Why should I believe in your religion and faith?

[YmirGF]

Is Mickey Mouse back in the House?

You rang, my dear?

*dons glasses*

Ooops, wrong mouse.... me bad... :flirt:

 

[Kcnorwood]

Why is your particular religion or faith more truthful than another one?

Anyone that tells that thier religion is the only true one is really wanting you to join them so that they can feel justifed for beliving in it themselves.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Anyone that tells that thier religion is the only true one is really wanting you to join them so that they can feel justifed for beliving in it themselves.

Hi Kcnorwood,

Thank you for sharing your view. Do you think when people share that their religious faith as being absolute truth, that they simply have deep conviction in what they believe? It seems if everybody believes in mutually exclusive gods on this site, then people are only sharing an imaginary god created in their own minds. If there is only One True God which would be absolute truth, then those believing in another god are worshiping an idol god that they created. Does that make sense? Do you agree or disagree with this posting? Please explain your view too.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Latest Frubals Received Thread

Thank you Katzpur for the frugals and kind words. I was hoping you would continue our discussion. It doesn't seem right that you are willing to to share your views without being challenged. In summary, you believe Joseph Smith is a prophet from God sent to restore the apostate Christian Church. I just believe the Christian church was not apostate for 1,800 years, and Joseph Smith did not rescue or restore true Christianity. Let's continue when you are ready and able.

 

[Draka]

Hi Kcnorwood,

Thank you for sharing your view. Do you think when people share that their religious faith as being absolute truth, that they simply have deep conviction in what they believe? It seems if everybody believes in mutually exclusive gods on this site, then people are only sharing an imaginary god created in their own minds. If there is only One True God which would be absolute truth, then those believing in another god are worshiping an idol god that they created. Does that make sense? Do you agree or disagree with this posting? Please explain your view too.

Unless one realizes that all gods are NOT mutually exclusive. Perhaps a god that demands that it is the only one, the only truth, is a petty, jealous, vindictive, egotistical god that is not worthy of worship. Or, if one looks at the world openly and sees all the vast array of deities and religions around the world and throughout time, and one is still adament that there is only one "true god" then they have to be willing to admit that the one that they proclaim it to be COULD indeed be, as you put it, a false idol. For there is no proof that the one god you WISH for there to be is any more valid than any other...no matter how you may hem and haw that there is.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Unless one realizes that all gods are NOT mutually exclusive. Perhaps a god that demands that it is the only one, the only truth, is a petty, jealous, vindictive, egotistical god that is not worthy of worship. Or, if one looks at the world openly and sees all the vast array of deities and religions around the world and throughout time, and one is still adament that there is only one "true god" then they have to be willing to admit that the one that they proclaim it to be COULD indeed be, as you put it, a false idol. For there is no proof that the one god you WISH for there to be is any more valid than any other...no matter how you may hem and haw that there is.

Thanks for that posting Draka,

We are getting somewhere on this thread! Could you please refresh my memory and share the God that you worship and pray to? How did you come to that conclusion to worship and believe in your God? Did you God provide objective evidence as being God? Is you God one of many gods, or the One True God? If your god is one of many gods, do you believe there is a Supreme God above all other gods? :rainbow1:

 

[Draka]

Thanks for that posting Draka,

We are getting somewhere on this thread! Could you please refresh my memory and share the God that you worship and pray to? How did you come to that conclusion to worship and believe in your God? Did you God provide objective evidence as being God? Is you God one of many gods, or the One True God? If your god is one of many gods, do you believe there is a Supreme God above all other gods? :rainbow1:

Since I've already explained my beliefs in several posts on this thread and you have so graciously "round-filed" them I am not about to explain myself again.

As far as I'm concerned you can take your "one true" argument and .... "file" it somewhere dark.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Since I've already explained my beliefs in several posts on this thread and you have so graciously "round-filed" them I am not about to explain myself again.

As far as I'm concerned you can take your "one true" argument and .... "file" it somewhere dark.

Wicca - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ahh. so you do believe in light and darkness.

Isaiah 5:20:

Woe to those who call evil good
and good evil,
who put darkness for light
and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet
and sweet for bitter.

 

[Draka]

Wicca - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ahh. so you do believe in light and darkness.

