Each of the world's major religions has scriptures that are considered sacred and lay the foundation for a believer's faith. It's odd that our epistemological standards seem to vary largely based on the situation. When it comes to the evening paper or a doctor's advice, "have faith" isn't an acceptable reassurance (we understand these people are human). What makes people so certain that the authors of their holy texts were any less prone to human fallibility? It seems that time has afforded them the luxury of divine inspiration. The ubiquity of religion/spirituality throughout the world clearly demonstrates that seeking purpose is an innately human activity that is influenced by factors such as the environment and cultural history. Shouldn't we at least try to verify the origins of beliefs that so divide us? Is there a point to which "I have faith" becomes an inadequate substitute for doing some serious unbiased (as in, the truth above all else) research?
2007-01-28 11:13:17 · 12 answers · asked by hanovercc 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
It's a pretty big undertaking, but the results can be fascinating.
2007-01-28 11:31:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely. Blind faith is the faith of the blind. We have the ability to reason and question. Those faculties should be used to verify the authenticity, authority, and integrity of any so-called scripture. Why should spiritual texts not be subjected to scrutiny? When dealing with religious texts, purported to be the words of an Absolute God, one should expect that the books be superlative in every respect. They should be accurate, clear, concise, consistent, and unchanged. Faith is an aspect of understanding, not reasoning. An unintelligent person can gain knowledge from an authoritive text, but even the most intelligent person cannot gain knowledge from a text that has no integrity.
2007-01-28 19:25:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I, personally, would want to thoroughly research a way of life before completely dedicating myself to it.
It seems some people of some faiths dedicate their lives to a religion that they may not know much about, and that to me is not a good way to live.
I'd like to add, however, that over-analyzing texts and taking it too literally could be detrimental. I believe, for example, that many of the legends in the Bible are metaphorical, and should not be taken literally. The trick is learning how to make that distinction and unfortunately that's not something I can help you with.
2007-01-28 19:21:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You assume too much. Most of us have done our research and found our God to be true and faithful. The author of my text (the bible) is God. He is infallible.The seeking purpose is not an innately human activity as such. God placed within every man the desire to know God. We all have that desire, but man represses it to the point God is far from his mind.
2007-01-28 19:21:47 · answer #4 · answered by Fish <>< 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your question is quite scholarly, but have you considered that the biggest movements in human history were supported by just the right myths? Seems that non-truth has historically been a better motivator than truth.
2007-01-28 19:19:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
This polemic has been going around for too long, I wish religious people coul keep their beliefs for themself and don't annoy us with their lack of strength, which push them into trying to obliterate any other beliefs as if threaten them. If I choose to have faith in the fairies I do not care if you tell me that they don't exist , I would not try to kill you, or feel threaten by you not sharing my beliefs.
2007-01-28 19:59:45 · answer #6 · answered by joelle G 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"Investigate" and " watch" are words used in the writings of many religions. "To have faith" does not mean blindness, otherwise the word "using wisdom" will be not mentioned. Most of the brilliant minds that brought contributions to humanity believed in the message of their Holy Books. Wisdom helps us to know if the words of God are symbolic or factual.
2007-01-28 20:09:35 · answer #7 · answered by Jorge T 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Religions shouldn't be based on written words. If God is as powerful as they say 'he' is, then 'he' should be able to prove to everyone that 'he' exists and what 'he' wants them to believe in. A bible isn't reliable enough to rule peoples lives.
2007-01-28 19:17:55 · answer #8 · answered by S K 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Okies, how well did you research the chair you're sitting in before you sat down in it for the first time?
Yeah, same with us, we just sort of had to sit down in faith and enjoy the results :)
2007-01-28 19:23:22 · answer #9 · answered by arewethereyet 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
"O monks, just as a goldsmith tests his gold by melting, cutting and rubbing,
sages accept my teachings after full examination, and not just out of devotion."
Buddha
2007-01-28 19:17:23 · answer #10 · answered by Om 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