• 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!

Is it most useful tool of comarative religions?

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
The revealed religions must quote claim and reason on an issue from the revealed scripture they believe in. The non-revealed religions, if they have any canonized scripture, must also do the same. The non-religion people must quote from a text book of science or from a peer-reviewed article published in a religion of repute for the claims and reasons on an issue.

Is it fair and useful to know the Truth? Please

Thread open to everybody. Please
Regards
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Is it fair and useful to know the Truth? Please
Why do you want me to quote someone else? I have opinions of my own and I value them more highly than any one else's.

That is one of the big differences between you and me. You accept the authority of others more easily than I do. I expect everyone to give me a reason to believe that I deem acceptable.
Tom
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
The revealed religions must quote claim and reason on an issue from the revealed scripture they believe in.

No, they don't. They can and sometimes do, but it is certainly not a requirement. There is more to the scripture-based religions of the world than their scriptures. Commentaries on scriptures by relevant specialists and experts are also used. And non-specialists or non-experts are quite welcome to air their two pence as well. How much weight or authority these things are given depends a bit on the nature of the tradition. There are also many elements of scriptural religions that don't derive from scripture at all, but some other source of authority, like decrees from clergy or other leadership figures... even accords drawn up by committees in a local church group. To say that these religions "must" support their arguments with scripture is just not accurate. It would be interesting to examine a specific tradition where this was the case, though. It wouldn't surprise me if there are some.


The non-revealed religions, if they have any canonized scripture, must also do the same.

No, they don't, for the same reasons as above. Though good luck finding canonized scripture in any such religion.

The non-religion people must quote from a text book of science or from a peer-reviewed article published in a religion of repute for the claims and reasons on an issue.

Not only do they not have to do this, it doesn't make any sense. Which, as I recall, I've said before on some threads you've created along these lines.


Is it fair and useful to know the Truth?

Is it fair and useful to have something that is impossible to have? Hell if I know.
 

VioletVortex

Well-Known Member
I am inspired by various writings about Satanism. There is no single scripture that is central to Satanism. There is The Satanic Bible, which holds only philosophical value to me The Demonic Bible (a much better book IMO), the book of Thelema (another philosophical writing), The Diabolicon, various other writings, and finally, my own mind and interpretation of the scriptures, as well as my personal beliefs.

I think one's own mind is the most important tool for their spiritual beliefs. It's less about absolute truth than it is logical assumption inference, both from within and what has already been written.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
The revealed religions must quote claim and reason on an issue from the revealed scripture they believe in. The non-revealed religions, if they have any canonized scripture, must also do the same.
Do they? Why?

The non-religion people must quote from a text book of science or from a peer-reviewed article published in a religion of repute for the claims and reasons on an issue.

Is it fair and useful to know the Truth? Please
No. It is not.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
The revealed religions must quote claim and reason on an issue from the revealed scripture they believe in. The non-revealed religions, if they have any canonized scripture, must also do the same. The non-religion people must quote from a text book of science or from a peer-reviewed article published in a religion of repute for the claims and reasons on an issue.

Is it fair and useful to know the Truth? Please

Thread open to everybody. Please
Regards

Here was my second reply to this type of thread:

"Use life as scripture. Use books as commentary."

By the way @Quintessence this (above) is on special loan for you. ;)

Paarsurrey:

:leafwind: "All my best thoughts were stolen by the ancients" ~Ralph Waldo Emerson
 
Last edited:

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
While thanking everybody who gave ones' input in this thread.
If, one has disagreed with the criteria, please give another criteria like we check everything. We have a scale, standard, to check the length and width. We have a scale, a standard one, to weigh things. We have a currency, standard in a country, to evaluate the price and its utility to us, so on and so forth. Unless we have one standard we cannot compare or evaluate things.
Can we, please.
Right? No offense intended , please.
Regards
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
Unless we have one standard we cannot compare or evaluate things.

Sure we can. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) doesn't use the same standards to evaluate drugs as your doctor does when deciding to prescribe it to you, and you probably don't use the same standards as either of those when deciding whether or not you want to be medicated for a condition. An artist who is doing a drawing of a tree can still compare the visual aesthetics of one tree to another tree while being completely ignorant of the taxonomic classification standards for plants. And certainly when people are looking for life mates, they do not use some singular standard to compare and evaluate prospective mates? Why on earth should we expect a singular standard for comparing religions when there exists no such thing for life as a whole?
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
While thanking everybody who gave ones' input in this thread.
If, one has disagreed with the criteria, please give another criteria like we check everything. We have a scale, standard, to check the length and width. We have a scale, a standard one, to weigh things. We have a currency, standard in a country, to evaluate the price and its utility to us, so on and so forth. Unless we have one standard we cannot compare or evaluate things.
Can we, please.
Right? No offense intended , please.
Regards

The standard of a lot of non-revealed religions is observation, experience, and practice. It's an interactive religion. Just as you have RPG games. RPG games are like some pagan religions non-revealed religions. While if you're playing a fighting game, a revealed religion will have specific buttons on your hand control to do specific rules. It may have a "key" so you can cross reference what moves to do. Things like that.

Many non-revealed religions (at least what I practice) doesn't. RPG games are hard. Some people find it a bit too much to make decisions alone. "What potion should I use?" or "If I go to the Worliff Castle, I can get that elixir but I'd have to sacrifice a life point" or "I could go to the dealer and buy it without sacrifice but I'd have to pay 100 more tokens for the expense of token labor."

If you're not familiar with RPG games, Role Playing Games lets you act and make decisions in a strategic way that better your life status, your parties (if you have one), et cetera. It lets you be the judge of where to go in the maze. I don't know if Im explaining it right. Maybe gamers can help.

While fighting games are just two or three player games where opponents on both sides battle each other. It's simple. However, there is no "thinking things out" involved. Especially if you already know what keys to press and how to move, it defeats the purpose of a game.

Life is the same way. It's an RPG. If you want to learn about role playing in life's complex game, your "proof" is observation, practice, experience, and good judgement.

No one gives you the keys to heaven.

At least not in my faith.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Is it fair and useful to know the Truth?

In my experience it is seldom worth knowing the "Truth" because people capitalize truth when they are about to tell you something that either they cannot reasonably demonstrate to be true, or something that is actually false.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
What about Truth (an attribute of G-d) conversing with His Prophet and telling about realities? Please
Regards
 
Top