This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

I don't understand how people think their religion is the correct religion.

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Religion
  3. I don't understand how people think their religion is the correct religion.

User Info: Faust_8

Faust_8
2 months ago#21
When you think about it, literally every single person on the planet thinks the same thing:

"Man, there are hundreds of false religions out there."

It only differs on whether they think there is a true one, and if so, which one it is.

But yeah I also can't really imagine the thought process that allows one to recognize that hundreds of religions started based on nothing, just hearsay and superstition slowly building with no nugget of truth at the center...but they think "well MY religion isn't like that."
"A book is proof that humans are capable of working magic." --Carl Sagan

User Info: Stuflames

Stuflames
2 months ago#22
Faust_8 posted...
When you think about it, literally every single person on the planet thinks the same thing:

"Man, there are hundreds of false religions out there."

It only differs on whether they think there is a true one, and if so, which one it is.

But yeah I also can't really imagine the thought process that allows one to recognize that hundreds of religions started based on nothing, just hearsay and superstition slowly building with no nugget of truth at the center...but they think "well MY religion isn't like that."


Kind of like that, is where I'm starting. People here seem to be saying 'well I see the nugget of truth'. But so do others, of other sects and completely different religions, people that also get results both mundane and fantastic by their faith. Without some kind of scientific method (more or less), I don't get what makes people think that they are *right* and other people are wrong. I really don't.

And if you think you are right or correct about the state of the universe based on belief, the mind of God or The Gods, then you think the other people are wrong.

I don't get that... confidence, I guess.

Yes.

I don't understand the confidence people have in their various faiths. The confidence in a belief that's something that doesn't even *need* to be proven to have confidence in it, that by subtle differences and interpretations could be damning rather than saving, and where others have equal or more confidence in the same subject, with the same or similar proofs, but their conclusions don't align with yours.

And this is not a subject of philosophy, morality, or the human condition, that can be interpreted in different ways through debates of empathy or sympathy or pragmatism. Religion is *not* that. It's a *concrete* thing - 'this is how the world works, this is the best understanding of the mind of God'.

It's not a morality or philosophy. It's not an opinion. Subscribing to a religion is subscribing to a fact. It's not (supposed to be) wishful thinking. It's assigning a definitive truth to the universe.

'This is God and what he expects and thinks, and I don't understand every bit of it but this history describes the best way to go on it'.

How can you presume to know the mind of God like that? How can you think you're not being tricked or misled by Man or God himself? Where does that trust come from, and why do you think it's even good to have that kind of trust?

It... Like I keep saying, I don't get it. I don't get the logic, what can make a person think they have true answers that they don't have.

It's not about manuscripts of this piece of history or that. It's about the arrogance of presuming knowledge of a supernatural's mind or minds.

So, as the topic title says, 'I don't understand how people think their religion is the correct religion', and I suppose I just exposed myself as more of a blogger in this topic than a person looking for answers because in all sincerity I don't think that anyone will be able to satisfy me with answers - and like many others in this board then I guess I should instead just say:

Repent. Because you don't know what you claim to know. Your whole-hearted beliefs are no better than another's beliefs, based in no more truth. In history and in the now there are hearts stronger than yours, full of more conviction, more belief, but those hearts believe in something else.

So repent for your arrogance, believer. Repent for your simplicity and duplicity. For your self deception and the web of deception your create around you. Repent.

... Not what I wanted to say to start, but in truth it would be disingenuous to continue this topic saying I'm really going to argue anything else.

Oh well.
PSN: GolemSix

User Info: OrangeWizard

OrangeWizard
2 months ago#23
Stuflames
I don't understand the confidence people have in their various faiths.


Why do you think that the religious people are any different than the non-religious when it comes to reasoning or being confident?

You seem to be thinking that religious people are different, like they are some mysterious alien being that nobody can relate to. The first step in understanding the religious, is to get rid of this assumption.

How do they come to their conclusions? The same way all other humans do.
How do they come to be so confident? The same way all other humans do.

You're saying the same things that cause me to give the same reply, so you must not believe or agree with what I said the first time, and have just repeated now. You must have some reason for this. Do you mind sharing it?
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCevfumG9WSyr165n84HfwRQ

User Info: SockThief

SockThief
2 months ago#24
Stuflames posted...
I don't have the level of commitment/conviction towards there being no greater power to consider myself a true atheist, so no you won't be able to trap me by saying Orange Wizard's argument applies to my current beliefs or convictions.


I haven't read anything except the OP. If you don't want to talk about what you said in the OP, that's your decision, but my question after reading it is what your position is on the existence of God.
I steal your sock.

User Info: Moorish_Idol

Moorish_Idol
2 months ago#25
Stuflames posted...
Repent. Because you don't know what you claim to know. Your whole-hearted beliefs are no better than another's beliefs, based in no more truth. In history and in the now there are hearts stronger than yours, full of more conviction, more belief, but those hearts believe in something else.

Before I repent, could you explain if you believe these things to be true or know them to be true? If the latter, how?
Not everything has to be about something.
Camofrog, Caroline, Chadder, Diana, Ketchup, Lyman, Olivia, Ruby, Shari

User Info: dhalsimrocks

dhalsimrocks
2 months ago#26
I think I get what the TC is asking and I do think it's a good point, but could be approached differently. I'm going to take a shot at it.

