Holy Scriptures Quotes
Quotes tagged as "holy-scriptures"
Showing 1-30 of 79

“Each religion makes scores of purportedly factual assertions about everything from the creation of the universe to the afterlife. But on what grounds can believers presume to know that these assertions are true? The reasons they give are various, but the ultimate justification for most religious people’s beliefs is a simple one: we believe what we believe because our holy scriptures say so. But how, then, do we know that our holy scriptures are factually accurate? Because the scriptures themselves say so. Theologians specialize in weaving elaborate webs of verbiage to avoid saying anything quite so bluntly, but this gem of circular reasoning really is the epistemological bottom line on which all 'faith' is grounded. In the words of Pope John Paul II: 'By the authority of his absolute transcendence, God who makes himself known is also the source of the credibility of what he reveals.' It goes without saying that this begs the question of whether the texts at issue really were authored or inspired by God, and on what grounds one knows this. 'Faith' is not in fact a rejection of reason, but simply a lazy acceptance of bad reasons. 'Faith' is the pseudo-justification that some people trot out when they want to make claims without the necessary evidence.
But of course we never apply these lax standards of evidence to the claims made in the other fellow’s holy scriptures: when it comes to religions other than one’s own, religious people are as rational as everyone else. Only our own religion, whatever it may be, seems to merit some special dispensation from the general standards of evidence.
And here, it seems to me, is the crux of the conflict between religion and science. Not the religious rejection of specific scientific theories (be it heliocentrism in the 17th century or evolutionary biology today); over time most religions do find some way to make peace with well-established science. Rather, the scientific worldview and the religious worldview come into conflict over a far more fundamental question: namely, what constitutes evidence.
Science relies on publicly reproducible sense experience (that is, experiments and observations) combined with rational reflection on those empirical observations. Religious people acknowledge the validity of that method, but then claim to be in the possession of additional methods for obtaining reliable knowledge of factual matters — methods that go beyond the mere assessment of empirical evidence — such as intuition, revelation, or the reliance on sacred texts. But the trouble is this: What good reason do we have to believe that such methods work, in the sense of steering us systematically (even if not invariably) towards true beliefs rather than towards false ones? At least in the domains where we have been able to test these methods — astronomy, geology and history, for instance — they have not proven terribly reliable. Why should we expect them to work any better when we apply them to problems that are even more difficult, such as the fundamental nature of the universe?
Last but not least, these non-empirical methods suffer from an insuperable logical problem: What should we do when different people’s intuitions or revelations conflict? How can we know which of the many purportedly sacred texts — whose assertions frequently contradict one another — are in fact sacred?”
―
But of course we never apply these lax standards of evidence to the claims made in the other fellow’s holy scriptures: when it comes to religions other than one’s own, religious people are as rational as everyone else. Only our own religion, whatever it may be, seems to merit some special dispensation from the general standards of evidence.
And here, it seems to me, is the crux of the conflict between religion and science. Not the religious rejection of specific scientific theories (be it heliocentrism in the 17th century or evolutionary biology today); over time most religions do find some way to make peace with well-established science. Rather, the scientific worldview and the religious worldview come into conflict over a far more fundamental question: namely, what constitutes evidence.
Science relies on publicly reproducible sense experience (that is, experiments and observations) combined with rational reflection on those empirical observations. Religious people acknowledge the validity of that method, but then claim to be in the possession of additional methods for obtaining reliable knowledge of factual matters — methods that go beyond the mere assessment of empirical evidence — such as intuition, revelation, or the reliance on sacred texts. But the trouble is this: What good reason do we have to believe that such methods work, in the sense of steering us systematically (even if not invariably) towards true beliefs rather than towards false ones? At least in the domains where we have been able to test these methods — astronomy, geology and history, for instance — they have not proven terribly reliable. Why should we expect them to work any better when we apply them to problems that are even more difficult, such as the fundamental nature of the universe?
Last but not least, these non-empirical methods suffer from an insuperable logical problem: What should we do when different people’s intuitions or revelations conflict? How can we know which of the many purportedly sacred texts — whose assertions frequently contradict one another — are in fact sacred?”
―
“But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.”
―
―
“The knowledge of Holy Scriptures is able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, the Saviour.”
―
―
“The prophesy of the Holy scriptures is assurance of God's faithfulness to fulfill the promises.”
―
―
“When you pray in tongues regularly, God will give you prayer points in understanding (via dreams and visions) that you will have to pray according to scriptures and also in tongues.”
―
―
“The best literature, still with ancient power in forming character while shaping conduct is the Holy Scriptures”
―
―
“The Holy Spirit's ministry is one of divine order and purpose, bringing structure and form to God's creation and people. From creation to the establishment of the Church, His work is marked by intentional design and orchestration. In the church, the Spirit's gifts were never meant to create confusion, but rather to edify and build up the body of believers in love and truth. God's nature is one of peace, not confusion, and the Spirit's work reflects this character. The Spirit's primary focus is on sanctification, guiding believers toward a deeper understanding of God's truth and reverence for Him. By prioritizing Scripture and sound doctrine, we can discern the Spirit's work and avoid deception that often accompanies an overemphasis on emotional experience.”
―
―
All Quotes
|
My Quotes
|
Add A Quote
Browse By Tag
- Love Quotes 100.5k
- Life Quotes 79k
- Inspirational Quotes 75.5k
- Humor Quotes 44k
- Philosophy Quotes 30.5k
- Inspirational Quotes Quotes 28.5k
- God Quotes 27k
- Truth Quotes 24.5k
- Wisdom Quotes 24.5k
- Romance Quotes 24k
- Poetry Quotes 23k
- Life Lessons Quotes 22k
- Quotes Quotes 20.5k
- Death Quotes 20.5k
- Happiness Quotes 19k
- Hope Quotes 18.5k
- Faith Quotes 18.5k
- Inspiration Quotes 17k
- Spirituality Quotes 15.5k
- Relationships Quotes 15.5k
- Religion Quotes 15.5k
- Motivational Quotes 15k
- Life Quotes Quotes 15k
- Love Quotes Quotes 15k
- Writing Quotes 15k
- Success Quotes 14k
- Motivation Quotes 13k
- Travel Quotes 13k
- Time Quotes 13k
- Science Quotes 12k