A Religious Buffet

By skepticlawyer

Via the Australian Skeptics… Enjoy.

Religion-Flowchart_1

15 Comments

  1. Posted October 24, 2009 at 6:12 am | Permalink

    My barking out laughter point was ‘are you rich or insane? You should be a scientologist!’

  2. Posted October 24, 2009 at 6:46 am | Permalink

    Um, buddhists aren’t deists if memory serves…

  3. Posted October 24, 2009 at 7:11 am | Permalink

    Lots of Gods in the Mahayana tradition (China and Japan), but none in the Theravada tradition (Thailand, Burma, Cambodia). In none of them, however, is the Buddha a god. The Buddhist logic is that it’s cruel to take away people’s gods, particularly their household gods, or to undermine the family (ancestor worship). The gods have their own realm (‘The Realm of the Devas’), while the ancestors can still be honoured via the traditional ‘godshelf’ seen in Japanese homes.

  4. Caz
    Posted October 24, 2009 at 10:48 am | Permalink

    I love that.

    Thanks for the laugh, great stuff.

  5. Posted October 24, 2009 at 8:36 pm | Permalink

    If you think Buddha isn’t a deity go watch Monkey Magic. Can normal people stick a monkey in a rock for hundreds of years without killing it? Case closed.

    Although I was taken straight to Athiest, having Mayan as my first actual religious preference was kinda cool given I (in my complete ignorance no doubt) associate them with combining chocolate and ritual sacrifice (what’s not to love?!).

  6. Posted October 24, 2009 at 10:19 pm | Permalink

    Damn, LE, you beat me to it…

  7. Posted October 25, 2009 at 5:06 am | Permalink

    If you think Buddha isn’t a deity go watch Monkey Magic

    Now that’s an authoritative source…

    Having grown up opposite a Mormon family am wracking my brains about the magical underwear. Polygamy, tick. An angel called Moroni, tick. The magical underwear isn’t ringing any bells though.

  8. Posted October 25, 2009 at 5:59 am | Permalink

    Googling ‘Mormon magic underwear’ resulted in this as the No# 1 entry.

  9. Posted October 25, 2009 at 10:26 am | Permalink

    I have the whole box set after blogging about my latent desire to obtain it years ago and having a reader who also worked in a DVD store email me with an offer… very enjoyable but it does go downhill as they stretch the concept out, and start doing 70s ish things to be cool like, um, swearing and dancing under mirrorballs!

  10. Posted October 26, 2009 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    I am just wondering if the chart means that Christians (in this chart there are only the “boring, generic” types) can never be annoying, or whether that means that the annoying ones should become Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormons.
    Comment please?

  11. Posted October 26, 2009 at 5:22 pm | Permalink

    Have no idea, Andrew. I suspect like much humour, subjecting it to analysis has the effect of making the humour evaporate instantly…

    Also you were trapped in the spammer, I don’t know how long for. It is a mite tetchy at the moment. Sorry about that.

  12. jc
    Posted October 26, 2009 at 6:26 pm | Permalink

    I should be Mormon because I like bacon? umm ok.

One Trackback

  1. […] [Source: Skeptic Lawyer] […]

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*