C
cho_pilo
Guest
Anyone please?
- Status
P
puzzleannie
Guest
there is no such thing as personal opinion when it comes to religion, which is based on absolute truth revealed by God.
L
LoyalViews
Guest
Exactly, period.
No “opinion” is true, only that revealed to us by God through His most holy Church upon Earth.
A
Aelred_Minor
Guest
These first two responses are true for revealed religion, especially Catholicism.
“Religion” simply as such is too broad a category for any real answer to this question besides “it depends on which religion you’re talking about.”
“Religion” simply as such is too broad a category for any real answer to this question besides “it depends on which religion you’re talking about.”
R
richard_elmore
Guest
In any religion other than the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Faith, one opinion is pretty much as good as another. In the One True Church, the legitimacy of an opinion depends on the extent to which it is consistent with revealed truth as interpreted by the Church’s Magisterium. For example, every Catholic is bound to accept the teaching that artificial contraception is intrinsically wrong, but one Catholic might hold that to be true in every instance while another might argue that in the case of a married couple one of whom has Aids, the use of artificial contraception would be the lesser of two evils. However, a Catholic who argued that the use of artificial contraception would always be acceptable because (for instance) it would be better than an overpopulated world would clearly be flouting the Church’s teaching and his opinion could not be regarded as valid (in any religious sense). Hope that helps. Incidentally, your question should have been ‘whose opinion’.
B
Bezant
Guest
It depends on the religion, but when it comes down to what people will do, people will usually do what they think is right – with or without an authority saying it has the authority to decide what’s right.
C
cho_pilo
Guest
Let’s assume that there is a God and she did reveal absolute truth to someone, how can you tell which “truths” came from God, and which were written by liars claiming to have heard God, and which were later edited by liars?
D
davidv
Guest
One knows what is true, and from God, by listening to the Church that His Son, Jesus established in the first century AD.
L
LoyalViews
Guest
He. God is referred to as “he”.
We can tell which truths come from God, because they are declared by the Church, by the Successor of St Peter when speaking ex cathedral, which makes him infallible.
T
ThinkingSapien
Guest
Though the thread never came to any conclusion this question sounds a lot like the question behind the thread “Supernatural Epistemology” from a few months back.
C
cho_pilo
Guest
There are many brands of Christianity with many contradictory teachings. Many fundamentalist Christians actually believe the Catholic church is the anti-christ. Once again, how can one tell which are truthful and which are liars?
I
inocente
Guest
I’d guess most people use their God-given brain and God-given conscience.
J
Julia_Mae
Guest
Who decides “right and wrong?” If you mean generally, as in “It’s wrong to steal” then this will be a general precept of a religion. If you mean in any specific circumstance in your own life, you make the choice. In the end, the person who will stand in front of the Judgement seat is you.
That being said, moral precepts handed down for thousands of years aren’t just whims. And those choices you make in everyday circumstances are very important. Understanding why these things are considered right or wrong gives you the ability to make the correct choice.
T
ThinkingSapien
Guest
When I was growing up what I heard wasn’t quite that strong. Rather it was thought that Catholics worshiped idols and icons and that it was a cult. I don’t know how wide spread or isolated that view was. But there were lots of other odd and backwards occurances in this southern baptist region.
W
WesleyF
Guest
W
Whadyamean
Guest
Yours. I don’t understand Puzzleannie’s answer and that of those who might agree with her. One’s own acceptance of ideas in the ages up to seven, who’s mental state we now know mimic hypnotic suggestibility, tend to be the foundation for one’s religious predilections. Perhaps we have all noticed that Muslims don’t spring forth from devout Catholic families, nor others from other religions. In fact, may who have highly opinionated ideas about religion tend to have their own version of that faith, as do we all necessarily have our own “take” on what is purported to be a “universal” ideology, however subtle or notable those differences might be. And if you have a rudimentary knowledge of General Semantics, critical thinking skills, or especially any depth of self knowledge, you have by now admitted to yourself that while and even if you subscribe to a formulaic paradigm of existence, your experience and perspective regarding it are necessarily unique.
