Rationalizing faith.

[DBT]

To think that your life's work, everything you have struggled for, built, accumulated, loved, cherished, become attached to....comes to nothing in the end. Others may enjoy the fruits of your labour, but for you, it is the end.

 

[Learner]

Worshipping will still remain. Self-worship (selfies included), worshipping of other people because they "look good" or they argue about "who's the baddest" and bow down etc.. (all sorts of influencial emotions involved especially when they're young) - the woshipping all sorts of idols, so to speak. Getting rid of religion doesn't get rid of those bad human traits, as you know.

That's an improvement, finding idols to "worship" among real things instead of deranged fantasies.

We're not going to agree on what the deranged fantasies are, but, are you sure of the improvements in (at least some of) these "real things?" One example: Children as young as 9 years old want to have plastic surgery to look like their idols - children being sexualised by trendy fashions and celebrity worship (some parents go along with it). THe reality thats also happened, teenage suicide-pacts around the world or Self-harm because of the lyrics of a dark trendy song.

Desensitizing how young people view violence, like, just standing there chuckling when someone (including old people) gets beat senseless or knocked out, capturing on video for the view counts, which seems somewhat "normal" these days, like some other social media crazy thing.

But it's not exactly religious worship, is it? if the idols are temporary enthusiasms?

Temporary enthusiasms, as you put it, can affect someone in negative or positive ways depending on the circumstances, which may go further as influencial in their lives, as you know.

 

[Angry Floof]

My infinite loop detector light is flashing, the last word is yours.

Fine. But remember my questions for the next time.

I suppose part of the social media environment is people who think they are locked in life or death battles with anonymous people.

I'll get back to you when my light saber is fully recharged.

I suppose part of the social media environment is people who find it so easy to dismiss others as superficial or delusional when they point out the superficiality and delusion of religion. It's not possible, in your mind, that I've lived a life of experiences and have spent time thinking, reading, and talking on these subjects. This is not a claim to expertise but rather a rebuttal to your unfair and itself superficial dismissal of me.

Again, there is not one thing that religion offers to human experience that can't be had without it.

Again, if religion "goes away," there is no need to replace it with anything. It will replace itself with more conscious, mature, and realistic values and principles. The only things that would "go away" with religion are backward, unneeded, archaic, inhumane, and superstitious beliefs. Everything you think religion offers humanity, we already have. Religion is the animal brain urge to control people through fear and fantasy, and requires ignorance to survive. We are capable of changing our minds with new information and experiences. Religion is just an extraneous parasite taking credit for these things we already have.

Whatever we value and cherish, we can find better, more humane symbols, stories, and concepts to represent these things. We already do that, only religion is the aspect of culture where we take old stories literally, even when they are ridiculous and have no relevance to reality or human life.

 

[abaddon]

We're not going to agree on what the deranged fantasies are, but, are you sure of the improvements in (at least some of) these "real things?" One example: Children as young as 9 years old want to have plastic surgery to look like their idols - children being sexualised by trendy fashions and celebrity worship (some parents go along with it). THe reality thats also happened, teenage suicide-pacts around the world or Self-harm because of the lyrics of a dark trendy song.

Looks like another instance of too-easily 'believing in' things.

Desensitizing how young people view violence, like, just standing there chuckling when someone (including old people) gets beat senseless or knocked out, capturing on video for the view counts, which seems somewhat "normal" these days, like some other social media crazy thing.

Temporary enthusiasms, as you put it, can affect someone in negative or positive ways depending on the circumstances, which may go further as influencial in their lives, as you know.

I'm going to guess that the basic idea here is that people have a center of greater meaningfulness and support if they "worship God" (ie, devote their mind to something less trite than the bright shiny objects). But it's hard to find this point when it's couched in terms of obedience to an external being which to me is only another idol.

 

[steve_bank]

learner, do we have to start listing all the abuses of religion thorough history?Please don't give us the dodge that does not really represent religion.

Back in the 80s gay men were tierd up in barbed wire fences and dragged behind cars, all because good moral Christians believe what Leviticus says.

There is no morality in the bible, except a combative warlike tribe called Hebrews who believe in an all powerful god gas their backs as long as they worship.

 

[Learner]

I've only touched upon just some of the things that would be regarded as harmful or insane, which doesn't require religion/Christianity. I thought we all agree here at least (without the need for "dodging") i.e., humans do what they do - good things & strange harmful things, regardless.

(I won't go off into the various scriptures now, I'll just say: Each to his own interpretive opinion of the bible Christian theology.)

 

[DBT]

Should not the sheer diversity in theology and interpretation cause believers to think and to question their own assumptions and beliefs?

 

[Politesse]

Should not the sheer diversity in theology and interpretation cause believers to think and to question their own assumptions and beliefs?

Sure. Why wouldn't you want to do that anyway?

 

[DBT]

Should not the sheer diversity in theology and interpretation cause believers to think and to question their own assumptions and beliefs?

Sure. Why wouldn't you want to do that anyway?

How many do? Generally speaking, is it serious questioning of one's cherished beliefs or just times of doubt that are quickly rationalized or suppressed in order to maintain one's faith?

 

[Politesse]

Should not the sheer diversity in theology and interpretation cause believers to think and to question their own assumptions and beliefs?

Sure. Why wouldn't you want to do that anyway?

How many do? Generally speaking, is it serious questioning of one's cherished beliefs or just times of doubt that are quickly rationalized or suppressed in order to maintain one's faith?

I'm sure "most atheists" see any inquiry that doesn't end with a declaration of atheism as "times of doubt that are quickly rationalized or suppressed in order to maintain one's faith".

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Should not the sheer diversity in theology and interpretation cause believers to think and to question their own assumptions and beliefs?

Sure. Why wouldn't you want to do that anyway?

How many do? Generally speaking, is it serious questioning of one's cherished beliefs or just times of doubt that are quickly rationalized or suppressed in order to maintain one's faith?

It's an identity issue for a person and the person's group. That identity is something to be protected because it means nothing less than survival. So the reaction is certainly understandable. We all need and have an identity, obviously.

To Poli's point about atheists, however, we're saying we don't have a religious component to our identity. When many of us were young Santa belief was very important but it's going to be pretty tough to get under an adult's skin by disparaging them for not venerating the great Claus. Among a group of first-graders it might be an issue.

 

[abaddon]

the types of theology
(basic list taken from https://redeeminggod.com/types-of-theology/)

1. Natural theology - arguments for EoG based on reason and empirical evidence.

(IOW, rationalization of fantasy.)
​

2. Biblical theology - knowledge about God from the bible.

(IOW, indulging fantasies that will require rationalizations.)
​

3. Historical theology - knowledge about God from the ideas about God over time.

(IOW, rationalizing the fantasies using earlier rationalizations.)
​

4. Systematic theology - knowledge about God that synthesize the other types of theology.

(IOW, fantasizing a "big picture" from all the rationalizations about God.)
​

5. Dogmatic theology - knowledge about God that emphasizes church-approved ideas.

(IOW, deferring to authoritative assertions about which of the rationalizations are "true".)
​

6. Practical theology - ways to apply the "knowledge about God" to life.

(IOW, trying to squeeze pragmatic value from the haze of rationalizations.)
​

 

[abaddon]

How many do? Generally speaking, is it serious questioning of one's cherished beliefs or just times of doubt that are quickly rationalized or suppressed in order to maintain one's faith?

I'm sure "most atheists" see any inquiry that doesn't end with a declaration of atheism as "times of doubt that are quickly rationalized or suppressed in order to maintain one's faith".

Do you have some examples of what's there that should survive doubt?

 

[Angry Floof]

I've only touched upon just some of the things that would be regarded as harmful or insane, which doesn't require religion/Christianity. I thought we all agree here at least (without the need for "dodging") i.e., humans do what they do - good things & strange harmful things, regardless.

(I won't go off into the various scriptures now, I'll just say: Each to his own interpretive opinion of the bible Christian theology.)

The "evil doesn't require religion" argument is an important part of the Chase the Strawman game. Every single religious apologist will use it at some point, and some will repeat it over and over and over no matter how many times it is exposed as nonsense.

Of course evil doesn't require religion. It only requires human nature, which is where religion comes from in the first place. It's a human construct in response to our fears and ignorance of our own nature. Blaming a supernatural external evil entity, believing Others are in the grasp of said entity, punishment of Other as righteous - often tempered as "spiritual" warfare - as if that could stop the animal brain fear and violence that latches so easily and naturally to a story of absolute good and evil with a punisher god in charge of it all, seeking out protection from a loving, nurturing parent (crazy that y'all turned a mother goddess into the male one-god authoritarian shitshow we have now and/or relegating the powerful mother to the role of weak, crying nursemaid, but that's another topic).

Anyway, evil requires human nature, but much of religion cultivates the worst of that nature. I've posted about this time and again, but it seems to go over the heads of religious apologists.

If you can't question an authority, how will you fight back if an authority abuses you or someone else?

If belief is absolute and certain, how would you change your mind with new information? And there is always going to be new information. This is the only reason religion is often centuries behind in its teachings, and yet religious organizations as well as individuals will often straight up murder people who don't agree!

If you are "saved" and others are "not saved," and your whole framework of reality is based in an absolute binary of good and evil, how do you manage to not fall into an "us vs. them" mentality and remember that you're not actually any different from the rest of humanity, which is what you need to maintain any kind of compassion for people not like you, even people you hate. Not many people manage this and the ones who do are actually better humans in their ordinary humanity than their supposed moral system would have them be.

And you can't expect the ignorant and uninitiated to understand any nuance or metaphor you might claim is in these teachings? What we see in the world around us, you know, reality, the real life we actually live and the reality we all share and in which we experience any pain or joy, what we see is white supremacists and Christianity tightly intertwined.

Why can't Christianity, if it's so damn good for humans, prevent white surpemacy and the violence and suffering and social chaos that come from it? Why can't Christianity, if it's so damn good for humans, prevent lynchings in its name, child abuse, the Inquisition, murder of homosexuals, etc., etc., etc.?

It's not enough to just say "It's not Christianity's fault." Because, yes, it fucking is. So many of the basic tenets of Christianity are conducive to the evil behaviors we see being done in its name.

Once again:
- Authority worship
- Scriptures/teachings/authority figures cannot be questioned
- Doubt is a mortal sin
- Black and white framework of good (us) vs. evil (them - and there is always a them as you cannot fight an imaginary devil so conveniently put that devil into your out-groups and have someone to fight)
- Insistence on conformity to traditional beliefs as determined by denomination or church authority
- Punishment of non-conformity, varying in degree across denominations and churches
- Insistence on conformity from everyone else in society
- Punishment of non-conformity of everyone else in society

Important point here: when an authoritarian cult such as Christianity is a small and weak group within a larger society, they of course will not impose their beliefs on anyone because that larger society will not tolerate it, whether that society is just in their treatment of minorities or not.

But when the authoritarian cult such as Christianity is baked into the society's substrate, even if the society is secular in its founding ideals and documents, that "majority" of Christians (mainly by indoctrinated identity and "belief in belief" rather than actual belief), insinuates its way into government and politics, like it has been doing recently in the U.S. starting with Reagan and building with every Republican admin and ratcheting its way to state sanctioned white supremacy and violence, you can forget about the meek and kindly minority shit. Every bit of that black and white, fear-based theology will arise in society exactly as we are seeing it. And if left unchecked, will become what we see in other theocratic nations with women brutalized and controlled, outgroups punished, gays murdered, men (white men in the case of the U.S.) enjoying all the privilege and freedom and exacting the punishments and laws.

Back to the list:

- Obedience to authority figures (father, pastor, God, political or religious mouthpiece in media). Followers submit to the authority even on small, private issues such as how they wipe their asses or what they can eat
- Little or no empathy for out-groups, varying with denomination and church, vastly decreased and turning to hatred and violence when the religious group has power over the entire society
- Anti-pluralism
- Strong nationalism
- Few leaders, many followers


A people who worship authority and cannot question that authority are just sheep for any con man who comes along and says the right things to make them feel good. This is a real no-brainer but seems to be lost on religious apologists.

Not every strain of Christianity is a Monsanto superweed of authoritarianism, bigotry, war, etc., given the right conditions. Quakers, for example, don't have conformity or evangelism as their core beliefs. They are so far removed from Christianity because they value respect for autonomy, pacifism, and humility. The faith and beliefs of The Friends, as they are formally called, are more like Buddhism in that they focus on practices of self reflection and humility. They don't just pay it lip service like almost the entire rest of Christendom.

