Posts Tagged ‘claims’
I write on religious education forum <http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/>one of our friends
beenherebeforeagain, a scientist from Central Illinois, has written post #26 under the topic/thread <Claims and Burden of Proof> which I have appreciated and with his permission the same is given hereunder for the benefit of the viewers of this blog.
“1) “Isn’t it better” is a value judgment, based on some pre-existing assumptions about what is good or bad. It’s possible to make a reasoned argument that it is better, but not everyone will agree, because they will have use different assumptions in their reasoning. It’s been pretty conclusively shown in psychology that people don’t build beliefs from facts, but use facts to justify beliefs most of the time.
2) While in logic there might be a reason for some beliefs to be considered “default” positions, the standard method in most sciences is called the “null hypothesis,” a statement to the effect, “There is no evidence of X.” The null hypothesis is always paired with an alternative, “There is evidence of X.” The scientist then collects and analyzed appropriate evidence to see if there is evidence or no evidence. Many scientists would probably take the position that the default should be “there is no evidence of God,” but I (and I like to believe there are others with me) would say that the correct default is to recognize that “God” is an inherently untestable proposition for science, and therefore science should not be spending time trying to refute God. Other propositions, such as “There is no evidence of a global flood of Biblical proportions occurring roughly 4,000 years ago” (paired with the alternative that there is evidence) is a testable proposition, and certainly falls within the venue of science.
3) “…who accept and believe unfalsifiable conjecture that have already been REFUTED and DEBUNKED…” Really? if it’s an unfalsifiable conjecture, by its very nature it cannot be refuted or debunked. The problem often is that modern skeptics don’t like to allow such conjectures to go without response of some kind. “Believing in Gods” is therefore not like either of your propositions above: believing in God(s) is believing in something that cannot be empirically tested. Is that a good or a bad thing? Your position is a value judgment based on prior assumptions.
4) As a scientist, I’ll disagree that there is “a” scientific method. There are a number of methods used in science, appropriate for different kinds of science activity, none of which works in all situations.
5) Beliefs are not the same as hypotheses, and people rarely change beliefs because of evidence–yes, it does happen, but it’s also very difficult to define what exactly is a belief, and what exactly is a change, and why does that change happen? Modern science and skeptics have defined certain kinds of information as not valid evidence for use in science: individual experience, divine revelation, holy texts, and so on are among them. But most people reason using all of the information available to them–they have to learn to exclude these “nonvalid” sources from consideration to learn to do science. It’s another value judgment, based on some prior assumptions, about what should be considered evidence, and how it should be analyzed.
Yes, to a scientist/skeptic, the reasoning of creationism and ID appears invalid, but to supporters of Creationism and ID, the reasoning of scientists/skeptics appears invalid–because both sides make different assumptions about what is acceptable as evidence in their reasoning. It doesn’t make progress to insult the other side.
6) Burden of proof always lies with the maker of a positive claim, but the burden of rejoinder means that if you wish to respond, you must take on the burden of proof to show that the first claimant is incorrect in either their evidence or their reasoning. In order for this to be effective, one must be able to clearly state their own pre-existing assumptions, and clarify how those assumptions differ from the original claimant. In the world of science, it is never enough just to undermine the argument of a claimant–one must offer an alternative that explains more of the evidence in a (usually) simpler but still testable manner.”
In religion no physical or material experiments are performed or possible to be performed; in religion it is experiences and Word of Revelation from the one true God form the facts that the issues are perceived as right or wrong
There took place an interesting discussion on the above topic, initiated by me, on my favorite discussion forum, the hubpages:
OP from paarsurrey:
The theists who believe a Word revealed; should mention the claims of their religion from the Book they believe in and the reason from it.
The atheists who don’t believe in religion should present their claims from science, which they eulogize so much, and reason from science.
1. Uninvited Writer
Still attacking atheists?
Not attacking the atheists; they are good people and I don’t judge anybody. I just mention what I sincerely believe to be truthful with an open mind.
