U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-14-2019, 05:05 PM
Status: "I care about your eternity. Sorry." (set 17 days ago)
 
262 posts, read 35,407 times
Reputation: 28

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
Hi there Iwas.

I would be delighted if you or anyone were wanting to explain to me your/their thoughts "good, bad or ugly" about my Nine Truths. Appreciated, because I have had other people become quite hostile about letting me know they would do no such thing. Not even read them!

See my "biblical question" above if you like as well, but either way you are absolutely correct about the ultimate question when it comes to establishing universal truth.

How?

There is certainly more than one answer and there are certainly some answers far better than others, if only we can better judge the criteria along these lines for starters. In part this too is what my Nine Truths attempts to address. Something like how a jury is called upon to arrive at a verdict, "beyond a reasonable doubt." Not always easy, but we all have a sense there is a correct verdict regardless all nonsense to the contrary and/or regardless how difficult it may be to arrive upon.

I've got to sign off now, but if you care to comment further, I will look forward to reading your further thoughts about any of this. I say yes. Thanks again.

Hi LearnMe. I responded to you in this thread: (Post 113)
To all who visit and comment in the Religion and Spirituality forum. Why?
I look forward to our discussion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-15-2019, 12:32 AM
 
Location: Denver, CO
9,538 posts, read 5,576,888 times
Reputation: 4096
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
One issue that I see commonly confused is this with respect to what qualifies as truth or worthy. What is the truth is NOT a function of oldest or largest or easiest to understand...

The criteria that determines what is truth should be much more for any person truly interested to establish what is truth and what is nonsense. What is worthy of our trust and faith and what is not.

There is so much in the Bible that is clearly NOT true, how it has endured for so long is truly a good question, and if answered correctly, we might all better understand the actual truth about all holy books in general.

A few assumptions perhaps worth considering for starters...

"Understand at any age?" Much of the Bible still doesn't make any sense to me...

"Endured for so long?" Which version? Which translation? According to whom?

"Stumbling block to the proud and to intellectuals?" Not a problem for the embarrassed and uneducated then?

"Greatest selling book of all time?" I can't count the number of times a Bible was offered to me free of charge, and I have a few copies. Not a one did I purchase, but why are books popular generally speaking?

The 30 Best-Selling Novels of All Time
Don Quixote by Miguel de Cervantes.
A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens.
The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien.
The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exuper.
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone by J.K. Rowling.
And Then There Were None by Agatha Christie.
The Hobbit by J.R.R. ...
Dream of the Red Chamber by Cao Xueqin.

https://bestlifeonline.com/best-selling-novels/

I notice Harry Potter is on this list, reminding me of good Christian friends of ours who wouldn't let their kids read Harry Potter, because of the "satanic nature" of Rowling's books. (An absolute favorite of our daughters). I think this is the sort of "stumbling block" that really makes you wonder...
I respond to this only to comment on the Harry Potter books which I thoroughly enjoyed as a theist. Unlike my fundamentalist counterparts (like Ozzy), I discovered the God-story in those pages of witches and wizards. And I later on read a book by another theist who read the books to see if they were worthy of letting his home schooled children read. He wrote his book right after Harry Potter number five but before number six (can’t remember the book names as I’m old and posting this late at night). He correctly predicted that Dumbledore would have to die for the God-story to be followed. Dumbledore was an allegorical John the Baptist, clearing the way for a greater one to follow (Harry).

The names are frequently allegorical. Harry POTTER is reminiscent of the biblical comment of God being the potter and us the clay. The Malfoys name comes from the Latin word that is the basis for our words malfeasance, malformed, and malicious. The white hair denoted the wolves in sheep’s clothing which was what the Malfoys were.

Of course Harry resurrects in the end which was the only way he would defeat “he who could not be named” (Death? The one thing none of us wants to dwell up One?). Longbottom was a kind of everyman who wasn’t good at much, made a fool of himself frequently, and got no respect from his fellow students. But in the final showdown, before Harry resurrects, when the good guys have no hope, Longbottom steps forward in a final act of defiance (he “believes” in Harry) and that faith in the midst of a battle that seemed to have a foregone conclusion was the impetus for Harry’s resurrection.