Isaiah 5:20:

Woe to those who call evil good
and good evil,
who put darkness for light
and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet
and sweet for bitter.

Ok, it's official...you make no sense and have no clue as to what you are talking about. You are to be pitied.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

The idol of subjective truth?

Religious pluralism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Kcnorwood]

Hi Kcnorwood,

Thank you for sharing your view. Do you think when people share that their religious faith as being absolute truth, that they simply have deep conviction in what they believe? It seems if everybody believes in mutually exclusive gods on this site, then people are only sharing an imaginary god created in their own minds. If there is only One True God which would be absolute truth, then those believing in another god are worshiping an idol god that they created. Does that make sense? Do you agree or disagree with this posting? Please explain your view too.

I have no problem with people sharing their faith with others,however people who preach to others & telling them that they need to get right with (whatever God) I do have a problem with. That goes beyond sharing that tellling others what to believe. One persons truth is not everyone & people need to let others worship as they want too. Just because one doesn't agree does not mean it's wrong.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

I could easily be Anglican, but it'd be charismatic, emergent Anglican. My church membership is Assemblies of God, but I have always been kind of Anglican in doctrine, since it was Lewis more than anybody else who led me to Christ (more accurately, back to Christ, but that's a long story). And I sometimes wander down to St. Mark's Cathedral in Seattle for a "high church" Episcopal liturgical service. Pretty cool stuff, at least as a change of pace.

Mere Christianity, Screwtape Letters, and that Lion movie.

 

[Izdaari]

Mere Christianity, Screwtape Letters, and that Lion movie.

All favorites of mine. I have most of Lewis' works. Those are his most popular, but he has plenty more.

 

[Wandered Off]

It seems if everybody believes in mutually exclusive gods on this site, then people are only sharing an imaginary god created in their own minds.

This is our "intelligent design." It's how we process information, and it's no less true for you than anybody else.

If you saw me in person, your mind still does not experience me directly. Instead, your mind receives sensory input and assembles it using the context of past memories and experience to form a "image" of me, like a TV picture. All you know of me is that image. In my case, you have a physical referent for the image, and you can get updated information as change occurs. In the case of "spiritual" entities, you lack the physical referent. Common sense would tell us that not having a physical referent drastically reduces the accuracy of your mental reproduction.

If there is only One True God which would be absolute truth, then those believing in another god are worshiping an idol god that they created. Does that make sense? Do you agree or disagree with this posting? Please explain your view too.

This will happen to people who do not distinguish their mental image from God. As long as you keep in mind that the map is not the territory, then you're doing as well as you can given the way we process information.

Here's an excellent thread from a while back on this:
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...75-religious-faith-inherently-idolatrous.html

 

[Fish-Hunter]

This is our "intelligent design." It's how we process information, and it's no less true for you than anybody else.

If you saw me in person, your mind still does not experience me directly. Instead, your mind receives sensory input and assembles it using the context of past memories and experience to form a "image" of me, like a TV picture. All you know of me is that image. In my case, you have a physical referent for the image, and you can get updated information as change occurs. In the case of "spiritual" entities, you lack the physical referent. Common sense would tell us that not having a physical referent drastically reduces the accuracy of your mental reproduction.

This will happen to people who do not distinguish their mental image from God. As long as you keep in mind that the map is not the territory, then you're doing as well as you can given the way we process information.

Here's an excellent thread from a while back on this:
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...75-religious-faith-inherently-idolatrous.html

When you think about it, truth is defined or experienced based on whatever source (holy book, subjective experience, own mind) you determine to be authoritative revelation from God. If you believe in a deity, how does this deity communicate to you and why? Why is your source of revelation more valid than another source that might be contradictory to your source? It appears the source of revelation would have to come outside yourself, unless you believe that you are deity in a sense. For example, the Christian Bible (Old and New Testament), Book of Mormon (another testament), Torah, and the Quran claim to be revelation from God, yet they have mutually exclusive claims from each other. Therefore, all sources cannot be right at the same time. All sources can be wrong, or one source is true revelation from God and the others wrong. Religious pluralism maybe politically correct, but is intellectual suicide. Do you agree? Why or why not?

 

[Wandered Off]

When you think about it, truth is defined or experienced based on whatever source (holy book, subjective experience, own mind) you determine to be authoritative revelation from God.

