Justify your belief???

[Spirit of Light]

I think on a basic level this has to do with most religious people belonging to orthodoxies. Orthodoxy requires "correct belief, right thinking". Praxis is secondary nor do you even have to be affiliated with a particular denomination as what matters most is that "correct" belief. There can be continual self-justifcation (convincing) yourself your beliefs are "correct", particularly when faced with other beliefs of equal conviction.

In my experience, religious persons who belong to orthopraxies are far less likely to feel this need, nor feel threatened if someone doesn't share those beliefs.

I no longer see my self belonging to one certain teaching or path.
But still am just as spiritual as before

 

[Spirit of Light]

I have to? Under whose authority?

You must ask @Sheldon or @KWED about that

 

[Trailblazer]

Why do religious people have to justify their personal religious and spiritual belief?

Imo, religious people only have to justify their beliefs to themselves, not to anyone else.

 

[danieldemol]

You must ask @Sheldon or @KWED about that

They are not authorities over you, and are not even on the RF mods team, which means you dont *have* to justify your beliefs.

What you seem to be doing is objecting to other people *requesting* you to justify your beliefs.

In other words they are not limiting your freedom, rather you are complaining that their freedom to ask hasn't been limited.

This just comes across as selfish to me.

In my opinion.

 

[osgart]

Why do religious people have to justify their personal religious and spiritual belief?

Morality has to be justified. Anything else religious need not be justified unless it's forced upon everybody else.

A religious rationale can be rational. Rationality boils down to being convinced of certain intuitions. The non believer has totally different intuitions they often like to officialize for everybody. Inferences to the best explanation is what everyone tries to do. Non believers go a step further in calling their inferences irrefutable when it's only another intuition they strongly hold. They may call it direct evidence, but it's an inference from evidence. And no one has a monopoly on right inferences. Only physical phenomena can give direct evidence. Inferences about physical phenomena are never so assured as being actually the case in reality.

 

[Spirit of Light]

They are not authorities over you, and are not even on the RF mods team, which means you dont *have* to justify your beliefs.

What you seem to be doing is objecting to other people *requesting* you to justify your beliefs.

In other words they are not limiting your freedom, rather you are complaining that their freedom to ask hasn't been limited.

This just comes across as selfish to me.

In my opinion.

First of all the OP isn't about me at all, that I mention two members comes from being in discussion with them, they claim believers Must prove and justify their beliefs,

 

[Spirit of Light]

Morality has to be justified. Anything else religious need not be justified unless it's forced upon everybody else.

A religious rationale can be rational. Rationality boils down to being convinced of certain intuitions. The non believer has totally different intuitions they often like to officialize for everybody. Inferences to the best explanation is what everyone tries to do. Non believers go a step further in calling their inferences irrefutable when it's only another intuition they strongly hold. They may call it direct evidence, but it's an inference from evidence. And no one has a monopoly on right inferences. Only physical phenomena can give direct evidence. Inferences about physical phenomena are never so assured as being actually the case in reality.

Faith is not based upon scientific proof, it is based on faith and belief in the teaching

 

[Secret Chief]

And die. You also HAVE to die.

Taxes and death.
The only two certainties in life.

Fair enough. I was trying to stay upbeat.

 

[Trailblazer]

If you have to justify it, then it means there is doubt.

Maybe or maybe not.

 

[Trailblazer]

Because all to often the religious try to enforce their immoral beliefs upon others.

That cuts both ways... Often, atheists try to impose their morality upon others.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Faith is not based upon scientific proof, it is based on faith and belief in the teaching

Sounds to me like you just told us that faith is unjustifiable.

 

[Trailblazer]

There should be doubt in any belief.

There might be doubts about certain things but there should be no doubt about what is central to the belief.

 

[osgart]

Faith is not based upon scientific proof, it is based on faith and belief in the teaching

Proof isn't scientific it's philosophical. I think non believers confuse this often.

There's always reasons or intuitions that cause faith to happen.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That cuts both ways... Often, atheists try to impose their morality upon others.

Atheists do not own a particular morality. They just have morality. Show them that they are wrong and they will change. Exactly what morality are you talking about?

 

[LuisDantas]

Why do religious people have to justify their personal religious and spiritual belief?

When they do, it is usually because at least one of three factors are in play.

1. Because they are proselitizing and therefore have to be or at least appear convincing.
2. Because they are acting in dangerous ways for themselves or others and hope to justify those behaviors.
3. Because they demand some sort of exception or privilege.

In truth, neither situation ought to even happen at all. Except perhaps for the first.

Of course, attempts at justification are hardly valid excuses for the later two situations anyway.

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm an atheist, and I've never asked you to justify your beliefs. Stop generalizing.

Only certain atheists do that, not all atheists.

 

[Trailblazer]

Atheists do not own a particular morality. They just have morality. Show them that they are wrong and they will change. Exactly what morality are you talking about?

Sexual morality...
That is what I am discussing with @KWED on the Who as Baha'u'llah thread.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There might be doubts about certain things but there should be no doubt about what is central to the belief.

Are you sure about that? To me it sounds like you are saying that people should be irrational. I would say that it is fine if one believes in a god, but one should always leave some room for doubt. When it comes to the religious and doing evil, and the two have gone hand in hand for a huge part of history, being sure in one's belief is what made the evil possible. I would say that doubt is a healthy thing for everyone to have.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sexual morality...
That is what I am discussing with @KWED on the Who as Baha'u'llah thread.

If you can show that a particular sexual morality is bad then I would change my morality. But if you claim something is bad just because a prophet or other holy man said so, that is nt good enough. I have seen plenty of damage done by that sort of "morality"..

By the way, where have atheists ever tried to impose their sexual morality upon others? I have never seen that happen.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Sexual morality...
That is what I am discussing with @KWED on the Who as Baha'u'llah thread.

The only sexual morality that atheists impose on others is the idea that sex requires consent.

Personally, I'm fine with imposing that sexual morality on everyone.