Therefore one’s entire subscription is opinion because it cannot be commensurate to a hypothesized commonality that no one can in fact experience as such. so while there is certainly a high degree of seeming agreement in these matters, in fact they are due to what is an assumed, not real, overlap.
G
greylorn
Guest
Yes, I know that we don’t get along, but you do ask pertinent questions, and you did write, “Anyone.”
The beauty of religion is that it is entirely based upon the dominance and relevance of authority figures— priests, ministers, mullahs, shamans, bishops, elders, prophets, popes— pretty much any high mucky-muck who talks smoothly and convincingly, or who has control of a suitably large army.
The alleged authority of most every religion is “absolute,” or “divinely inspired,” or whatever. The truth is that every religious belief is an invention of some man, and more recently (e.g. Madame Blavatsky) of some woman. Each inventor claims to have been divinely inspired. If he does not, his followers will happily make that claim in his behalf.
This allows religions to teach whatever they want and claim that they are teaching God’s own word.
You might find it interesting to take a tour of various churches, synagogues, mosques, and new-age campsites, Spend a week watching and listening to the nits on GOD-TV and other highly profitable religious networks, and be sure to include the “Creflow Dollar” show. Visit a few union halls as well, and to complete your education, attend a Richard Dawkins lecture. You will find that everyone in every sermon, program, and lecture you attend is right. Absolutely right.
Quoting (with permission) from my book, Digital Universe, Analog Soul…
"Upon adopting the simple conclusion that there is at least one Creator about whom I know absolutely nothing except the evidence of His/Hers/Their creation, plus the evidence of my own existence, I realized that religions offer a variety of confusing, inconsistent, and illogical descriptions of the Creator’s nature and purpose.
Seeking better, I adopted the obvious principle that the only Bible certain to have been written by the Creator is Creation itself. In other words, the only legitimate Bible, one certain to have not been written by men, is the physical universe itself.
Data from the universe suffers from the same disadvantage as Bibles written by men, in that it can and therefore will be interpreted differently by different interpreters who are absolutely right. (Only a few centuries ago, Catholic dogma placed the earth not only at the center of our solar system, but at the center of the entire universe.)
However, unlike human-written scriptures, interpretation of the physical universe is immune to rewrites and false translations. This is why the religious wars currently being conducted between the remnants of Christianity and the followers of Islam employ weaponry derived from the same laws of physics."
Ultimately, the answer to your question is simple, but it does depend upon your mental properties.
If you do not have a mind capable of thinking for itself, right and wrong is determined by whoever is speaking from the pulpits, lecture halls, or TV programs that define your beliefs.
If you do have a mind, it determines right and wrong.
W
Whadyamean
Guest
I like the excerpt from your book, finding it accurate and pointed about a dynamic rampant in human “thought.” The only change I might make is to leave it at “-]physical/-] universe.”
Thanks for sharing.
G
greylorn
Guest
I’ve often wondered about the usefulness of the -]cross-out/-] function, but no longer. Thank you! Likewise for your understanding.
Would you eliminate the adjective “physical” because you regard it as incorrect, or incomplete?
Do explain, please. I enjoy rational conversations with kindred spirits.
W
Whadyamean
Guest
The feeling is mutual.I’ve often wondered about the usefulness of the -]cross-out/-] function, but no longer. Thank you! Likewise for your understanding.
Would you eliminate the adjective “physical” because you regard it as incorrect, or incomplete?
Do explain, please. I enjoy rational conversations with kindred spirits.
I would leave it out because if it was me it would be a potential limitation. Human bandwidth of perception is notoriously small. Not that is in any way proof, but what are animals tracking when there is nothing there? Fan blades are visible when still, not so much when moving. Movies are a series of stills going by rapidly. I just always like to leave room for more. The largest room in the Universe is the room for improvement, no?
- Status