Are there any religions based on logic?

Yes. But on the other hand, math doesn't go against religion as much a biology, for example. And there are dogmas, too. Also in the past centuries all the european scientists were religious, too and most of them didn't dare go against the dogmas. Let's hope we are more open-minded today

But I get what you mean. Science tends to be more objective and actually looks for answers and tries to prove their claims, that's for sure. (But it doesn't mean it is unconditionally right).

That's a nice comparison

 

IIRC, 5 point Calvinism. I'm not as well versed in world religion as some others here, though. Some would argue Catholic Scholasticism too, but I don't think so. Calvin was a lawyer, so you can imagine what he was like.

 

Aaradia and 8limbs i cannot agree enough with what you said- i fail to see what religious arguments actually accomplish- I'll happily get along with most people regardless of what beliefs they hold,i just don't see what people gain from exhausting themselves over religious arguments.

 

try reading philosophy, its a good place for logic over non logic

 

mostly its that faith based (I.e non logical) beliefs, tend to cause trouble in the real world

 

What about catholicism / calvinism Iogically based?

 

I think you could if you were just prodded with certain questions every now and again.

FWIW, I would have had you pegged as leaning somewhere between one of the many variations of Buddhism (I can't tell you the difference between say Theravada & Mahayana Buddhism anymore, yet alone any other denomination) and LaVeyan Satanism. It's actually got nothing to do with belief in a literal deity of Satan and God (etc), but is more of a individualistic/nihilistic ideology that focuses on promotion and "perfection" of the self.

I know they are hideous umbrella terms, have you thought about looking at some of the variations of Wiccan/Neo-Pagan faiths?

This thread has got me scratching my head though. I'm rusty as hell on my theology because I haven't looked at different faiths for years, but OP's got me musing now.

 

This is a problem when you look at things from the outside. You run the risk of focussing on the the wrong things or asking the wrong questions because you lack the foundation in history and context. This is a problem with critical analysis of religion, it's often very hard to do without a lot of study. For example literal translation of Genesis is not historical. Church scholars had discounted it 1600 years ago. Also when viewed in the wider context of the faith a literal translation of the early chapters of Genesis is actually heretical. However to know that you'd have to know something about early church history, understand the Christian views on the action of God in the world and know about heresies.
Ironically I would suggest that the people who adopt a pick and mix approach are the people who profess biblical literalism.
I think one of the problems Christianity faces in the Western world is that people think they know about it.

 

You mean LaVeyan Satanism, right? Buddhism is not Nihilistic whatsoever, and definitely doesn't promote "perfection of the self". What self, according to Buddhism, is there to perfect?

 

Calvin strips Christianity of "mysticism" in favor of a tightly argued, rather "legalistic" system of thought. Calvin is most famous for his five points (TULIP), but that's only part of his system.

Scholastics (and Augustine) sought to reconcile Catholicism with classical Greek philosophy. Augustine was a Plato/Platinus fanboy and his philosophy is now known as "Christian Platonism".

You can disagree with the premises and/or conclusions of these guys, but there's no doubt that they are "logical" in the Western sense.

 

Brother why should everything be based on logic? Logic only goes so far, whether you're describing the human experience or the fundamental nature of the universe, at that level human logic no longer works! You could argue maybe it just hasn't figured out how, and that's a great philosophical question brother, and I think it's there you'll find the religions. Some religions really do attempt to use both logic and "unlogic" over the years, but it's important I think to realize that religion and science shared a long history before becoming distinct, separate disciplines in just oh the last few hundred years, if that. You will find many religious scientists, as well as scientifically-minded people of faith.

In a Venn diagram, they could be shown as separate circles with an overlap, but their furthest reaches are relatively inaccessible to each other. One deals with the extreme limits of human logic, and the other the extreme, possibly infinite human imagination.

Is imagination logical? Would you want it to be?

 

Ya, this^^
Dr Phillip Carrey, in his course on Einstein's theory of Relativity, does an overview of the history of physics. A lot of folks he talks about (including Plato) brings loads of religious prescriptions to their method.

 

Yeah, my nihilistic comment was meant to be about LaVeyan Satanism, not Buddhism. Apologies if it came across wrong.

 

Quick guide to creationism among religions (doesnt go into varying sects a lot)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/rs/environment/

 

Thats where we disagree, logic is everything, science is the study of the fundamental nature of the universe, and through it, we have seen inside the atom, to the beginning of the universe, we have peered accross the galaxy and through time itself.
Non logic is simply denying these wonders, in a king canute like attempt at denying what logic and process has brought humanity.

God is simply a manmade device for controling others and explaining mysteries, now theres less natural mysteries to explain, it simply remains a device to control people.

Although the current pope is at least using his powers for good.

 

Logically please point out where my judgement is wrong, I'm open to logical debate, I can and will change my mind when faced with evidence.


Its the use of 'non logic' I abhor, its essentially saying I cant explain it, and I wont even try.

 

"i don't understand it...i know, god did it! now i understand!"

 

Didn't Terry Pratchett refer to that as the "god of the gaps"?