There are and have been thousands of religious beliefs systems and thousands of gods and supernatural beings claimed to be real. Man of these religions, or perhaps even most, are mutually exclusive and cannot be true simultaneously. The adherents of these religions are confident that they are correct based on the evidence they observe in the world.

It follows that most people who have ever lived believed in false religions, and that's if one of them happens to be true, which may not be the case. Yet despite these false beliefs, the adherents are quite confident they are right and they will point out evidence as to what makes them right.

It follows that most people believe in false religions because their evidence and/or reasoning is poor or faulty.

When we observe that the religious beliefs of most people are those of their geography or family, we can also add that the religions of most people are highly influenced by family and culture and not by good reasoning and quality evidence.

When we add that the evidence provided by most religious believers to support their claims is very similar (personal experience, prayer, the existence of morals, invisible entities, holy books and texts, arbitrary aspects of holy books claimed to make them special and better than others, prophets and conduits to god[s]), then we can conclude that many people believe false religions based on the same sorts of evidence provided by the other religions. Even if one of them happens to be true, this sort of evidence is now compromised and must be called into question.

Most religions, including the most popular ones, originated during pre-scientific times or times before critical scientific discoveries were made. Scientific and historical findings have challenged many of the religious claims including the validity of stories in holy books and scriptures.

When we observe that it is very easy for adherents of one faith to debunk the beliefs of another faith based on scientific and historical evidence, yet simultaneously reject any scientific or historic evidence that challenges their own, we can also conclude that many people believe in false religions despite the scientific and historical evidence to the contrary.

Finally, there are natural explanations for religious belief itself, including the origins of the major religious traditions that exist today.

When considering this background knowledge, the prior probability of any one religion's beliefs being true is extraordinarily low. Therefore, if any one of those religions is actually true, the evidence to overcome this very low prior probability must not only be extraordinarily good, it must also have no better explanation, such as a natural one.

Considering all of this, is it rational for religious believers to be as confident as they are?
May all your disgraces be private

User Info: kozlo100

kozlo100
2 months ago#27
Stuflames posted...
And if you think you are right or correct about the state of the universe based on belief, the mind of God or The Gods, then you think the other people are wrong.


For lots of folks, that isn't exactly right. Certainly not in that strictly binary way.

It's pretty common for members of one religion to think that folks of other religions are seeing that same kernel of truth, just maybe not seeing it totally clearly, or not seeing all of it. Those folks aren't wrong, stupid, or delusional. They're perfectly intelligent and normal people, they just don't have the same information that you do.
Time flies like the wind,
and fruit flies like a banana.

User Info: OrangeWizard

OrangeWizard
2 months ago#28
dhalsimrocks posted...

When we add that the evidence provided by most religious believers to support their claims is very similar (personal experience, prayer, the existence of morals, invisible entities, holy books and texts, arbitrary aspects of holy books claimed to make them special and better than others, prophets and conduits to god[s]), then we can conclude that many people believe false religions based on the same sorts of evidence provided by the other religions. Even if one of them happens to be true, this sort of evidence is now compromised and must be called into question.


I don't think this is true. You're making the assumption here that all religions are equally valid, and have equal evidence.

When you take a look at something like the bible, which is composed by ~40 authors spanning ~1500 years, and has survived to become the most translated, most circulated book in the world, and then say that the religion of this book is equally valid to those that worship, I don't know, Los Santos Malandros, are on equal footing?
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCevfumG9WSyr165n84HfwRQ

User Info: Lord_Ichmael

Lord_Ichmael
2 months ago#29
OrangeWizard posted...
I don't think this is true. You're making the assumption here that all religions are equally valid, and have equal evidence.

When you take a look at something like the bible, which is composed by ~40 authors spanning ~1500 years, and has survived to become the most translated, most circulated book in the world, and then say that the religion of this book is equally valid to those that worship, I don't know, Los Santos Malandros, are on equal footing?


Being more popular doesn't make it more true. I think Ancient Greek and most variants of Christianity are roughly equally valid because they both claim things that are impossible, it's just less obvious that some of the things Christianity claims are impossible since it's logical rather than physical impossibilities. (Not interested in arguing why I think that btw, we've done that dance before)

User Info: OrangeWizard

OrangeWizard
2 months ago#30
Lord_Ichmael posted...

Being more popular doesn't make it more true.


"More true" is a meaningless phrase. I think you mean "more likely to be true", and that would be correct. However, one religion being more popular than another is an example of a piece of evidence that would be found in one, but absent from the other, so it would still be true that not all religions have equal evidence.


I think Ancient Greek and most variants of Christianity are roughly equally valid


I'm curious, do you think that it's "more valid" to believe that I have 1kg in gold bullion in my possession , than 10kg? How about 10 vs 100? How about 100 vs 1000? Does, at any point, any combination of numbers become "equally valid", or is it always a linear distribution between amount of gold and validity?
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCevfumG9WSyr165n84HfwRQ
  1. Boards
  2. Religion
  3. I don't understand how people think their religion is the correct religion.

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived