Why believe one religious scripture over another?

[dyanaprajna2011]

Many, if not most religions, rely to a great extent on their respective scriptures. Believers will almost always give deference to their scripture, even when dealing with topics that aren't of a religious nature. This is to be expected, but when is it time to stop?

Believers often expect non-believers to simply accept the teachings of their scripture as evidence for a multitude of things. However, this poses a problem- how does one determine which scripture is more truthful than another? Seeing as how most religions, and by extension, their scriptures, are primarily metaphysical in nature, and hence, not objective, how does one determine, objectively, which scripture one should rely on?

Each scripture says that it is true, but this doesn't make it so. Each scripture says that it is from god, but this doesn't make it so, either. Each scripture makes the same claims about itself as every other scripture, so what is the objective determination that one uses to decide which scripture to follow? Is there even any objective criteria to use in making such a determination?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

It's similar to the process and methodology used by people in choosing one football team over another to be a fan of.

 

[Contemplative Cat]

It's similar to the process and methodology used by people in choosing one football team over another to be a fan of.

Unfortunately pretty much. Its just personal bias

 

[Iti oj]

Come on man Biblical prophecy! The Quran is the miracle of Islam. The Upanishads have aliens. Sorry I couldn't think of a good one for Hinduism.

 

[Revoltingest]

Many, if not most religions, rely to a great extent on their respective scriptures. Believers will almost always give deference to their scripture, even when dealing with topics that aren't of a religious nature. This is to be expected, but when is it time to stop?
Believers often expect non-believers to simply accept the teachings of their scripture as evidence for a multitude of things. However, this poses a problem- how does one determine which scripture is more truthful than another? Seeing as how most religions, and by extension, their scriptures, are primarily metaphysical in nature, and hence, not objective, how does one determine, objectively, which scripture one should rely on?
Each scripture says that it is true, but this doesn't make it so. Each scripture says that it is from god, but this doesn't make it so, either. Each scripture makes the same claims about itself as every other scripture, so what is the objective determination that one uses to decide which scripture to follow? Is there even any objective criteria to use in making such a determination?

When people have tried to convince me that they have the singular true religion, I've often asked the same question.
I proffer that I just arrived on this planet (not so hard to believe, given my coiffure & attire), & I know nothing of religion. (My planet is devoid of it. We're spiritually barren.) What makes your religion the true one, while making all the others false? The answers are invariably a list of unique details, which often aren't unique at all. Objectivity never is never ever employed.

 

[Caladan]

I don't find is strange or unreasonable for different cultures to be more associated with their sacred scriptures. I do find it a problem when they expect others to conform their judgment about life's circumstances to those scriptures.
Personally I think I have a range of sacred texts in my library that I cannot possibly list all of them here. Lets just say that they cover thousands of years of writing and various regions of origin. I find the comparative aspect of religious discussion very potent in this regard, and in addition it is also gratifying to analyze and study a specific text and its context without excessive bias.
So in other words, whatever your scripture is, respect it enough to be able to relate to it in a broader human picture and historical timeline. Don't assume to be an expert on your scripture with absolute answers nor to be an expert to such a degree that allows you to shun other regions' scriptures as if they were tabloids.

If 5-6 years of academic study taught me anything it is that I have found enormous wisdom and content reading Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Biblical, Classical, Gnostic, Christian, and Islamic texts. In fact it would be incredibly daft to exclude any of these if one wishes to have a serious education, or even a refreshing perspective.

 

[Jollybear]

In the case of every religious text, i think there is some truth in everyone of them and some false in most of them.

An example. The koran says Jesus did not die or rise from the dead, but was translated to heaven. The bible says he died and rose. Which one is true and which one is false? Or, are they both false? But they both can't be true in that area because they both have a different view here.

Well, one way to determine which one is true is by realizing the bibles account of Jesus dying and rising was written first before the koran's account of this same event.

The second way to determine it is the claims of the witnesses and then there deaths for the claims.

Thus, i would side with the bible on that area, rather then the koran. However, other area's of topic can be true in the koran, but this area, i would disagree on.

 

[SkylarHunter]

Many, if not most religions, rely to a great extent on their respective scriptures. Believers will almost always give deference to their scripture, even when dealing with topics that aren't of a religious nature. This is to be expected, but when is it time to stop?