The atheists have an equal chance to prove that atheism are a truthful ideology, whatever, please read the OP.
Thanks for your input. I feel encouraged.
3. A Troubled Man
That is the tallest tale you’ve spun so far.
4. A Troubled Man
Honesty does not bestow you.
Do you actually believe we don’t know you’ll never compare anything to Islam? Wow, you must really believe the rest of us are so dim witted as to not see right through you.
5. Paarsurrey posted
Can a christian mention the claims of their religion pertaining to trinity from Gospels they believe in and the reason from the Gospels?
6. Paarsurrey posted
Quran asks atheists and others:
[2:112] And they say, ‘None shall ever enter Heaven unless he be a Jew or a Christian.’ These are their vain desires. Say, ‘Produce your proof, if you are truthful.
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/sh …; verse=111
– to bring your proofs of the claims and the reasons both from the source you believe in.
7. Paarsurrey posted
Quran values brilliant arguments:
[12:109] Say, ‘This is my way: I call unto Allah on sure knowledge, I and those who follow me. And Holy is Allah; and I am not of those who associate gods with God.’
[12:110] And We sent not before thee as Messengers any but men, whom We inspired, from among the people of the towns. Have they not then travelled in the earth and seen what was the end of those before them? And surely, the abode of the Hereafter is better for those who fear God. Will you not then understand?
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/sh … ;verse=108
8. Wilderness posted
While you are producing quotes from scriptures written thousands of years ago, you have to know that they prove only that the words were written. As proof that the words are actually true and from God they are worthless.
There is no reason for any atheist to even read these scriptures, let alone believe them to be true, and you are aware of that.
Why do you then continue to produce them?
9. Paarsurrey posted
How could you make comparison between religions, ideologies, philosophy in search of truth?
It is for those who are on truth and in search of truth.
10. Wilderness posted
I see. My misunderstanding of the thrust of your OP.
But, Paar, if you don’t like a quote or statement from any religion but your own, you just declare it not to be a truthful religion. There is no search for truth; you already know it all.
Why would you expect anyone else to do any different?
11. Paarsurrey posted
I appreciate your input, friend.
One should give claim and reason as I mentioned in the OP; truth will itself shine in the process; one could pick it up if one is an open mind.
Everybody is free to quote both claim and reason from the book one believes in; of course of his choice.
The atheist, as they don’t have a book, they could quote from science which they eulogize so often.
12. Psycheskinner posted
I don’t see an open mind, I see
13. Paarsurrey posted
14. MelissaBarrett posted
You are free to quote anything you like, however, you need to understand that people who don’t follow your religion are unlikely to be swayed by your religious texts.
On an aside, I get irritated by pages of quotes from any text. The texts are on the internet, if I wanted to read them I would go looking. A note on which parts of exactly which texts are being referenced is sufficient. I hate having to scroll for five minutes to find an original sentence.
In addition, I very rarely quote religious texts unless we are specifically discussing the meaning of a verse or it’s a “where does it say that” kinda thing. I figure if you have to copy and paste another source to tell what your opinion is, you might possibly be brainwashed. It is YOUR opinion after all, right? I mean you don’t let a book do all your thinking for you?
15. Paarsurrey posted
That might be you; there are others who think otherwise; they advise that I should quote from Quran instead of Bible.
When I quote from Quran; I mean the reason mentioned in it; which I only explain further; Quran is a Living Book; it provides reasons in the context and needs no, necessarily, advocates.
I enjoy your posts, friend.
16. Knolyourself posted
My book is reality as it happens.
17. Paarsurrey posted
You mean there was no reality in the past; and there will be no in the future?
Hubpages is a good discussion site; one could comment there or here in this blog; comments are most welcome.
Sorry, my forum question was written late last night, and I was tired. But I guess my question is why do you follow the Quran? What evidences are there for its validity? I’m just curious. Please comment back soon. Thanks friend
Hi friend Oneman89
Sorry, I never observed that somebody has asked me a question; today I first time observed it and answered it forth with.
