HyperSignal
Member
There are many religious systems that exist on this planet. How does anyone actually know which one could be the correct one, when none of them can actually verify what they claim as truth factually?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Spin the Wheel
- Thread starter HyperSignal
- Start date
PoetPhilosopher
Veteran Member
You become an atheist and give up any idea of the delicious, tasty afterlife that sometimes comes with theism.
Samael_Khan
Goosebender
Most people choose a religion based on family and feelings. Most people I meet join a religion because it helped them in some important aspect in their life. I actually don't know anybody who joined a religion based on thorough examination of evidence.
All religions are human creations, imo.
Samana Johann
Restricted by request
By giving them a challenge before having proved well and asked the wise, by putting it's teaching into practice, householder.
AN 3.65: Kalama Sutta — The Instruction to the Kalamas/To the Kalamas {A i 188; Thai 3.66} [Soma | Ven. Thanissaro].
The Buddha explains to a group of skeptics the proper criteria for accepting a spiritual teaching.
My worldview does not conform to any religion; my religion conforms to my worldview. My worldview is based on experiential evidence and is the correct one for me.
Should an experience bring me to different understanding, either my religion would have to adapt, or I would have to abandon my religion.
PureX
Veteran Member
The "correct" one is the one that works best for the individual practicing it. The practice of religion is not about 'knowing' things. It's about trusting in what we hope to be so even though we don't know it to be so. Religion is about the application of faith, to life, not the application of knowledge.
Last edited:
Check local listings.
Why assume there has to be a correct one? Perhaps God created 1000 or more different religions just so folks can find something that aligns with how they are wired, or the circumstances they were born into. He didn't create one flower, he created thousands.
What's wrong with doubt and uncertainty? The alternative is a fundamentalist way of clinging to views, which the Buddha should be against, no? The reasonable view should be that doubt and uncertainty are a necessary and helpful part of the human experience that keeps us realistic and humble, so long as it does not go so far as to paralyze us from action.
I'm with you so far, Buddha...
You lost me. How do you arrive at correct views about the world without logical reasoning and consideration of things like how probable an explanation is?
It seems that he saying one should arrive at the truth through direct experience, or through observation of what "the wise" do, or observations of an action's consequences. All of which are fine, but all of which require logical reasoning, inference, consideration of probability, etc.
PoetPhilosopher
Veteran Member
If this thread goes the way of asserting that truth is what we can observe, I'd point out that a person can observe some poisonous mushrooms as harmless in nature given their closeness in appearance, yet we all know the result of eating one.
To avoid the confusion of the term "observation" (which implies literal sight), it might be better to say that we know something is true/real if we can perceive it (with any of our 5 senses) and independently verify it.
PoetPhilosopher
Veteran Member
Yes. Key word being verify, I think.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Why. You think there is a correct one?
There is no one correct one. There is no way to evaluate them factually beyond a certain point.
My "go to" for this question is the story of the "blind men and the elephant" with each 'blind man' the teachings of a different religion. The Truth is beyond them all. But it is also true that following a religion can be helpful to some people.
They are all paths to the same goal, find the one that fits "you" and go with it, or pick and choose if you need to, screw organized religion/dogma, build your own, and experience the Gods for yourself.
Books and text are just interpretations of an almost unexplainable event(s), that transcends reality, when one interacts with the Gods. Not any one way is the right path.
I think it is a question of, who would you be willing to keep as your God. And all people have something as their god, even if they don’t admit it. What people keep as their god can be seen by what they serve with their actions. Those who lie, serve the father of lies, and those who love, serve God who is love.
He who doesn't love doesn't know God, for God is love.
1 John 4:8
Bible God says, love your neighbor as yourself. I think that is good and I want to do so. Can you say it I not good? Is it not factual? Have I deceived myself?
I think Bible God is the greatest. He has the knowledge and wisdom, also about the future. I think all else are basically meaningless, without any meaningful to say. To keep someone else as my god, would be same as keeping your left foot shoe as my god, in my opinion. It may exist, but I think it would not be worth to be kept as my god. There are really no other reasonable options besides the Bible God. That is why I think the question about correct religion is quite simple.
Samana Johann
Restricted by request
Householder from the left cost,
The opposite of doubt is faith, confidence. Real Knowing, release, a product of having done, based on it. Not really knowing, to afirm such, in regard of what and how to do, for lasting happinnes, a matter of honesty toward oneself.
It's like with a committee and voices of opposition. As long as the opposition is not made silent, the commitee is incapable to act. If follow the bad opposition, it even gets worse. Opposition are defilements of clear seeing, acting.
