Jump to content

Why don't you believe in God?


mollypolly190

Religion  

324 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you believe that people who are more educated are less likely to have religious beliefs?

    • Yes
      205
    • No
      119


Recommended Posts

http://bowdoinorient.com/article/2625

I read this interesting article and thought it would be a suitable prompt for this thread considering it has diversified from its original go or no god to a broader theological/ atheistic debate.

Basically it tries to pin point where atheistic morals come from. You often hear an atheist say " I can be charitable and kind to my neighbour without having a belief in a Bronze Age god. No need for a misogynist, racist, violent book written by goat herders." Some might say that they simply borrow these values from religion but just reject any divine reason for following these and as well fail to provide an atheistic replacement to justify these actions.

Let the debating and raging ensue!

Edited by Luka Petrovic
Link to post
Share on other sites

http://bowdoinorient.com/article/2625

I read this interesting article and thought it would be a suitable prompt for this thread considering it has diversified from its original go or no god to a broader theological/ atheistic debate.

Basically it tries to pin point where atheistic morals come from. You often hear an atheist say " I can be charitable and kind to my neighbour without having a belief in a Bronze Age god. No need for a misogynist, racist, violent book written by goat herders." Some might say that they simply borrow these values from religion but just reject any divine reason for following these and as well fail to provide an atheistic replacement to justify these actions.

Let the debating and raging ensue!

IMO it's entirely from a social stem. If we wanted to live, from a back-in-the-dark-mists-of-time perspective, we had to work in groups and co-operate or we'd starve as individuals. So we had to have social rules. A bit like a dog pack - only they have social rules but no bible. We're a little more complicated than dogs, of course. Ultimately I want to survive and also personally be unmolested, without letting anybody take advantage of the system whereby we can all function together (hence the justice system). Society protects people who follow the code and rejects people when they realise that they're not following the code, so these people get sent out into the wilderness and can't make it alone. Or nowadays we stick them in prison. I can work as a group with somebody provided I don't steal their stuff and the outcome of this is that we both survive and do better than we would individually. If I steal their stuff, I am not a contributing member of the group and following the rules by which we can all co-operate, and so I'm rejected. Therefore I shall not covet their cows or kill other members of society because it would result in my being kicked out as I can no longer form part of the group. No group wants a thief or somebody who might turn on them.

In short: treat others as you wish to be treated. The fundamental tenet of almost every belief system and also of every equal society. Personally I'm of the view that religions are simply a way of codifying these rules in a simple society. The rules need to be set in stone so that they're explicit enough to challenge people who've broken them and thereby maintain the equilibrium.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I agree some of this might be inherent, but animals also eat their off spring, males kill each other to mate with females and become the alpha male. So is this at all justified because its in our animal nature? I'm pretty sure if I tried any of that today i would wind up in a jail no matter how primal my actions are. So where can you make up for that?

Do we all want to be treated equally and are all of our interest and stakes the same? They are not so rules are not that objective that they are blindingly obvious.

But if there is religion to codify society why did we invent a judiciary and civl court along side the religious one? And are the laws in the judiciary court based off these religious laws?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree some of this might be inherent, but animals also eat their off spring, males kill each other to mate with females and become the alpha male. So is this at all justified because its in our animal nature? I'm pretty sure if I tried any of that today i would wind up in a jail no matter how primal my actions are. So where can you make up for that?

Do we all want to be treated equally and are all of our interest and stakes the same? They are not so rules are not that objective that they are blindingly obvious.

But if there is religion to codify society why did we invent a judiciary and civl court along side the religious one? And are the laws in the judiciary court based off these religious laws?

'Animal nature' isn't really related to what I was saying. If male humans killed each other to become the alpha male, it would prevent social cohesion and success/survival which can only be achieved as a group because you can't have murder within the group and still function. If we ate our offspring, that would also be counter to success. In the past the ancient Greeks left their weak babies out on a hillside because they couldn't care for them (detrimental to the group) and the same in many other societies. Maybe in some places where they were desperate for nutrition, you would eat a weak baby. In our society we don't need to do these things and can support all children so to do so would be harming the group in that sense of an individual's right to freedom from molestation - rather than being a necessary way of preserving an already extant individual or group's right to continue surviving. In the past the group would be damaged by supporting these people. Now the group has capacity to absorb the weak or whatever, and so the priority is no longer survival and it's freedom from molestation and protection of the individual. Each species is different. We are a social species with a complex society so we're not going to behave like dogs or ants or whatever you come up with, but we will behave in a way which is coherent for our pattern of behaviour and our circumstances in terms of success.

As for religious law and judicial law, firstly all of the laws we need for society are not written in the bible. Second to that, the bible doesn't inform you as to what to do for a hell of a lot of situations and god isn't in the habit of raining lightning down on murderers, so you need a system that works in practice. Judgement by your peers and punishment by collective decision is how society polices itself. The bible can't do that, there's nobody to take decisions or enforce them, and it doesn't cover a lot of stuff that we want laws for. "Thou shalt not drink and drive" isn't in there. Similarly, people feel like there's more than just a black and white. If you drink and drive because your wife has left you and you are feeling suicidal, people will punish you differently to if you drink and drive because you're just an idiot who wasn't emotionally disturbed, you just behaved in a thoughtless manner with disregard for other peoples' safety. It's like manslaughter vs murder. Religion doesn't allow for any of that: trial by peers does. Back in the day maybe a simple system worked, but there's always going to be more complex cases or a feeling that responsibility should be allocated elsewhere on a more human level.

Given that I think both religion and civil laws are based largely off what we want to survive together as a group then I guess you could say they're based off the same thing more than one off the other. Only civil laws evolve with the time and religious laws are stuck back in whenever they were designed. No more stoning people and chopping off their hands now, but back then I'm sure that fitted in with the climate of the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree some of this might be inherent, but animals also eat their off spring, males kill each other to mate with females and become the alpha male. So is this at all justified because its in our animal nature? I'm pretty sure if I tried any of that today i would wind up in a jail no matter how primal my actions are. So where can you make up for that?

Do we all want to be treated equally and are all of our interest and stakes the same? They are not so rules are not that objective that they are blindingly obvious.

But if there is religion to codify society why did we invent a judiciary and civl court along side the religious one? And are the laws in the judiciary court based off these religious laws?

'Animal nature' isn't really related to what I was saying. If male humans killed each other to become the alpha male, it would prevent social cohesion and success/survival which can only be achieved as a group because you can't have murder within the group and still function. If we ate our offspring, that would also be counter to success. In the past the ancient Greeks left their weak babies out on a hillside because they couldn't care for them (detrimental to the group) and the same in many other societies. Maybe in some places where they were desperate for nutrition, you would eat a weak baby. In our society we don't need to do these things and can support all children so to do so would be harming the group in that sense of an individual's right to freedom from molestation - rather than being a necessary way of preserving an already extant individual or group's right to continue surviving. In the past the group would be damaged by supporting these people. Now the group has capacity to absorb the weak or whatever, and so the priority is no longer survival and it's freedom from molestation and protection of the individual. Each species is different. We are a social species with a complex society so we're not going to behave like dogs or ants or whatever you come up with, but we will behave in a way which is coherent for our pattern of behaviour and our circumstances in terms of success.

As for religious law and judicial law, firstly all of the laws we need for society are not written in the bible. Second to that, the bible doesn't inform you as to what to do for a hell of a lot of situations and god isn't in the habit of raining lightning down on murderers, so you need a system that works in practice. Judgement by your peers and punishment by collective decision is how society polices itself. The bible can't do that, there's nobody to take decisions or enforce them, and it doesn't cover a lot of stuff that we want laws for. "Thou shalt not drink and drive" isn't in there. Similarly, people feel like there's more than just a black and white. If you drink and drive because your wife has left you and you are feeling suicidal, people will punish you differently to if you drink and drive because you're just an idiot who wasn't emotionally disturbed, you just behaved in a thoughtless manner with disregard for other peoples' safety. It's like manslaughter vs murder. Religion doesn't allow for any of that: trial by peers does. Back in the day maybe a simple system worked, but there's always going to be more complex cases or a feeling that responsibility should be allocated elsewhere on a more human level.

Given that I think both religion and civil laws are based largely off what we want to survive together as a group then I guess you could say they're based off the same thing more than one off the other. Only civil laws evolve with the time and religious laws are stuck back in whenever they were designed. No more stoning people and chopping off their hands now, but back then I'm sure that fitted in with the climate of the time.

it doesn't prevent social cohesion, if it did, lions, wolves and countless other pack animals wouldn't do as well as they do. Its the law of the jungle so to speak.

You make the ancient Greeks and Romans sound as if putting a baby in a ceramic container to die were ethical. Actually a lot of the time these babies wouldn't die, they were instead collected by baby snatchers who would keep them for themselves or sell them on. These children would grow up to become sex slaves and hard labourers for their masters, I don;t see how that is all justifiable or moral on the parents part. Where there is a will or a way, just because you are cornered into an unfortunate situation doesn't mean your actions are justifiable.

You say all of the laws we need for a society are not written in a bible. Well all the laws needed in the US were not written in the constitution. but the laws in each of these documents has provided a framework for a very complex and every changing society, so I'm not sure where that argument puts us.

These laws you speak of are Israelite civil laws. No one, but the Nation of Israel (historically, not the modern one) was supposed to follow these laws. Therefore It is civil laws that are stuck in the times in which they were created. Basic religious laws are the ones that stand the test of time.

This is really hardcore as well. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4QFsKevTXs

Edited by Luka Petrovic
Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't keep up with the whole 15 pg thread but i have a question which i though would be most relevant here. I'm just curious on different perspectives.To the people who say you only believe when something is proved, or in science or when something is put out in front of you. What are your perspectives on morality and ethics how would these be proved how do you judge if something is unethical or immoral? Because just like religion morals are something you believe in so where do you get your moral beliefs from? society? instinct?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I think that religion was created to explain the unexplainable. Where do people go when they die? Why does the sun rise in the morning? Early religions all answer questions similar to these, usually with multiple deities. Now that we know where the sun goes, those religions are revealed as fake. Of course, there's still plenty of mystery in the universe, and we know very little at all in the scheme of things, but I think that as we learn more, religion will be dismissed as cultural myth, like how the Greek parthenon is viewed now.

Religion may stick around of course, because it gives people hope when there is none. They can cope with the loss of a loved one when they feel that they are in a better place .

The main issue I have with religion is how specific it is to humans. What would make humans so special as to be the only ones with souls and God's favor? That doesn't seem fair to me. What about animals, even plants?

Also, my experiences with religion have made me equate religion with ignorance*. Growing up, my parents told me I could believe whatever I wanted and I could make my decisions for myself. My mother was spiritual (believed in a "better place" and a benevolent god), but my father was more logic oriented. When I went to my first year of school and people learned that I didn't go to church, they assumed, "oh, well then she must worship the devil". Of course these were 5-year-old kids, but the teaching was there. Those who equate atheism with immorality irk me in a similar way. Most of my friends are religious and I don't hold that against them as long as they don't try to recruit me.

*side note: I live in Oklahoma, the heart of the Bible Belt, so that's probably where that bias comes from.

Also, I feel like I'm blabbering, so sorry about that :dunno:

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that religion was created to explain the unexplainable. Where do people go when they die? Why does the sun rise in the morning? Early religions all answer questions similar to these, usually with multiple deities. Now that we know where the sun goes, those religions are revealed as fake. Of course, there's still plenty of mystery in the universe, and we know very little at all in the scheme of things, but I think that as we learn more, religion will be dismissed as cultural myth, like how the Greek parthenon is viewed now.

Religion may stick around of course, because it gives people hope when there is none. They can cope with the loss of a loved one when they feel that they are in a better place .

The main issue I have with religion is how specific it is to humans. What would make humans so special as to be the only ones with souls and God's favor? That doesn't seem fair to me. What about animals, even plants?

Also, my experiences with religion have made me equate religion with ignorance*. Growing up, my parents told me I could believe whatever I wanted and I could make my decisions for myself. My mother was spiritual (believed in a "better place" and a benevolent god), but my father was more logic oriented. When I went to my first year of school and people learned that I didn't go to church, they assumed, "oh, well then she must worship the devil". Of course these were 5-year-old kids, but the teaching was there. Those who equate atheism with immorality irk me in a similar way. Most of my friends are religious and I don't hold that against them as long as they don't try to recruit me.

*side note: I live in Oklahoma, the heart of the Bible Belt, so that's probably where that bias comes from.

Also, I feel like I'm blabbering, so sorry about that :dunno:

Well, when you really look at it, almost any academic/educational discipline humans created, were to explain the unknown, the unexplainable. Science, math, geography, etc. we could have gotten rid of religion ages ago, but it still holds on. To reflect your comment, even during the age of the Parthenon, the ancient Greeks were voracious mathematicians, philosophers and and scientists. They even knew that the earth revolved around the sun, rather than the other way around, yet the sun godApollo, was still worshipped.

If you consider religion a survival mechanism, you have to face the self defeating nature of naturalism which believes all we know is just for our survival, it isn't objective. So yes religion is just for survival, but then is everything else we "know" scientifically and we really know nothing. Therefore the theory defeats itself.

Yeah wow, not easy living in the Bible Belt. Born agains, evangelicals, etc, really give a bad name to theists. I can see where a lot of agnosticism, atheism and even anti-theism stems from experiences living in the bible or being in evangelical Christian community/family.

That being said I cant just blame them, those agnostics, atheist and antitheists who have grown up with such examples have to be mindful that being a theist doesn't necessitate not thinking or being logical/ using reason and that historically theologians were insanely intelligent and well rounded individuals. Saying that religions dumbs you down is wrong, dumb people will do dumb things with whatever information you give them. Be it scripture or some trashy secular pop culture.

Well no one says animals don't have souls, I have never heard of a specific teaching in a religion that says so, and the plants thing, well generally we connect the soul on an emotional level. Humans are very emotionally complex, other animals are as well but to a lesser extent. When have you ever seen a plant cry? Or somehow mourn for a fallen fellow flora? So unlike animals and ourselves we aren't even sure plants feel let alone have a soul. Humans as well are (supposedly, but I've seen turtles who are more with it) the most conscious beings with the highest level of reason, logic and understanding. We as a species also hold great power over others. Religion isn't necessary to see that we are quite important and have an important role on this planet.

With atheism though, as seen earlier in the thread, I am unsure where they derive morals. By all means an atheist can be moral, more moral than a theist, but that doesn't mean they got their morals from their atheistic beliefs. I science has no morals, it is objective, nature has some morals, but they are very simple and have their limitations. Where else do we get our morals from other than religions? It's not even just theists who believe this. Nietzsche who was a famous atheist philosopher even said that without god, man cannot be moral. He predicted great atrocities in the 20th century. Which was quite true indeed. The list goes on, Benjamin Franklin a deist, potentially an atheist according to some said " If Men are so wicked as we now see them with Religion what would they be if without it?"

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

My idea for religion has been that i dont believe in it and never will. But i wouldn't ever say why, i think anyone should be able to believe whatever they want without anyone giving their own prejudices

You are right but i think not being able to justify your belief with authenticated evidenec/proof or whatever, shouldn't be considered faith because if one doesn't know about it, how can one believe in it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My idea for religion has been that i dont believe in it and never will. But i wouldn't ever say why, i think anyone should be able to believe whatever they want without anyone giving their own prejudices

You are right but i think not being able to justify your belief with authenticated evidenec/proof or whatever, shouldn't be considered faith because if one doesn't know about it, how can one believe in it.

Now you are talking about a philosophical idea call positivism I think. Now im no philosopher but I think that is when people take the opinion that unless something can be proved by imperial facts, it just becomes something irrelevant.

Again this might sound wrong to you, but it is just MY OWN belief not to believe in any higher power. I have no evidence to prove that there is any god or that there isn't, it is simply the stance that I take.

Link to post
Share on other sites

my thinking may be slightly different: i believe in GOD but not in religion. i believe that God is obviously there. there has to be a creator of everything; the whole world in general or perhaps narrowing it down to a decider or peoples' fates/destinies and one who controls life and death. but religion separates us. i can't put this in the right way but i feel that there should be only one religion, common to all, if any, otherwise we should all believe in God and at the same time, our morals and principles shouldn't be based on religious beliefs. we should all do what is right at all times, even though that differs from each individual's moral values. this probably doesn't make great sense, but there should be equality in religious terms.. that would prevent so many fights, racism, stuff like that.. but ultimately, God is there and he probably decides everything for a reason. moving on to many lives/births..why are there so many poor people? being born into a poor family and suffering, perhaps, without doing anything wrong. why does this happen? i convince myself by assuming that they must have committed loads of sins in their previous births..but if those people are now 'good', why do they suffer? what do you guys think about this?

sorry if i confused y'all

Link to post
Share on other sites

my thinking may be slightly different: i believe in GOD but not in religion. i believe that God is obviously there. there has to be a creator of everything; the whole world in general or perhaps narrowing it down to a decider or peoples' fates/destinies and one who controls life and death. but religion separates us. i can't put this in the right way but i feel that there should be only one religion, common to all, if any, otherwise we should all believe in God and at the same time, our morals and principles shouldn't be based on religious beliefs. we should all do what is right at all times, even though that differs from each individual's moral values. this probably doesn't make great sense, but there should be equality in religious terms.. that would prevent so many fights, racism, stuff like that.. but ultimately, God is there and he probably decides everything for a reason. moving on to many lives/births..why are there so many poor people? being born into a poor family and suffering, perhaps, without doing anything wrong. why does this happen? i convince myself by assuming that they must have committed loads of sins in their previous births..but if those people are now 'good', why do they suffer? what do you guys think about this?

sorry if i confused y'all

Then what is the purpose of him? Who decides how you worship this universal deity and what the morals stemming from their existence are. I hear many people say they are "spiritual but not religious." What does that entail exactly?

Link to post
Share on other sites

my thinking may be slightly different: i believe in GOD but not in religion. i believe that God is obviously there. there has to be a creator of everything; the whole world in general or perhaps narrowing it down to a decider or peoples' fates/destinies and one who controls life and death. but religion separates us. i can't put this in the right way but i feel that there should be only one religion, common to all, if any, otherwise we should all believe in God and at the same time, our morals and principles shouldn't be based on religious beliefs. we should all do what is right at all times, even though that differs from each individual's moral values. this probably doesn't make great sense, but there should be equality in religious terms.. that would prevent so many fights, racism, stuff like that.. but ultimately, God is there and he probably decides everything for a reason. moving on to many lives/births..why are there so many poor people? being born into a poor family and suffering, perhaps, without doing anything wrong. why does this happen? i convince myself by assuming that they must have committed loads of sins in their previous births..but if those people are now 'good', why do they suffer? what do you guys think about this?

sorry if i confused y'all

Then what is the purpose of him? Who decides how you worship this universal deity and what the morals stemming from their existence are. I hear many people say they are "spiritual but not religious." What does that entail exactly?

i mentioned that above; he controls everything. he has created everything and decides peoples' destinies and lots more. well, how to worship this universal deity should be one's choice.. i won't be able to explain it, but my main thoughts revolve around God being one and the fact that i don't believe in a specific religion.. i mean for instance, i wouldn't mind going to either a mosque, church, hindu temple or even not going.. i believe in God and if i want to simply thank him for all that i have, i don't need to believe in a certain religion for that.. you may disagree with me, but this is just one of my beliefs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the reason why i voted yes on the idea that people who are more educated are less likely to believe in religion is because i feel that educated people are often smart due to the fact that they are "question askers." im sure that you have noticed just in tok class that it's okay to question things. one thing however that is a big and perhaps the biggest topic to question is religion. Religion is based off of faith. i have my reasons to believe that there is a God that created me and everything else because i believe that this world is to intricate to have been blown into existence by nothing basically. i know that that statement is very bias and i am not very educated in the science possibilities, but science is truly just everything we believe or "know" to be true isn't it? so why if Back in the day they thought that the idea of the earth being round was such a bogus idea is religion not the same thing? we just can't prove God to exist yet and when and if we can then it will be possible. so my theory is ask more questions and more will be discovered and maybe eventually "God" will be discovered and then it will become science. So if you know that it is science wouldn't knowing God make you more educated? Many of the greatest and smartest people to ever live were religious and many were very religious because they know that there must be something greater out there that can explain this existence.


but tht's just a thought...

Link to post
Share on other sites

the reason why i voted yes on the idea that people who are more educated are less likely to believe in religion is because i feel that educated people are often smart due to the fact that they are "question askers." im sure that you have noticed just in tok class that it's okay to question things. one thing however that is a big and perhaps the biggest topic to question is religion. Religion is based off of faith. i have my reasons to believe that there is a God that created me and everything else because i believe that this world is to intricate to have been blown into existence by nothing basically. i know that that statement is very bias and i am not very educated in the science possibilities, but science is truly just everything we believe or "know" to be true isn't it? so why if Back in the day they thought that the idea of the earth being round was such a bogus idea is religion not the same thing? we just can't prove God to exist yet and when and if we can then it will be possible. so my theory is ask more questions and more will be discovered and maybe eventually "God" will be discovered and then it will become science. So if you know that it is science wouldn't knowing God make you more educated? Many of the greatest and smartest people to ever live were religious and many were very religious because they know that there must be something greater out there that can explain this existence.

but tht's just a thought...

Science is only what we think we know, we are limited by our perception and our bodies. Some come to the conclusion that everything we know is to survive so it may not actually be true, just useful to our survival. Until you can leave the human body, your capabilities are capped.

On the earth is round thing, that whole story is bogus. The ancient Greeks knew that the Earth was round and learned people from then on knew that. The whole earth is flat actually came from people who were not educated either theologically or in some stream of study of the world around us. They interpreted scripture literally and well, thats now making many problems haha.

