|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Where Faith Comes From in the "moderate" Christian religions | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
In a recent post I've thought about how "moderate" Christians come to their religion besides through the Bible (as to them it's not ALL literally true). If so, then on what do they base their beliefs? Any takers/thoughts?
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : To reset "signature" to smaller font size. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Added the "in the "moderate" Christian religions" part to the topic title. Also changed the "all" to "ALL. I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. - Stephen Roberts I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in- Dan Foutes "In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."- Douglas Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
Are my beliefs illogical? Yes, most definitely. I don't need to rely solely on the Bible for my personal beliefs, though my critics contend that my God is in fact a made-up imaginary friend.My personal conversion experience, however, was quite real to me, and carries a lot of weight in my decision making process pertaining to belief. What I'm asking is that if you don't believe in God because of the Bible, then where do you get that belief from? (If you answer "from God," why didn't He talk to you before you picked up his bestseller?)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
If your "conversion experience" played that big a role, then what was it like? Was it a bunch of evangelists saying "we'ew better, come play w/ us," was it a revelation as expressed earlier, or was it the influence of friends and family around you.
Also, if you cannot discard your belief because your are convinced it was real, then why did you pick it up in the first place? If it is too hard to discard it now, then why did you pick it up before? I will admit that there is a possibility of being already influenced along with a combination of the other factors. I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. - Stephen Roberts I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in- Dan Foutes "In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."- Douglas Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
I agree. There are people who may have begun their belief because of their parents/culture/tradition/etc, but continue to believe for no other reason than that they want to. For a while in middle school, I was sort of in this group. I liked the idea of a parental figure in heaven who would watch out for me, and more importantly, a way for me to continue to "live" or be aware after death. Same here. I have a bunch of friends who can never answer if I ask them a religious question, and if I ask them why they keep worshipping, they just can't think of a response. I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. - Stephen Roberts I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in- Dan Foutes "In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."- Douglas Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
My faith at the time was basically based on an arbitrary choice to believe what my parents had believed. I was comfortable with believing - I'd done it since I was a child, I had a massive support group telling validating those beliefs, etc. Which is exactly why I'm firmly against indoctrination. I'm fine with faith. You can have your perfect relationship with your god(s) all you want; but once you set up a religion, once you try to spread beyond yourself or any others who have come to your same conclusions independently, that's when it becomes a religion and that's when I have a problem with it. Religion, face it: your masses should choose their own path instead of blindly following your words. I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. - Stephen Roberts I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in- Dan Foutes "In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."- Douglas Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
I have read that religious experiences can be stimulated electrically, so your observation that they seem to be built in seems to be correct.
Yes in fact they can be, as they stimulate a feeling of "oneness" similarly to that of many drugs such as LSD. In fact, the fact that LSD affects the brain in that manner means that there are receptors for that chemical in the brain, and thus the "Religious experience" can be produced naturally by the brain.
I have not had one of these experiences, but I gather that they can be very convincing.
Yes in fact they are. In Michael Shermer's book How we believe, he describes how he went through the electric current and was stimulated into an idea of spirituality. The reason that it did not blow into a full religious experience was the doubting and skepticism on Shermer's part.
I wonder if faith arises in part from some sort of flaw in the wiring of our brains.
That is a good guess, but no. Religion arose through humans seeking patterns in their environment: it was a sort of adaption trait in the early human's life. Priests and medicine men tended to get more women. In addition, the idea of a God that was watching over the tribe/city/nation was definitely both an orderly set of rules (their theology) as well as a confidence builder (in that they could travel farther from home or wage more war) I'd really like to recommend Shermer's book. It's one of the best I've come across in a long time. I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. - Stephen Roberts I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in- Dan Foutes "In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."- Douglas Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
Ah. Thank you Oni. I thought I had the right drug, but I wasn't sure. I read somewhere that LSD promotes a feeling of spirituality or oneness and ascribed that to religion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
It is my opinion that for these trips to give a sense of spirituality one must have an apriori belief in things of that nature. Atheists coming into the trip without such beliefs really have no notion of spirituality, for the most part, and don't really tap into that neural brain processing. - (complete speculation) Exactly. See Message 24 for details on this.
Now, a "oneness" is different. But this would require use to define what we mean by "oneness." I have felt a oneness with nature, both on LSD and shrooms. Maybe some consider that spiritual, I wouldn't, though. By oneness I meant with the universe, a kind of "Nirvana" or complete understanding. True? No. Convincing? Yes. (to many)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
Indeed, if the book of Genesis didn't exist at all, or if we dismissed it as a fairy-tale with no sort of divine inspiration behind it even considered as allegory, we could still observe that humans in general, and we ourselves in particular, fall short of moral perfection. (And you will note in practice that when evangelists try to persuade people that they are in need of a savior, they don't start by trying to convince their audience that they are descended from Adam and Eve and then go on to prove that they must be morally imperfect on those grounds: because there is a much more direct way to reach this conclusion.) Of course, this implies that there is some form of human moral perfection. (note human- not God/angels/Jesus)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
He is dismissing it because, unless you can prove that God was able to guide evolution throughout and did so, there is no reason to suspect it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
So, in short, I base my religious beliefs on promoting humanity, as opposed to dodging accountability towards it. Accountability towards humanity is obviously how the continuous living of the world is accomplished. One Love An admirable view. I wish all theists thought this way.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
It is not necessary to add the proposition that he guided our evolution from a temporal point of view. When a computer programmer writes a program to produce fractals, s/he writes the program, puts in some parameters, and presses the START button: we should think the programmer very inferior if s/he had to keep pausing the program and tinkering with the variables. Yes; however, this would be a more deistic POV. Theists, though, do believe that God needs to keep tinkering with us and can't leave well enough alone. Good points about active guidance v. initial parameters.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
A theist doesn't believe that God needs to tinker with everything. Having said "Let there be gravity", he doesn't need to intervene to make things fall. Yes, but this is only in relation to the laws of the universe which God can (apparently) break to perform his miracles.
Christians are doubtless obliged to believe that God has performed some miracles, but they are not thereby obliged to deny that some things happen by secondary causes. Note my quote below.
Theists...do believe that God needs to keep tinkering with us and can't leave well enough alone. (emphasis mine)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
But that in science, in reality, the theory very often comes before the observation. Just as Einstein said: 'The theory determines what we can observe'. In some cases, slevesque, you are right. However, in many cases, you are mistaken. I notice that you said in most cases, not all, which is why I am not addressing that. However, in most prominent cases, such as the BBT (worked out w/ equations) or ToE (formed from observations while on a cruise).
In regards to Popper, he says that scientist do not work according to the scientific method, because to say you can start with observations but without a theory is absurd. I hope that you by "theory" you mean "hypothesis," as hypotheses are are formed through observation and should not attempt to misinterpret the facts, rather they should follow the scientific method. Theories are formed after many observations, experiments, and the combination of many conforming hypotheses.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Teapots&unicorns Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 178 Joined: |
jaywill writes:
Of course, that assumption would be completely unfounded. Are you under the impression that anyone was making such an assumption? "Some animals are extinct. Therefore Evolution took place" has always seemed to me a shaky assumption. I think he's got it down wrong- if anything it's the opposite- we have animals now that didn't exist then. Of course, thus isn't the entire ToE, just an observation If anything, you are talking about natural selection, only one part of the ToE. Edited by Teapots&unicorns, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024