Three methods of discovering "the truth"

[_Buffalo]

Science is the only way to determine truth.

You're trying to be sarcastic, but that's correct.

[_Sethbag]

Science is the only way to determine truth.

Too dogmatic for this scientist. How about: Science is the best method we've developed so far for converging our knowledge of the way things are toward truth.

I know why you prefer the dogmatic version though. If you can cast science as a religion, then you can cast doubt on it merely by asserting your own, contradictory religion.

[_keithb]

All too often, ex-Mormons (or phony current Mormons willing to crucify their savior afresh) have no clue as to the Christian formulation for understanding truth.

Galatians 1:5-6 teaches that the truth of the Gospel comes from three concurrent sources -- the priesthood, the Holy Ghost and the "word".

At that time, the "word" meant the Hebrew scriptures, the oral tradition of the gospels and the pastoral letters from the apostles.

Another series of nonsensical statements. To illustrate, consider this statement about voodoo:

The practice of Voodoo is probably as old as the African continent itself. Sometimes written Voudou, Vodou or Voudun, the word itself means God Creator or Great Spirit. It has been greatly distorted and misused; human sacrifices, vampires, dripping blood and devil worship all make the stuff of spooky novels and Hollywood movies. Yet none of these originated with or ever belonged to Voodoo!

Voodoo is a life affirming practice that encourages its participants to better understand the natural processes of life and their own spiritual natures.

If one looks at the dictionary, Voodoo is likely to be defined as an ancient religion from Africa that involves the cult of Ancestors, of various animistic spirits, and the use of trances to communicate with such spirits. It is true that Voodoo did originate in Africa. Today it is practiced by millions throughout the world, in Africa, the Caribbean, Central, North and South America, in various forms, often with elements of catholicism mixed in. However, its main purpose remains as always to heal: to heal the individual in relationships within himself or herself, with others and ultimately with God.

So, you can see that the truth spell of voodoo is completely justified because, in fact, voodoo is derived from ancient truths known to the African religions.

Again, why should I trust what is the tradition of one set of illiterate nomads versus the next set of illiterate nomads?

[_Hoops]

Too dogmatic for this scientist. How about: Science is the best method we've developed so far for converging our knowledge of the way things are toward truth.

I know why you prefer the dogmatic version though. If you can cast science as a religion, then you can cast doubt on it merely by asserting your own, contradictory religion.

You didn't take the bait, but Buffalo did. Good for you.

[_Buffalo]

Too dogmatic for this scientist. How about: Science is the best method we've developed so far for converging our knowledge of the way things are toward truth.

I know why you prefer the dogmatic version though. If you can cast science as a religion, then you can cast doubt on it merely by asserting your own, contradictory religion.

You didn't take the bait, but Buffalo did. Good for you.

When the religious want to denigrate science, they call it a religion. When they want to make their religion sound more respectable, they call it science. It's indicative of the shared insecurity of the faithful in America.

[_Hoops]

When the religious want to denigrate science, they call it a religion. When they want to make their religion sound more respectable, they call it science. It's indicative of the shared insecurity of the faithful in America.

When the atheists want to denigrate religion they represent it in a way that is most convenient to them and in the worst light possible. In their arrogance they will never concede what religion has done to make modern life better. It's indicative of their blind hatred for that which they don't understand.

[_Buffalo]

When the atheists want to denigrate religion they represent it in a way that is most convenient to them and in the worst light possible.

Yes. We represent it as "religion."

In their arrogance they will never concede what religion has done to make modern life better. It's indicative of their blind hatred for that which they don't understand.

I suspect religion may have been a necessary step in our social evolution. It's becoming increasingly vestigial, however.

[_keithb]

When the atheists want to denigrate religion they represent it in a way that is most convenient to them and in the worst light possible. In their arrogance they will never concede what religion has done to make modern life better. It's indicative of their blind hatred for that which they don't understand.

That's a valid point. Sometimes, certain atheists' zeal for persecuting religion can mimic the zeal of the persecution that takes place in many religions towards those outside the faith.

However, this reality has very little to do with both the OP and the question of whether or not any religion is "true" and how one would go about ascertaining the truth of said religion.

[_Hoops]

However, this reality has very little to do with both the OP and the question of whether or not any religion is "true" and how one would go about ascertaining the truth of said religion.

I'm not Mormon so I have no comment on the op specifically.

I'm wondering, though, about this ---- if we both agree that the earch is round ( as a general description), does it matter that you've arrived at this truth via mathematical calculation and I arrived at it by employing a witch doctor? Don't we both operate under the same truth?

[_keithb]

I'm wondering, though, about this ---- if we both agree that the earch is round ( as a general description), does it matter that you've arrived at this truth via mathematical calculation and I arrived at it by employing a witch doctor? Don't we both operate under the same truth?

"Does it matter" is a slightly ambiguous parameter here.

If you mean, "Did we get the same result?" I would say that, in this case, the answer is yes.

However, I would point out that, excluding either incredible luck or the presence of some supernatural power on the part of the witch doctor, this is an outcome that is highly unlikely. Indeed, a witch doctor guessing at the shape of the earth would probably conclude, without other evidence, that it was flat, since it is approximately flat locally. Indeed, with any scientific question, the witch doctor would be unlikely to arrive at the correct solution and would come up with all sorts of unscientific theories. This is similar to the cause underlying the numerous unscientific statements in the Christian Bible.