No, I don't care about being "literally" or "factually correct" as an approach to religion. As others have said, that's not the point.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A good approach to mythology is realizing that such stories are meant to inspire and motivate, rather than the crazy delusional notion people have into thinking that such outlandish mythology is real and had actually occurred in real life.Being "factually correct" is not and was never the point of religion, just as it is not and was never the point of art. Religion, the arts, the humanities? They're MYTHOS, not logos. And treating mythos as logos (or vice versa) is stupid. Forgivable in a culture that doesn't bother to teach the difference between the two, but still stupid.
See:
Metaphysical mistake | Karen Armstrong
Karen Armstrong: Should we believe in belief?: Confusion by Christians between belief and reason has created bad science and inept religionwww.theguardian.com
Good Sage advice is recognizing and identifying what actually works and is not broken and ineffective.For most humans being content is the only answer. Being factually accurate takes a lot of work and may not always be provable or worthwhile Take politics, love, humanitarian needs or food needs ...etc. Are eggs good or bad for you? Are vaccinations good or bad? Should the Republicans or democrats be in charge. Best way to live is decide what's important to you and live contently.
Not that important at all. The goal of Hinduism is character improvement with the ultimate goal of moksha. It is WAY more about practice than belief, and that is a major difference between the Abrahamic paradigm and the dharmic paradigm. Many Hindus do all kinds of practice, but have never read a single scripture, and asked about what they believe about God, would have a hard time explaining anything at all. Best wishes.When it comes to your personal religious/ spiritual beliefs (or lack thereof), how important is it to you that your beliefs are factually and literally correct?
When I was raised as a Bible literalist Christian, there was always a strong emphasis that our beliefs as a Christian were factually correct. Jesus is literally God and the Bible is literal history. The pastor would have sermons where he would deride the idea that the Bible was to be taken symbolically.
I am not a Christian anymore. I am a seeker who is unsure what to believe. I am unsure if I even want to seek. However, if religion were to give me peace, I wonder if I can overlook the fact that I cannot factually prove any religion. Many have tried.
However, it may still be more important for me to be factually correct in my personal beliefs. If I surmise that atheism is the more likely truth, then even if being religious would bring me personal peace, would I want to be religious? I think I would feel unfulfilled, like I was lying and playing charades.
Anyways, how important is it to you that your spiritual beliefs be grounded in literal factual reality?
I think that one will be happier if he confronts truth and reality and allows himself to mature outside of the dictates of religions that prefer him in his childish state - engaging in magical thinking, accepting claims as fact for lack of critical thinking skills, and feeling insecure, helpless, and vulnerable.When it comes to your personal religious/ spiritual beliefs (or lack thereof), how important is it to you that your beliefs are factually and literally correct?
Facts are the domain of the intellect. There is another kind of intelligence. As Rumi saidhow important is it to you that your beliefs are factually and literally correct?
My religion is not proven as true (Flawlessism), but I believe in it because of how it benefits me. That aside, if someone were to disprove it as possibly true, then I wouldn't be able to believe in it anymore since I would know it's false. I was once a Christian, and I had always convinced myself that the bible was true even when people would raise valid points to me, thinking I should just have faith in it anyway, not really listening to what they were saying, preventing them from ever disproving it to me. Unlike before, I do listen (unless the person is acting like a jerk, as that implies they don't actually care about myself finding truth, they just want to cause problems for me, but even people like that I don't always ignore if it sounds like they're making a good point).When it comes to your personal religious/ spiritual beliefs (or lack thereof), how important is it to you that your beliefs are factually and literally correct?
When I was raised as a Bible literalist Christian, there was always a strong emphasis that our beliefs as a Christian were factually correct. Jesus is literally God and the Bible is literal history. The pastor would have sermons where he would deride the idea that the Bible was to be taken symbolically.
I am not a Christian anymore. I am a seeker who is unsure what to believe. I am unsure if I even want to seek. However, if religion were to give me peace, I wonder if I can overlook the fact that I cannot factually prove any religion. Many have tried.
However, it may still be more important for me to be factually correct in my personal beliefs. If I surmise that atheism is the more likely truth, then even if being religious would bring me personal peace, would I want to be religious? I think I would feel unfulfilled, like I was lying and playing charades.
Anyways, how important is it to you that your spiritual beliefs be grounded in literal factual reality?
That is such a nihilistic thing to say. Or maybe it is just a criticism of the idea of religion that you hold as true?Being factually correct indeed isn't the point of religion. It is rather the baseline assumption of every single major religion.
On a scale of 1 to 10.....a zero.When it comes to your personal religious/ spiritual beliefs (or lack thereof), how important is it to you that your beliefs are factually and literally correct?
That is such a nihilistic thing to say. Or maybe it is just a criticism of the idea of religion that you hold as true?
Religion is not automatically relevant and protected from misguidance.
Like any other movement, it has a duty to care for its own health and the quality of what it teaches.
Presuming that it is right and calling it a day is not helpful there.
No prob then, as zero is actuallyAs a Muslim your believe is invalid without certitude and sincerity. This means believing in all that stated in the scripture and in the authenticated sayings of the prophet and hence, behaving according to the instructions. Those in doubt, gain nothing. They follow a mirage to get to water.
Plenty of reason not to.What I was getting at is that the underlying assumption (held by the believer) in most religions is that they represent the truth.
If Jesus is not God, if Jesus didn't rise from the dead, if Muhammad is not a prophet, if the atman and samsara don't exist... There is no reason to follow any of those religions.
I think it comes down to how central the tales of a religion's origins is to the religion itself.What I was getting at is that the underlying assumption (held by the believer) in most religions is that they represent the truth.
If Jesus is not God, if Jesus didn't rise from the dead, if Muhammad is not a prophet, if the atman and samsara don't exist... There is no reason to follow any of those religions.
I think it comes down to how central the tales of a religion's origins is to the religion itself.
It varies.
Truth built on lies?I think it comes down to how central the tales of a religion's origins is to the religion itself.
It varies.