjustin]

109. Well contrary to your opinion I can think for myself.

[amuse bouche]

110. Ok

[hrmjustin]

113. Why do you have to be like this?

[amuse bouche]

114. Why do you have to be like this?

[hrmjustin]

115. You asked me a question and I answered. You then insulted me.

Why?

[amuse bouche]

117. You call it insults. I call it constructive criticism

You call it faith. I call it pie in the sky bullshit

Semantics

[hrmjustin]

118. Then there is no reason to continue this.

[amuse bouche]

119. There never was a reason to continue

Once the brainwashing has set in, it is a rare Zombie that can break loose and free himself

[hrmjustin]

120. Your saying I am a Zombie?

[Iggo]

43. Can't even imagine it, huh?

Where's those open minds I keep hearing about?

[hrmjustin]

44. Why would I want to get rid of religion?

[Iggo]

45. Imagine that there's no religion. Just imagine it.

There's no "hrmjustin must get rid of religion" in there at all.

Just asking you to have the same open mind that religionists keep asking us to have.

Imagine that there's no religion.

[edhopper]

46. "Imagine all the people

living for today"

is the key line.

[Iggo]

47. Perhaps some day he'll join us.

[cleanhippie]

91. "Perhaps some day YOU will join us"

I think the song you're thinking about is called "Imaginary".

[Iggo]

95. I was paraphrasing.

And yeah, I ain't holding my breath.

[cleanhippie]

96. I know. Just poking a bit of fun.

But it really wasn't directed at you.

[hrmjustin]

49. Would be overcrowded then.

[stopbush]

53. Exactly. What's more unbelievable?

A secret cabal that exerts worldwide power, or a miracle worker who rose from the dead?

Real religion and fantasy. What's the difference?

[edhopper]

57. Many believe both

if they have fallen for "The Protocols of Zion" scam.

[procon]

58. How can any religion claim to be "real"

if it is based on superstition, occult practices, mythology, supernatural mysticism, or paranormal phenomena?

[tularetom]

64. The whole concept of religion originated with ancient kings to control the masses

See, if you spend all your time worrying about what will happen to you in the next life you won't notice how shitty this life is for you.

Or as Napoleon put it, "religion keeps the poor from murdering the rich.

[edhopper]

68. Don't you think

the paleolithic people had religion? Even Neanderthals?

[Warren Stupidity]

70. The earliest evidence is neolithic, circa 7-1000 BCE.

[edhopper]

73. There are idols,

drawings and ritual burials from far earlier, at least 20,000 to 30,000 BCE.
Evidence of religion predates the neolithic. (of course we have to define religion for each other, a discussion I don't have time for)

[Warren Stupidity]

74. Sure - but those only weakly establish "religion" as in

the organized religions that are prevalent starting in the Neolithic era, complete with religious buildings etc. I agree that it depends on the definition of religion.

Elephants appear to mourn their dead, are they religious?

[edhopper]

75. I don't know

they have very big brains and I think the consciousness of animals is an interesting subject of which little is known.

But the rest is probably about what we each consider religion, adding "organized" makes your statement clearer.

[tularetom]

71. Yeah, to explain weather and natural phenomena they probably did

But I think the concept of an afterlife as a reward or punishment for your conduct in this life was a concept dreamed up by some paranoid ruler who got scared every time he saw the way the starving peasants looked at him.

[yodermon]

78. Religion is based on false premises.

All logical implications based on false premises are, strange as it seems, logically true.
See "vacuous truth": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuous_truth

An example: "If George Bush is the current president, then I'm a monkey's uncle" is perfectly true.
Another: "If Jesus Christ rose from the dead, then you can believe and be saved" .. totally true!
"If I clear myself of all engrams, i will be restored to my natural thetan state" .. Awesome!

Logical implication truth table:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_table#Logical_implication

[JNelson6563]

83. Ok, they are all fake.

People use religion to feel better and will fight you to the death if you tried to take it from them. I guess that's why it is so hard to fake atheism. Love of false hope always comes through. Hatred of unbelievers comes through even more.

Julie

[amuse bouche]

103. Of course Scientology and Mormonism are fraudulent

and easily dismissed, but that is only because they are so new

The old ones are more accepted because they have been around so long, but they are equally fraudulent. Invented to control the ignorant and scaredy-cat masses

All are fake..fake ...fakeity..fake...fake

[rug]

116. Still posting by bumper stickers I see.