Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scrutin

Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scrutiny/ inspection (just like public listed companies)

Because in Singapore, ALL religious organisations are AUTOMATICALLY registered as charitable societies with associated benefits of zero income tax, GST free, zero property tax etc, I believe that BOTH accounts and practises of ALL RELIGIOUS groups must be open to scrutiny.

All board meetings records/notes MUST be filed with commissioner of charities as MUST all accounts be made transparent and available on internet (MORE TRANSPARENT THAN PUB LISTED COMPANIES): as must the salary of anyone earning in excess of 6 figures in bands of S$100,000. All gifts/ tokens of appreciation of value in excess of S$200 must also be accounted for. (Pastors/ preachers who evade personal income tax on gifts/ payments received should face the music).


All public preechings/ sermons can be video taped by ANY audience although permission is to be sought if the faces/ identity of participants (other than the identity of the organisation which is to be transparent)/ performance of rituals is to be shown.

That should put paid to all these corrupted religious leaders involved in financial impropriety involving 'round-tripping', other deceptive financial sleights of hand and wrong teachings (cherry picked bible verses presented out of context/ excessively shallow/ misguided interpretations of the word 'jihard' etc) etc.

jiakpengtime said:

Thread source: Pastor Joseph Prince denies he is among top 10 richest pastors


And so what if his salary is skyhigh? What are people trying to imply? And so what if he isn't? Why the need to publicly deny?
#moneymoneymoneyissofunnyinamadman'sworld
-----

An online report claiming that Joseph Prince, the founder and senior pastor of New Creation Church, has a net worth of US$5 million ($6.36 million), has been roundly dismissed by the church's council.
In a statement posted on its website on Tuesday, the council said that the pastor had stopped drawing a salary from the church since 2009.
They said that Mr Prince had shared with them that his net worth is "substantially lower than the US$5m that has been alleged". The council also said that it regards Mr Prince's net worth as personal in nature.
The Oct 7 report, which has been making its rounds online, was published on www.richestlifestyle.com, an entertainment website which describes itself as "dedicated to the celebrity lifestyle", and "giving you scoops on luxury cars and yachts" and "celebrity net worth". It purportedly has an office in New York.
The site listed Mr Prince as the 10th richest pastor in the world - alongside preachers such as American evangelist Billy Graham and Nigerian bishop David Oyedepo. The post said Mr Prince reportedly draws a salary of $550,000 but did not attribute the source of the information.
The pastor hosts a religious television show called Destined to Reign, which is broadcast in the United States, Europe, Africa, Australia, Israel, South Korea and Indonesia. It is part of the non-profit international Joseph Prince Ministries which was established in 2007, and is independent of New Creation Church.
The church's council said that Mr Prince "recognises that a strong foundation of corporate governance can only enhance the church". They added that he had voluntarily stepped down as a member of the Council to focus on his spiritual role.
It added: "The Council is disappointed with the manner in which the reports were generated and circulated without proper effort having being made to validate the facts. The Council asks that these reports be withdrawn or clarified, so as not to undermine the good work of the church and Pastor Prince."
New Creation Church, which is a member of the National Council of Churches of Singapore, first started holding meetings from a flat in block 17 Holland Drive in 1983. Since then, it has grown to have more than 31,000 worshippers. Members congregate for services across five venues here, including the Star Performing Arts Centre in Buona Vista.
The 5,000-seater Star Theatre is located within the $500 million Star Performing Arts Centre which is operated by the church's business arm, Rock Productions. Members contributed to the centre's building fund.

Click to expand...

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

Does it mean i am alllowed to point out the flaws of all religions?

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

sochi2014 said:

Does it mean i am alllowed to point out the flaws of all religions?

Click to expand...

Guess U are welcomed from a scholarship POV ( not one with ulterior motive/ personal grudge/ vandetta) although I don't know u personally, nor if sammyboy forumers have the necessary maturity to engage without the discussion degenerating to personal attacks/ the skill of moderators to professionally moderate a religious discussion: not easy to find people with the maturity and decernment to moderate well.

However, compared to some other local forums, I must comment that the Sam Leong owner guy is fairly fair (if not liberal) in his moderation of these forums thus far. (Not so politico-religious-phobic as say mycarforums, discuss.SG etc)

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

Faith is a flaw.

Cheers!

sochi2014 said:

Does it mean i am alllowed to point out the flaws of all religions?

Click to expand...

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

Agoraphobic said:

Faith is a flaw.

Cheers!

Click to expand...

Faith in PAP, faith in your wife to be faithful, faith in your bank not to go bankrupt/ misuse your savings to invest in derivative $ instruments, faith your hawlker fare does not contain gutter oil?

Faith applies to a whole gamut of things, not just religion.

Without good faith beyond just simple reason , people/ society just cannot function.

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

You have a point, but am referring to religion here. Faith is belief, without having any proof/evidence. Religion is based on faith. Either you belief, or you don't. And if you do, you do not question. You accept. Based on faith, everything preached, is truth. To me, religion is a choice. One either has faith, or chooses no religion. I do not have faith, but do not object to those who choose to accept. They have a right to.

Cheers!

bic_cherry said:

Faith in PAP, faith in your wife to be faithful, faith in your bank not to go bankrupt/ misuse your savings to invest in derivative $ instruments, faith your hawlker fare does not contain gutter oil?

Faith applies to a whole gamut of things, not just religion.

Without good faith beyond just simple reason , people/ society just cannot function.

Click to expand...

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

Agoraphobic said:

You have a point, but am referring to religion here. Faith is belief, without having any proof/evidence. Religion is based on faith. Either you belief, or you don't. And if you do, you do not question. You accept. Based on faith, everything preached, is truth. To me, religion is a choice. One either has faith, or chooses no religion. I do not have faith, but do not object to those who choose to accept. They have a right to.

Cheers!

Click to expand...

Sorry, U are defining misplaced faith: I.e. faith WITHOUT any factual basis or distorted reason.
I have religion and I do question its precepts against competing world views: e.g. evolution theory (Christianity preaches creation theory), so U need to have faith either way U believe since even the aethist bases his view of god's inexistance upon various reasons, NONE of which conclusively prove God's absence though together, come to some plausible conclusion (depending on one's standards of proof): like wise the religious: they to have their own reasons, none of which by human standards can conclusively proof the existence of their God but it is sufficient by their personal standards that their God is prescient and real.

I believe I have high standards and do study religion history when I have time, thus I also condemn the catholic church teaching / collection of 'indulgences' money in the 15th century (~Martin Luther time): so much $$$ that many catholic priest took up pedophilia as a past time...

Religion is like spectacles, u see better if you approach with a clean heart (clear lenses) but your view becomes blurr if U put on a pair with dirty lenses (unclean heart); for those who choose to be immoral: they are blind preachers and like themselves, their (misled) followers similarly fall into the death pit.

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

That's why faith is flawed.

Cheers!

bic_cherry said:

Sorry, U are defining misplaced faith: I.e. faith WITHOUT any factual basis or distorted reason.
I have religion and I do question its precepts against competing world views: e.g. evolution theory (Christianity preaches creation theory), so U need to have faith either way U believe since even the aethist bases his view of god's inexistance upon various reasons, NONE of which conclusively prove God's absence though together, come to some plausible conclusion (depending on one's standards of proof): like wise the religious: they to have their own reasons, none of which by human standards can conclusively proof the existence of their God but it is sufficient by their personal standards that their God is prescient and real.

I believe I have high standards and do study religion history when I have time, thus I also condemn the catholic church teaching / collection of 'indulgences' money in the 15th century (~Martin Luther time): so much $$$ that many catholic priest took up pedophilia as a past time...

Religion is like spectacles, u see better if you approach with a clean heart (clear lenses) but your view becomes blurr if U put on a pair with dirty lenses (unclean heart); for those who choose to be immoral: they are blind preachers and like themselves, their (misled) followers similarly fall into the death pit.

Click to expand...

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

Agoraphobic said:

That's why faith is flawed.
Cheers!

Click to expand...

Haha, U are being unreasonable AND CONTRADICTING yourself here by placing your shallow 'faith' in NOT reading what I just said.

Faith is UBIQUITOUS.

The guy who bets his monthly salary on horse racing has faith, as do newly married couples in the compatibility and faithfulness of their self/ partners. Even boarding a public bus/ crossing the street requires a degree of faith that one finishes such a journey in one piece/ arrives in time for appointment: otherwise, one should try the next better option (e.g. take safer transport/ even a plane to say KL if the bus cannot arrive on time etc). There are indeed many more applications in life of faith then merely in the context of religion, depending on one's particular priority in life/ activity involved and in.

All faith is built on knowledge be it true of false knowledge.
Knowledge itself by colloquial classification is either scientific or hypothetical, reasoned or extrapolated (assumed) or even gut-feel. Of course there is no guarantee that scientific or reasoned knowledge is always true, likewise, nobody can say that all hypothetical/ extrapolated/ gut-feel knowledge is always false.

Ignorance is the lack of knowledge, however, just as the source, method of obtainment and method of interpretation of such knowledge differs, faith differs just as names differ.

To say that 'faith' is a flaw/ that 'all faith is flawed' is to like say that oneself DOES NOT EXISTS: a philosophical self contradiction.

I do not have time to argue with people who repetatively parrot one lined, unsubstantiated motherhood statements/ myth and shall henceforth respond to your assertions supported either by fact or example.

Thank you for your kind participation and have a nice day...

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

bic_cherry said:

Haha, U are being unreasonable AND CONTRADICTING yourself here by placing your shallow 'faith' in NOT reading what I just said.

Faith is UBIQUITOUS.

The guy who bets his monthly salary on horse racing has faith, as do newly married couples in the compatibility and faithfulness of their self/ partners. Even boarding a public bus/ crossing the street requires a degree of faith that one finishes such a journey in one piece/ arrives in time for appointment: otherwise, one should try the next better option (e.g. take safer transport/ even a plane to say KL if the bus cannot arrive on time etc). There are indeed many more applications in life of faith then merely in the context of religion, depending on one's particular priority in life/ activity involved and in.

All faith is built on knowledge be it true of false knowledge.
Knowledge itself by colloquial classification is either scientific or hypothetical, reasoned or extrapolated (assumed) or even gut-feel. Of course there is no guarantee that scientific or reasoned knowledge is always true, likewise, nobody can say that all hypothetical/ extrapolated/ gut-feel knowledge is always false.

Ignorance is the lack of knowledge, however, just as the source, method of obtainment and method of interpretation of such knowledge differs, faith differs just as names differ.

To say that 'faith' is a flaw/ that 'all faith is flawed' is to like say that oneself DOES NOT EXISTS: a philosophical self contradiction.

I do not have time to argue with people who repetatively parrot one lined, unsubstantiated motherhood statements/ myth and shall henceforth respond to your assertions supported either by fact or example.

Thank you for your kind participation and have a nice day...

Click to expand...

Just because you like to study religion does not make you an expert. Come on, i don't need fooking faith to take a bus!

Philosophy: In ALL human endevors involving the element of Hope, Faith is by definiti


Philosophy: In ALL human endevors involving the element of Hope, Faith is by definition present.

zeebjii said:

Thread source (SBY): Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scrutiny/ inspection (just like public listed companies)

Just because you like to study religion does not make you an expert. Come on, i don't need fooking faith to take a bus!

Click to expand...

Thank you for your acknowledgement in my interest in the study of religion (comparative), 'specializing' especially the Christian viewpoint although I admit no professional qualifications in this regard.

In so far that the premise of faith is 'hope': I assert that U have exercised mutual faith in so far as U hope that:

1. the bus driver is licensed and qualified to drive the bus
2. the vehicle(bus) is inspected and cleared for safe use in order for commuters to arrive safely and on time
3. the traffic lights are safety inspected and will not reveal confusing traffic signals that cause sober motorist to collide
4. even in case of accident, the bus company is insured by a solvent insurance company who will uphold the welfare of commuters in highest regard
5. the laws/ legal courts of the land regularly serve justice to ensure that reckless drivers and rogue bus insurers are penalised/ neutered to make public transport commuting safe and pleasant for all
6. and I haven't even touched on the topic of Ebola epidemic yet...

Thus in so far as U have faith in the situation (bus journey from A to B) to result in the outcome that U are hoping for (safe arrival at destination), U have operated on (exercised/ exerted) faith (in hope of your expected outcome) whether U realise it or not.

In short, faith is the basis of all actions premised on (/with elements of) hope.

Back to this thread topic since the conversation has digressed: transparency in Church (/religious organisations) accounts will improve the nature of religious faith by Congregational (/public) check and balances both in teaching and financial prudence. Just as drunk/ reckless motorists are routinely weeded out at roadblocks, likewise essential is transparency necessary to weed out corrupt religious leaders: the former so that citizens can have faith in the safety of road journeys, the latter so that the practise of religion remains chaste and pure for the well-being of everyone.

Hebrews 11:1 (bible hub.com)
New International Version: Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.

New Living Translation: Faith is the confidence that what we hope for will actually happen; it gives us assurance about things we cannot see.

English Standard Version: Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

New American Standard Bible : Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

King James Bible: Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Click to expand...

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

Perhaps you mean "hope" when you refer to "faith."

Let's keep things simple, "faith" is belief that is not based on proof. But if people choose to have faith, that is their choice as far as I'm concerned.

Cheers!

bic_cherry said:

Haha, U are being unreasonable AND CONTRADICTING yourself here by placing your shallow 'faith' in NOT reading what I just said.

Faith is UBIQUITOUS.

The guy who bets his monthly salary on horse racing has faith, as do newly married couples in the compatibility and faithfulness of their self/ partners. Even boarding a public bus/ crossing the street requires a degree of faith that one finishes such a journey in one piece/ arrives in time for appointment: otherwise, one should try the next better option (e.g. take safer transport/ even a plane to say KL if the bus cannot arrive on time etc). There are indeed many more applications in life of faith then merely in the context of religion, depending on one's particular priority in life/ activity involved and in.

All faith is built on knowledge be it true of false knowledge.
Knowledge itself by colloquial classification is either scientific or hypothetical, reasoned or extrapolated (assumed) or even gut-feel. Of course there is no guarantee that scientific or reasoned knowledge is always true, likewise, nobody can say that all hypothetical/ extrapolated/ gut-feel knowledge is always false.

Ignorance is the lack of knowledge, however, just as the source, method of obtainment and method of interpretation of such knowledge differs, faith differs just as names differ.

To say that 'faith' is a flaw/ that 'all faith is flawed' is to like say that oneself DOES NOT EXISTS: a philosophical self contradiction.

I do not have time to argue with people who repetatively parrot one lined, unsubstantiated motherhood statements/ myth and shall henceforth respond to your assertions supported either by fact or example.

Thank you for your kind participation and have a nice day...

Click to expand...

Reading The Bible Properly Can Improve One's Reasoning Skills

Reading The Bible Properly Can Improve One's Reasoning Skills

Agoraphobic said:

Thread source (SBY): Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scrutiny/ inspection (just like public listed companies)

Perhaps you mean "hope" when you refer to "faith."
Let's keep things simple, "faith" is belief that is not based on proof. But if people choose to have faith, that is their choice as far as I'm concerned.
Cheers!

