Are others wrong?

[Nimos]

Reason for doing so notwithstanding, could it not be said that they are both correct? Not eating meat is correct for me? Eating meat is correct for you?

Sure, that is no issue.

Our views are not contradictory, one apply to you, the other one to me. Also we are not evaluating our views against anything, meaning you could change your view to suddenly also prefer eating meat and it would still be correct for you.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Sure, that is no issue.

Our views are not contradictory, one apply to you, the other one to me. Also we are not evaluating our views against anything, meaning you could change your view to suddenly also prefer eating meat and it would still be correct for you.

Is there any reason this logic can't be applied to religious belief (or lack thereof)?

 

[Vinayaka]

Do you see others belief wrong because you believe differently than them?

Or can you not accept that there are other answers than what you believe in religious or spirirually?

This seems like a trick question. It's too obvious to me. Anyone who can't understand that there are alternative POVs on a lot of stuff have the concept of right/wrong firmly embedded in their heads somewhere. I know very few, if any, people like that.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Do you see others belief wrong because you believe differently than them?

Or can you not accept that there are other answers than what you believe in religious or spirirually?

I don't know if they are right or wrong... but that's just it - I want the "believer" to admit the same thing! They normally aren't willing to do so... which is exactly why I get on their case... and will continue to do so until someone provides the "real deal" - evidence for their proposition so compelling that it cannot rationally be denied. Short of that, I'm not going to buy your story, and I am going to tell you why you shouldn't either.

 

[Nimos]

Is there any reason this logic can't be applied to religious belief (or lack thereof)?

As long as they are not contradictory it is no issue. Meaning that we don't measure it against something.

For instance:

Our truth statement / belief (Can't change no matter what): "Stealing is wrong."

Then it doesn't matter whether it is a poor person stealing or someone else. The only correct answer is that "Stealing is wrong", because that is what we decided was true. We might ignore that a poor person is stealing, but doesn't change that ultimately, when we are asked about whether it's right or wrong, and again have to stay true to the statement above, that we would have to say that stealing is wrong, because that is the truth.

The reason for this is because we measure against this statement, just as a religious person measure against their scriptures, and just as the above statement, these can't be wrong. So if a scripture say that there is only one God, then there can't be any other, despite that we might accept that other people believe there is, but based on our belief, they are simply wrong ultimately.

 

[firedragon]

Do you see others belief wrong because you believe differently than them?

Or can you not accept that there are other answers than what you believe in religious or spirirually?

Whats the evidence? Thats the question that should be asked.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I'll do this as soon as you prove there is no other side of death.

The other side of death relates to the elements. Our remains will be chemically recycled. Other than that, there is no other side of death. Otherwise, as I said prove ghosts or vampires.

Whether there is anything on the other side is a matter of debate, but we are all currently on this side of a door that opens for us all.

The other door also is always open to us and we all will go through that one time or the other.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Do you see others belief wrong because you believe differently than them?

Or can you not accept that there are other answers than what you believe in religious or spirirually?

I don't see the beliefs as black and white. All beliefs contain truth. It is just the matter of how much truth is in a particular belief system.

 

[Valjean]

Precisely.
I do not see others' beliefs as wrong.

So Antonio says Earth is flat, and Luca says it's spherical, and you believe neither is wrong?

 

[ameyAtmA]

Do you see others belief wrong because you believe differently than them?

Or can you not accept that there are other answers than what you believe in religious or spirirually?

No, I don't see that others are automatically wrong.
In order to not digress from spiritual topic, we don't have to talk about what is obviously wrong, harmful, wicked or immoral.

• In the context of spirituality as taught by different religions, I have been able to see several to be simultaneously either "true" "good" or "there for a reason" that I can tell.
• There are some that are of the opinion that "If my religion is right yours is automatically wrong". I do not see it that way.

• God or spiritual reality is not something simple, static and black-and-white. It is multi-layered, multi-dimensional, co-existing, simultaneous reality.

