I don't mean burden in terms of conscience. I mean burden in terms of a logical argument.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How do you see it?
- Thread starter paarsurrey
- Start date
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
It is the same thing. My stance is reasonable.
Regards
Burden of proof is not the same thing as burden of conscience. A person can be incapable of proving something true (i.e. not meeting the burden of proof) while at the same time not feeling any burden on their conscience about it (i.e. having faith that it is true despite lack of proof). A person can also have a burden on their conscience that doesn't have anything to do with burdens of proof in arguments (i.e. feeling guilty about stealing something).
Muffled
Jesus in me
Yes, it certainly looks that way. "Will the real God please stand up."
I believe I am here. Haven't you noticed?
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Any body who affirms something to be known by others as facts, there is no harm if he is asked to prove what he says.
Regards
You miss the point by far, then. Quite a pity, that.
You are not entitled to decide what the Truth is, and you are most definitely not entitled to decide that you have learned it and other should fall in line just because.
People should either be convinced or accepted as capable and within their rights to disagree. Unless you provide evidence for your claims, perhaps.
And claims of the truth of the Quran, or the Bible, or of the existence of God... well, it is just not possible to provide enough evidence for any of those.
cambridge79
Active Member
A truth that you decided to be the truth.
considering you are the one making a claim, The fact that you dont see the burden of proof doesn't make you wise, it just makes you blind.
Oh no wait..... you read it in a book.... a book that you decided contains the truth....Oh no wait you didnt decide it... the book itself tells you that it contains the truth.....
Exactly, which is why it isn't unreasonable to ask for proof that the Quran is infallible.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Why don't you give your own evidence of God, if you believe one? Do you believe in God? Please
Regards
Belief in God is a different matter than accepting an infallible Quran. Deists believe in God but they don't accept infallible literature, for example. As for my own belief in God, I'm not completely sure what to think.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Don't the Christians (like the one you are) believe in God, so why you are not sure of your belief in God. I don't get you exactly. Kindly elaborate. Please
Regards
Many of them are completely sure of God's existence, yes, but not all are. It's the lack of verifiable evidence that gives me pause and makes me uncertain.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Can one pull out a nail with a hammer? Surely one cannot. One needs to follow the appropriate tools/methodology to get a job done. With the physical tools one cannot get to the proper spiritual path. Jesus had no doubt about God, because he followed the proper path to get to God, a Christians should do the same for confirmation. Right?
Regards
Except that different people claim that they have had spiritual experiences and guidance which puts them on different paths and gives them completely different religious views. So simply claiming that a spiritual experience gives one confirmation that their faith is the right one is insufficient given the fact that different faiths are at odds with each other. God lets one person know that Jesus was God in the flesh and yet tells another that Jesus was not God. They can't both be right.