What's your religion?

[Pixelholic]

That is the best thing ever said.

I am also an atheist. When I have children, I might expose them to my ancestral religion (Hinduism) by taking them to temples etc. But I will always teach them to be critical of religious dogma, and hope -- though I won't insist -- that they see through the charades that define religion.

I am told that my type -- ENFP -- makes people more prone to spirituality and religious beliefs. That might be the case; I continue to admire
spiritual beauty, but I feel that by taking part in it I am doing something contrary to my beliefs.

just teach them to think critically and the rest will fall into place. I agree with teh ENFP spirituality thing. It's like we're hardwired for it, but I think most humans are. I just find my spiritual wonder in the universe itself in the same vein as Sagan.

 

[Mole]

Disbelief and the Suspension of Disbelief

Why can't we have our cake and eat it too?

Why can't we disbelieve and suspend our disbelief?

It's plain some disbelieve and some suspend their disbelief. And as nothing human is foreign to us, why don't we have both.

Of course some will say it is not logical to do both. And this is true if we try to do both at once, for not only is it illogical, it is impossible. However it is possible to do both at different times and in different places.

There are those who will swear by disbelief and swear they are atheists, and yet think nothing of suspending their disbelief in a movie theatre.

And so we only have to move across the road to a church, synagogue, mosque or temple and suspend our disbelief there. After all, it is only a change of venue but the suspension of disbelief is exactly the same as in the movie theatre.

So it seems odd to me that atheists refuse to suspend their disbelief in a house of worship but will suspend their disbelief in a movie theatre. It seems like special pleading. It's unseemly.

 

[Pixelholic]

actually Atheists treat movies and religion as the same thing: Fiction.

Not really any special pleading needed.

 

[Mole]

actually Atheists treat movies and religion as the same thing: Fiction.

Not really any special pleading needed.

That still leaves us with the problem that atheists go to the movies but not to houses of worship.

 

[Andy]

Why can't we have our cake and eat it too?

Why can't we disbelieve and suspend our disbelief?

It's plain some disbelieve and some suspend their disbelief. And as nothing human is foreign to us, why don't we have both.

Of course some will say it is not logical to do both. And this is true if we try to do both at once, for not only is it illogical, it is impossible. However it is possible to do both at different times and in different places.

There are those who will swear by disbelief and swear they are atheists, and yet think nothing of suspending their disbelief in a movie theatre.

And so we only have to move across the road to a church, synagogue, mosque or temple and suspend our disbelief there. After all, it is only a change of venue but the suspension of disbelief is exactly the same as in the movie theatre.

So it seems odd to me that atheists refuse to suspend their disbelief in a house of worship but will suspend their disbelief in a movie theatre. It seems like special pleading. It's unseemly.

The essential differance is that in a movie you suspend your disbelief about something to allow it to be accepted as part of the story. In church, you would have to suspend your disbelief in order to accept something as part of reality, which is a different feat altogether.

 

[Pixelholic]

Because fiction that tries to convince you that it is not fiction gets really tiresome. Also if one is interested in learning about the religion then a house of worship is a terrible place to go to do research.

 

[Sniffles]

actually Atheists treat movies and religion as the same thing: Fiction.

Ever hear of something called a parable?

 

[Pixelholic]

Yeah I have. Last I checked they weren't solely religious. And since they are primarily analogies, they are usually fictitious.

 

[Riva]

Well I managed to get half-way through where he said he didnt give a damn about my beliefs, to which of course I decided to repay in kind. His little temper tantrum is one of the best proofs to show the truth of Proverbs 24:7 "Wisdom is too high for a fool to understand."

Your wisdom is so high Peguy I do not understand you. I must be a fool . I especially don't understand how you could believe your beliefs are 'wisdom' & anyone who denies them is a fool. So I guess I must be a fool.

 

[Sniffles]

Yeah I have. Last I checked they weren't solely religious. And since they are primarily analogies, they are usually fictitious.

They're fictitious but still convey a moral truth. So whether Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, or the prodigal son really did squander his family inheritance is quite irrelevant. Not to mention there are distinctions between the historical books like Maccabees or Kings I&II(to give two examples) and say the Book of Job or Proverbs. It's been argued that the Bible as well as other ancient texts don't necessarily fall into modern categories of fiction or non-fiction; but might constitute an entirely different genre called "Faction".

