The Reasons Behind Following a Religion

[negitron]

Why would god create parasitic wasps?

Don't you know what he did to poor Job? God's a bastard.

 

[DaveC426913]

Why would god create parasitic wasps?

Never understood why people think God should spend all his days coddling and wet-nursing people. Or why, if he does not, that makes him mean.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

They taught me thinking and reasoning skills, and applying those I realized that all modern religions (which I am familiar with) are so riddled with contradictions and nonsense that no rational thinking person would join/remain.

My experience has been that people who make such statements understand very little about religion. Generally they are speaking out of ignorance and bias.

You said yourself that you weren't actually raised to be religious, and your mother didn't even practice, so how much could you really know? How much time have you spent praying?

If you have never lived it, then by definition you are clueless.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

This all reminds me a bit of the people we get here who have decided that physics is all wrong. They looked it over and made up their minds.

 

[Evo]

My experience has been that people who make such statements understand very little about religion. Generally they are speaking out of ignorance and bias.

You said yourself that you weren't actually raised to be religious, and your mother didn't even practice, so how much could you really know? How much time have you spent praying?

If you have never lived it, then by definition you are clueless.

I was raised by a devoutly religious mother, I attended church every Sunday, special service every saturday evening, religious school every saturday morning. We observed all religious days. By the time I was 8 I had serious doubts that what I was being taught was not all the work of men. I could not imagine that the being they described could have mandated such atrocities and have all of the worst of human failings. When I was 11 I told my mother that I could no longer attend church as I had come to the conclusion that it was bogus. I had actually researched and written a comparitive analysis of the largest religions as a basis for my decision.

People that have left religion because they don't need it or see a point to it have valid opinions.

 

[Kurdt]

You don't have to have tried everything to have an informed opinion about it Ivan. Granted there are the over zealous ignoramuses that spend any opportunity they get blindly attacking something, but that is not usually the case for the majority of people.

 

[jobyts]

If you have never lived it, then by definition you are clueless.

well, that's the main point of agnostics/atheists against religion's after life theory.

 

[robertm]

How much time have you spent praying?

How much time have you spent talking to yourself, out loud, alone? The jury is in on prayer studies, no matter which Big-Man believers claim to be talking to.

If you have never lived it, then by definition you are clueless.

Even non-religious people have the ability for empathy, I mean, I know they are baby-eating Satan worshipers and all, but they are still human.

If someone is not schizophrenic, then of course they can not really know what it is like to suffer in that way, but that does not mean that they can not grasp some aspect of the experience.

We all suffer from more or less of the same kind of qualia, which is precisely why I can imagine exactly what it would be like to be fully immersed in a given cult or conspiracy theory; and why I can also accurately communicate with you all about it. On the other hand, it is much more difficult to imagine myself as, say, a fish.

 

[Pupil]

My experience has been that people who make such statements understand very little about religion. Generally they are speaking out of ignorance and bias.

You said yourself that you weren't actually raised to be religious, and your mother didn't even practice, so how much could you really know? How much time have you spent praying?

If you have never lived it, then by definition you are clueless.

One doesn't need to spend time praying, bloodletting, or taking human/animal sacrifices to come to the conclusion that none of those religious practices work.

Aren't we getting a bit off topic here? The OP asked what reasons believers believed, but we're making comments such as:

Why would god create parasitic wasps?

Don't you know what he did to poor Job? God's a bastard.

If you have never lived it, then by definition you are clueless.

etc...

I understand many of these comments were made in jest, but one's religion (or lack of) can be a big part of who he or she is, so the person won't easily be able to hold off replying (I couldn't even help myself!). Being an atheist/non-theist/antitheist/agnostic/etc... I love a religion bashing joke as much as the next guy, but this isn't the thread to shout out contradictions/bad things in someone's religion. I sincerely want to hear why people actually believe. I don't want to see the thread get locked because we started a poo-flinging war, or pissed off a religious moderator.

