Revolation

[The one]

I thought of something a long time ago.

When you are born into a family, of course you will learn and accept the religion that your parents believe, because you just know it. Of course your parents are right, they have to be, they certainly wouldn't lie to you. Your parents have to be right, and you know it. Because your parents tell you the correct religion, you don't need evidence for it, you just know it.

But then how could you know that the religion was defininatley true. Because your parents have taught and told you? And not only that, but there are so many different religions. And other familes teach and tell their children about the true religion, and again they just know that their religion is correct.

So what I'm basically trying to get at is how can you know which religion is the correct one. Infact, how could you even know if any of these religions were correct anyway? No, I'm not saying that athiests are right at all, but I am saying this----

I believe that the truth is to know that we do not know...

I am not trying to sway anyone's belief, as I said, I don't know anything anyway, but I am trying to explain a different view of things, but not in any way to question anybody's religion or beliefs. I apologize if I have.

This is the reason why I am agnostic.

[Dorn]

So what I'm basically trying to get at is how can you know which religion is the correct one. Infact, how could you even know if any of these religions were correct anyway?

Etymologically, "true," in its Indo-European origin, stems from what is sure, strong, steadfast, safe, consistent, accurately fitted, and so on. It relates to the ancient word for "tree" (dru), where the "true" (as adjective) signifies whatever grows from it. This is the foundation from which your world is formed. And if agnosticism--the basest and commonest of theological perspectives--is the extent to which you grasp the divine, be it in the shape of organized religion or personal spirituality, then it appears as a wound, as cracks in your foundation.

[The one]

I'm guessing what you said is interesting, however I do not understand it. Could you repeat it but without the metaphors and riddles?

[Dorn]

I'm guessing what you said is interesting, however I do not understand it. Could you repeat it but without the metaphors and riddles?

I didn't use a single riddle and the lone metaphor was the obvious wound (cracks) in your foundation (tree trunk). What I am thereby alluding to, further, is your inability to extend your thoughts into the realm of the abstract, the space in which reason remains a mere building block.

[The one]

Reason? First of all no one even knows any reason for anything (as in creation, god, spirit stuff). And, you're also saying that an idea is a building block? Do you mean building to the truth? Or building something else? Because I do not believe that a mere idea could possibly build to any truth at all.

And you say that I have an inability to extend my thoughts into the realm of abstract? I don't really get the meaning of that, but it sounds like you're saying that I can't think of things that have no reason what so ever and can somehow impossibly be possible? Is that it? Because if it is, that's wrong.

[Dorn]

Reason? First of all no one even knows any reason for anything (as in creation, god, spirit stuff).

You're confusing or conflating reason as faculty with reason as motive (for something particular). And for the sake of clarity, from now on, I will only refer to reason as faculty, viz., as that which determines by thinking.

And, you're also saying that an idea is a building block?

Not once did I mention the word "idea," which is a form or vision present in one's mind, but it's a fortunate misreading since that would most definitely be the case. Let ideas grow, branch out, and you'll likely form a body of ideas as if shaping an architectural structure.

And you say that I have an inability to extend my thoughts into the realm of abstract?

Your default is the agnostic pop credo, "I don't know." But not once do you branch out from it. Unlike agnostics at large, or the poor Socrates you travestied in the OP, your entire thought process remains enclosed within a base prison.

[The one]

Okay, the fact that I state that I don't know should mean that I am not in, but out of the prison, since I am not abiding by a certain belief, but I admit to not knowong. Also, if you're suggesting that I have no ideas, which I gather from what you say as 'base prison', please read my 'theories' topic in this thread, and then come back to me and tell me that my mind is not open to ideas.

[Eternal Novice]

A large dynamic in religion has always been faith. You're supposed to believe it and know it's true even though you don't. That structure begins to break down when people like you begin to think and actively search for reasonable alternatives and thereby notice the fallacies in the origional idea. I personally feel that many religions overemphasize faith, which is less a virtue than it is a pattern of belief; when love, an actual virtue, is much more meaningful and important. Having said that, I also think it's important that each individual finds something to believe in that feels right for them, and doesn't try to fool themselves into believing something that is an affront to their individual character. There are seven billion people in the world. What every one of them believes is true, is true in their own minds. Find what's true for you.