I'm pretty sure no one will read all of this, least of all a religious apologist, but if you don't understand by now that "It's not Christianity's fault, it's human nature's fault" is a lie and a copout, that is your lack of intellectual honesty, no one else's.

 

[DBT]

How many do? Generally speaking, is it serious questioning of one's cherished beliefs or just times of doubt that are quickly rationalized or suppressed in order to maintain one's faith?

I'm sure "most atheists" see any inquiry that doesn't end with a declaration of atheism as "times of doubt that are quickly rationalized or suppressed in order to maintain one's faith".

You avoided the question.

Putting aside the lack of foundation for a justified conviction, evidence...just given the contradictory nature of theology, not everyone can be right, Hindus, Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc, cannot all have the truth, logically most must be wrong, their belief must logically be false.

So if a believer genuinely questions their faith, would not the first step be to realize this? That the odds are that what you believe to be true is most likely to be false....

 

[steve_bank]

Should not the sheer diversity in theology and interpretation cause believers to think and to question their own assumptions and beliefs?

It leads to conflict up through today. Shiite vs Sunni Muslims. Protestants vs protestants. Protestants vs Catholics. In the 90s there was a contentious spitt in the American Anglican church over gays. One group aligned with a anti gay congregation in Uganda of all places. American Christin's argue over who is the REAL Christian.

My chronic refrain is region is no different than any other other group in terms of morality and actions.

 

[Angry Floof]

Should not the sheer diversity in theology and interpretation cause believers to think and to question their own assumptions and beliefs?

My chronic refrain is region is no different than any other other group in terms of morality and actions.

And you would be wrong. Religions vary wildly in their beliefs, and what we believe influences our perceptions and choices. Beliefs can and should be examined in light of the psychology, attitudes, and behaviors they encourage.

 

[steve_bank]

I've only touched upon just some of the things that would be regarded as harmful or insane, which doesn't require religion/Christianity. I thought we all agree here at least (without the need for "dodging") i.e., humans do what they do - good things & strange harmful things, regardless.

(I won't go off into the various scriptures now, I'll just say: Each to his own interpretive opinion of the bible Christian theology.)

There was a Law And Order episode that touched on this.

Someone hears god tell him to kill prostitutes, is he insane or responsible for murders he commits?

Wicans, Satan worshippers, Ekamkar and a host of other tarditions are all the same to me. Pick your posing. IIn the 70s I read Diary Of A drug Fiend by Aleister Crowly. He was a brit who creted a mystical following with robes and rituals. Drugs were probably part of it, in the end he fleeced people for money mostly from the upper class.

Then there is Scientology. There is a possible link between Crowley and Hubbard who was a 2nd rate scifi writer and bullshit artist, Trump like.

He created Duane tics and a tradition involving ETs and spirits entering the body. He used the E Meter, essentially a skin resistance galvanometer used as part of lies detection equipment. It detects sweat.

That in a broad sense is how I view organizd religion. Corrupt mostly male power structures.

Christianity was created probably based on undocumented stories of a Jewish mystic. The gospels are obviously a reflection of Greek mythology.PT Barnum and his freak show made him money. It is all the sane behavior underneath.

The problem with Abrahamic faiths is the assumption of a singular moral authority saying what is good and what is evill. suppressing anything deed evil.

Evil to me is justifying any actions in the name of a god.

 

[DBT]

My chronic refrain is region is no different than any other other group in terms of morality and actions.

There are variations, the Quran gives instructions to the faithful on how to deal with non believers, for instance.

 

[steve_bank]

My chronic refrain is region is no different than any other other group in terms of morality and actions.

There are variations, the Quran gives instructions to the faithful on how to deal with non believers, for instance.

The Koran is more structured and coherent written by one person as compared to the incoherent bible. However the Koran is open to interpretation. It does say tolerance for non believers who do not threaten Islam.

I read a book on Mohamed. A traditional story says when people observed his wife bathing nude in a public pond and complained, he resounded the sin is not in the nakedness' it is in the eye of the beholder.

Any Imam can issue an interpretive fatwa, but it holds no authority.