 

[jobyts]

What is the main reason you follow a religion? (not open to athiests please)

0-5 years: Agnostic
6-14: Catholic
15-current: Atheist

But recently I read about Humanism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism) and now I think my religion was/is humanism in all these years. Apparently, humanism also has many subcategories, which I haven't gone through yet. Most probably, I should be a fit on one of the categories.

 

[Pupil]

0-5 years: Agnostic
6-14: Catholic
15-current: Atheist

But recently I read about Humanism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism) and now I think my religion was/is humanism in all these years. Apparently, humanism also has many subcategories, which I haven't gone through yet. Most probably, I should be a fit on one of the categories.

Can you claim Humanism is religious? That really goes to the definition of religion, which hasn't been established here.

 

[jobyts]

Can you claim Humanism is religious? That really goes to the definition of religion, which hasn't been established here.

Probably not. My views in general seem to be coherent with humanism. Even if it there is an organized humanistic religion, I wouldn't probably join it. I do not enjoy the herd mentality.

 

[arildno]

I believe in my non-God because that makes sense to me and my sense of morality.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Its funny that people seem to ascribe all of their negative (and sometimes uninformed) opinions to the religious as a whole instead of believing that many of them may well be intelligent and thoughtful individuals.

One doesn't need to spend time praying, bloodletting, or taking human/animal sacrifices to come to the conclusion that none of those religious practices work.

Prayer obviously does not work? Do you even know what prayer is?
I have met few other than children that truly believe all you have to do is pray for something and God will bring it to you if you're good, as if God is like Santa Claus or something and all you have to do is be a good little boy or girl to get your presents. To the vast majority of the religious prayer is a sort of meditation. A way to look for understanding. If you have never prayed or never prayed properly then how can you really know whether or not it 'works'?

I am not religious, never have been, and have never prayed by the way.

 

[JazzFusion]

Interesting - I was just reading the spirited (no pun intended) debate in another thread on the several possible interpretations of Quantum Mechanics.

I think we all try to make sense of the world around us. We find a model that seems to 'fit' with the bulk of the data to which we have access. We 'tweek' the theory and our interpretation of it as we encounter new data and new situations. Our new experiences may give new insights into our current model, or they may cause us to question how/if our current model applies, but in rare cases, our experiences may cause us to completely abandon an old model in favor of a new one. I think this applies equally to believers and non-believers.

Personally, I follow a specific religion because I believe it to be true. I have come to that conclusion mostly through trial-and-error and personal experience. I have had my share of 'tweeks' and adjustments in my personal model of the universe. I have also had one life-altering paradigm shift.

 

[robertm]

I think we all try to make sense of the world around us. We find a model that seems to 'fit' with the bulk of the data to which we have access.

This is exactly where a lot of problems arise. Why is it that people feel that a model of reality that fits with their own personal experiences is any sort of argument for universal validity? What reliable data does your every day non-scientist have access to? Why is it that almost no care is taken as to the viability of the history/foundations/claims of the many religious "models" of reality? Why are people so willing to take any information at all from anyone or anything on faith? Why do people put so much stock into ideas that make them feel good?

Is the motivation for evidence-free belief really to "make sense of the world around us"?

Why is having faith considered, almost universally, as a good thing? It seems to me to be an asinine stamp of our lowly origins.

 

[Pupil]

Its funny that people seem to ascribe all of their negative (and sometimes uninformed) opinions to the religious as a whole instead of believing that many of them may well be intelligent and thoughtful individuals.

People stereotype all the time for almost any ideal. The same could be said for political views, occupation, etc, not just religion. It's sad but true.

Prayer obviously does not work? Do you even know what prayer is?

I take the definition of prayer to be what most of the praying individuals define it to be:

- the act of communicating with a deity (especially as a petition or in adoration or contrition or thanksgiving)

- reverent petition to a deity

- someone who prays to God

- A practice of communicating with one's God

etc...

(Source www.google.com define:prayer)

If you define it to be something else, you better say so. And yes, prayer obviously does not work. Why? Personal experience, reasoned argument, and scientific studies.

I have met few other than children that truly believe all you have to do is pray for something and God will bring it to you if you're good, as if God is like Santa Claus or something and all you have to do is be a good little boy or girl to get your presents. To the vast majority of the religious prayer is a sort of meditation. A way to look for understanding. If you have never prayed or never prayed properly then how can you really know whether or not it 'works'?

I am not religious, never have been, and have never prayed by the way.

If one accepts the premise that there are no deities, then it follows that praying does not work (and that's without the studies or personal experience).

 

[humanino]

If you define it to be something else, you better say so.

I was raised in a catholic family. The priest who taught us made it pretty clear that a prayer was NOT communicating with an individual deity. He insisted that prayers for our individual good were selfish and pointless. A prayer as defined by him was the concentration of the praying person on positive thinking towards general situations or other group of people. This to my understanding is NOT meditation, but already closer than what you define. I guess I was lucky. I practiced meditation even long after I grew out of my child christianity.

 

[drankin]

BTW, I love my faith. It may be a complete figment of my imagination, a total illusion, but so what? It gives me more peace of mind than anything. It gives me a moral compass, direction, purpose, a sense that my life doesn't end here on earth. A sense of companionship where I would otherwise be lonely. I sense of community and brotherhood with those that share my faith. If it all turns out to be a farse, which I doubt completely, I've lost nothing but I've gained a fulfilling life that was meaningful to me and the community I've shared my faith with. I would argue that having a faith has been an evolutionary development that is hardwired into our nature. That would at least explain why so many have a faith no matter how "developed" we think we are. Why bash it. If it's not for you, then don't partake.

I think it's amazing how people can sustain themselves on shear "faith" alone against all obvious odds. Nothing to do with a religion. But it's the same mental muscle we all have.
Human beings are simply an incredible species capable of accomplishing things with nothing but faith in an idea that is not a reality until they make it so. It's the same thing people apply to their "religion". It becomes a reality to them that they live by though there is nothing tangible to an outside observer to support it. It's a human capacity we have always had. I find it a fascinating facet of being human.

 

[Pupil]

positive thinking towards general situations or other group of people.

This seems to me to be an almost word-for-word definition of optimistic thinking.

I suppose you can define prayer that way if that's what you want, but it'll confuse a lot fewer people if you didn't.

 

[humanino]

...

Is it not Wager[/url] ?

 

[GeorginaS]

Is it not Wager[/url] ?

That would be, yes.

 

[robertm]

BTW, I love my faith. It may be a complete figment of my imagination, a total illusion, but so what? It gives me more peace of mind than anything. It gives me a moral compass, direction, purpose, a sense that my life doesn't end here on earth. A sense of companionship where I would otherwise be lonely. I sense of community and brotherhood with those that share my faith.

This is all great and warm and fuzzy and just peachy with me; so long as you and your community stay out of my life and government affairs.



Edit: For clarification: "so long as the creeds that you and your community chose to adopt..."

 

[humanino]

This is all great and warm and fuzzy and just peachy with me; so long as you and your community stay out of my life and government affairs.

We have been trying hard to keep this discussion going. Thanks for your input.

 

[robertm]

We have been trying hard to keep this discussion going. Thanks for your input.

I'm sorry, how is the separation of church and state not relevant to religious practice?

Does my wish that others do not attempt to force upon me their own ethical and behavioral religious rules offend you?

Would you say that the religious at large do not attempt this on a massive scale everyday, as well as historically? Creationism, is a particularly succinct example.

Why can I, as a man, not marry another man, if I so wished, in most of the united states?

I hope that the wish to live and let live is not grounds for the closing of this thread.

Edit: I have added some clarification of my point to post #73.

 

[Cyrus]

I'm sorry, how is the separation of church and state not relevant to religious practice?