Believers often expect non-believers to simply accept the teachings of their scripture as evidence for a multitude of things. However, this poses a problem- how does one determine which scripture is more truthful than another? Seeing as how most religions, and by extension, their scriptures, are primarily metaphysical in nature, and hence, not objective, how does one determine, objectively, which scripture one should rely on?

Each scripture says that it is true, but this doesn't make it so. Each scripture says that it is from god, but this doesn't make it so, either. Each scripture makes the same claims about itself as every other scripture, so what is the objective determination that one uses to decide which scripture to follow? Is there even any objective criteria to use in making such a determination?

I suggest you take some time and do your own research. There are so many people saying so many things you can get a head ache just thinking about it.
There's a lot of information available today if you look for it. Check the major religions in the world, what they teach and based on what and read their "sacred" books so you can make your own opinion instead of just accepting what someone else says.

 

[outhouse]

This is nothing more then a matter of education and knowledge.

To many people prefer apologetics over historical knowledge, that is the real problem.

Religious bias blinds people

 

[Maya3]

Come on man Biblical prophecy! The Quran is the miracle of Islam. The Upanishads have aliens. Sorry I couldn't think of a good one for Hinduism.

Aliens in the Upanishads? Um don't think so.

Maya

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

However, this poses a problem- how does one determine which scripture is more truthful than another?

Most people just ask their daddies which scripture is the best.

Seeing as how most religions, and by extension, their scriptures, are primarily metaphysical in nature, and hence, not objective, how does one determine, objectively, which scripture one should rely on?

The only true scripture is the scripture you write yourself.

 

[LuisDantas]

The way I see it, not all scripture claims to be divinely inspired. Even for those that do, it is not IMO proper to cite them in order to justify religious stances of any kind.

Why? Because scriptures are teachings, and teachings must be adjusted or corrected for the circunstances they meet. Even if it turns out that God taught them. Even a supreme teaching still needs to applied wisely. Having a supremely perfect teacher does not excuse one from exercising personal understanding and developing religious wisdom.

Maybe God exists and could have made it so that somehow the teaching substitutes or guarantees such wisdom. However, it is plainly obvious that he did not, not in this world that we live in.

At the very least, that so many bitter arguments develop over scripture is strong evidence that said scripture is simply Not Enough.

Instead, scripture is meant to be a tool, to be used when and how appropriate, under the responsibility and discernment of actual people.

 

[crossfire]

Many, if not most religions, rely to a great extent on their respective scriptures. Believers will almost always give deference to their scripture, even when dealing with topics that aren't of a religious nature. This is to be expected, but when is it time to stop?

Believers often expect non-believers to simply accept the teachings of their scripture as evidence for a multitude of things. However, this poses a problem- how does one determine which scripture is more truthful than another? Seeing as how most religions, and by extension, their scriptures, are primarily metaphysical in nature, and hence, not objective, how does one determine, objectively, which scripture one should rely on?

Each scripture says that it is true, but this doesn't make it so. Each scripture says that it is from god, but this doesn't make it so, either. Each scripture makes the same claims about itself as every other scripture, so what is the objective determination that one uses to decide which scripture to follow? Is there even any objective criteria to use in making such a determination?

Check your Kalama Sutta. Doctrines that teach/preach greed, hatred, and delusion lead to long term harm, especially since people will prompt others to do harm due to the teachings. Doctrines that teach/preach the development of an absence of greed, hatred, and delusion lead to long-term good.

If you are a Christian, check Matt 7--by their fruits ye shall know them.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Believers often expect non-believers to simply accept the teachings of their scripture as evidence for a multitude of things.

I've never found that attitude to be prevalent among Jews.

 

[Jainarayan]

Believers often expect non-believers to simply accept the teachings of their scripture as evidence for a multitude of things.

In my experience, it's only been converts, re-converts or the 'culturally sheltered' who do this. All the day-to-day Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus I've ever known don't think their way is any more truthful than any other. Maybe it's the company I keep to, but it's pretty much "no matter how we all pray or believe, we all bleed red".

However, this poses a problem- how does one determine which scripture is more truthful than another? Seeing as how most religions, and by extension, their scriptures, are primarily metaphysical in nature, and hence, not objective, how does one determine, objectively, which scripture one should rely on?

It's what I think has the most valuable lessons, with most scriptures overlapping in the behavior and morality departments. I have no problem with meshing the Gospels, some books of the Old Testament, the Bhagavad Gita, teachings of the Buddha, the Tao Te Ching. One just has to be open-minded, discerning and discriminating enough. Just my opinions.

