Religion
Related: About this forumI’m an atheist. So why can’t I shake God?
Turns out it's pretty hard to believe in nothing when your psyche is wired for faith
By Elizabeth King
February 4 at 6:00 AM
I spoke in tongues when I was a kid. I went to church twice a week with my mom, stepdad and my five siblings. I prayed before every meal, every night before bed and various times throughout the day. I believed in the Bible and I feared hell. Until my mid-teens, I was a born again Christian who loved God with all her heart. These days, though, Im an atheist with nothing to prove.
The story of my departure from the church resembles that of many others who have abandoned the flock. When I was about 16, I started asking questions during services that my youth pastors couldnt or didnt want to answer: Why is it a sin to be gay? Why is it okay to spank children? Where does the Bible say we cant have premarital sex?
When these questions were given the time of day, youth leaders at my church would smugly tell me that I must be struggling with some things in my own heart to be so concerned about these topics and would point to something vague in the Bible. When I persisted I was told to just have faith.
By the time I was asking those questions, I didnt have faith anymore. I didnt believe there was a God, or heaven and hell. It wasnt even a choice that I had made, I had just slowly stopped believing until suddenly all of it was gone.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/02/04/im-an-atheist-so-why-cant-i-shake-god/
merrily
(45,251 posts)In the space between those two sentences is the answer to the question in the subject line.
Nothing doesn't love you unconditionally.
Nothing doesn't hear your prayers, let alone answer them.
Nothing does not give you hope of seeing your deceased love ones again.
And on and on.
On and off, I have been a believer, and an atheist and back again to both. No matter where I was on the continuum, when something was very bad or very scary, I prayed or asked a believer to pray.
rug
(82,333 posts)While it's true that many, believers or not, turn to thoughts of a God (which is not the same as praying) when things are very bad or scary, I wonder how many think of a God in times of joy or happiness.
merrily
(45,251 posts)I don't like sharing a lot online. However, I do say both "Please" and "Thank you."
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Our religion-teacher showed us this diagram how there are different degrees of Christians:
People who go to church but don't help others were considered better Christians than people who don't go to church but help others.
The most important thing for Jesus Christ was loving thy neighbour! Why was going to church suddenly more important than loving thy neighbour?
That was the moment my attitude on religion changed from confusion and disinterest to criticism and curiosity.
rug
(82,333 posts)It completely erodes the unifying and universal nature of most religions.
It doesn't have to be that way.
merrily
(45,251 posts)by the New Testament to Jesus.
I'm not trying to encourage you or anyone to believe in the Bible, but it does say certain things and that diagram is not consistent with the things the Bible says.
rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)Is hardly consistent within its own fantasy universe.
Why do people believe any of this obvious woo?
merrily
(45,251 posts)If not, please don't purport to be replying to my post. Thanks.
rug
(82,333 posts)Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)Seems to be more of a simple-minded distortion to believe there aren't inconsistencies in the bible.
rug
(82,333 posts)By all means, explain that simple-minded distortion.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)I suspect you can't provide an answer to that question.
rug
(82,333 posts)Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)If you want to continue to play games, by all means do so. Your negative responses are quite telling.
From now on, I'll simply repost the question and give you the opportunity to continue to evade it:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=222820
rug
(82,333 posts)"Why do people believe any of this obvious woo?"
That unvarnished, broad-brushed statement, unmitigated by any limitation, characterizes the entirety of beliefs of billions of human beings, and the thousands of years of human history exploring human beliefs, as "woo". That is simple-minded distortion, bordering on bigotry, in its purest form. Not to mention, it's stupid.
Now go defend it.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)But that doesn't make it a distortion.
