Is Religious Faith just another Religious Myth

[ideologyhunter]

It's valuing life all the more because it's a desperately finite commodity. Hello, life. Goodbye, life. Glad I had my spin. Hope I did something good here and there.

 

[southernhybrid]

It's valuing life all the more because it's a desperately finite commodity. Hello, life. Goodbye, life. Glad I had my spin. Hope I did something good here and there.

Yeah. I can go with that. What makes us healthy and satisfied, imo, is to find a purpose, try to follow a healthy lifestyle, make friends, be sociable, ( when we're not having a pandemic ) be a life long learner, assuming you don't suffer from cognitive deficiencies, and give support and if possible do little things for people who aren't as lucky or as we say in the south, "blessed" as you are. I'm fine with that word because blessing can be secular and genetic.

I have no problem with people who have the need for religion as long as they understand there is no empirical evidence for their beliefs. I do have one dirt poor friend, who has health problems and isn't educated, but is a dear, sweet woman who never complains. She depends on her religion to give her hope and depends on her church for emotional support.

As long as the Christian is a loving person who doesn't use their beliefs as a weapon, I'm fine with that. When it's used to condemn people like me because we insist on having some believable evidence to support any claim of the supernatural, it becomes a cause for division.

So to some extent, I get that some people find comfort in religion, but I don't understand why anyone thinks that an egotistical god who's primary goal is to receive praise is a morally upright position. The Bible god is obviously evil, or afflicted with a mental disorder. Sure he's a fictional character, but a fictional character who is deeply flawed. Humans are deeply flawed too, so I guess it makes sense in a way that humans would create a god with the same positive and negative traits as humanity.

 

[Lion IRC]

...I get that some people find comfort in religion

Some atheists find comfort in believing there's no God.
It allows them to live like there's no tomorrow.

 

[steve_bank]

...I get that some people find comfort in religion

Some atheists find comfort in believing there's no God.
It allows them to live like there's no tomorrow.

Can you quote somebody on that? For me I ma just relieved I never got caught up in it.

Not everyone needs to escape the reality of existence and can just deal with it. The finality of life.

 

[abaddon]

Some atheists find comfort in believing there's no God.

It's only a matter of not taking up the belief that there is a God. Not everything is a matter of belief... but can a believer like you understand that?

Not having the god-belief has a nice side-effect: no need to fret over the loss of that belief.

It allows them to live like there's no tomorrow.

Do you mean an after-death "tomorrow" where there's a reckoning with this gawd-thingamajig, where we answer for whatthefuckever? Another needless burden, to take up any belief at all about an "after-death" state.

 

[DBT]

...I get that some people find comfort in religion

Some atheists find comfort in believing there's no God.
It allows them to live like there's no tomorrow.

There are consequences to the things we do today.....cause and effect.

 

[southernhybrid]

...I get that some people find comfort in religion

Some atheists find comfort in believing there's no God.
It allows them to live like there's no tomorrow.

I know a lot of atheists but I've never met one like that. Not believing in god doesn't bring comfort and discomfort. It doesn't change one's morality. Sadly, I've known Christians who use their religion as an excuse to be assholes. If they believe they have sinned, all they think they need to do is ask forgiveness from their invisible friend. I'm not claiming that's always the case, but it's common these days.

 

[abaddon]

...I get that some people find comfort in religion

Some atheists find comfort in believing there's no God.
It allows them to live like there's no tomorrow.

I know a lot of atheists but I've never met one like that. Not believing in god doesn't bring comfort and discomfort. It doesn't change one's morality.

Some ancient cult-leader said otherwise in Romans 1. A cultist is going to believe that fellow's assertions instead of observing and thinking for himself.

Romans 1 tells how God has always been obvious, so "the unrighteous" gentiles (I guess all pagans and atheists) have to reason away our deep-seated belief in God. So now we're neck-deep in our desires for sin because, according to 'the Book' we have rejected God.

Someone who's intent on believing this bizarre nonsense, to be "righteous", probably doesn't care much if he's an asshole.

 

[southernhybrid]

I know a lot of atheists but I've never met one like that. Not believing in god doesn't bring comfort and discomfort. It doesn't change one's morality.