And yeah many many people stop thinking when they join a religion, but many also grow intellectually through their faith.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really know why but God seems so unlikely to me. I think that God is just something people made up to give them hope, answers and whatnot. And I know that all the scientific theories can't all be proven but those are the one's I chose to believe.

i as an Evangelist christian completely respect this stance from people. You can't prove that God does or does not exist. you just have a hunch of what you choose to believe and you should follow that. i have reasons for believing but if you don't then you don't there's nothing wrong with either way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the reason why i voted yes on the idea that people who are more educated are less likely to believe in religion is because i feel that educated people are often smart due to the fact that they are "question askers." im sure that you have noticed just in tok class that it's okay to question things. one thing however that is a big and perhaps the biggest topic to question is religion. Religion is based off of faith. i have my reasons to believe that there is a God that created me and everything else because i believe that this world is to intricate to have been blown into existence by nothing basically. i know that that statement is very bias and i am not very educated in the science possibilities, but science is truly just everything we believe or "know" to be true isn't it? so why if Back in the day they thought that the idea of the earth being round was such a bogus idea is religion not the same thing? we just can't prove God to exist yet and when and if we can then it will be possible. so my theory is ask more questions and more will be discovered and maybe eventually "God" will be discovered and then it will become science. So if you know that it is science wouldn't knowing God make you more educated? Many of the greatest and smartest people to ever live were religious and many were very religious because they know that there must be something greater out there that can explain this existence.

but tht's just a thought...

Science is only what we think we know, we are limited by our perception and our bodies. Some come to the conclusion that everything we know is to survive so it may not actually be true, just useful to our survival. Until you can leave the human body, your capabilities are capped.

On the earth is round thing, that whole story is bogus. The ancient Greeks knew that the Earth was round and learned people from then on knew that. The whole earth is flat actually came from people who were not educated either theologically or in some stream of study of the world around us. They interpreted scripture literally and well, thats now making many problems haha.

And yeah many many people stop thinking when they join a religion, but many also grow intellectually through their faith.

see people this guy knows his sh!t haha thanks man i very much agree we will never really know what is what but it does make a good discussion topic. i like how you state both directions.

Edited by bear_grylls_of_ib
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Just had to edit this for an interesting point: How amazing is it that people can have such differing views on this subject, and differing levels of belief as well..

Anyway, my monologue:

I love this debate so much - I only wish I had time to read all the answers!

I was raised a Roman Catholic, with a Protestant dad who wasn't involved in our religious education, and understandibly so. So we were RC and went to church every Sunday. Numerous times we thought it was unfair that we had to go to church, and dad didn't :D

But interestingly, both of my siblings got confirmed and now enjoy the (at least) weekly visit to church.

Now, my own position is open, I think. I I don't not believe in God, but at the same time, I don't think I do. I am open to the possibility of one (or many tbh - it's a lot more comical to complain to the RainGod than just God.)

But what started to make me think was when I stopped drawing in church and actually listened to what the priest was saying. And sometimes there was a feeling, just a little nag, that I didn't believe in what was being said, or that it was wrong - that something was wrong with the way it was phrased, or how everything sounded so factual. Just little things that got me frustrated with, what I thought at the time, was a blind sheep mentality by those who practiced RC.

I have in the past asked my mum about RC, and sometimes she can't answer the question. That bothers me. If I were to follow something wholeheartedly, I'd want to know what I was following. Which is why I now don't go to church - I believe that it should be personal choice to go to church, and I do not enjoy the experience of being told things that we should do, without any room for manoeuvring.

There is the possibility, of course, that I didn't need a deity to rely on in times of hardship. Honestly, I've never really had any, and I have always been confident enough to ask my friends or family (who are quality people) or to deal with it myself. God is also an easy answer for the unexplainable. Which I understand, to a certain extent. It's easier to believe things happen for a reason, rather than 'things happen, but not necessarily for a reason.'

As for looking down upon religious people - of course I don't. I think it's necessary that people understand their faith and its complexities (if they only believe in part of a religion, as a consequence, that is still better.) When people are ignorant of the religion they claim to follow, then I get a bit frustrated. Similarly if they try and convert you - I've met people who believe that not believing in the existence of deities = ignorance. And also, actually, when they are incapable of accepting other people's views.

On a side note: I have never met an extremist in any religion, but it would definitely be an interesting conversation. I've seen interviews on Youtube, and it would be interesting to see if my patience was tested as much.

Edited by Champ219
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...