One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest

Moral of the story: If you're a Christian, don't use the "Flew Argument."

A "Convenient Truth." (Part 2)

So how relative is "religious truth?"

As in my last post about religious truths, these "truths" are connected to human emotional systems, which are connected to life-threatening circumstances and social needs. The doctrine of salvation is a good example of religious truths.

A Very Smart Reply

I really don't have any idea who created this, but it's a very smart reply.

A "Convenient Truth." (Part 1)

I saw a post written by a confused Mormon member about something called "religious truth" and atheists doing the offense? Uh…whatever.  

The OP didn't really elaborate what he meant by religious truth, other than some mix-up words about science, secular, and atheism (To be honest, reading the post is like eating a granola bar). So I guess I have to start by exploring religious truth.

In a nutshell, religious truths are expressions of human experience for the purpose of achieving the greatest well-being possible (i.e., salvation, absolute freedom, or total harmony). These "truths" are connected to human emotional systems, which are connected to life-threatening circumstances and social needs. Looking at it, we can say that "religious truth" is all about providing reassurance or comfort.  

Now, here's the problem. If religious truth are expressions of human experience, then it's relative since human experiences varies from different interpretations. It is also subjective. It is influenced by personal opinions and feelings.