Using that logic, every religion is evidence for <insert whatever you are trying to demonstrate>.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Using that logic, every religion is evidence for <insert whatever you are trying to demonstrate>.I'm careful about bias. Significant beneficial social change that happen over centuries because of one man is evidence. I think that qualifies.
I differ from @Bungle_Bear in that regard and agree with you: religions differ. So, would you lay out, without begging the question, why the difference between Christianity and all other religions makes your original assertion valid.@Bungle_Bear That's logical if all religions were the same.
So I'm betting that you've not been able to counter them.From personal experience I can say that sometimes it's just not worth the trouble to go through the many many supposed evidences of a claim.
I'm not going to study all the hundreds of thousands of data points to still believe there was not much confirmation bias or other sloppy science involved in a politically advantageous (think, money) and conscience relieving (think, "I'm just another animal!").
I still have huge areas of disbelief unanswered in my skepticism toward Darwinian Evolution.
What is said to be the first cause again? Oh, right - the God of the bible. What a coincidence. But since there is a 'law' of causation, there is an obvious question, and the typical answer to that question pretty much refutes the original claim.I could easily say the same for my accepting of the existence of First Cause, the cosmological argument. The fact that it is as solid as the law of causation is not even necessary for it to correspond with your belief in evolution.
What other sources of "fact" are there?...the notion that falsifiable evidence is the only trustworthy source of fact —particularly for those less organized mentally, or less educated— comes across as a little bit arrogant too.
Their religion is building up from the ground. An answer to death and life. Christianity is founded on revelation from above. Not built up over generations but concepts never imagined. Christianity has all the distinctions that would follow for a faith built on Divine Revelation.I differ from @Bungle_Bear in that regard and agree with you: religions differ. So, would you lay out, without begging the question, why the difference between Christianity and all other religions makes your original assertion valid.
Religions may differ in their detail, but ultimately they are all the same - the belief in, and worship of, a controlling power or god.I differ from @Bungle_Bear in that regard and agree with you: religions differ. So, would you lay out, without begging the question, why the difference between Christianity and all other religions makes your original assertion valid.
In what sense are the following religions not built on divine revelation?Their religion is building up from the ground. An answer to death and life. Christianity is founded on revelation from above. Not built up over generations but concepts never imagined. Christianity has all the distinctions that would follow for a faith built on Divine Revelation.
Mostly Eastern religions, Buddhism, Confucianism, Daoism, Shinto. AIUI the last two have divine aspects, but not revelatory ones. Don't know about African religions...Buddhism?
Yes, but that is based upon your perception of what is significant about a religion. A more objective stance would be to acknowledge, up front, that while religions differ you consider the essential elements to be broadly the same. An absolute statement of the kind you made is, absolutely, wrong.Religions may differ in their detail, but ultimately they are all the same - the belief in, and worship of, a controlling power or god.
I'd be interested to see a religion where that wasn't the case.
@pitabread and @FrumiousBandersnatch have indicated the flaw in your assertion.Their religion is building up from the ground. An answer to death and life. Christianity is founded on revelation from above. Not built up over generations but concepts never imagined. Christianity has all the distinctions that would follow for a faith built on Divine Revelation.
I'll give you confuscianism. The others have gods - Shinto has 8 million kami.Mostly Eastern religions, Buddhism, Confucianism, Daoism, Shinto. AIUI the last two have divine aspects, but not revelatory ones. Don't know about African religions...
Even gods in buddhism can be subject to the cycle of karma and reincarnation. (Depending on the flavor of buddism) while sects like pure land buddism have an idea more like christianity's grace but i'd argue a bit more defined.As a religion it has gods. As a philosophy not so much.
For most indigenous cultures they "experience" spirit in nature in more or less a mystic sort of way.Don't know about African religions...
That's true with most mystical trajectories.I've also encountered eastren mysticism that lacks gods in the sense your thinking of.
They may have gods, but AIUI they're not based on divine revelation. If having gods was the criterion, the list would be shorterI'll give you confuscianism. The others have gods - Shinto has 8 million kami.
That sounds rather like the Japanese and Chinese views of the world. I must have another scan of Baggini's 'How the World Thinks'...For most indigenous cultures they "experience" spirit in nature in more or less a mystic sort of way.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?