What's Wrong About Religion?

[Lark]

I actually agree with Tellenbach. Rationality means reasoning from facts and evidence. Given that the Bible/Koran/[pick your book] is not sufficient evidence of God, belief in God requires a suspension of rationality. I've said it before, no intelligent argument can be made for God, because the assumption of the supernatural is totally baseless.

What you're describing is empiricism rather than rationalism, its actually radical empiricism at that, which would deny A LOT of things besides deities, divinity etc.

Scriptures are not evidence of God for anyone who does not believe in scriptural literalism, like the majority of Christians excepting the reformation/schismatic churches.

Thomas Acquinas worked out a number of proofs of God's existence from reason alone, the RCC does not hold to all of them still but it does hold that belief in God's existence is a product of reason, as well as revelation. I'm not sure that supernatural is as correct as it is to say it is mysterious.

It sounds like you're concerned to have a critical, questioning approach to your beliefs, that's great, that's a good thing and I'd recommend one of the great rationalists to you Francis Bacon, his essays on all things, including religion, are very good. He suggested that a little learning inclines people to atheism but greater depth of learning inclines the same people to theism instead.

 

[Tellenbach]

What you're describing is empiricism rather than rationalism, its actually radical empiricism at that, which would deny A LOT of things besides deities, divinity etc.

Lots of people have seen ghosts or experienced God; I have no problem with people believing in such things. Religion becomes a problem when the ideology contradicts what is obvious. People in North Korea actually believe the crazy fat kid is a god when we all know he's just a chubby asshole.

 

[???]

I suppose its like how children learn to walk before they've given a walking tour much thought.

Or that everyone learns to speak a language instead of free stylingly inventing one on the spot.

Sometimes its hard to admit that someone other than you could've asked all the difficult questions already and come up with some pretty good answers already. You know. Independently of you or your input. Then it becomes an enduring tradition which everyone relies upon, often without even acknowledging they're doing so.

Innovation and novel ideas are fine but think of them as the football teams and tradition is the pitch they're playing on.

Fair enough.
But then out of curiosity, if people are relying on others for answers, then do you think religion should come with open disclaimers about the limits of their faith? Or at least some kind of open criticism that people could be aware of as well?

Cause last week, I had Jehovah's Witness come to my house to try and convince me to join their church. They had a lot of arguments for their beliefs and I told them why I thought they were flawed. So they ended up saying that everyone wants to be loved and that God loves everyone and that I should give it a chance. I wanted to say that some people may not want to be loved, but it didn't seem like something I should say, so I just said "I guess so" in a way that sounded like I was agreeing with them and they left. It seems like often religion preys on the impressionable or those that seek something like love or belonging or some kind of answer. And not that there is anything wrong with wanting that or even having religion provide it, but when religion appeals to these emotional or spiritual needs to bring in new members, it feels kind of exploitative. These people aren't provided with an understanding of what they are getting into.

 

[???]

Lots of people have seen ghosts or experienced God; I have no problem with people believing in such things. Religion becomes a problem when the ideology contradicts what is obvious. People in North Korea actually believe the crazy fat kid is a god when we all know he's just a chubby asshole.

But why would a mortal choose such a haircut?

 

[Lark]

Lots of people have seen ghosts or experienced God; I have no problem with people believing in such things. Religion becomes a problem when the ideology contradicts what is obvious. People in North Korea actually believe the crazy fat kid is a god when we all know he's just a chubby asshole.

To be honest I dont think the ghosts and experiences of God are as important to religion as I understand it but its true that religion generally gets considered at its worst rather than at its best, its a shame but what you going to do?

Besides point it out to people in the hope they'll maybe consider it. Not much really.

You're right that ideology fulfills the function of religion to a lot of people who've repressed that side of themselves or imagined they can expunge that from their natures. Again, what you going to do? It happens.

 

[Wunjo]

Like I said, "for many people". I didn't say for everyone.

So where are all the libertarians? What are the obstacles? I think religion is a major obstacle.

Firstly, yes, you did not and still, it's not really libertarian I think to be that intolerant; if the people in question are generally being intolerant of you. True, there are many intolerant among religious people but correlation does not equate to causation, according to simple math.

Secondly, an important percentage of the libertarians in my country either have a faith or practice some sort of religion; while others are deists, atheists etc. and they seem to get along quite well.

But then again, it's just another part of the world.