[VenusInChains]

I don't think there is a right or wrong religion, just whatever you feel is best for you. Kinda the same way I feel about internet service providers, just gotta look around to see what suits you. They all think they have the greatests offers, but ultimately its your decision.

I do feel sorry for people who are brought up in strict religious families though. It can't be easy to break free from something you don't believe in and get cursed to hell by your family.

[Dorn]

Okay, the fact that I state that I don't know should mean that I am not in, but out of the prison, since I am not abiding by a certain belief, but I admit to not knowong.

Not quite. The only available perspective that you presented, your negative revelation, is to be found in the following sentence: "I believe that the truth is to know that we do not know..."

And if I may take the liberty to expand on this sentence, I'd interpret it as follows:
I believe: (the ultimate) Truth is to acknowledge that we do not know [omitted].

But what is it that we do not (or cannot) know? What is purposely omitted? Isn't it the very Truth you presented as the prerequisite and cornerstone of your own belief? Put differently, I believe: Truth is unknowable. Fair enough. Replace Truth with God and you are suddenly theistic ("God is unknowable"). But for some reason this unknowable God/Oneness/All is also unavailable to us mortals by means of reading scripture, meditating, praying, etc.

Such is the mindset of a prisoner who, when granted pen and paper, is forever sketching the bars from the inside of his cell.

[The one]

A large dynamic in religion has always been faith. You're supposed to believe it and know it's true even though you don't. That structure begins to break down when people like you begin to think and actively search for reasonable alternatives and thereby notice the fallacies in the origional idea. I personally feel that many religions overemphasize faith, which is less a virtue than it is a pattern of belief; when love, an actual virtue, is much more meaningful and important. Having said that, I also think it's important that each individual finds something to believe in that feels right for them, and doesn't try to fool themselves into believing something that is an affront to their individual character. There are seven billion people in the world. What every one of them believes is true, is true in their own minds. Find what's true for you.

Yes, you're right, and everyone should be free to think what they want to, but you talk as if it's bad that I admit to not knowing. Also, you mentioned that people shouldn't "fool" themselves into going against their individual beliefs. Well, in a way, I could say that people "fool" themselves into believing their own thing rather than admitting to not knowing.

[The one]

Okay, the fact that I state that I don't know should mean that I am not in, but out of the prison, since I am not abiding by a certain belief, but I admit to not knowong.

Not quite. The only available perspective that you presented, your negative revelation, is to be found in the following sentence: "I believe that the truth is to know that we do not know..."

And if I may take the liberty to expand on this sentence, I'd interpret it as follows:
I believe: (the ultimate) Truth is to acknowledge that we do not know [omitted].

But what is it that we do not (or cannot) know? What is purposely omitted? Isn't it the very Truth you presented as the prerequisite and cornerstone of your own belief? Put differently, I believe: Truth is unknowable. Fair enough. Replace Truth with God and you are suddenly theistic ("God is unknowable"). But for some reason this unknowable God/Oneness/All is also unavailable to us mortals by means of reading scripture, meditating, praying, etc.

Such is the mindset of a prisoner who, when granted pen and paper, is forever sketching the bars from the inside of his cell.

Okay, I could of put it differently, and yeah, who knows, a religion may be correct, mabye even mutiple religions, or even different parts of religions mixed together, we don't know. But I wouldn't say "god is unkowable", becasue how do we even know if there is a God or not? But I don't get the prisoner bit you included.

[Dorn]

Okay, I could of put it differently ...

Then why don't you? A single sentence, condensed, could make more sense than your entire OP.

But I wouldn't say "god is unkowable", becasue how do we even know if there is a God or not?

Well, which definition of God do you accept? Because in that case you are distancing yourself from theists, atheists, and agnostics, who can all agree on a common definition.

But I don't get the prisoner bit you included.

You have raised walls and bars--negations upon negations--that limit your vision and movement in all directions.

[The one]

Okay, I could of put it differently ...

Then why don't you? A single sentence, condensed, could make more sense than your entire OP.

But I wouldn't say "god is unkowable", becasue how do we even know if there is a God or not?

Well, which definition of God do you accept? Because in that case you are distancing yourself from theists, atheists, and agnostics, who can all agree on a common definition.

But I don't get the prisoner bit you included.

You have raised walls and bars--negations upon negations--that limit your vision and movement in all directions.

What do you mean why don't I? I just admitted it, what more do you wany? And what's OP?

You're also straying from what I was saying, "how do we even know if there is a god", which you reply "which definition of God do you accept?" And you then state that I am distancing myself from theists, athiests, and agnostics, who all agree on a common definition. What's a common definination got to do with what I said, and I also do not know what a theist is.

And I still don't get the prisoner bit, sorry.

[Dorn]

What do you mean why don't I?

It couldn't be made clearer: if you can express yourself differently, then why don't you? (And OP is either original post or poster.)

You're also straying from what I was saying, "how do we even know if there is a god", which you reply "which definition of God do you accept?" (...) What's a common definination got to do with what I said ...

It depends, you see. An ontological discourse differs substantially from a scientific one, so we have to be absolutely clear about our definitions before we proceed.

... and I also do not know what a theist is.

I'm amazed, frankly, how you can understand what an atheist is, but be clueless once the prefix (a-) is removed. Clearly, this is for you.

[The one]

I know what you mean by putting it clearly, I said that I learnt from that, not that I don't understand what you're on about.

Also, I suspect 'God', to be the one most people know about, as in I defy God as benevolent, omniscient and omnipotent, the creater of everything, and all that...

And thank you for insulting my intelligence, you're link also didn't help, so I researched myself, theism is the belief of God. If I'm wrong on that because I didn't research enough, or your link actually DOES help, then just isult my intelligence further...

[Dorn]

... I don't understand what you're on about.

I am "on about" you including I believe in a position that is supposedly distant from faith. Why not rephrase?

Also, I suspect 'God', to be the one most people know about, as in I defy God as benevolent, omniscient and omnipotent, the creater of everything, and all that...

Your definition goes too far. I'd rather state that God is the Absolute, the One, the All, the Supreme, and so on, without claiming knowledge about any particular characteristic. (You may be conflating Christian theology with metaphysics at large--the difference between tradition and worldview.)

[The one]

I agree with your definition, but I how could I rephrase what I said. (since your explanation of what you were on about is still questioned by myself as what you're on about that explanation- basically, I don't understand the whole you included "i believe" bit, and then what you said about distance from faith)

[smora]

All I can say is you are right! Religions are passed down by generation to generation! What I can say is what I beleive in my heart and what is true there is only One God, how you want to beleive in him is your own conviction. What you believe in your own heart! I'm sure you know what the 7 deadly sins are, and what the 10 commandements say, so in that being said I'm sure in God's eyes your good! Even thou I believe in Christ doesn't mean you have to and doesn't mean God will ever turn his back on you! Because the Bible and every other religous memoir states that is your heart that God sees and nothing else!!

[marsha.robeson]

religion is man made. all u hv to do is ur best. do good, shut up & go home. dont fear the reaper. the end of this life is only us returning.

[smartatart]

most religions are like that, since you were taught it, then you believe it. but in my case, there is evidence all around signifying truth in my religion, Christianity. There are prayers answered, miracles working, and so many other things.

[marsha.robeson]

thats not ur religion doing that babe. thats God...we all came from the darkness and the light. it is in us all. good and evil. we are all made from one God, so HE is in us all. there are hundreds of religions but only ONE HIGHER POWER...with love and faith, anything is possible because with God, everything is possible.

[smartatart]

Nice one.

[marsha.robeson]

There is no right or wrong religion. they are all made by man. you wont go to a bad place for picking the wrong one. as long as you do good, be good to others and thank our higher power, who put us here and gave us life, you cant go wrong. do good works for ppl, be kind and have a gentle heart and faith that everything will work out the way its destined. that's mainly what religions preach anyway. you tube this : God vs. Religion. (its awesome)