In either the last or next to last book there is a direct quote from Scripture on the tombstone of The Dumbledore’s: Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also (Matt 6:21) This, I believe, was allusion to Voldemort’s attempts to hide his soul in valuable things which all ultimately get destroyed as Jesus was alluding to in this verse from the Sermon on the Mount.

A second direct quote is on the graves of Harry’s parents
The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death’…” Harry thinks that is a Death Eater idea? “Why is that there?” Harry asks, but Hermione responds, “It doesn’t meaning defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry,” It means…you know…living beyond death. Living after death.” (Hallows 328)

Hermione’s interpretation is spot on. The Bible verse quoted is in Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, chapter 15, verse 26. Paul wrote to the Corinthians about Christ’s resurrection being an indicator that Christ’s followers would also be resurrected. In the Resurrection, death would truly be destroyed, and the faithful will “live beyond death” as Hermione described it.

The churchyard burial ground represents “hallowed” ground contained the bodies of the good guys in series and was named GODric’s (my emphasis) Hollow.

When they leave the churchyard Hermione conjures a wreath of roses to lay on the graves of Harry’s parents.
According to one tradition of Christian symbolism, the Christmas Rose is a symbol of the Nativity. The symbolism of the Holy Family of Joseph, Mary, and the infant Jesus can also be found in the monument of the Potter family, a memorial sculpture that depicts James, Lily, and the infant Harry.

But YOUR point is well-taken. At the time conservative “christians” in particular saw it all as evil. And few took the time to read or discover for themselves. The Potter series was just another “sin” to avoid.

But for all that negativity the series took off and has been a total astonishment to many.

But not to me.

I believe the appeal is because the God-story is one we intrinsically want to hear. Young people in particular (innocence) were captured by it. The God story has appeal. Yes there are conflicts, and setbacks and betrayals (just like in the Bible). Yet the end story is full of hope and promise, and draws believers and even some unbelievers to listen to it even without getting the connection.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2019, 08:40 AM
 
Location: Sun City West, Arizona
23,293 posts, read 10,673,211 times
Reputation: 20715
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
I respond to this only to comment on the Harry Potter books which I thoroughly enjoyed as a theist. Unlike my fundamentalist counterparts (like Ozzy), I discovered the God-story in those pages of witches and wizards. And I later on read a book by another theist who read the books to see if they were worthy of letting his home schooled children read. He wrote his book right after Harry Potter number five but before number six (can’t remember the book names as I’m old and posting this late at night). He correctly predicted that Dumbledore would have to die for the God-story to be followed. Dumbledore was an allegorical John the Baptist, clearing the way for a greater one to follow (Harry).

The names are frequently allegorical. Harry POTTER is reminiscent of the biblical comment of God being the potter and us the clay. The Malfoys name comes from the Latin word that is the basis for our words malfeasance, malformed, and malicious. The white hair denoted the wolves in sheep’s clothing which was what the Malfoys were.

Of course Harry resurrects in the end which was the only way he would defeat “he who could not be named” (Death? The one thing none of us wants to dwell up One?). Longbottom was a kind of everyman who wasn’t good at much, made a fool of himself frequently, and got no respect from his fellow students. But in the final showdown, before Harry resurrects, when the good guys have no hope, Longbottom steps forward in a final act of defiance (he “believes” in Harry) and that faith in the midst of a battle that seemed to have a foregone conclusion was the impetus for Harry’s resurrection.

In either the last or next to last book there is a direct quote from Scripture on the tombstone of The Dumbledore’s: Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also (Matt 6:21) This, I believe, was allusion to Voldemort’s attempts to hide his soul in valuable things which all ultimately get destroyed as Jesus was alluding to in this verse from the Sermon on the Mount.

A second direct quote is on the graves of Harry’s parents
The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death’…” Harry thinks that is a Death Eater idea? “Why is that there?” Harry asks, but Hermione responds, “It doesn’t meaning defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry,” It means…you know…living beyond death. Living after death.” (Hallows 328)

Hermione’s interpretation is spot on. The Bible verse quoted is in Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, chapter 15, verse 26. Paul wrote to the Corinthians about Christ’s resurrection being an indicator that Christ’s followers would also be resurrected. In the Resurrection, death would truly be destroyed, and the faithful will “live beyond death” as Hermione described it.

The churchyard burial ground represents “hallowed” ground contained the bodies of the good guys in series and was named GODric’s (my emphasis) Hollow.

When they leave the churchyard Hermione conjures a wreath of roses to lay on the graves of Harry’s parents.
According to one tradition of Christian symbolism, the Christmas Rose is a symbol of the Nativity. The symbolism of the Holy Family of Joseph, Mary, and the infant Jesus can also be found in the monument of the Potter family, a memorial sculpture that depicts James, Lily, and the infant Harry.

But YOUR point is well-taken. At the time conservative “christians” in particular saw it all as evil. And few took the time to read or discover for themselves. The Potter series was just another “sin” to avoid.

But for all that negativity the series took off and has been a total astonishment to many.

But not to me.

I believe the appeal is because the God-story is one we intrinsically want to hear. Young people in particular (innocence) were captured by it. The God story has appeal. Yes there are conflicts, and setbacks and betrayals (just like in the Bible). Yet the end story is full of hope and promise, and draws believers and even some unbelievers to listen to it even without getting the connection.
Your final conclusion is correct -- christians believe what they want to believe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2019, 10:29 AM
 
39,918 posts, read 11,178,949 times
Reputation: 5162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
I respond to this only to comment on the Harry Potter books which I thoroughly enjoyed as a theist. Unlike my fundamentalist counterparts (like Ozzy), I discovered the God-story in those pages of witches and wizards. And I later on read a book by another theist who read the books to see if they were worthy of letting his home schooled children read. He wrote his book right after Harry Potter number five but before number six (can’t remember the book names as I’m old and posting this late at night). He correctly predicted that Dumbledore would have to die for the God-story to be followed. Dumbledore was an allegorical John the Baptist, clearing the way for a greater one to follow (Harry).

The names are frequently allegorical. Harry POTTER is reminiscent of the biblical comment of God being the potter and us the clay. The Malfoys name comes from the Latin word that is the basis for our words malfeasance, malformed, and malicious. The white hair denoted the wolves in sheep’s clothing which was what the Malfoys were.

Of course Harry resurrects in the end which was the only way he would defeat “he who could not be named” (Death? The one thing none of us wants to dwell up One?). Longbottom was a kind of everyman who wasn’t good at much, made a fool of himself frequently, and got no respect from his fellow students. But in the final showdown, before Harry resurrects, when the good guys have no hope, Longbottom steps forward in a final act of defiance (he “believes” in Harry) and that faith in the midst of a battle that seemed to have a foregone conclusion was the impetus for Harry’s resurrection.

In either the last or next to last book there is a direct quote from Scripture on the tombstone of The Dumbledore’s: Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also (Matt 6:21) This, I believe, was allusion to Voldemort’s attempts to hide his soul in valuable things which all ultimately get destroyed as Jesus was alluding to in this verse from the Sermon on the Mount.

A second direct quote is on the graves of Harry’s parents
The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death’…” Harry thinks that is a Death Eater idea? “Why is that there?” Harry asks, but Hermione responds, “It doesn’t meaning defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry,” It means…you know…living beyond death. Living after death.” (Hallows 328)

Hermione’s interpretation is spot on. The Bible verse quoted is in Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, chapter 15, verse 26. Paul wrote to the Corinthians about Christ’s resurrection being an indicator that Christ’s followers would also be resurrected. In the Resurrection, death would truly be destroyed, and the faithful will “live beyond death” as Hermione described it.

The churchyard burial ground represents “hallowed” ground contained the bodies of the good guys in series and was named GODric’s (my emphasis) Hollow.

When they leave the churchyard Hermione conjures a wreath of roses to lay on the graves of Harry’s parents.
According to one tradition of Christian symbolism, the Christmas Rose is a symbol of the Nativity. The symbolism of the Holy Family of Joseph, Mary, and the infant Jesus can also be found in the monument of the Potter family, a memorial sculpture that depicts James, Lily, and the infant Harry.