Click to expand...

Okay, then perhaps it might be an issue of semantics/ terminology.
In the vernacular (secular definition), some people ask "what is your faith": which in this case, means: " what is your religion".

The bible definition, according to Hebrews 1:11, just using the New International Version translation as example: "Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see": defines faith as the 'confidence'/ 'assurance'.

All actions (buy canned food, cross street, take aeroplane ride, get married ), religions (mainstream) etc are premised upon some form of confidence leading to hope in the action (decision, conduct, ritual etc) thus taken.

So whilst U seem to prefer understanding the term 'faith' as equating to the term (noun) 'religion', the proper definition of the term 'faith' (even as explained in Hebrews 1:11) is more likely akin to the both ubiquitous, organic and broad use of the term 'confidence'.

Of course, there can be false confidence as there is false hope (/false religion too). In every case therefore, according to the proper use of the term 'faith' as I believe: the devil lies in the details: what are the facts behind the situation, what is the explanation (reasons) for the conclusion based upon the facts presented: are the facts complete and the reasons robust?

Just as confidence is most times based upon some reason if not proof no matter how vague, so is 'faith': being a synonym of the word 'confidence'. Your sweeping assertion that "faith is flawed", with the exception of any substantiation, is presumptuous and arrogant if not wrong.

IMHO, reading the bible DOES improve one's command of the English language, if not one's reasoning skills. If U wish to improve your reasoning skills to exceed the current, perhaps starting to read the bible more often might be good for you.

Cheers!

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

If You are still not convinced You have misplaced your faith and hope in a man-made religion, go and read this http://singsupplies.com/showthread.php?191586-Forget-about-Noah-s-Ark-There-Was-No-Worldwide-Flood

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

bic_cherry said:

Faith in PAP, faith in your wife to be faithful, faith in your bank not to go bankrupt/ misuse your savings to invest in derivative $ instruments, faith your hawlker fare does not contain gutter oil?

Faith applies to a whole gamut of things, not just religion.

Without good faith beyond just simple reason , people/ society just cannot function.

Click to expand...

I mean, is a belief system that lacks proof really a good thing ? Of course not. The problem with having a baseless belief system is that you have no idea whether it is actually right or not. Worse, people seldom if ever even care if their faith/belief is right or not.Faith, or a belief without evidence, is not a rational thought, it is an emotion the desire for something to be true regardless of any evidence. they often run counter to what is supported by rational thought or the evidence, to reality.

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

drifter said:

I mean, is a belief system that lacks proof really a good thing ? Of course not. The problem with having a baseless belief system is that you have no idea whether it is actually right or not. Worse, people seldom if ever even care if their faith/belief is right or not.Faith, or a belief without evidence, is not a rational thought, it is an emotion the desire for something to be true regardless of any evidence. they often run counter to what is supported by rational thought or the evidence, to reality.

Click to expand...

Admittedly, faith is based upon gut feel in ADDITION to knowledge because nothing, not even bible translation versions can be 100% correctly interpreted (99.999% possibly, but not 100%) simply because firstly, no human interpreter is 100% focused/ pure (everyone is distracted/ addicted to one thing or another) and secondly, no communication between languages let alone generations/ culture can be 100% clear (misunderstandings in interpretation inevitably occur when reading in a foreign (ancient) language): still, on the balance of probabilities (but I would personally say beyond reasonable doubt): text of mainstream religions do have something valuable to teach.

As mentioned, since we live in a world premised upon the dimension of time in addition to inherent unknowns: it is inescapable that we have to make decisions about an unknown future based upon current experiences: formal or informal, reproducable or otherwise, documented or otherwise:
E.g. I cross the zebra crossing confidently after stopping vehicle car drive has responded with eye contact to grant me permission to cross (I.e. I believe/ have faith that the vehicle driver means me no harm), I drive a car to my destination because I believe (based upon knowledge and experience) that the journey will be successful (I will not meet with bandits/ hijackers, the road is viable and not blocked, the car is maintained and functional, driving the car to location unserved by public transport is sensible choice etc etc).

