Why do you say" you have to prove your personal faith and beliefs"

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Some people? Of course. Some people have all sorts of ideas. That does not prove anything.

You do realize that by minimizing and excluding the people you disagree with, you're making my point for me... right?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Why should someone have to prove to you that "their belief" is right for them. It is a personal belief in a religious faith they hold. Who are you to say they are wrong, or it is not logical to believe as they do, because YOU don't believe what they do.

Who are you to tell a faithful believer that their belief is wrong, because there is no "evidence" that YOU accept to be true?

It is not your belief/disbelief, but if the faithful believer has all the personal evidence that their belief is right for them.

Who are you to tell them it is not?
The believer has the proof they need personally to hold their faithful belief in what ever religious faith they follow. They do not have to prove it to anybody.

You can ask: why do you believe so or so, and what ever the answer you get that is why that person believe what they do. You do not have the right to say "your belief is wrong" just because you disagree. Accept that people believe and walk away.

And yes I know your attack will come...who cares anyway????

In such cases, I'm compelled to question why people need to even openly ask as if a validation from others is a nessessity for a personal belief ?

 

[Nimos]

Why should someone have to prove to you that "their belief" is right for them. It is a personal belief in a religious faith they hold. Who are you to say they are wrong, or it is not logical to believe as they do, because YOU don't believe what they do.

Who are you to tell a faithful believer that their belief is wrong, because there is no "evidence" that YOU accept to be true?

It is not your belief/disbelief, but if the faithful believer has all the personal evidence that their belief is right for them.

Who are you to tell them it is not?
The believer has the proof they need personally to hold their faithful belief in what ever religious faith they follow. They do not have to prove it to anybody.

You can ask: why do you believe so or so, and what ever the answer you get that is why that person believe what they do. You do not have the right to say "your belief is wrong" just because you disagree. Accept that people believe and walk away.

And yes I know your attack will come...who cares anyway????

I get the feeling that your angle is towards atheists as being the ones that questions this. But it should be just as important for you to do this.

From being on this forum and just in general, I will say that 99% of the religious people here seems friendly and in general shares a "love" or passion for whatever religion they follow.

You follow Sufism, which is a path of Islam or what to say. And in general you present yourself as being a person which support peace, love and harmony so to speak. And you most likely believe that your way of doing this is correct in relationship to the Quran.

I would also assume that you disagree with what ISIS and other Islamic fundamentalist do, but following what you are saying, you ought not to question what they do or believe in, because to them this is obviously the right way to do it.

So your view or you questioning what they believe in and how the choose to represent the Quran and the God you believe in, must be somewhat relevant as well. Because lots of people suffer as a result of this, so the problem is that these people doesn't just leave it as a personal believe, but obviously think that everyone should live, following these rules.

Since im an atheist, I look at it slightly different than you probably. Because I have no issue with whatever people believe in, I will question it. But where I do have an issue, is when rules are applied to society due to religious reasons. Like you are not allowed to say this and that, or this type of food won't be served etc. Which is obviously because, I think applying rules to society without there being justification for it shouldn't be done.

But equally for you, it shouldn't be wanted or accepted that certain representations of Islam is either, if these are interfering with your beliefs. But logically this quickly goes beyond religion, because obviously if you shouldn't accept their views, why shouldn't they be allowed to do it as well? So it has to go beyond religion and what type of society one want to live in. As I said before, you seem to support the same values as I do or at least we are closer to each other compared to that of an ISIS supporter. But honestly I think you as a Muslim probably have a better chance of affecting another Muslim's view, than I have as an atheist.

But as an atheist, I/we live just as much in societies where our "beliefs" are getting ignored in one way or another, just as some religious people will experience it, so its about finding a balance, but if we can talk about beliefs or are "allowed" to question them, then we won't get anywhere.

Would you question the belief of someone from ISIS or not? or do you think that it is just a personal belief and therefore we shouldn't care about it?

 

[blü 2]

So it is a belief that the world is natural/physical/material or a fact?

How do you answer that question?

Using what definition of 'fact'?

 

[Spirit of Light]

Are you saying religion has discovered other physical laws that science has not, or that there are multiple truths? That's hard to believe. Scientists pry into everything, and religion isn't particularly secretive.
If religious people have discovered any objective evidence of new laws, please inform us. That's all we've been asking.
The laws of physics can be broken? Please explain.

That is what I say yes.
Braking the physical law could be done if a person develop what sometimes are known as extraordinary abilities, clairvoyant and so on.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Sometimes people will not tolerate beleif that is not in accordance with their own morals and values in life . For example I do not beleive for one minute that God would ever suggest hurting people , so if any religions books or scriptures suggests God said any of these type things , then I'd suggest that would never be what God wants or said .
Why would God create to destroy or hurt ? Objectively God wouldn't .

Whom am I to tell them ? Nobody but I am somebody whom is allowed opinion and critisism .

Yes of course you are entitled to have your opinion and even make constructive criticism, that is not what the OP speak about.
It speak about seeking the answer to the constant negativity from a few, and I mean only a few atheists come with in this forums.
Even when a member calling my belief stupid, because He could not understand how I can believe without so-called physical evidence.

The thing is, I don't need physical evidence to believe the scriptures when I see it happening within my own being.

 

[Spirit of Light]

In such cases, I'm compelled to question why people need to even openly ask as if a validation from others is a nessessity for a personal belief ?

Validation can be two maybe more things.
Uncertainty on their ability to see the truth told in the spiritual teaching they follow.
Confirmation that they are on the right track and do understand similar or same as other believers.

And when none believers come along and stomp on everything a religious person tries to get a discussion with other believers, that can hurt like hell some times.

I know because it happens to me more and more when deeper questions are asked.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

How do you answer that question?

Using what definition of 'fact'?

We start with the assumption that we can trust our senses, then it becomes a fact by magical thinking that the assumption makes it a fact, That is how you do it. You start with something which is not a fact and then in effect claim that what follows is real/a fact.

 

[Truthseeker]

Even when a member calling my belief stupid, because He could not understand how I can believe without so-called physical evidence.

The thing is, I don't need physical evidence to believe the scriptures when I see it happening within my own being.

Exactly. But they need physical objective evidence. Ask @Trailblazer how often she has heard that.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Exactly. But they need physical objective evidence. Ask @Trailblazer how often she has heard that.

About every day..almost as if non-believers telling what a believer should believe

 

[blü 2]

We start with the assumption that we can trust our senses, then it becomes a fact by magical thinking that the assumption makes it a fact, That is how you do it. You start with something which is not a fact and then in effect claim that what follows is real/a fact.

No, the questions were,

1. How do you do it, and

2. What did you mean when you said 'fact' ?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

No, the questions were,

1. How do you do it, and

2. What did you mean when you said 'fact' ?

Yeah, I don't do it. I am a skeptic. I don't do, I believe I can trust my sense, therefore my beliefs based that I believe I can trust my sense, magically becomes real facts as independent of my mind.
In other words. I don't start with a belief and then later based on that belief declare that it is a fact, that there are no gods.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

About every day..almost as if non-believers telling what a believer should believe

There are sort of 5 groups of people represent there.
Those who know that the world is natural and that is a fact.
Those who know that the world is from God and that is a fact.
Those who believe in some naturalistic sense, but accept other beliefs.
Those who believe in some religious sense, but accept other beliefs.
Those who don't care about that.

 

[blü 2]

Yeah, I don't do it. I am a skeptic. I don't do, I believe I can trust my sense, therefore my beliefs based that I believe I can trust my sense, magically becomes real facts as independent of my mind.
In other words. I don't start with a belief and then later based on that belief declare that it is a fact, that there are no gods.

So what did you mean to denote when you said "fact"? What definition of fact were you using?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

So what did you mean to denote when you said "fact"?

That it is so independent of the mind and is so of the thing in itself.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Would you say relativity, the speed of light or the laws of motion were "right for" someone?

Yes. They are right for the people making calculations based on those phenomena, and will remain right for as long as they are useful and productive. But only in those situations where their application is effective and appropriate; they may sometimes not be, even in cases of scientific discovery or endeavour.

The laws of physics are no more set in stone than the laws of Moses. Both are human constructs, and subject to shifting perspective.

“There is no cardinal or fixed point, philosophical or methodological, with which to anchor the adventure of knowledge.”
- Carlo Rovelli

 

[blü 2]

That it is so independent of the mind and is so of the thing in itself.

So there are facts, you say?

How do you know?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

So there are facts, you say?

How do you know?

I don't know that there are facts. Remember that I am global skeptic. I can talk about the idea of facts like the idea of God. But I don't know anything about either other than they are ideas.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Why should someone have to prove to you that "their belief" is right for them. It is a personal belief in a religious faith they hold. Who are you to say they are wrong, or it is not logical to believe as they do, because YOU don't believe what they do.

Who are you to tell a faithful believer that their belief is wrong, because there is no "evidence" that YOU accept to be true?

It is not your belief/disbelief, but if the faithful believer has all the personal evidence that their belief is right for them.

Who are you to tell them it is not?
The believer has the proof they need personally to hold their faithful belief in what ever religious faith they follow. They do not have to prove it to anybody.

You can ask: why do you believe so or so, and what ever the answer you get that is why that person believe what they do. You do not have the right to say "your belief is wrong" just because you disagree. Accept that people believe and walk away.

And yes I know your attack will come...who cares anyway????

Whenever you make claims or express beliefs and then expect other people to "respect" those claims / beliefs, keep them into account, join you in those beliefs or do anything else then to simply shrug their shoulders and walk away, then you have a burden of proof to meet. Meeting that burden of proof would give those other people a reason to do any of those things.

If you go on to say that you don't care about meeting your burden of proof, then I will not be caring about your beliefs either, because that tells me that you yourself don't even care about it.

If proper justification is not important for you, then your beliefs and claims are irrelevant.

And I have no respect for such beliefs for that reason.

That doesn't mean you don't have a right to hold such beliefs.
Just don't expect me to respect such intellectual bankruptcy. Because I won't.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Well, the question"prove it" does come up every day in RF, a bit tired of it

Whenever you publicly make claims / express beliefs, you should expect such answers.
Not just on RF but in all situations.

If you don't wish your beliefs to be questioned and met with scrutiny, then keep them to yourself.