• 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!

What on Earth is a "Uniquely Religious Truth"?

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Thread questions...

Are there really such things as truths that can only be demonstrated to be truths by uniquely religious means?

If so, what are those means? On what grounds do they have epistemic validity?


......
My opinion (if anyone happens to be interested)...

Seems to me when people speak of "uniquely religious truths", they are most often clueless as to how those truths can be established apart from what in the end boils down to some method that is indistinguishable from mere whim.

Again, I fail to see how uniquely religious truths are any more a real thing than uniquely male truths, or uniquely Tory truths, or uniquely scientific truths, or uniquely stray dog truths. Either a thing is true or it is not true. The statement, "There is snow on the ground", is either true or it is not true. That is, there is one and only one set of means, procedures, techniques, etc for establishing whether the statement is true or false. There are not multiple sets with one set being "secular" and another set being "religious" and a third set being "female" and a fourth set being "feral kittens". What works to establish truth and falsehood, works universally to establish truth and falsehood.
_______________________
"Truth" in the context of this OP is being defined according to a modified version of the Correspondence Theory. For those of you to whom it matters. Also, No Surrender to Deflationism! Death before Dishonor!


......
And now, in a futile effort to make it up to you for such a boring OP....

 

Audie

Veteran Member
There is an element of oxymoron in the term.

All ceremonies and beliefs and vocabulary
of all but one religion at best, are garbage.

There is so much vacuous phony nonsense
in religion!

The Pope and cardinals with their goofy outfits
might be playing Star Wsrs and taking
all seriously. Frippery!

People talk about "spiritual" and "spiritual values /truths"
but everyone means something different by it.

Why would "religious truth" be any different?
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
Thread questions...

Are there really such things as truths that can only be demonstrated to be truths by uniquely religious means?

If so, what are those means? On what grounds do they have epistemic validity?

Perhaps the Sermon on the Mount in Matt 5,6 and 7 are, in a sense, uniquely religious truth.
Loving and giving to those who hate you.
Celebrating weakness over human strength
Treating the moral commandments of the bible as absolute
Going against one's own human nature.

etc..
 

Darkforbid

Well-Known Member
Well if you can't give an example of what you're talking about in the OP,, do you have any point at all?
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Perhaps the Sermon on the Mount in Matt 5,6 and 7 are, in a sense, uniquely religious truth.
Loving and giving to those who hate you.
Celebrating weakness over human strength
Treating the moral commandments of the bible as absolute
Going against one's own human nature.

etc..

I rather like the Sermon on the Mount, but
I think that to call those things "truths" is outside
the scope of the word "truth" as it is being used
in the OP. The Sermon speaks about values,
rather than truths -- as truths are being
defined in the OP.

Of course you can define "truths" anyway you
want, but then --- you are not discussing the OP.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
To be sure, I myself am not arguing for the view
that religions contain no truths. I'm merely questioning
the notion that they contain truths that are unique to
religions.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Thread questions...

Are there really such things as truths that can only be demonstrated to be truths by uniquely religious means?

If so, what are those means? On what grounds do they have epistemic validity?

Short answer: No.

Longer answer: Only if you decide that fully subjective, fully personal truths should be declared "religious" for that very reason.
 

Guitar's Cry

Disciple of Pan
How about: prophets are inspired by God

How is that any different from the rest of us? Each of us is a little bit of "truth"--a fact corresponding with an observable part of a shared reality--from God--the Universe as a dynamic and conscious (since we are) Whole. Why shouldn't I be as prophetic as Moses or Buddha?
 

Audie

Veteran Member
How is that any different from the rest of us? Each of us is a little bit of "truth"--a fact corresponding with an observable part of a shared reality--from God--the Universe as a dynamic and conscious (since we are) Whole. Why shouldn't I be as prophetic as Moses or Buddha?

I kind of think anyone who wants to pick up
a staff can be just as real as they.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
To be sure, I myself am not arguing for the view
that religions contain no truths. I'm merely questioning
the notion that they contain truths that are unique to
religions.

Things like the flood are only true in religionville.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Well, we have the 'uniquely religious truth'.
'Sarvam Khalu Idam Brahma' (All things here (are) Brahman).
Does it qualify?
 

Darkforbid

Well-Known Member
How is that any different from the rest of us? Each of us is a little bit of "truth"--a fact corresponding with an observable part of a shared reality--from God--the Universe as a dynamic and conscious (since we are) Whole. Why shouldn't I be as prophetic as Moses or Buddha?

Your belief in blood magic I would of thought
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Thread questions...

Are there really such things as truths that can only be demonstrated to be truths by uniquely religious means?

If so, what are those means? On what grounds do they have epistemic validity?


......
My opinion (if anyone happens to be interested)...

Seems to me when people speak of "uniquely religious truths", they are most often clueless as to how those truths can be established apart from what in the end boils down to some method that is indistinguishable from mere whim.

Again, I fail to see how uniquely religious truths are any more a real thing than uniquely male truths, or uniquely Tory truths, or uniquely scientific truths, or uniquely stray dog truths. Either a thing is true or it is not true. The statement, "There is snow on the ground", is either true or it is not true. That is, there is one and only one set of means, procedures, techniques, etc for establishing whether the statement is true or false. There are not multiple sets with one set being "secular" and another set being "religious" and a third set being "female" and a fourth set being "feral kittens". What works to establish truth and falsehood, works universally to establish truth and falsehood.
_______________________
"Truth" in the context of this OP is being defined according to a modified version of the Correspondence Theory. For those of you to whom it matters. Also, No Surrender to Deflationism! Death before Dishonor!


......
And now, in a futile effort to make it up to you for such a boring OP....



Truth comes in 3 flavours

1/ the quality or state of being true. (See 2)
2/ that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.
3/ a fact or belief that is accepted as true

A uniquely religious "Truth" resides in the belief subset of flavour 3
(the capital T and quotes are important to differentiate between real truth and uniquely religious truth)
 
Top