The earth has 4 corners. Noah lived to be over 900 years old. The earth is only a few thousand years old. These are only a few things found or commonly interpreted from the bible which are obvious woo. Now I suspect you don't believe in such nonsense, but that doesn't change the fact that many people do. So the question still remains as to why, and if all you have to offer in response is name calling and claiming it's a distortion, then it leads one to believe you don't have a good answer.
rug
(82,333 posts)As does your response. If your condemnation of religion is based on a literal reading of texts, you really don't have very much.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)I'm not condemning religion "based on a literal reading of texts".
Please don't forget that misrepresenting what someone else wrote and preceding to argue on that basis is a pretty solid indicator that you really don't have very much.
For further reading see...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
rug
(82,333 posts)Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)I was assuming your answer to that question would be yes, but this may have been a poor assumption.
rug
(82,333 posts)Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)What I am saying - and have said - is that your loathing for religion is based on a literalist reading of text.
One of us is a literalist. It's not me.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)...when obviously you have no way of knowing.
At least for the first time you have provided a direct answer to a direct question, and you should be commended for it. Asking relevant questions and expecting relevant answers is the basis of substantive discussion.
Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, quite a few people are bible literalists, including public policy makers. When asked if they thought the world was 6,000 years old, Cruz refused to answer. Rubio says he's not a scientist. Carson said yes. At the risk of insulting your intelligence, you may not realize new earth creationism is now being taught in US schools. Do you also think it's a distortion of religion to point that out and condemn it?
rug
(82,333 posts)It said:
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)Now I suspect the question was rhetorical, but you chose to answer it, albeit with thinly veiled namecalling and claims of distortion you have yet to explain.
I'd certainly like to know why people believe any of this obvious woo. Especially since it's so often used as a basis for public policy. YMMV.
rug
(82,333 posts)Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)The circle was promised in post #38, so if you're just now coming to that realization, you're almost 20 posts behind the power curve.
rug
(82,333 posts)It is now decaying at an alarming rate.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)If you are testing my limits for silly nonsense, I can assure you I'm prepared to let you run with that as long as you want.
rug
(82,333 posts)Brettongarcia
(2,262 posts)It would be better if you included just the next short sentence: "Or so I thought"
rug
(82,333 posts)Copyright and all. It's not all that difficult to click the link and read it all.
Brettongarcia
(2,262 posts)Any particular reason? Including just one more sentence would help make things clearer .
As it is, your intro distorts or incorrectly diagrams this avowed atheist's position.
rug
(82,333 posts)That's precisely as she wrote it.
Why don't you discuss the article instead of the excerpt?
Brettongarcia
(2,262 posts)Sometimes many people appear to make exaggerated statements, just because we have taken only part of what they said. In this case, deleting one earlier paragraph, with ellipses, and adding this one, would have better introduced the author's point.
Regarding our atheist's point? I think the case that we are " hardwired" for religion is not good. Hardwired means built into the physical structure of the brain. Implying that say, chimpanzees might have religion. But more likely, most of it is not biological, but cultural. Most of us over 30 were very, very systematically indoctrinated in religion, in Sunday School or church or school, or through tv religion and social pressure. Which was anything but natural or biological.
Those who believe, like to assert their beliefs are entirely natural and inevitable. But there's plenty of academic discussion on this; from the famous "nature vs. nature" debate.
Possibly there is an animal instinct to be silent before loud or threatening authorities, though. Aggressive religious preachers and religious terrorists probably got lots of followers that way.
"Fear of the Lord" as even the Bible says, is the beginning of much of religion. Much of religion relies on silence before intimidation.
rug
(82,333 posts)Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)The things attributed to Jesus by the bible, mostly cool, especially for the Iron Age.
The things attributed to Jesus by many modern Christians,
Some people evolve backwards or, at best, in a southwestern direction.