 

[yoda89]

I've never found that attitude to be prevalent among Jews.

Depends on the outside believer. Judaism is mainly a religion not focused on converting others and more so on converting their own children. Your kids are non-believers until you tell them what to believe. Instead of letting them figure it out for themselves. So you are converting non-believers as you tell children what to believe. Did you grow up in a Jewish household?

Now you accept your scripture for many answers to a multitude of things. Am I right? How is that different from his point.

You just focus on children instead of adults. Not any different from others just like to think so. Therefore you don't get as much flak. Because your bull isn't forced into adults who know better.

Prove me wrong and prove your snide comments throughout the board are not because you think you are better than others. If not accept your the same as the other religions.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Believers often expect non-believers to simply accept the teachings of their scripture as evidence for a multitude of things.

I've never found that attitude to be prevalent among Jews.

Depends on the outside believer.

No, it does not. It is a fact that I've never found that attitude to be prevalent among Jews.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Now you accept your scripture for many answers to a multitude of things. Am I right? How is that different from his point.

THe question is irrelevant: even if that were the case it in no way follows that I "expect non-believers to simply accept the teachings of their scripture as evidence for a multitude of things."

You just focus on children instead of adults. Not any different from others just like to think so. Therefore you don't get as much flak. Because your bull isn't forced into adults who know better.

Prove me wrong and prove your snide comments throughout the board are not because you think you are better than others. If not accept your the same as the other religions.

You're ranting -- off-topic and incoherently.

 

[2ndpillar]

Many, if not most religions, rely to a great extent on their respective scriptures. Believers will almost always give deference to their scripture, even when dealing with topics that aren't of a religious nature. This is to be expected, but when is it time to stop?

Believers often expect non-believers to simply accept the teachings of their scripture as evidence for a multitude of things. However, this poses a problem- how does one determine which scripture is more truthful than another? Seeing as how most religions, and by extension, their scriptures, are primarily metaphysical in nature, and hence, not objective, how does one determine, objectively, which scripture one should rely on?

Each scripture says that it is true, but this doesn't make it so. Each scripture says that it is from god, but this doesn't make it so, either. Each scripture makes the same claims about itself as every other scripture, so what is the objective determination that one uses to decide which scripture to follow? Is there even any objective criteria to use in making such a determination?

Dear dyan,
The O.T. gives a measuring rod as to how to distinguish light from darkness. Isaiah 8:20, "To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn."

As to what is the "measuring rod" in respect to what Yeshua said, he simply quotes Dt 19:15," a matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses." An example would be Paul being a self professed apostle and prophet. Yeshua's answer would be cited in John 5:31," If I alone bear witness of myself, my testimony is not true." Therefore, the witness of Paul about being a prophet is simply not true.

As for what the message of Yeshua was, it was about the "kingdom of God" which is centered on keeping the "Commandments". And is summation of the commandments, were "Love God...., and Love your neighbor as yourself". This is basically the same summation Rabi Hillel gave, which was,"that which is hateful to you do not unto another: This is the whole Torah". This is also the same type of quote from Confucius: "Never impose on others as you would not choose for yourself".

 

[gilligan8914]

Many, if not most religions, rely to a great extent on their respective scriptures. Believers will almost always give deference to their scripture, even when dealing with topics that aren't of a religious nature. This is to be expected, but when is it time to stop?

Believers often expect non-believers to simply accept the teachings of their scripture as evidence for a multitude of things. However, this poses a problem- how does one determine which scripture is more truthful than another? Seeing as how most religions, and by extension, their scriptures, are primarily metaphysical in nature, and hence, not objective, how does one determine, objectively, which scripture one should rely on?

Each scripture says that it is true, but this doesn't make it so. Each scripture says that it is from god, but this doesn't make it so, either. Each scripture makes the same claims about itself as every other scripture, so what is the objective determination that one uses to decide which scripture to follow? Is there even any objective criteria to use in making such a determination?

Any religion claiming to be the true religion of God, according to their own scriptures, can not be the one true religion, because other religions claim the same thing based on their own scriptures. If your religion claims to be the one true religion based on your own scripture, then it is not. Many others claim the same. Their claim has no more truth to it than does all others. They cannot all be right (true), so they all must be wrong (false).