Assurance (a subset of the biblical definition of faith) also doesn't always come with direct proof although correlations can be very strong: e.g. if your spouse is a navy seal or commando commander, it would not be unreasonable to feel safe despite being marooned in the wilderness with him/her even if U have NEVER personally witnessed his/her survival skills: seeing him/her going to work in uniform, the badges earned should more than suffice provided that U live in a corruption free country and not one where army uniforms and badges are carelessly sold as tourist souvenirs.

The more observant one is about one's environment, the better one is able to make decisions (faith in one's choices/ decisions): thus, due to the huge expanse of the universe (creation), the experiences of each person are often dissimilar (though similarities often abound): as such, for issues pertaining to the religious view of what life is after death, it is often impolite to criticise another's belief: however, where anti-social acts are concerned e.g.adultery, theft, kidnapping/ rape etc: I do not think that any mainstream religion condones such acts. For the wide expanse in between: e.g. which girl one should marry, which religion to adopt: these remain personal choices and best made from an honest personal standpoint/ need (I.e. one only receives enlightenment if one is honest and focused on an issue in question: otherwise, one is ought to fail to be enlightened if one is distracted by addiction/ greed).

In short, because life is so multifaceted, unless U have irrefutable proof about something (e.g. jumping down >10metres without training will result in broken bones or even death): it is difficult to access the rationality of another person's decisions if U have not walked a mile in his/ her shoes.

Hebrews 11:1 (bible hub.com)
http://biblehub.com/hebrews/11-1.htm

New International Version: Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.

New Living Translation: Faith is the confidence that what we hope for will actually happen; it gives us assurance about things we cannot see.

English Standard Version: Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

New American Standard Bible : Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

King James Bible: Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Click to expand...

Conclusion: faith depends on the enlightenment of the individual: if the enlightenment is real: then the faith is real, otherwise, it is just misplaced if the enlightenment is from misplaced/ untrue observations/ facts. It is evidence 'visable' only to the enlightened, to the unenlightened, faith is just another ordinary face in the crowd.

Click to expand...

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

bic_cherry said:

Admittedly, faith is based upon gut feel in ADDITION to knowledge because nothing, not even bible translation versions can be 100% correctly interpreted (99.999% possibly, but not 100%) simply because firstly, no human interpreter is 100% focused/ pure (everyone is distracted/ addicted to one thing or another) and secondly, no communication between languages let alone generations/ culture can be 100% clear (misunderstandings in interpretation inevitably occur when reading in a foreign (ancient) language): still, on the balance of probabilities (but I would personally say beyond reasonable doubt): text of mainstream religions do have something valuable to teach.

As mentioned, since we live in a world premised upon the dimension of time in addition to inherent unknowns: it is inescapable that we have to make decisions about an unknown future based upon current experiences: formal or informal, reproducable or otherwise, documented or otherwise:
E.g. I cross the zebra crossing confidently after stopping vehicle car drive has responded with eye contact to grant me permission to cross (I.e. I believe/ have faith that the vehicle driver means me no harm), I drive a car to my destination because I believe (based upon knowledge and experience) that the journey will be successful (I will not meet with bandits/ hijackers, the road is viable and not blocked, the car is maintained and functional, driving the car to location unserved by public transport is sensible choice etc etc).

Assurance (a subset of the biblical definition of faith) also doesn't always come with direct proof although correlations can be very strong: e.g. if your spouse is a navy seal or commando commander, it would not be unreasonable to feel safe despite being marooned in the wilderness with him/her even if U have NEVER personally witnessed his/her survival skills: seeing him/her going to work in uniform, the badges earned should more than suffice provided that U live in a corruption free country and not one where army uniforms and badges are carelessly sold as tourist souvenirs.

The more observant one is about one's environment, the better one is able to make decisions (faith in one's choices/ decisions): thus, due to the huge expanse of the universe (creation), the experiences of each person are often dissimilar (though similarities often abound): as such, for issues pertaining to the religious view of what life is after death, it is often impolite to criticise another's belief: however, where anti-social acts are concerned e.g.adultery, theft, kidnapping/ rape etc: I do not think that any mainstream religion condones such acts. For the wide expanse in between: e.g. which girl one should marry, which religion to adopt: these remain personal choices and best made from an honest personal standpoint/ need (I.e. one only receives enlightenment if one is honest and focused on an issue in question: otherwise, one is ought to fail to be enlightened if one is distracted by addiction/ greed).

In short, because life is so multifaceted, unless U have irrefutable proof about something (e.g. jumping down >10metres without training will result in broken bones or even death): it is difficult to access the rationality of another person's decisions if U have not walked a mile in his/ her shoes.

Click to expand...

Faith is not a virtue , faith is gullibility . I’m not saying that proves there’s no God ( because we can't proof spaghetti monster do not exists too ) what I’m saying is: ( cupping his hands ) Here’s something we’ve learned about the universe, and it doesn’t match with your literal view of the Bible. Now there’s a conflict there, and we need to resolve that. And some people resolve it in favour of the Bible saying ‘The Bible’s absolutely right’ and ignore whatever actual evidence is presented there. I find that to be patently absurd because it turns Christianity into a self-contradictory proposition, and so (by the way) does the entire idea of a Revelation in the New Testament. Because your position (to the extent that I understand it cause you haven’t got kind of a straight answer yet) is one where there is a God who has an important message for mankind and somehow he only reveals it to certain individuals who then write this down and thousands of years after this initial revelation, we have to rely on copies of copies of translations of copies by anonymous authors with no originals, and the textual testimony to a miracle, for example the loaves and fishes , there’s no amount of reports - anecdotal testimonial reports - that could be sufficient to justifying that this event actually happened as reported. No amount. And anything that would qualify as a God would clearly understand this, and if it wanted to convey this information to people in a way that was believable, would not be relying on text to do so, and this for me is the nail in the coffin for Christianity. The God that Christians believe in is amazingly stupid if it wants to actually achieve its goal of spreading this information to humanity by relying on text; by relying on languages that die out , by relying on anecdotal testimony. That’s not a pathway to truth! And anything that would qualify for a God should know this, which means either that God doesn’t exist or it doesn’t care enough about those people who understand the nature of evidence to actually present it. Now which of those possibilities do you think is accurate?

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

Trying to debate a fundamentalist is a hopeless task but hey it's fun .

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

Faith is taking the place of fact in providing the basis for religion. The number of religions claiming full factual support for their beliefs is declining, and fully-literal interpretations of religious texts are becoming less popular. There’s good reason for these trends: given current historical and scientific evidence, it’s hard to see how facts alone justify most religious belief. Something more is now necessary.

That’s where faith comes in. Faith is often described as a “way of knowing” that doesn’t require factual evidence. It’s a deep and sincere feeling that something is true. Many religious believers feel a close emotional connection to their God. To them, this feeling is itself proof of their beliefs; no further evidence is necessary.

Certainly it’s the case that some religious beliefs could be true. The universe is a mysterious place, and our understanding of it is not, and never will be, complete. There may be things that are true but that can’t be proven true with factual evidence. Some of them could be current articles of religious faith. But does faith help us arrive at this truth? What type of certainty does it provide?

We all know from personal experience that we’re sometimes wrong. Our beliefs aren’t always true. It’s possible to know something to be true only later to find out that it isn’t. When you’re depressed, you may feel helpless and worthless. Your feelings are real , you may feel them so strongly, in fact, that you’re certain they’re true. You may know you’re helpless and worthless even though you aren’t. These feelings are so strong they can cause people to kill themselves.

Knowing is a state of mind. When we know something is true, we feel with great certainty that it’s true. But the act of knowing does not itself make anything true: our mental states represent the world, they don’t control it. A belief that is strongly felt–or even known–can be false. Our feelings themselves are real, but the reality they point to may not be. Faith doesn’t provide any great level of certainty.

So our beliefs and feelings are unreliable. But aren’t they still some indicator of truth? Otherwise anything and everything is equally likely to be true, and that seems absurd. Indeed, it is absurd — our knowledge of the world is imperfect, but we still manage to use it day-to-day. Our senses–emotional or otherwise–are flawed, but that doesn’t mean they’re useless.

Now if all knowledge is imperfect, why single out faith? Why is knowledge obtained through faith worse than any other knowledge? The answer is that, while all ways of knowing are flawed, some are better than others. What makes some ways better? The fact that they can be corrected through thought and experience.

A belief that cannot change can’t be moved closer to truth. Faith-based beliefs could be true, of course, but they could also be false. A strong feeling that something is true doesn’t make it true. You’re not actually helpless and worthless when you’re depressed, even though you may know you are. People who kill themselves due to depression have great faith in their depressed thoughts. Faith-based beliefs are what they are — they can’t be corrected through thought and experience.

There are other reasons to question faith. We tend to believe things we want be be true. Psychology research indicates that people tend to interpret ambiguous information in a way that benefits their interests. Most people think their abilities are above average when compared to their peers. They can’t all be right. We can test our abilities, but we can’t test beliefs we hold on faith. We may hold such beliefs partly because we want to hold them, and in such cases we should be all-the-more-ready to question them.

Our beliefs are strongly influenced by when and where we grow up. I believe the earth is round now, but I’d likely have believed it was flat had I grown up a few thousand years ago. Had I grown up in 10th century Norway, I’d likely have believed in the existence of Thor, the great pagan god of thunder. Faith-based beliefs are, like all beliefs, influenced by upbringing. While we might like to think they’re the product of a transcendent understanding of the universe, the truth is more mundane: we’re likely to possess ones that reflect the time and place we grew up.

That makes it even worse that they can’t be changed. How do I know my present faith-based beliefs are better than ones I might have had had I been born someplace else or at another time? There’s no good way to choose between them. Any belief may be wrong, of course, but only non-faith-based beliefs can be changed through thought and experience. Thought and experience may not allow us to arrive at all truth, but they’re the best tools we’ve got faith doesn’t bring anything to the table.

Faith is a bad way of knowing. Like all beliefs, faith-based beliefs can be mistaken, and we may hold them only because we like them or because we grew up in a particular time and place. But only faith-based beliefs can’t be corrected through thought and experience. They’re not necessarily wrong–they could even be right–but that doesn’t change the fact that faith is a bad reason for believing them.

Is faith all bad? Not necessarily. Faith-based beliefs can certainly be useful. As many will attest, they can increase happiness. If I want something to be true and I believe through faith that it is true, I may be a happier person ( an drunken person is a happy man ) . Faith has contributed to the happiness of many people. But is it the only path to happiness? I don’t think so. We can appreciate the wonder and mystery of the universe without having unjustified faith that it is or is not a certain way. We can live with purpose without having faith that this purpose was ordained for us.

Choosing not to live according to faith may, in fact, be a moral choice. If we accept that our beliefs can be wrong and change them when necessary, we stand a greater chance of understanding each other. Without faith we have the tools necessary to bridge differences. The possibility of a peaceful coexistence improves. Faith is not all bad, yes , but it may do more harm than good.

Re: Accounts and teachings of ALL religious institutions should be open to public scr

drifter said:

Trying to debate a fundamentalist is a hopeless task but hey it's fun .

Click to expand...

Still, that's nothing compared to debating with a DIVA! LOL!

Sorry, it's trolling a DIVA. Can't be having a debate with DIVA. It just does not happen.