But YOUR point is well-taken. At the time conservative “christians” in particular saw it all as evil. And few took the time to read or discover for themselves. The Potter series was just another “sin” to avoid.

But for all that negativity the series took off and has been a total astonishment to many.

But not to me.

I believe the appeal is because the God-story is one we intrinsically want to hear. Young people in particular (innocence) were captured by it. The God story has appeal. Yes there are conflicts, and setbacks and betrayals (just like in the Bible). Yet the end story is full of hope and promise, and draws believers and even some unbelievers to listen to it even without getting the connection.
It's rather like me seeing LoR in terms of the Atheist campaign, even though the religious thinking in the story is unmissable. What this seems to be is the old argument of 'Good Things In The Bible'. The Good Things exist in humanist morality and books sometimes draw on them and sometimes not. Which is why the Bible may have some good things in it and some things not so good.

Bottom line is that Humanist morality - the morality we all use (1) - including Christians - is the measure against which all books, fiction, Holy Books or non -fiction are measured, and the Books are not the measure of the morality.

(1) including Bible - believers when they judge God's deeds to be good and worthy of praise or bad and thus to be excused, blamed on men or denied.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2019, 10:33 AM
 
Location: Sun City West, Arizona
23,293 posts, read 10,673,211 times
Reputation: 20715
Quote:
Originally Posted by UsAll View Post
A truer statement couldn't be said! (per the boldfaced comment of yours seen above).

But not just Christians alone; it can accurately be stated about anyone or nearly anyone that takes a gnostic perspective (whether a gnostic theist or a gnostic atheist or a gnostic pantheist or a gnostic panentheist and so on) . . . as differs from an agnostic perspective. Underlying this assertion is the truthful fact that there is no such thing as "absolute knowledge (absolute certitude)" but rather just "degrees of certitude (degrees of probability)". So, for example, while my present stance is that I don't actively embrace the idea of there being a so-called "god" as typically defined by the world's monotheistic or polytheistic religions nor the premise behind pantheism and panentheism, in the end, I say that "I don't know in an absolute or final sense . . . but nor does anyone else (though any number of my fellow humans will assert to the contrary and insist that they DO know with absolute certitude).

Even in science (i.e., "science" as it is properly supposed to be practiced and manifested), even when science and scientists state that something is an established scientific fact, what they are really implicitly saying is that "the overall body of evidences, findings, testings, and vettings support this as being true or factual until we'd otherwise, in the future, discover the truth(s) to be different from what we knew or thought we knew . . . if such a time ever comes."

In other words, science, by its very nature, is not promoted as "revealed truth" (and therefore unchangeable/unmalleable) in the way that religions too often assert themselves but is designed to only be based on what can be deemed as truly valid and applicable evidences that can be experienced and observed or that can otherwise be reasonably inferred by the tangible evidences that ARE available for observation and inspection . . . and then said findings must be vetted by the scientific community at-large and over the course of time to deem that the particular scientific assertions pass muster. Yet "religion & spirituality" operate by a different set of criteria (e.g., "I know this to be be so because I feel it in my heart or because it makes me feel good or because I meditated on it at-length and concluded it myself or because it reverberates with my inner being" . . . and other such ways of expressing such certitudinal stances).
But here's the difference between good science and religion.

Religious beliefs differ by society and often within a society.

In science done right, if 1,000 people do the same experiment the same way (no change in variables), 1,000 people should get the same result. When I was teaching science we had labs, and in a class of 24 there would be one lab table (of 2 students) who would almost always come up with a different result than everyone else. So then I would have the class probe how that odd group had changed some variable, and it was always discovered.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2019, 10:39 AM
 
2,448 posts, read 2,458,938 times
Reputation: 2878
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi View Post
But here's the difference between good science and religion.

Religious beliefs differ by society and often within a society.

In science done right, if 1,000 people do the same experiment the same way (no change in variables), 1,000 people should get the same result. When I was teaching science we had labs, and in a class of 24 there would be one lab table (of 2 students) who would almost always come up with a different result than everyone else. So then I would have the class probe how that odd group had changed some variable, and it was always discovered.
An addenda to the above posting of mine which I'd deleted (to be tacked on to the end of my last paragraph's sentence):

Underlying so much of their thinking is a resistance or perhaps even a fear of saying "I don't know" or "we don't know". as though it is a crime to say this or is to be deemed as a failing or shortcoming on their part. It is not. If it truly is the case that we truly do NOT know something to be true in an epistemological sense, then we should all have the intellectual honesty and integrity to say "I don't know". It may be the case that all things in life will not be knowable or become knowable to us in an objective sense. There may be some things that will remain unknowable to all of us for the remainder of our natural lives . . . and perhaps some things that will remain unknowable to ALL of humanity for as long as humanity continues to exist as a species.

Last edited by UsAll; 08-15-2019 at 10:50 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2019, 10:57 AM
 
13,216 posts, read 3,354,922 times
Reputation: 1642
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
I respond to this only to comment on the Harry Potter books which I thoroughly enjoyed as a theist. Unlike my fundamentalist counterparts (like Ozzy), I discovered the God-story in those pages of witches and wizards. And I later on read a book by another theist who read the books to see if they were worthy of letting his home schooled children read. He wrote his book right after Harry Potter number five but before number six (can’t remember the book names as I’m old and posting this late at night). He correctly predicted that Dumbledore would have to die for the God-story to be followed. Dumbledore was an allegorical John the Baptist, clearing the way for a greater one to follow (Harry).

The names are frequently allegorical. Harry POTTER is reminiscent of the biblical comment of God being the potter and us the clay. The Malfoys name comes from the Latin word that is the basis for our words malfeasance, malformed, and malicious. The white hair denoted the wolves in sheep’s clothing which was what the Malfoys were.

Of course Harry resurrects in the end which was the only way he would defeat “he who could not be named” (Death? The one thing none of us wants to dwell up One?). Longbottom was a kind of everyman who wasn’t good at much, made a fool of himself frequently, and got no respect from his fellow students. But in the final showdown, before Harry resurrects, when the good guys have no hope, Longbottom steps forward in a final act of defiance (he “believes” in Harry) and that faith in the midst of a battle that seemed to have a foregone conclusion was the impetus for Harry’s resurrection.

In either the last or next to last book there is a direct quote from Scripture on the tombstone of The Dumbledore’s: Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also (Matt 6:21) This, I believe, was allusion to Voldemort’s attempts to hide his soul in valuable things which all ultimately get destroyed as Jesus was alluding to in this verse from the Sermon on the Mount.

A second direct quote is on the graves of Harry’s parents
The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death’…” Harry thinks that is a Death Eater idea? “Why is that there?” Harry asks, but Hermione responds, “It doesn’t meaning defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry,” It means…you know…living beyond death. Living after death.” (Hallows 328)

Hermione’s interpretation is spot on. The Bible verse quoted is in Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, chapter 15, verse 26. Paul wrote to the Corinthians about Christ’s resurrection being an indicator that Christ’s followers would also be resurrected. In the Resurrection, death would truly be destroyed, and the faithful will “live beyond death” as Hermione described it.

The churchyard burial ground represents “hallowed” ground contained the bodies of the good guys in series and was named GODric’s (my emphasis) Hollow.

When they leave the churchyard Hermione conjures a wreath of roses to lay on the graves of Harry’s parents.
According to one tradition of Christian symbolism, the Christmas Rose is a symbol of the Nativity. The symbolism of the Holy Family of Joseph, Mary, and the infant Jesus can also be found in the monument of the Potter family, a memorial sculpture that depicts James, Lily, and the infant Harry.

But YOUR point is well-taken. At the time conservative “christians” in particular saw it all as evil. And few took the time to read or discover for themselves. The Potter series was just another “sin” to avoid.

But for all that negativity the series took off and has been a total astonishment to many.

But not to me.