Mariana
(14,847 posts)The first commandment is to love God. Your religion teacher apparently believed that attending church was an expression of obedience to that one. See Mark 12: 28-31 and Matthew 22: 37-39
Also, Jesus never defined what he meant by "your neighbor". Some people interpret it to mean all human beings, and some people don't.
merrily
(45,251 posts)There were no Christian churches in the Bible. What is referred to as the "church" are only groups of people. These were either pagans or Jews who had converted to Christianity. If they went to any place of formal worship at all, it was a Jewish temple or a pagan temple. Then, they came together with each other socially, in each other's homes--and none of that necessarily equates to loving God, which is in the heart and mind, if anywhere.
Jesus taught against public displays of various kinds. This was a response to public shows of piety and ritual that had grown up among the Jews, esp. by "whited sepulchers"
Matthew 6 King James Version
1 Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.
2 Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
3 But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:
4 That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.
5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
See also, Matthew 23
SwankyXomb
(2,030 posts)if you're not going to church, you're not giving them money, and that's really what it's all about.
safeinOhio
(32,527 posts)Never find myself praying, but sometimes I think about if I'll be lucky or not. Both are crazy.
nil desperandum
(654 posts)became problematic for me as well. Perhaps a different set of clergy that was comfortable discussing uncomfortable questions with a teenager might have changed things. I was asked to stop coming if I was going to ask those questions and not accept that there were no answers for certain questions.
I tried a few other iterations of christianity with much the same result, then I read some of the things written by the founders. I found myself interested in Jefferson's quote that said one day the mythical creating of Jesus from the womb of the virgin would be thought of in the same way as the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.
Some reading usually leads to other reading, by the time I joined the military way back when my dog tags would state that I had "NO PREF" for religion.
On more than one occasion my lack of faith came up during my service. Sometimes it would feel like life would be easier if I had the ability on blind faith to accept that presence of the almighty.
After the military I no longer live in a bible belt or religious area, most people keep their religion to themselves. I get the occasional door knocker whom I politely send on their way.
I don't claim to have any special insight. My experiences around the world have led me to the point where I am comfortable stating I've seen no evidence of any godlike beings directing human activity, and if the things I've seen are directed by god, then all of you are in some serious trouble when you meet that god.
edhopper
(33,188 posts)thus we have an evolutionary explanation for God and religion, and evidence that God is a man made artifact to satisfy an instinct.
rug
(82,333 posts)In other words, a hypothesis.
Beware of confirmation bias.
edhopper
(33,188 posts)I only said evidence. And yes evidence in support of a hypothesis.
I do find the evolutionary roots of religion and belief very interesting.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)It's not hard to imagine how daily indoctrination in one's formative years is going to have a lasting effect. That doesn't mean anyone would have any such inclination absent such indoctrination.
rug
(82,333 posts)Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)Nonbelievers who become believers doesn't prove any inherent inclination toward belief either.
rug
(82,333 posts)Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)If you are trying to be willfully obtuse, you are doing a good job.
rug
(82,333 posts)Why are you walking away from it?
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)If you don't understand what I wrote, you should ask relevant questions that do not force one to accept a false premise. I'm not going to play those games other than to point out how childish they are.
rug
(82,333 posts)Apparently you don't.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)I'm afraid I must insist on a more adult level of discourse. Playing childish games is fun for a while, but they get old really quick.
rug
(82,333 posts)I won't hold it against yo. Or feel the need to call you names.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)If you ask a loaded question, you're not going to get an answer no matter how much you pout about it. If you want to call that evasion, then by all means do so. That only reflects poorly on you as does your failure to answer relevant questions which looks quite a bit like a familiar story about a pot and a kettle.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=222820
Turns out it's pretty hard to believe in nothing when your psyche is wired for faith
...just when you've been indoctrinated in it since you were a child and developed the habit of thinking and speaking in those terms.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)The brains of mammals are both prewired for certain things and can be rewired for others. The latter seems far more likely in this instance.
The question still remains that if we had no preconceived notion of superstition, would we invent it? The OP doesn't shed much light on that question.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)I don't deny the existence of god. I'm just unconvinced of any evidence for one or more.
I feel no obligation to reason against something that was never proven to begin with.