• It is possible, and not difficult to see the thread running thru' all of these pearls holding them together.

• There is a matter of interpretation too. Some religions that take themselves to be exclusive are surprisingly more inclusive than they think.

Also -- the adjective or adverb is not always about Right and Wrong.

• It is about whether this idea has a place and a purpose and applies to those to whom it applies.

• If a doctrine, group or cult exists, unless it is totally immoral, harmful, dangerous and outrageous, it exists for a purpose, because there are those who benefit from it.

• There are many presentations or theories -- what we call "siddhAnta" "darshan" in this context, in Sanskrit, that on the surface are contradictory, mutually exclusive, some say diametrically opposite. However, they need not be, and can co-exist, because they are there for a purpose.

• The original intention of a specific scripture can be missed and when seen in the better light - solves the puzzle better

• Logical fallacies is what we have to watch out for --

A, therefore B, but that does not necessarily mean ~not C
A is B. That does not mean C is not B


It is as simple as that .... to me ~

 

[SalixIncendium]

The other side of death relates to the elements. Our remains will be chemically recycled. Other than that, there is no other side of death. Otherwise, as I said prove ghosts or vampires.

So chemical recycling, ghosts, or vampires are the only three options on the other side of death?

If so, which one applies to reincarnation and Moksha?

 

[SalixIncendium]

So Antonio says Earth is flat, and Luca says it's spherical, and you believe neither is wrong?

Antonio and Luca are both wrong.

 

[Estro Felino]

So Antonio says Earth is flat, and Luca says it's spherical, and you believe neither is wrong?

We are speaking of religious beliefs.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Whats the evidence? Thats the question that should be asked.

Who ask about the evidence? You as a believer or you as a non believer?
Non believers do not accept any "evidence" that a religious person will give, due to that most often there is no physical evidence in a belief (Hint, it is a belief)

 

[Twilight Hue]

Antonio and Luca are both wrong.

That means there is a part of the world where razor blades never dull.

 

[MonkeyFire]

Do you see others belief wrong because you believe differently than them?

Or can you not accept that there are other answers than what you believe in religious or spirirually?

One world, one religion. Just because I believe that doesn’t mean I am the correct one.

 

[firedragon]

Who ask about the evidence? You as a believer or you as a non believer?
Non believers do not accept any "evidence" that a religious person will give, due to that most often there is no physical evidence in a belief (Hint, it is a belief)

I thought you were speaking of a particular topic in your OP. One belief vs the other. So evidence can be provided.

But now you are speaking of nonbelievers and believers. Thats a whole different topic.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I thought you were speaking of a particular topic in your OP. One belief vs the other. So evidence can be provided.

But now you are speaking of nonbelievers and believers. Thats a whole different topic.

The OP is about different belief yes. But it happens that RF are crowded with atheists and they never accept anything a believer call truth or belief to be truth.

And to be brutally honest @firedragon i do no longer know what you believe in, that is why i framed my question the way i did. it was not to offend you in any way. But i honestly do not understand you.

 

[firedragon]

The OP is about different belief yes. But it happens that RF are crowded with atheists and they never accept anything a believer call truth or belief to be truth.

And to be brutally honest @firedragon i do no longer know what you believe in, that is why i framed my question the way i did. it was not to offend you in any way. But i honestly do not understand you.

Haha. Im sorry if I confused you somehow. But if you ask me a specific question I can answer you. Maybe then you will understand what you wish to understand about my beliefs brother. No problem.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Haha. Im sorry if I confused you somehow. But if you ask me a specific question I can answer you. Maybe then you will understand what you wish to understand about my beliefs brother. No problem.

The question is. Just because a person holds a belief, could be religious belief, or science for that matter. Just because someone else comes along and say "my belief is" does that mean one of them have to be wrong? or can it be that both have a part of the answer, but because they are at different wisdom level they can not see the truth in what the other person say?