Some ancient cult-leader said otherwise in Romans 1. A cultist is going to believe that fellow's assertions instead of observing and thinking for himself.

Romans 1 tells how God has always been obvious, so "the unrighteous" gentiles (I guess all pagans and atheists) have to reason away our deep-seated belief in God. So now we're neck-deep in our desires for sin because, according to 'the Book' we have rejected God.

Someone who's intent on believing this bizarre nonsense, to be "righteous", probably doesn't care much if he's an asshole.

That's true. In fact, these folks don't even realize they are assholes. Those are the type of people who I knew during my childhood indoctrination into evangelical Christianity. They tended to be very self righteous and seemed to enjoy condemning others outside of their religion.

 

[remez]

Oh please spare us the pity party remez! You have no idea what we atheist sometimes have to put up with when we are open about our lack of belief in gods………………….

…..very cute. Projection at its best.

 

[remez]

Remez is out to assail what he calls the "blind-faith, no reason, no evidence insulting straw man" that we atheists are throwing his way. The trouble is, when you have faith in invisible entities you can characterize them any way you choose, and believers do, and therefore any quality that he finds to be in the 'blind faith' category you will find fully embodied in people you meet, religious tracts, TV preachers, Mike Pence meditations, etc. etc. It is no fabrication to say that much of what goes for accepted wisdom in publicly stated religion is smack dab in the blind faith, no reason, no evidence category. Such as, to quote a self-described Bible lover, "This virus will someday just go away, like a miracle!" Or try this quote from St. Ignatius: "We should always be disposed to believe that what appears to be white is really black, if the hierarchy of the Church so decides."
Speaking just for me, and not the Worldwide Atheist Conspiracy, I look at that quote using Remez' rubric and say: Blind faith? Check. No reason? Check. No evidence? Double check. Insulting? No. Accurate and justified. It's a blind faith, no reason, no evidence way of looking at the world.

Parsed below

Remez is out to assail what he calls the "blind-faith, no reason, no evidence insulting straw man" that we atheists are throwing his way.

Absolutely.

The trouble is, when you have faith in invisible entities you can characterize them any way you choose,

Also true. I do believe in invisible things. But that doesn’t necessitate that I just make up characterizations about those things. The trouble IS you have this arbitrary process of dismissing invisible things predicated solely on the possible danger that people just make things up. We all believe in invisible things………electrons, gravity, logic and mathematics, moral, ethics, etc. Should we dismiss those as well?

and believers do,….

Some do. Why is it reasonable to suggest all do? Some atheists believed in stupid things like the steady state theory. Does that mean all atheists should be considered to be making things up? Further as you infer….Does that render cosmology stupid?

and therefore any quality that he finds to be in the 'blind faith' category …..

I don’t find any quality to blind faith.

you will find fully embodied in people you meet, religious tracts, TV preachers, Mike Pence meditations, etc. etc. It is no fabrication to say that much of what goes for accepted wisdom in publicly stated religion is smack dab in the blind faith, no reason, no evidence category.

Agreed. But there are stupid atheists as well. There are great atheists that say stupid things about some things and brilliant things about other things. Does that render all atheists stupid and of one mind? Example Krauss’ equivocation of “nothing” was very stupid. Yet I don’t find him to be a stupid man with everything. And I find the quantum world completely fascinating and full of reason. Just not his particular reasoning about a universe from “nothing.”

Such as, to quote a self-described Bible lover, "This virus will someday just go away, like a miracle!"

I know of many Christian doctors in my circle of influence that have voiced that particular line of reasoning to be stupid on two different levels. I have discussed this with them because it is so timely relevant and prevalent with stupid Christians. I have redressed Christians of this particular error on two different levels. The reasoning and the mischaracterization of a miracle. I agree it makes Christians look stupid, but to infer that more reasonable Christians reason that way is stupid. Just because it is described for some does not mean it should be prescribed to all and it does not render the God they believe in nonexistent. It just means they, like many atheists, are stupid on some wrong minded idea.

Or try this quote from St. Ignatius: "We should always be disposed to believe that what appears to be white is really black, if the hierarchy of the Church so decides."