This is the essence of free will. You are the one who confers authority.

It appears the source of revelation would have to come outside yourself, unless you believe that you are deity in a sense.

Or unless you believe deity resides within you and would not require a third-party agent at all.

For example, the Christian Bible (Old and New Testament), Book of Mormon (another testament), Torah, and the Quran claim to be revelation from God, yet they have mutually exclusive claims from each other. Therefore, all sources cannot be right at the same time.

One of many reasons the whole notion of second-hand revelation is absurd. God has a message for all of humankind but tells only a tiny few? When it comes down to it, what these texts have in common is the rather odd authority claim, "Some guy said God told him to tell you...."

Religious pluralism maybe politically correct, but is intellectual suicide. Do you agree? Why or why not?

Well, any belief that flows contrary to the intellect is a small form of intellectual suicide. That may not always be a bad thing necessarily. In light of the way we process information (from my last post), religious pluralism is the best explanation for reality. There may well be some objective truth, but we cannot comprehend it. Anything conceptualized automatically becomes subjective. It's just the nature of our brains. With that, I'd say that to claim to know objective truth is more akin to intellectual suicide than religious pluralism.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

This is the essence of free will. You are the one who confers authority.

Or unless you believe deity resides within you and would not require a third-party agent at all.

One of many reasons the whole notion of second-hand revelation is absurd. God has a message for all of humankind but tells only a tiny few? When it comes down to it, what these texts have in common is the rather odd authority claim, "Some guy said God told him to tell you...."

Well, any belief that flows contrary to the intellect is a small form of intellectual suicide. That may not always be a bad thing necessarily. In light of the way we process information (from my last post), religious pluralism is the best explanation for reality. There may well be some objective truth, but we cannot comprehend it. Anything conceptualized automatically becomes subjective. It's just the nature of our brains. With that, I'd say that to claim to know objective truth is more akin to intellectual suicide than religious pluralism.

Thanks for discussing things through intelligence. The concept of free will is a good path to take. I'm not sure if everybody is brought into this world with a blank slate, or a netural will without inclinations toward good or evil. But that's another discussion. I'm sure we can agree that a child's will is always influenced by their parent's presuppositions (right or wrong). I have tried to share this with Katzpur because she was born and raised in a Mormon household, and currently lives in Salt Lake City. So the will of a child is being shaped and molded by whatever authority figure that is in their life. Do you think an Islamic baby born in a devout Islamic home in an Islamic government runned country has a free will to believe contrary to the Muslim Faith? We all have a world view infuenced by our upbringing and environment. Therefore, the will is never free or netural.

 

[Kcnorwood]

When you think about it, truth is defined or experienced based on whatever source (holy book, subjective experience, own mind) you determine to be authoritative revelation from God. If you believe in a deity, how does this deity communicate to you and why? Why is your source of revelation more valid than another source that might be contradictory to your source? It appears the source of revelation would have to come outside yourself, unless you believe that you are deity in a sense. For example, the Christian Bible (Old and New Testament), Book of Mormon (another testament), Torah, and the Quran claim to be revelation from God, yet they have mutually exclusive claims from each other. Therefore, all sources cannot be right at the same time. All sources can be wrong, or one source is true revelation from God and the others wrong. Religious pluralism maybe politically correct, but is intellectual suicide. Do you agree? Why or why not?

Who else besides you said their religion was the only one? The Gods that others believe I'm sure talk to us just like the one you believe in talks to you. Why is it so hard for people like you to let others worship as they see fit?

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Who else besides you said their religion was the only one? The Gods that others believe I'm sure talk to us just like the one you believe in talks to you. Why is it so hard for people like you to let others worship as they see fit?

It's easy to have that perspective if you embrace religious pluralism as absolute truth. I don't mean to offend anyone, but to me...religious pluarlism cannot be absolute truth and is an illusion to the reality of the truth.

 

[Draka]

It's easy to have that perspective if you embrace religious pluralism as absolute truth. I don't mean to offend anyone, but to me...religious pluarlism cannot be absolute truth and is an illusion to the reality of the truth.

But as no religion or faith can be proven true then all religions have just as much validity as others. Why is it so hard for you to understand that no religion has the market cornered when it comes to your precious "truth"?