Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!genrad!decvax!harpo!floyd!vax135!ariel!houti!hogpc!houxm!hocda!spanky!burl!sb1!mb2b!uofm-cv!don
From: don@uofm-cv.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Religions based on "holy books"
Message-ID: <205@uofm-cv.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 7-Jun-83 00:56:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: uofm-cv.205
Posted: Tue Jun  7 00:56:00 1983
Date-Received: Wed, 8-Jun-83 04:35:39 EDT
Lines: 47


Many religions are partly or totally based on a  particular  book
or set of books that are believed to be holy or sacred.  Examples
of "holy books" include the Bible (Christianity), The  Torah  and
the  Talmud  (Judaism),  the  Koran  (Islam),  Science and Health
(Christian science), the book of Mormon, etc.  I'm sure there are
others,  and  I  would  be interested in seeing additions to this
list.


A couple of questions:


1)  How do persons following holy book X determine that X is  the
"correct"  holy book as opposed to Y or Z.  Do all religions that
follow holy books accept their particular books on faith alone or
do some have particular tests of validity.


2)  How do the followers of holy book X regard holy book  Y;   do
they feel that Y is:

a)  a deliberate and malicious lie, perpetrated by  evil  people,
or perhaps the devil himself

b)  possibly well intended but written by ignorant,  misinformed,
or "confused" people

c)  valid except where it contradicts X

d)  valid for its followers, but not valid for followers of X

e)  something else?


I would be interested  in  comments  from  both  "believers"  and
"unbelievers", particularly regarding the second question.

If anyone is wondering, no I don't believe any particular book is
holy.   I  believe all books are the product of entirely fallible
human authors, and I see no evidence for revelation, in books  or
any  other  form.   If  this makes you want to attack my beliefs,
call me nasty names, quote passages from your  book,  etc.,  feel
free.

                    Don Winsor
                    Ann Arbor, MI