Question(s) for the Religious

[Walking Void]

*the question(s) are focused to the religious*

*the non-religious can step in too*

Okay, okay, so You have a belief in something divine, something of a religion. You positively think of a specific something as if that something is true, so I have a question. If I were to make up something in my mind just now and call it divine while not being the same thing that You believe in... is my belief justified/justifiable?

Say, I believed in a swimming pastrami creature. If You agree that it is real, You might be insane. If You disagree, is it not fair to say that an invisible, inaudible, untouchable human-shaped being that exists anywhere and everywhere is just as ridiculous? If You say that it is possible that the creature exists, then can You say that your belief might not exist in this reality or a pseudo-reality? If not, how could You be as low as to pick your own beliefs and deny mine? Or even discriminate other religions? Start ridiculous angry wars?

Just because your belief system may have more maturity (age) to it, does that imply that it is more viable than my own 5-minute belief? If true, does that not portend that everyone should be at least a Jew and not a Christian or Muslim for the Yahweh religions?

How do You justify your religion? Is it by reference to something in itself? If monotheistic religions and polytheistic religions are both stalwart in their beliefs, who is incorrect? Nobody? Believe what You want to believe? If so, then You would have stopped getting in everyone's face just to push your own beliefs. And stop indoctrinating babies, babies who are open books and empty pages.

/endrant /endquestions

[Godscreated]

You need to restructure your questions so they can be answered in some organizer way. What you have will lead to confusion and a gambit of different arguments. Suggest only a couple at a time.

GC

[Captain Colostomy]

If the swimming pastrami creature promises me virgins in this very life, I may sign on.

I do imagine violence helps. Nothing kicks off a religion like persecution, martyrdom and murder in the deity's name. For a peaceful beginning, I think it boils down to luck...mainly in the form of willing converts disgusted by their present circumstances. Subsequent violence is just a catalyst towards faster future acceptance.

[fr0d0]

If I were to make up something in my mind just now and call it divine while not being the same thing that You believe in... is my belief justified/justifiable?

From what you've said, your belief isn't justified because you just told me it isn't.

If I told you that I had no justification for my belief I'd expect you to say the same.

[Cyberman]

Interesting that you're as quick to accept him merely at his word that his belief isn't justified as you aren't at taking that same word expressing his belief. Why is that, I wonder?

[The Reality Salesman01]

If I were to make up something in my mind just now and call it divine while not being the same thing that You believe in... is my belief justified/justifiable?

From what you've said, your belief isn't justified because you just told me it isn't.

While I see your point Frodo, I think that in this conjecture, you wouldn't be aware of his personal knowledge of it being pretend.

If he was just ranting about some divine entity, and it was made-up (unbeknownst to you), on what grounds would you be able to dispute it?

He's asking what your process is to discern that which is made-up, from that which is divine. What criteria do you have to distinguish TRUE claims of divinity from false ones?

[Walking Void]

You need to restructure your questions so they can be answered in some organizer way. What you have will lead to confusion and a gambit of different arguments. Suggest only a couple at a time.

GC

-Can I make up something spiritual and officially coin it divine?

-Is it just as authoritative as any other belief?

-Is it equivocal (not any less or more valid than say a belief in a god) to any other other belief? If no, on what grounds would my belief be denied its authority?

-Does age or population help to justify or fortify a belief system?

-Are there more than 1 god? If no, are polytheists incorrect?

[John V]

-Can I make up something spiritual and officially coin it divine?

Go right ahead. In fact, if you want to make a comparison to religion, you should make up something spiritual. A swimming pastrami creature isn't spiritual, it's corporeal.

-Is it just as authoritative as any other belief?

No. There are numerous ways to evaluate a claim. I typically start as Frodo did - the very first thing I'll assess is whether the claimant actually believes it himself. You admittedly don't, so why should I? This criterion isn't restricted to spiritual claims. If I tell my kids that there's a turkey in the back yard, they'll run to the window to see it. If one of them sees me wink as I say it, indicating that I don't believe it myself, she won't run to the window.

[Bad Writer]

-Can I make up something spiritual and officially coin it divine?

Go right ahead. In fact, if you want to make a comparison to religion, you should make up something spiritual. A swimming pastrami creature isn't spiritual, it's corporeal.

The point is that, to us, that's all religion is. You ask for proof of the Spaghetti monster (not Pastrami but same Italian origin) because you cannot take us at our word. It doesn't matter if this thing is spiritual or corporeal, for neither can be proven with demonstrable evidence, as far as we've seen.

You ask us to take a walk in your shoes, to believe in something we can't see, to give faith a try. Many of us have attempted this, and results always vary, or there are simply no results. If you took a look at the world through our eyes, to try and see if your god can be demonstrated to exist by some testable and reproducible means, then you might understand us a little better.

-Is it just as authoritative as any other belief?

No. There are numerous ways to evaluate a claim. I typically start as Frodo did - the very first thing I'll assess is whether the claimant actually believes it himself.

The process of evaluating a claim stays the same whether it's true or not; we should never assume that it's true before we begin testing it. This is exactly how the court system in the U.S. works; a suspect is innocent until proven guilty, and not the other way around. If we assumed he was guilty from the get-go, not only would the process be biased against that person, but if he's really innocent, but it cannot be proven that he is, then we risk sending this person to jail or to the executioner's block.

Bottom-line, your examination process is flawed simply because you are shifting the burden of proof of your claim. We understand that you believe in it, but we can't verify its veracity without evidence, so we don't attempt to believe in it as you do. Doing so is called using faith, and faith is always blind.

You admittedly don't, so why should I? This criterion isn't restricted to spiritual claims. If I tell my kids that there's a turkey in the back yard, they'll run to the window to see it. If one of them sees me wink as I say it, indicating that I don't believe it myself, she won't run to the window.

I don't think that's what WV was postulating. The situation he created, that is, the person making up spiritual claims, is going to try very hard not to wink at the crowd when he gives his spiel. Whether the claim comes from an honest believer or a decidedly conny con man, we still need evidence to demonstrate whether or not what either person says is true.

[fr0d0]

If he was just ranting about some divine entity, and it was made-up (unbeknownst to you), on what grounds would you be able to dispute it?

He's asking what your process is to discern that which is made-up, from that which is divine. What criteria do you have to distinguish TRUE claims of divinity from false ones?

1. I couldn't dispute it on any grounds. I couldn't
believe it either, for the same reason: I know nothing about it.

2. I think that's more you're question. Information is all we have to go on. I found the information persuasive enough to then believe in its truth.