|
I said in my previous post that moral "truth" doesn't count in establishing the objective validity of religious faith, since morality is not objective.
"I choose a Christian faith (actually I was born into it--but believing is still my choice)"
If you were raised Muslim, I bet you'd be a Muslim now and claim that believing in Allah was your choice.
"Call them common sense principles: "Helping your neighbor is good." "Killing your neighbor is bad.""
That is the most popular interpretation, however the very same holy books have been used - with support! - to rationalize all manner of atrocities. For example:
"Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him. But all the young girls who have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."
..........Numbers 31:17 (Moses)
"The men of Judah captured another ten thousand (men) alive and took them to the top of the rock and threw them down from the top of the rock; and they were all dashed to pieces."
..........2 Chronicles 25:12
"Samar'ia shall bear her guilt, because she has rebelled against her God; they shall fall by the sword, their little ones shall be dashed in pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open."
..........Hosea 13:16
"Slay and utterly destroy after them, says the Lord, and do all that I have commanded you."
..........Jeremiah 50:21
"And the Lord our God gave him over to us; and we defeated him and his sons and all his people. And we captured all his cities at that time and utterly destroyed every city, men, women and children; we left none remaining..."
..........Deuteronomy 2:33
"Behold the day of the Lord comes, cruel, with wrath and fierce anger...Whoever is found will be thrust through and whoever is caught will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed in pieces before their eyes, their houses will be plundered and their wives ravished."
..........Isaiah 13:9, 13:15
"I will strew your flesh upon the mountains, and fill the valleys with your carcass. I will drench the land even to the mountains with your flowing blood..."
..........Ezekiel 32:5
"Therefore fathers shall eat their sons in the midst of you and sons shall eat their fathers...I will send famine and wild beasts against you and they shall rob you of your children; pestilence and blood shall pass through you; and I will bring a sword upon you. I, the Lord, have spoken."
..........Ezekiel 5:10, 5:17
------------------
Sound at least a LITTLE ambiguous in some parts? :)
"Does this mean that someone who happens to be Hindu is WRONG and is going to go to hell?? NO--absolutely
NOT! You know what I think? I think that person's religion is ALSO right."
Objectively right or morally right? Remember, using morality to justify objective validity is not logically consistent. It is impossible for both religions to be objectively correct (Hindu belief in reincarnation, Christian belief in one God, Christian belief that all non-Christians (which includes Hindues) burn in Hell, etc.) The two religions are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. One might as well try to argue that both quantum mechanics and relativistic physics are both correct, but this, as well, is an impossibility.
"That religion is every bit as right for that person as
Christianity is for me."
Right FOR that person is another story entirely. You're arguing for religion's usefulness in binding society together, which is not a sufficient foundation for belief or faith.
"There's no such thing as a religion that's completely infallable--that certainly includes Christianity. But, then again, there's no
SCIENCE that's completely infallible either."
"EVERY
religion has as its core certain moral, ethical, and historical TRUTHS."
There is no such thing as a moral truth. If I said "Egg rolls are delicious" it would be true FOR me but not OUTSIDE of me.
"there's no
SCIENCE that's completely infallible either. "
Science's approach is completely different. It is self-correcting, because it relies on observational evidence and pragmatic benefits for its conclusions. For this reason, we can be relatively sure that as science progresses, we are more and more understanding the objective nature of reality - whether or not we ever get there is another story. But, to repeat myself again and again from various arguments, if we were completely off the mark with atomic theory we would not have nuclear reactors.
In religion there is no such safeguard against fallacy. Since it IS subjective and intuitive, it is objectively unreliable and unverifiable.
|
