Why one must believe the "Academia" or the "scholars"?

[paarsurrey]

So, you don't evaluate religious claims on their own merit?

Did I ever say that? Please
Regards

 

[leibowde84]

Did I ever say that? Please
Regards

I believe so (see below).

"You evaluate each argument/theory on its merits though. It's even possible for a scholar to be totally wrong in their conclusions, yet to advance knowledge through being partially correct in their method."

Do you feel that this applies to how you treat your religious beliefs? Scriptural accuracy? Who wrote the Quran? Etc.?

Is an Artist bound to evaluate each argument/theory of Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics, Astronomy, Biology and etc, etc, etc. I do what is essential for my life. I am an ordinary person in the street with no claims of any scholarship or piety whatsoever. I need not do all that.

 

[gnostic]

So you'd follow these rules in other aspects of your life. But you seem to have a problem with doing that when it comes to scientific studies because.... Why?

That's true. He seemed to can't grasp anything outside of his religion. And his religion is only just one of many.

Even his Ahmadiyya is only supported by the a very tiny global population of Ahmadis. Between 87 and 90 percents of Muslims are Sunni, and the next biggest is the Shiite, so the vast majority of Muslims don't believe in Mirza, and believe him to be nothing more than a heretic. Other than the Ahmadi Muslims, no other Muslims believe Mirza to be the messiah or the madhi. Hence, majority of Muslims believe that Mirza was not a real Muslim, and his Ahmadiyya not a true Islam.

So would average Muslims seek out scholars from the Sunni or Shia, or from the Ahmadi scholars?

But your examples are excellent ones - the English and Physics, and Hindu scholars and Muslim scholars.

You wouldn't expect a bank teller or plumber to perform surgery on one's brain.

 

[gnostic]

"If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants."

Isaac Newton

Now was that a literal "giants" or just a simile or metaphor?

And can Newton really see further by standing on someone's shoulders?

Sorry, just ribbing you.

...now, was I talking about a real "rib"? Or did I mean something else?

Oh, the hole I just keep digging for myself, keep getting deeper and deeper...

...oh, dear. Was I talking of literal "hole" or....????

 

[roger1440]

Now was that a literal "giants" or just a simile or metaphor?

And can Newton really see further by standing on someone's shoulders?

Sorry, just ribbing you.

...now, was I talking about a real "rib"? Or did I mean something else?

Oh, the hole I just keep digging for myself, keep getting deeper and deeper...

...oh, dear. Was I talking of literal "hole" or....????

You understand what he means?

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

I think the best way for your heaven is to drink much alcohol and many prostitutes and girlfriends.
The best thing is to love Jesus according to your belief and to believe that he died for you.

Yes prostitutes best of nymphs in Paradise
You read the Koran and in the dream you to have Nymphs
While I am trying to what I want my own will
Christian and moral rejects prostitutes in the earth and the sky
Christ told us to look at Samarra coveted adultery in his heart
While Mohammed looked at his son's wife from behind a curtain tent and signed and raped her in his heart of his son Zaid wife
It Zainab girl colt

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

I think the best way for your heaven is to drink much alcohol and many prostitutes and girlfriends.
The best thing is to love Jesus according to your belief and to believe that he died for you.

God is the creator
We created and the meaning of the mind
I could with my mind and I know the good and the bad
For God has given us the possibility to make the knife in a hurtful tool that can be used in the murder and could be used in the kitchen
The same situation with alcohol can drink it in my mind and I'm summit
And beverages and also became the extremes of moral regression degrees
And Christian teachings make up your mind works in full freedom and choice
That rejects God
And that you believe
To drink wine, and rejected
Wine in the land of the best vintage of the Islamic paradise
And with it the boys of everlasting youth

 

[JoStories]

Do you trust a Muslim scholar if he told you that i see that Islam is the right path to heaven ?

Do you trust a Christian in the same light? What makes that Christian's view of how to get to heaven any more valid or correct than that of the Imam?

 

[JoStories]

If they are right and correct, I could believe them, but if they use too technical terms, I need not. It is there outlook, if they think, they are useful for the public good, than they should explain things in very easy, understandable language.
Regards

It seems you are saying that academics, IE: me, are not correct because we use too technical terms of language. Is that correct? Further, it seems you want us to 'dumb it down for you'. Is that also correct? I would ask you why you would not want to further your own education and understanding. What is it about technical terms that bothers you so much? And by technical terms, I assume here that you mean higher educative language, non?

 

[JoStories]

Some said that we shouldn't argue with the professionals, the scholars, the experts in a one specific field.

Can you provide an example of anyone who is a scholar who stated this? I never have, I can assure you and in fact, I often state that argumentation is not only wanted but encouraged. I would love to know which scholar here said such, or are you meaning scholars outside of this forum? If so, arrogance is found in all peoples, not just academics.

 

[FearGod]

Yes prostitutes best of nymphs in Paradise
You read the Koran and in the dream you to have Nymphs
While I am trying to what I want my own will
Christian and moral rejects prostitutes in the earth and the sky
Christ told us to look at Samarra coveted adultery in his heart
While Mohammed looked at his son's wife from behind a curtain tent and signed and raped her in his heart of his son Zaid wife
It Zainab girl colt

Lol, check your blood.

 

[JoStories]

It is the religious-forums, religion, every one of them has experts of religion, they do qualify from their institutions; why the Atheists/Agnostics/Skeptics/Humanists don't believe them? If they think following of the academia or the accredited scholars is a must; they should be the first to follow them. Yet they don't. Why? Please
Regards

Your OP is now becoming much more clear in its intent. You want to expect all atheists, etc, to drop their atheistic POV and believe in God because religious scholars are scholars and therefore, should be believed simply based on that fact? That is just nonsense, no offense intended there. I am a theologian. I am an expert in theology of many faiths, which at times I regret because I might have had more impact in the field had I narrowed my studies to one faith, or aspects of faith. However, that being said, that does not mean that a person should believe in my views of God just because i have that Dr. in front of my name. I can relate what I have learned to a person but what that person believes is up to them, not me. Belief and fact are not the same thing at all.

 

[FearGod]

Do you trust a Christian in the same light? What makes that Christian's view of how to get to heaven any more valid or correct than that of the Imam?

That's the point, we don't have to trust everything that one scholar says just because he's a scholar
but we have to investigate it ourselves.

 

[JoStories]

So speaking about religion, the scholars don't necessarily know the truth but they only
express their own thoughts and views which you're free to reject.

Yes and no. We do express our thoughts on issues but those thoughts are often, or should be, based on years, preferably decades, of intense study and scrutiny. We base those thoughts on evidence and fact, to the best of our ability. For example, if we were debating the historicity of Jesus, that debate would include historical data compiled to prove whether or not he actually lived. Or better yet, whether or not he was divine. Facts are at the core of what we try to express.

 

[JoStories]

That's the point, we don't have to trust everything that one scholar says just because he's a scholar
but we have to investigate it ourselves.

Agreed but one can listen to the scholar for what they have learned from years of study and perhaps find some understanding. One cannot teach belief. That is personal to the person who does believe but one can get a deeper understanding. For example, I sat in on a Biblical debate on the symbols of Christianity and their origins and I was able to make all of the participants see that very nearly none of the aforementioned symbols were unique to the Christian faith. It didn't change those peoples belief but it did provide an understanding that the faith was built on the shoulders of older ones.

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

Lol, check your blood.

Leave personal matters
This is the subject of an Islamist
I spoke about the Islamic paradise
It is where cheap sex
So that God offers you nymphs ??
And you make wine ??
Is that correct ??
But I am in the land of wine and drink it Create
Look for women
I know sin
And accept its results
And offer you a house charm to the famous Arab poet named Mutanabi
He was drinking wine on the ground
They said to him, You will not go to heaven
Because you drink wine
Do you know the answer to this fine poet
He wrote a beautiful poem
And offer you some words
I do not want paradise
And drinking alcohol me on the ground, best
Type the words of the poem in Arabic translated difficult because of Google
جنة بمنة لااريدها
وشرب الخمر لي افض منزل
الى نهاية القصيدة These poetic words in my memory since I was a young man
Unfortunately Forgot poem
And I do not know Is it lingering in new editions to this famous poet

 

[FearGod]

Agreed but one can listen to the scholar for what they have learned from years of study and perhaps find some understanding. One cannot teach belief. That is personal to the person who does believe but one can get a deeper understanding. For example, I sat in on a Biblical debate on the symbols of Christianity and their origins and I was able to make all of the participants see that very nearly none of the aforementioned symbols were unique to the Christian faith. It didn't change those peoples belief but it did provide an understanding that the faith was built on the shoulders of older ones.

But the knowledge of the ancient scholars isn't as rich as ours today, for example
knowledge and science today helped us to understand the quran better than the
ancient scholars did.

 

[JoStories]

But the knowledge of the ancient scholars isn't as rich as ours today, for example
knowledge and science today helped us to understand the quran better than the
ancient scholars did.

I would disagree with that. I would say that their interpretation was different but to say that they not as rich is an statement that cannot be proven. We can take their views but can we compare them to today's society, given the vast differences in culture and so on? I find things like the Vedas or Upanishads or even the old myths and the people who wrote about them to be as rich today as then.

 

[FearGod]

I would disagree with that. I would say that their interpretation was different but to say that they not as rich is an statement that cannot be proven. We can take their views but can we compare them to today's society, given the vast differences in culture and so on? I find things like the Vedas or Upanishads or even the old myths and the people who wrote about them to be as rich today as then.

Their knowledge in science were lacking, for example they thought that the moon
has its own light whereas today we know it isn't, just one example of many.

 

[serp777]

Mathematics is a language according to what? science?
Regards

According to the definition of language. A way of exchanging information and formulating thoughts. You can say a mathematical formula in the form of English demonstrating that they're just different forms of the same underlying logic.