Does my wish that others do not attempt to force upon me their own ethical and behavioral religious rules offend you?

Would you say that the religious at large do not attempt this on a massive scale everyday, as well as historically? Creationism, is a particularly succinct example.

Why can I, as a man, not marry another man, if I so wished, in most of the united states?

I hope that the wish to live and let live is not grounds for the closing of this thread.

Edit: I have added some clarification of my point to post #73.

You anger The Palin

Appease her with lavish gifts of clothing and trinkets!

 

[Huckleberry]

I think the creator made turtles, but that was yet another by-product of the ultimate objective of kitty-cat making. Turbo and I are split on the reason for humans. I say by-product, he says slave race for the kitties.

http://www.iamaturtle.org/" all the way down.

 

[BobG]

Prayer obviously does not work? Do you even know what prayer is?
I have met few other than children that truly believe all you have to do is pray for something and God will bring it to you if you're good, as if God is like Santa Claus or something and all you have to do is be a good little boy or girl to get your presents. To the vast majority of the religious prayer is a sort of meditation. A way to look for understanding. If you have never prayed or never prayed properly then how can you really know whether or not it 'works'?

I've always felt that praying for a miracle to deliver a person from an unpleasant situation is silly and pointless. It's better to pray for the strength and insight to handle the situations life hands you. In the end, the person becomes the miracle.

I have problems with a lot of particular religions, but I do think there's a whole side to human psyche that's not explained or helped by science or logic.

As far as religion being selected for, of course it is when you're talking about survival of cultures - which means you have to consider the things that are inherited socially; not just genetically. The problem with inherited traits, whether genetically inherited or socially inherited, is when those traits are carried into a new environment and become a liability that can't be shed. Most of my problems with particular religions is that their beliefs become so locked in by history that they carry around as many liabilities as benefits.

 

[skeptic2]

It's weird how you'll just believe something until someone finally contradicts it and it makes you start thinking. Like for example, years ago I read that your heart stops when you sneeze. I didn't question it, I just automatically assumed it as true. For years I believed it until someone told me it was a myth. Right when they said that, it enlightened me. I thought wow, it probably is a myth. At that moment, I finally thought about how it didn't make much since now that someone told me it wasn't true. It took that person's contradiction for me to use my own brain and the intelligence I had the entire time, to give it a second thought.

I thinks this happens because most people learn about religion as children before they are able to logically evaluate the claims. Later, as adults, if there never is a need to question what they were taught as children, those beliefs remain with them.

 

[humanino]

Does my wish that others do not attempt to force upon me their own ethical and behavioral religious rules offend you?

Not at all, and I appreciate your clarification. Thank you for elaborating. I was only concerned that a short message could have been misinterpreted.

 

[Topher925]

You anger The Palin

Appease her with lavish gifts of clothing and trinkets!

I guess we know who Cyrus "prays" to every morning.

Cryus, have you made your hajj to Alaska yet?

 

[negitron]

I guess we know who Cyrus prays to every morning.

Is that what they call it these days? My gramma always told me it would make you go blind.

 

[drankin]

This is all great and warm and fuzzy and just peachy with me; so long as you and your community stay out of my life and government affairs.



Edit: For clarification: "so long as the creeds that you and your community chose to adopt..."

Unfortunately for you we share the same government. So, it's not going to happen. And since government affects your life there will be a conflict there as well. Welcome to the USA (if you are Ameerican).

 

[Pupil]

Unfortunately for you we share the same government. So, it's not going to happen. And since government affects your life there will be a conflict there as well. Welcome to the USA (if you are Ameerican).

If you're in the USA then you shouldn't be saying it's "unfortunate for you," because it's unfortunate for everyone. Our country is built to have a secular government, and any breach of that is bad for everyone, not just Robert.

 

[Cyrus]

Is that what they call it these days? My gramma always told me it would make you go blind.

Blasphemous!