The point missed is that knowing, certaincly, is a product of putting into practice. One does not arrive at a destination by only speculate about the way, does not know it, if never there.
To walk a certain path requires to be certain that one doesn't dwells in secure, seeing aging, sickness, death, pain crashing by form all directions, requires being aware of ones situation and the dangers, in short suffering, the look after a way to escape lasting, and a guide telling the path. Faith, confidence leads to action, practice.
Adopting what is skillful, relay on a guide who actually known way and destiny, are all a matter of faith, strong confidence, adopting right view, the safe bet, which grows more firm after putting into practice.
On the detail pattern, how it works, there is nothing more useful as the Buddhas teaching to his son, if interested to listen to him: MN 61: Ambalatthika-rahulovada Sutta — Instructions to Rahula at Mango Stone
May it, by consideration, weaken doubt, for your and many of yours, long time happiness.
Doubt, all of it, falls, how ever, only for one who has done the task, arrived at the secure, an Arahat. Possible by human effort.
The opposite of doubt is faith, confidence. Real Knowing, release, a product of having done, based on it. Not really knowing, to afirm such, in regard of what and how to do, for lasting happinnes, a matter of honesty toward oneself.
It's like with a committee and voices of opposition. As long as the opposition is not made silent, the commitee is incapable to act. If follow the bad opposition, it even gets worse. Opposition are defilements of clear seeing, acting.
Doubt is one of the most unskillful mindstates, which acts a hindrance for what ever work, practice. As householder told, by speculating at the end: it paralyzes any conncentration. Sure, also bad, but it's better to relay on faith, or direct experians, to abstain from unskillful, bad.
That was the part he told not to follow blind, and might be food for doubt, in-action.
He gave samples how. Starting with considering outcome might be either harmfull or not, to be suspected that based on understanding or not, by investigating the "wise", the teacher, first.
Both, by direct experience, through observation, and asking wise, since one can not always trust oneself.
The point missed is that knowing, certaincly, is a product of putting into practice. One does not arrive at a destination by only speculate about the way, does not know it, if never there.
To walk a certain path requires to be certain that one doesn't dwells in secure, seeing aging, sickness, death, pain crashing by form all directions, requires being aware of ones situation and the dangers, in short suffering, the look after a way to escape lasting, and a guide telling the path. Faith, confidence leads to action, practice.
Adopting what is skillful, relay on a guide who actually known way and destiny, are all a matter of faith, strong confidence, adopting right view, the safe bet, which grows more firm after putting into practice.
On the detail pattern, how it works, there is nothing more useful as the Buddhas teaching to his son, if interested to listen to him: MN 61: Ambalatthika-rahulovada Sutta — Instructions to Rahula at Mango Stone
May it, by consideration, weaken doubt, for your and many of yours, long time happiness.
Doubt, all of it, falls, how ever, only for one who has done the task, arrived at the secure, an Arahat. Possible by human effort.
If by faith you simply mean confidence, fine. Our confidence should be proportional to the amount of evidence we have. It's not either/or. Most things in life we have some degree of confidence or degree of doubt about, and that is perfectly reasonable.
Your assumption is that we must remove all doubt to act wisely. This is false. Removal of all doubt about our worldview is quite dangerous; it leads to arrogance, over-confidence, and failure to see your own fallibility. This is the error of fundamentalism.
Again, doubt is not a hindrance to work unless it becomes too great. We should have an appropriate amount of doubt depending on how much evidence we have that the action we intend to take is the right one. When we are able to have some doubt or skepticism, it keeps us open-minded to evaluate the results of our actions to correct them if they are wrong or unwise.
I don't see anything wrong with all this overall. But all of it requires requires logical reasoning, inference, consideration of probabilities. If the Buddha's point is simply that we cannot live solely on speculative considerations in our head, and must live out wisdom and truth and love in our lives to really understand them, then I agree.
That depends on what you mean by "verify". If you mean that God needs to do some tricks in order to prove that he's real, then don't hold your breath. God verifies his existence with what is all around us....creation. If you appreciate it and go in search of the one who is capable of producing such beauty, then you may find him. But if you require more, then he might just leave you to your disbelief. He does not need us...we need him.
Jesus said in John 6:44...."No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him..."
He repeated that fact a few verses later.....(John 6:65)
"He went on to say: “This is why I have said to you, no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”
You see God is checking us out while we attempt to check him out. If he sees in us the right qualities, then he will 'draw' us to his son....the one who taught us how to worship the Father acceptably.