I believe the appeal is because the God-story is one we intrinsically want to hear. Young people in particular (innocence) were captured by it. The God story has appeal. Yes there are conflicts, and setbacks and betrayals (just like in the Bible). Yet the end story is full of hope and promise, and draws believers and even some unbelievers to listen to it even without getting the connection.
Fascinating! I'm not the sort of fan my daughter became, so perhaps I wasn't paying that kind of attention, but now that you mention it...

Fascinating. Did you put all this in your comment together yourself or does it come from some other source? If all you, fascinating and impressive.

I'm not sure why you make the point of wanting "only" to comment about Harry Potter when obviously you've given this broader topic plenty of thought as well, but I will say this. I too love a good story even while I am quite a fan of non-fiction and/or the truth. I wonder if you don't miss much that made the series a "total astonishment to many" and/or whether what you call a "God-story" is also a story of good vs evil.

The story of good vs evil is universally enjoyed in all it's many forms, even if the Bible was one of the earlier such stories, and of course there are lots of them. I suspect there is more to the success of the Potter series anyway, and not that I mind getting off-topic, but back to my point, what people believe in these regards also affects what we teach our children. No doubt about that either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2019, 11:20 AM
 
13,216 posts, read 3,354,922 times
Reputation: 1642
Quote:
Originally Posted by UsAll View Post
[b]Underlying so much of their thinking is a resistance or perhaps even a fear of saying "I don't know" or "we don't know". as though it is a crime to say this or is to be deemed as a failing or shortcoming on their part. It is not. If it truly is the case that we truly do NOT know something to be true in an epistemological sense, then we should all have the intellectual honesty and integrity to say "I don't know". It may be the case that all things in life will not be knowable or become knowable to us in an objective sense. There may be some things that will remain unknowable to all of us for the remainder of our natural lives . . . and perhaps some things that will remain unknowable to ALL of humanity for as long as humanity continues to exist as a species.
"If only Man would humbly, patiently and universally agree to allow."

From my Seventh Truth...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2019, 02:33 PM
 
2,448 posts, read 2,458,938 times
Reputation: 2878
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi View Post
Your final conclusion is correct -- Christians believe what they want to believe.
NOTE: I'd inadvertently deleted my original posting (which you see re-posting again below by myself) and then saw that C-D posters Phetaroi and LearnMe quoted and responded to parts of the total posting of mine that was self-deleted by me. So I'll re-post the entire original posting again with all its parts intact for all to read in its entirety. My original complete posting said the following (starting off with myself quoting Phetaroi's posting as seen above and then responding to that posting):


A truer statement couldn't be said! (per the boldfaced comment of yours seen above).

But not just Christians alone; it can accurately be stated about anyone or nearly anyone that takes a gnostic perspective (whether a gnostic theist or a gnostic atheist or a gnostic pantheist or a gnostic panentheist and so on) . . . as differs from an agnostic perspective. Underlying this assertion is the truthful fact that there is no such thing as "absolute knowledge (absolute certitude)" but rather just "degrees of certitude (degrees of probability)". So, for example, while my present stance is that I don't actively embrace the idea of there being a so-called "god" as typically defined by the world's monotheistic or polytheistic religions nor the premise behind pantheism and panentheism, in the end, I say that "I don't know in an absolute or final sense . . . but nor does anyone else (though any number of my fellow humans will assert to the contrary and insist that they DO know with absolute certitude).

Even in science (i.e., "science" as it is properly supposed to be practiced and manifested), even when science and scientists state that something is an established scientific fact, what they are really implicitly saying is that "the overall body of evidences, findings, testings, and vettings support this as being true or factual until we'd otherwise, in the future, discover the truth(s) to be different from what we knew or thought we knew . . . if such a time ever comes."

In other words, science, by its very nature, is not promoted as "revealed truth" (and therefore unchangeable/unmalleable) in the way that religions too often assert themselves but is designed to only be based on what can be deemed as truly valid and applicable evidences that can be experienced and observed or that can otherwise be reasonably inferred by the tangible evidences that ARE available for observation and inspection . . . and then said findings must be vetted by the scientific community at-large and over the course of time to deem that the particular scientific assertions pass muster. Yet "religion & spirituality" operate by a different set of criteria (e.g., "I know this to be be so because I feel it in my heart or because it makes me feel good or because I meditated on it at-length and concluded it myself or because it reverberates with my inner being" . . . and other such ways of expressing such certitudinal stances). Underlying so much of their thinking is a resistance or perhaps even a fear of saying "I don't know" or "we don't know". as though it is a crime to say this or is to be deemed as a failing or shortcoming on their part. It is not. If it truly is the case that we truly do NOT know something to be true in an epistemological sense, then we should all have the intellectual honesty and integrity to say "I don't know". It may be the case that all things in life will not be knowable or become knowable to us in an objective sense. There may be some things that will remain unknowable to all of us for the remainder of our natural lives . . . and perhaps some things that will remain unknowable to ALL of humanity for as long as humanity continues to exist as a species.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2019, 10:45 AM
 
13,216 posts, read 3,354,922 times
Reputation: 1642
Quote:
Originally Posted by UsAll View Post
NOTE: I'd inadvertently deleted my original posting (which you see re-posting again below by myself) and then saw that C-D posters Phetaroi and LearnMe quoted and responded to parts of the total posting of mine that was self-deleted by me. So I'll re-post the entire original posting again with all its parts intact for all to read in its entirety. My original complete posting said the following (starting off with myself quoting Phetaroi's posting as seen above and then responding to that posting):


A truer statement couldn't be said! (per the boldfaced comment of yours seen above).

But not just Christians alone; it can accurately be stated about anyone or nearly anyone that takes a gnostic perspective (whether a gnostic theist or a gnostic atheist or a gnostic pantheist or a gnostic panentheist and so on) . . . as differs from an agnostic perspective. Underlying this assertion is the truthful fact that there is no such thing as "absolute knowledge (absolute certitude)" but rather just "degrees of certitude (degrees of probability)". So, for example, while my present stance is that I don't actively embrace the idea of there being a so-called "god" as typically defined by the world's monotheistic or polytheistic religions nor the premise behind pantheism and panentheism, in the end, I say that "I don't know in an absolute or final sense . . . but nor does anyone else (though any number of my fellow humans will assert to the contrary and insist that they DO know with absolute certitude).

Even in science (i.e., "science" as it is properly supposed to be practiced and manifested), even when science and scientists state that something is an established scientific fact, what they are really implicitly saying is that "the overall body of evidences, findings, testings, and vettings support this as being true or factual until we'd otherwise, in the future, discover the truth(s) to be different from what we knew or thought we knew . . . if such a time ever comes."

In other words, science, by its very nature, is not promoted as "revealed truth" (and therefore unchangeable/unmalleable) in the way that religions too often assert themselves but is designed to only be based on what can be deemed as truly valid and applicable evidences that can be experienced and observed or that can otherwise be reasonably inferred by the tangible evidences that ARE available for observation and inspection . . . and then said findings must be vetted by the scientific community at-large and over the course of time to deem that the particular scientific assertions pass muster. Yet "religion & spirituality" operate by a different set of criteria (e.g., "I know this to be be so because I feel it in my heart or because it makes me feel good or because I meditated on it at-length and concluded it myself or because it reverberates with my inner being" . . . and other such ways of expressing such certitudinal stances). Underlying so much of their thinking is a resistance or perhaps even a fear of saying "I don't know" or "we don't know". as though it is a crime to say this or is to be deemed as a failing or shortcoming on their part. It is not. If it truly is the case that we truly do NOT know something to be true in an epistemological sense, then we should all have the intellectual honesty and integrity to say "I don't know". It may be the case that all things in life will not be knowable or become knowable to us in an objective sense. There may be some things that will remain unknowable to all of us for the remainder of our natural lives . . . and perhaps some things that will remain unknowable to ALL of humanity for as long as humanity continues to exist as a species.
Not sure what this clean up does for you or me, but I don't think anyone needs this lesson on what science can do in terms of revealing truth as well as the limitations. What remains for me, however, is the question of how best to separate truth from nonsense, and I see science as doing mostly that. Certainly better than religions, though Buddhism also invites and promotes intelligent objective critical thinking as well. The other religions don't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top