 

[drankin]

If you're in the USA then you shouldn't be saying it's "unfortunate for you," because it's unfortunate for everyone. Our country is built to have a secular government, and any breach of that is bad for everyone, not just Robert.

Of course religion should not influence government policy but religious people are in government, that was my point. Our Constitution makes it a point to both keep religion out of policy and at the same time protect the freedom of religion. Religious people with religious values are always going to be in office. It is a protected freedom. "[N]o religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."- Article 6

 

[Pupil]

Of course religion should not influence government policy but religious people are in government, that was my point. Our Constitution makes it a point to both keep religion out of policy and at the same time protect the freedom of religion. Religious people with religious values are always going to be in office. It is a protected freedom. "[N]o religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."- Article 6

Yes, but their decisions better not be based on religious motives. Many times this is not the case. C'est la vie, I suppose.

 

[drankin]

Of course, sometimes there are religious motiviations. I would not be surprised if there are not hundreds of people who hold office primarily because they feel it is their religious calling. Just look at the signers of the Constitution and their religious affiliations: http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html"

The Quakers even!

 

[Cyrus]

Of course, sometimes there are religious motiviations. I would not be surprised if there are not hundreds of people who hold office primarily because they feel it is their religious calling. Just look at the signers of the Constitution and their religious affiliations: http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html"

The Quakers even!

Yeah, because if you were non-religious (of the religion of the town you represented) no one would vote for you, and you would probably be ran out of town.

 

[robertm]

Of course, sometimes there are religious motiviations. I would not be surprised if there are not hundreds of people who hold office primarily because they feel it is their religious calling. Just look at the signers of the Constitution and their religious affiliations: http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html"

The Quakers even!

Yeah yeah yeah, the founders were religious (although the two coolest ones, Ben and Tom, were deists). This is meaningless. It is written into the constitution that:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

There is a reason that this is the first sentence of the first amendment. Societal decisions should be based on pragmatic observations. What guides our laws should be what works best. Not what arbitrary religious myths one or most people prescribe to. This is the definition of secular state.

If politicians want to "bless" America every time they open their mouths fine, but they can not make any policy based solely on a given religion's creed.

If a persons religion effects they way they govern, then the first amendment is being breached. If my representative's religious beliefs effect my life, the first amendment is being breached. Personal opinion should have no place in Government.

Of course, you will notice I keep saying "should". Obviously, none of this is the case.

 

[seycyrus]

Most atheists I know came to that state after being raised like most people (i.e., with religious beliefs taught to them by their family), yet came to question religion.

Most religious peole I know don't do much fretting about whether god exists or not...it's pretty much a settled question to them.

It's a mystery to me how you're reading that as egotistical.

Sorry for the late reply, real life you know.

It is quite apparent how it is an egotistical statement.

1) You obviously consider thoughtful investigation to have higher merit than thoughtless acceptance.

2)You squarely place yourself in the group that has "...thought about it a lot more..."

Therefore considering 1) and 2), it is obvious that you consider yourself amongst the group that is more enlightened than those relatively ignorant savages who practice religion.

How can you not realize that your statement *was* egotistical?

Considering the fact that your data is entirely anecdotal and at least partially biased I must ask you (and any others that choose to answer)...

How are you different from the clergy and such, in the dark ages (for example) who looked down upon the unlearned and ignorant comon folk and laughed in disdain at their ignorance?

They were certainly more educated and "thought about it more" than the average workmen.

I know you will say "But they were wrong, and I am right! The most educated, brightest minds of our time say so!"

Ahh...

You are the same then, at least in your words.

 

[seycyrus]

I would have to agree with you lisab.

Most of the people I know that belong to a religion belong because that's how they were raised and they've never thought about questioning it.

Most of the people I know who are religous think about their faith on a daily basis.

Most of the atheists I know, only think about their atheism when it comes time to mock religion in general, or the beliefs of others, specifically.

Furthemore, most of the people I know who are atheists have a belief system that stemmed from their rebellious teenager years when they rebelled against mommy and daddy without even a stray thought passing through their mind.