 

[Totenkindly]

Cause last week, I had Jehovah's Witness come to my house to try and convince me to join their church. They had a lot of arguments for their beliefs and I told them why I thought they were flawed. So they ended up saying that everyone wants to be loved and that God loves everyone and that I should give it a chance. I wanted to say that some people may not want to be loved, but it didn't seem like something I should say, so I just said "I guess so" in a way that sounded like I was agreeing with them and they left. It seems like often religion preys on the impressionable or those that seek something like love or belonging or some kind of answer. And not that there is anything wrong with wanting that or even having religion provide it, but when religion appeals to these emotional or spiritual needs to bring in new members, it feels kind of exploitative. These people aren't provided with an understanding of what they are getting into.

There is also the bit where, maybe a person might support/share their beliefs about love, but that doesn't mean they need to buy into their faith to hold those values -- or that their faith has exclusive ownership of such values.

Basically, religion can be a facet or tool to explore / "put a face on" how you approach certain values; but I get kinda wiggy at faiths that claim to have an exclusive hold on goodness and ethics. That's where they veer into exploitation. I do think they can prey on the lonely (looking to be included) and on the confused (who want to make sense of life) and on those riddled by guilt (who want to feel better about themselves) -- human needs that they offer a prepackaged resolution for. There are likely other ways to alleviate those issues, but the religion (if packaged well) makes it sound much more convenient and easy to buy into their solution.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

It's a bit of a mindfuck with all underlying human psychology dynamics dialed up to 11. Living up to expectations dialed to 11, guilt tripping dialed to 11, conformity pressure dialed to 11. It's is too much to take literally and wears me out.

 

[LightSun]

I read from a plethora of wisdom based sources. So I have read philosophy, psychology, comparative religions in the world as well Secular quotable’s.

I love Jesus teachings. I however hold true those of a not supernatural lean toward. Too me Jesus is the Agape of compassion and as well love. On the contrary I favor western societies (R.E.B.T.) Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy by Dr. Albert E. Ellis.

I’ve read A New Guide To Rational Living and Reason and Emotion In Psychotherapy. Along also CBT Dr. David B. Burns Feeling Good:New Mood Therapy and Feeling Good Handbook. These particular notable books rank #1 and #2 of a list of over 1,000 self help books in the psychology field by written by Dr. David B. Burns MD.

I brought the psychology written source to parallel Eastern Buddhism’s Mindfullness. In Westerners approach of R.E.B.T. with C.B.T. lies a list of termed cognitive distortions. I take what I find sensible from the various religious and secular quotes.

I do not however dogmatically give 100% dogmatic approach to any discipline. All religious text have the fallibility of a human being with human failing. Thus there is no full proof true religion. We can not know the mind of God.

In all the religions there lay scripture of what are (cognitive distortions); ‘All or Nothing or rather Black and White thought process,’ with a host of ‘Generalizations,’ Both are in cognitive error. I have found in researches those individuals that believe in a just and fair world tend to by scientific research to tend and be far more judgmental. Blame the victim as it were.

Those who holding to some dogmatic position can be judgmental. People being varied and to a degree polarizing, one can’t make all or nothing claim. It is in error.

 

[Jaguar]

What's wrong about religion. Do you have a couple of hours?

 

[Virtual ghost]

What's wrong about religion. Do you have a couple of hours?

Hours ?

 

[Lark]

Hours ?

I know, the thing is flawless!

 

[Luminous]

Hours ?

Days? Weeks? Months? Years?

 

[tinker683]

I think if anyone is making you feel guilty for exploring faith and trying to grow as an individual, you need to limit your exposure to that individual or group of individuals.

 

[Firebird 8118]

I think if anyone is making you feel guilty for exploring faith and trying to grow as an individual, you need to limit your exposure to that individual or group of individuals.

I agree - just as atheists shouldn't be judged for not believing in a higher power, religious people shouldn't be judged for their beliefs. I mean, if you're not hurting anyone or forcing anyone to see things the way you do, there's no harm in it and it's no one's business to judge.

And now I realize that the above statement can apply to just about anything, so yay.

 

[Coriolis]

I think if anyone is making you feel guilty for exploring faith and trying to grow as an individual, you need to limit your exposure to that individual or group of individuals.

It is the people that won't explore, that simply accept some faith blindly, that are more concerning. I encourage anyone pursuing earnest exploration, even if it leads them to realizations and perspectives different than mine.

 

[Earl Grey]

The misuse and cherrypicking to one's own ends. People who do that and end up like preachers are as unpleasant to look at as some 5 year old who picked up an algebra book and is badly trying to explain their own limited and selective view of things. You can't even teach, yet you are preaching? Sadly, there is no school to kick them out of for that kind of stupid, it is a self-made institution with an un-fire-able boss who ignores complaints.