No context for that. How do I know you are using it properly?

Speaking just for me, …..

Now you recognize the misuse of overgeneralizing? How inconsistent of you.

Speaking just for me, and not the Worldwide Atheist Conspiracy, I look at that quote using Remez' rubric and say: Blind faith? Check. No reason? Check. No evidence? Double check.

Then for once show me where I have espoused blind faith. You are operating under the false IDEALOGY that if you say it enough it must be true. Even though it flies completely in the face that I have repeatedly advocated against believing in anything without good reason.

Insulting? No.

YES Completely insulting.

Accurate and justified. It's a blind faith, no reason, no evidence way of looking at the world.

It’s neither accurate nor justified. For I have completely advocated against blind faith. Yet you are deluded that I do.

ideologyhunter is Deluded….checkmate.

 

[remez]

That's been the theme from the get-go, hasn't it? …… Isn't that why you're on about "the disparaging straw man"?

To counter the OP …Yes.

That's not a reverse of the OP. That's quite a distorted caricature.

Two parts there with an implicit “BECAUSE” that needs to be made explicit……SO............

That's not a reverse of the OP.

Why……………..?
BECAUSE…..

That's quite a distorted caricature.

….well that was precisely my point…….it was a straw man.

Maybe try to read the OP for what the intention is without going "insults! insults!"

Please you are telling me to ignore the obvious, fallacious, assumption to discuss the intention. Be fair.

Seriously. “without going "insults! insults!"” Complete oversimplification. You mean “without reasoning "that the intended discussion shouldn’t proceed since its main assumption is fallacious in an insulting fashion"
You are saying to me...........
“Just ignore that part already remez, and move on. We all "know" you can’t deal with reason because you’ll just believe it anyway.”

Now why oh why would that be insulting at all?

"It"... reasoning... isn't a singular thing. IOW, it's really not an "it" but an assortment of reasons for your beliefs. Some are clever, some not so much. I meant "you have [some] clever reasons", not that your whole reasoned faith is a coherent line of argument.

Fine. That’s all I was after. I’m not blind to the fact that you’ll find some theistic reasoning uncompelling. I was only redressing the insulting assumption (not yours, the OP) that there is no evidence or reasoning.

Reason and faith is a weird mix of some reasons with some articles of faith.

What do you mean by “some articles of faith?”

For I’m contending that I have reasons for what I believe. It is NOT NOT NOT a mix of reason and blind faith. We all need reasons for what we believe. I do not believe the universe is past finite based on blind faith. I contend you have to ignore the evidence for a past finite universe to believe that it is infinite or can't be determined, which is more in line with blind faith.

So "reasoned faith" is just piling reasons, rationalization, on top of a mythological critter like God. The being was already there before people started scratching around for some clever philosophical reasons to believe it.

That is your blind faith that “reasoned faith” is an epistemic process of presupposing God’s existence. Natural theology does not presuppose God’s existence. It reasons from nature to the existence of a first cause. The KCA does not presuppose God’s existence. It reasons from nature to a cause.
Further …….
You seem to be inferring that the argument is circular, because the conclusion existed prior to the construction of the argument. What makes an argument circular is that the conclusion is assumed in the premises not that the conclusion existed before the construction of the argument.

This is the reason for arguing with theists. Not just to elicit their automated programming but to say "your reasons have issues, you should rethink them".

Perfectly fine. That is the same reason why I’m attempting to reason with you and the cuddle huddle. Here in this particular thread, the OP had presented a misperception of the way theism works. The same with you and your misperception that natural theism presupposes God’s existence. You should rethink that?

That the faith article behind the reasons seems untouchable by reason (because the rationalizations always get more desperate) looks like that is the part of it all which is blind faith.

Nothing I have presented is beyond the touch of reason. Where you get uncomfortable is when my reason goes beyond the touch of science. At that point you blur the line and say we can’t reason any further and those that do are operating with a blind faith. Test me on this. Show me where my belief is not properly reasoned. I do not believe in anything without reason. Somethings are held very tentatively but not without reason. God’s existence is not tentative to me and is clearly open for new opposition.

Are there people who produce no reasons at all? who are 100% automated? I'd be surprised if there are.

Me too. But that is what the OP was inferring. DBT continues to broadcast that exact propaganda hiding behind is arbitrary and deceptive definitional approach.

But I never used the word "blind faith" to mean they haven't thought up rationalizations ("reasons").

I didn’t say you did that wholesale, but there are places in your reasoning where you do reason that. When you argued…“faith articles are beyond the reach of reason.”

Just that they're going on a lot about something that hasn't reached "justified true belief" status.

And that is the debate. Isn’t it?

To you….. a past finite universe has not reached the level of justified belief. To me it has.
So….
Why do you get to assume that your stunted belief is more rational than mine, or that my belief is beyond the touch of reason because you refuse to reason further?

At this point of conflict between you and I regarding the past finite universe, we each need to make a case for why our beliefs are more reasonable than the other…..more plausible. Yet every time I say that, you proclaim I’m getting fanatical and unreasonable.

Literally…… this is a compelling issue. (Sorry couldn’t resist) Seriously though, just because you are less compelled to believe something does not render your stunted belief more rational. For example….I for one disagree with those opposed to immunization/vaccination of children. I’m guessing you would too.

 

[remez]

Some atheists find comfort in believing there's no God.

It's only a matter of not taking up the belief that there is a God. Not everything is a matter of belief... but can a believer like you understand that?

Not having the god-belief has a nice side-effect: no need to fret over the loss of that belief.

Not having food to eat has a nice side benefit: no need to fret over getting fat.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

That's true. In fact, these folks don't even realize they are assholes. Those are the type of people who I knew during my childhood indoctrination into evangelical Christianity. They tended to be very self righteous and seemed to enjoy condemning others outside of their religion.

I remember some of those. This one girl said I was walking in his blood, grabbed her stomach like she was in some kind of pain, I thought she was going to hurl. Some of them are damn good actors obviously, though not very convincing for those who've outgrown the need for overly emotional theatrics.

 

[Lion IRC]

...I get that some people find comfort in religion

Some atheists find comfort in believing there's no God.
It allows them to live like there's no tomorrow.

I know a lot of atheists but I've never met one like that...

Well I know a lot of (biblical) theists and I never met one who said God is an invented belief - a placebo.

Wanna make a deal?
I'll stop accusing atheists of wishful thinking if you return the courtesy.

 

[remez]

That's true. In fact, these folks don't even realize they are assholes. Those are the type of people who I knew during my childhood indoctrination into evangelical Christianity. They tended to be very self righteous and seemed to enjoy condemning others outside of their religion.

I remember some of those. This one girl said I was walking in his blood, grabbed her stomach like she was in some kind of pain, I thought she was going to hurl. Some of them are damn good actors obviously, though not very convincing for those who've outgrown the need for overly emotional theatrics.

....and the pity party continues. Everybody huddle up some more.

 

[steve_bank]

...I get that some people find comfort in religion

Some atheists find comfort in believing there's no God.
It allows them to live like there's no tomorrow.

There are consequences to the things we do today.....cause and effect.

Like our politicians invoking god to help them when they are unable to deal with reality. So far god has not responded while we descend into chaos.

 

[DBT]

There are consequences to the things we do today.....cause and effect.

Like our politicians invoking god to help them when they are unable to deal with reality. So far god has not responded while we descend into chaos.

God in any of its versions, Allah, Yahweh, Brahman, etc, etc, doesn't appear to be helpful. Not at all helpful. Why, it's just like nothing is there.

 

[ideologyhunter]

"For many who live after Auschwitz, however, it is God, not genocide, that is inconceivable."
-Approaches to Auschwitz, Richard L. Rubenstein and John K. Roth

 

[steve_bank]

There are consequences to the things we do today.....cause and effect.

Like our politicians invoking god to help them when they are unable to deal with reality. So far god has not responded while we descend into chaos.

God in any of its versions, Allah, Yahweh, Brahman, etc, etc, doesn't appear to be helpful. Not at all helpful. Why, it's just like nothing is there.

The old saying, 'god helps those who help themselves'.