 

[Topher925]

Sorry for the late reply, real life you know.

It is quite apparent how it is an egotistical statement...

Fox News called. They said they want to give you your own show, right after Glen Beck.

 

[seycyrus]

should be based on pragmatic observations. What guides our laws should be what works best.

What??

Works best for who (whom)? According to what criteria?

If a persons religion effects they way they govern, then the first amendment is being breached.

No its not. Not unless it is directly related to the establishment of religion, or the free exercise thereof! You just quoted it.

 

[seycyrus]

Fox News called. They said they want to give you your own show, right after Glen Beck.

Uhm, sorry comrade, if I offended by my commentary.

 

[Pupil]

1) You obviously consider thoughtful investigation to have higher merit than thoughtless acceptance.

I literally laughed out loud when I read this. Obviously. Yes. Thoughtful investigation has higher merit than blind acceptance.

Therefore considering 1) and 2), it is obvious that you consider yourself amongst the group that is more enlightened than those relatively ignorant savages who practice religion.

She never said she was more enlightened and only ignorant savages practice religion. You're burning straw men at the stake, here.

 

[drankin]

I guess it's safe to say that religion influences policy but does not in a way that respects a particular religion.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I would have to agree with you lisab.

Most of the people I know that belong to a religion belong because that's how they were raised and they've never thought about questioning it.

How would you know? Same to you lisab. How would you know what personal struggles a person has with their faith; and what makes you think they would admit it to you when they do?

The fact is that all people of faith struggle with their faith at times; generally not all the time [for some it is all of the time], but at times. Even Mother Theresa admitted that she struggled with her faith. It is a common theme found in every church I have ever attended. Sooner or later, they all address the issue. There are also many books available for people going through a crisis of faith. You all want to make this as if people are brainwashed zombies, but that is nonsense. No matter how a person was raised, eventually faith is a choice. And anyone who chooses faith will struggle with that choice at times. In fact, one the the more famous bible verses is about how even Jesus lost faith [a wild idea for people who believe he was a deity].

In my opinion, what you can't accept is that other intelligent and rational people made a different choice than you did.

 

[seycyrus]

I literally laughed out loud when I read this. Obviously. Yes. Thoughtful investigation has higher merit than blind acceptance.

I never said I disagreed with that sentiment.

Rather, I disagree with her anecdotal evidence regarding who have "thought about it more".

She never said she was more enlightened and only ignorant savages practice religion. You're burning straw men at the stake, here.

Not at all. Note, I said "relatively". When you define a merit system and strongly place yourself in the higher caste, you are making a statement about your own perceived status.

It is evident in which group she self-identifies. It is equally evident regarding into which group she places those that practice religion.

Therefore, in accordance with her belief system (and yours) the non-practitioners have higher merit than the practitioners.

It is the same as stating "In my experience, those with dark hair are harder workers and more intelligent than those with fairer colored hair." "Oh yes, my hair *is* very dark, why thank you."

 

[Pupil]

Not at all. Note, I said "relatively". When you define a merit system and strongly place yourself in the higher caste, you are making a statement about your own perceived status.

It is evident in which group she self-identifies. It is equally evident regarding into which group she places those that practice religion.

Therefore, in accordance with her belief system (and yours) the non-practitioners have higher merit than the practitioners.

It is the same as stating "In my experience, those with dark hair are harder workers and more intelligent than those with fairer colored hair." "Oh yes, my hair *is* very dark, why thank you."

Again, you're just assuming her opinion on things when you have no basis for doing so. She didn't define a merit system, or place herself in a higher cast, or talk about her belief system, and you have no right to tell me what my belief system is or how I look at practitioners.

She made an empirical statement that she observed most people who are atheists questioned their religion and most people who are theists did not.

I agree with what she said, as I have had the same experience. It does not follow that I think I am in a higher cast than religious people or look at them as ignorant, etc, and I find it absurd that you presume I do.