 

[Pixelholic]

True enough. Where I grew up most of the people I met were Christian Literalists. So when I refer to the parable parts of the bible as fiction, its more a refutation of them rather than any attempt to reduce the morality tales.

 

[KLessard]

Christian. Baptist to be precise, although I don't limit my faith to the Baptist doctrines.

 

[Mole]

Crossing the Road

Ever hear of something called a parable?

Yes, this is a good point Peguy.

But perhaps I should explain what I am trying to do here.

I am trying to look at belief and disbelief from a different point of view.

And the point of view I have chosen is the suspension of disbelief.

Normally the suspension of disbelief is applied to art, from the movies to painting and from short stories to opera. But here I am doing something different - I am applying it to worship.

This is not so strange as it might appear as drama began as morality plays inside the church then moved to an outdoor stage attached to the back of the church. And interestingly we have such as stage attached to the back of the Uniting Church just up the road from me. (These stages have a particular name - perhaps Peguy can tell us). And then the play moved from the back of the church to the theatre and then to the movie theatre.

So all I am suggesting is that we move in the opposite direction. And instead of moving from the church to the movies, we move from the movies to the church.

This is entirely possible because in both cases we do exactly the same thing - we suspend our disbelief.

And it does us no credit to diss the suspension of disbelief by using the pejorative word, 'fiction'.

Let me say quite clearly that those who diss the suspension of disbelief are lacking imagination. They are impoverished and wish to impoverish us all.

Peguy, for instance, does not lack imagination and so he wishes to enrich us all.

And in like form I am suggesting we enrich ourselves by taking our high level skill, the suspension of disbelief, from the movies and cross the street to our chosen house of worship.

Or don't you believe me? In that case all you need to do is to suspend your disbelief and cross the road with me.

 

[Coriolis]

It was quite popular when it first came out, being one of the main slogans of the Christian Socialist and Social Gospel movements.

Interesting. I haven't researched the history of Christian slogans, but I am not surprised. Perhaps the trend is cyclic.

 

[Coriolis]

The essential differance is that in a movie you suspend your disbelief about something to allow it to be accepted as part of the story. In church, you would have to suspend your disbelief in order to accept something as part of reality, which is a different feat altogether.

Also, people usually go to the movies to be entertained. Should atheists then add church services to the local performing arts calendar and attend for the entertainment value?

 

[Nonsensical]

When does one abandon Agnosticism and fall into Atheism? I'm stuck between the two.

 

[Mole]

Also, people usually go to the movies to be entertained. Should atheists then add church services to the local performing arts calendar and attend for the entertainment value?

Only a short time ago the church was the centre of social life in the village.

And as we are now moving into the global village, it is time to reclaim the church for the social life of the earth.

 

[Coriolis]

Only a short time ago the church was the centre of social life in the village.

And as we are now moving into the global village, it is time to reclaim the church for the social life of the earth.

Ah. So is it your contention, then, that atheists should attend church for the social value? Would it be equally effective for religious people to go to the movies more? Perhaps everyone should start attending more sporting events. If the primary purpose is fostering communty social life, this can be done in many venues.

 

[ragashree]

When does one abandon Agnosticism and fall into Atheism? I'm stuck between the two.

When you cease to regard the question of whether some form of deity or higher power truly exists as a meaningful one, and come to consider it an irrelevance or a folly.

 

[Mole]

Ah. So is it your contention, then, that atheists should attend church for the social value? Would it be equally effective for religious people to go to the movies more? Perhaps everyone should start attending more sporting events. If the primary purpose is fostering communty social life, this can be done in many venues.

Quite so.

And I notice that many churches are falling into disuse and so what appears to be a problem may be an opportunity.

And as we are moving from individual literacy to the electronic tribe of the global village, now may be the time to reclaim the churches for the noosphere.

And the noosphere has many religious elements. It was coined by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, a paleontologist, a geologist and a Jesuit priest who took part in the discovery of Peking Man. And the noosphere has abolished time and space. So we are all like angels - disembodied pure spirits.

Our appropriate place is in the churches, but churches not with pulpits but huge liquid crystal screens on the walls, connected to the liquid crystal screens and cameras of all the other churches in the world.

The global village made manifest.