Unlike other Revealed books of other religions that have been changed over time; Quran is ever fresh, it has following feature not found in other Revealed books:
1. It is authored by the Creator-God.
2. It has claims with reasons. It provides the reason part for its commandments.
3. It is a book of systems; its verses are elaborated by the verses in the context; so it repudiates itself if wrong meanings are ascribed to it.
4. It is for everybody; literate or illiterate, ordinary or the genius or the People of the West as also for the people of the East.
5. It is not a theoreticians’ book, it is a practical guidance for the humans in ethical, moral and spiritual matters; there is not a single teaching in this book which has not been acted upon by its founder and the followers of his time.
6. Its meaning has also been secured by great people found in every century.
7. It is not a mythical book; while it does not claim to be a text book of science, it supports sciences if understood correctly.
8. It is peaceful and peace promoting.
9. It confirms truth in the revealed books of other religions as also their founders to be truthful persons in the origin.
10. It has no contradictions in it.
These are some of the features summarized here.
These features are the evidences of Quran being useful, truthful and also that it has been authored by the Creator-God.
This also explains as to why I follow Quran.
Thanks for asking the question.
Hi my friends
The Bible does not have an internal system of mentioning claims and reasons in it; this is a weakness of the Bible; it cannot guide its followers; they say it is inspired by the Spirit; but it has hardly any spirit in it; may be with the time its spirit has become already dead, for sure. In fact, therefore, the Church and its followers have to artificially and continuously resuscitate Bible by injecting claims and reasons into it.
They have not realized but it is another fact that all the lasting and truthful teachings of Bible have been preserved by the Creator- God Allah YHWH with utmost security in Quran inclusive of the necessary claims and reasons; hence the Christians are advised to thankfully make full use of Quran. Quran is the ultimate authority on Bible in this sense.
I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim
Is it not essential that God’s word should be straightforward for the text as to claims and full of rational and logical reasons stated there in the context, if God is full of Wisdom?May 21, 2009
Do you take truth seriously? Does Allah judge people who speak things not true? If I say bad things about Mohamed Muslims will kill me.
But Allah of Christians is more strong because I do not kill for Allah I believe He will judge. But if you tell lies about Jesus or Paul don’t you fear judgment of Allah? You should be responsible to check if these things are true before you say them.
I do not say things about Mohamed (bless him) because I do not know and have not read Koran.
I can only speak of Jesus who I know. If you have sincere questions about Bible you can ask.
But I tell you one thing that Paul could not change books not written by him. That is why several authors wrote New Testament. Paul only wrote part. He has no power to change other parts. Speak the truth not lies.
Hi friend maaark
You seem to be angry, perhaps. I think we may continue our discussion in peace. I respect your faith.
Please don’t mind, it is just a discussion to reach the truth.
Now just think about my viewpoint. I would have never known about Jesus and Mary and the Word of God Allah YHWH revealed on them; till I was first introduced about them by Quran.
Quran told me about them and I was filled with love and respect about them. This was more so because Quran gives rational and logical reasons also which convince one to the core of one’s heart.
Later some Christian friends presented me with full Bible, OT + NT, so I read them also from cover to cover, both the Catholic version and the Protestant version.
This reading confirmed many things which Quran had stated; but there were things in the Bible, I could not agree with. Bible could not present any rational and logical arguments with the text for the things which differed with Quran.
My love of Jesus and Mary did not allow me to accept things in the Bible which were against Jesus’ and Mary’s character and for which Bible could not present any rational and logical reasons, itself, if it was from God Allah YHWH.
I am not against Paul or the gospel writers; but for love of Jesus and Mary, I cannot accept if they write things which are not meaningful.
So the only solution is dialogue and discussion.
Thanks for your offering me to ask questions if I like.
My question is: is it not essential that God’s word should be straightforward for the text as to claims and full of rational and logical reasons stated there in the context, if God is full of Wisdom?
Please forgive me if I said anything which hurt your feelings unknowingly; I had however no intention doing it to you.
I love Jesus and Mary as mentioned in Quran.
I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim