DiscussMormonism.com

I have heard similar arguments made by C.S. Lewis, LDS general authorities, colleagues, and even family members. When I finally realized that this is the foundation of most people's faith, I was done with religion. Comments in bold.


This may surprise you, but I’m actually not big on “reasons” to believe in God’s existence. I’ve never met anyone who believed in God because they figured out the cosmos and came up with an amazing proof that totally convinced them.

Short version: There is no reason/evidence to believe in the existence of god.

It’s not so much that I made a heroic “decision” one day to “accept” something. It happened so subtly and slowly that I can’t say that I know when I started to believe. Sort of like falling in love… when does that “start”?

Short answer: By actually interacting with the person. It can be in person, online or whatnot, but to be real love there has to be a real interaction. The same cannot be said of god.

A man in love with a woman, or a sports fan dedicated to his team… they’ll come up with “reasons” why their love or their team is the greatest of all time. They’re not really “reasons” that will convince anyone else, and they’re not the real motivation behind the commitment there. We’re not just brains… we’re hearts too.

There is also a real team, a real woman. To compare an insivible and silent god (how does one diferentiate between him and the nonexistent?) to a sport team or a woman is not accurate at all.

So there’s a limit to the way we can “think” things out here, and I certainly can’t call anyone “stupid” because he doesn’t accept something I do. After all, I can’t even understand myself and why I do some of the things I do… how can I understand you? Or God, for that matter?

It is not about accepting a personal idea or concept. It is about what is real and what is not, it is about truth. I will never call a religious person stupid, what I will call them is confused and deluded because there is no other description one can give of an individual who tries to have others believe that their own personal myths and superstitions are real without any evidence or reasons to support it.

It’s like love in the sense, too, that I give myself over to faith. It’s not just about me, and something I figure out in my own headspace. It’s about Someone Else. And so faith is a relationship… or it’s not faith. I can have “faith” that Japan exists, even though I’ve never been there… because others have told me about it and I trust them. There’s a relationship there: me and others. I can have “faith” that Jesus was the Son of God because I trust the others who have passed on his words, and I trust him. Two different relationships there. And then prayer… the ultimate relationship.

Faith is not needed to believe that Japan exists. We have evidence, proof and yes, REASONS to know that it is so. It is not only because others have told us. What if they are lying? Trust means nothing if there is not a way to verify that it is not misplaced. Being gullible is nothing to be proud of. At the end of the day I don't feel inclined to use the label “relationship” to the act of talking to an invisible being that does not answer back.

So faith is a journey more than a decision or a thinking. It has to live, grow, sink its roots deeper into me… it’s a path along which I mature, hopefully… towards God… And I pray that you find some sort of resolution in your own life! Because it’s the path to true happiness, really. I’ve known so many people who smile on the outside and are so inwardly lonely and desperate on the inside because they’re living a life far from God… and so many people of faith who are inwardly in such peace, always. (They’re not always the “holy rollers,” which is interesting too.)

“Faith is nothing more than the license religious people give themselves to keep believing when reasons fail.” — Sam Harris

Sorry but I can’t renounce my thinking abilities in the name of faith. Religion is not needed to be truly happy. I live really, really far from “god” and I could not be any happier nor any more fulfilled.

Does anyone else out there have a better/shorter/simpler explanation?

Yes. There is no reason nor a shred of evidence that a god exists, much less that belief in one is warranted. Religion and beliefs in gods is a cultural phenomena. People inherit religion. Demographics show this to be true. Truth, evidence and reason have nothing to do with it.

Panopticon wrote: Religion and beliefs in gods is a cultural phenomena. People inherit religion. Demographics show this to be true. Truth, evidence and reason have nothing to do with it.

When I was a Christian, a clever young Iranian who had been raised a Muslim pointed that out to me, saying, "You know, it's interesting that if I had been brought up by your parents I would have been a Christian, not a Muslim, and vice versa." That made a lasting impact on me, and I think it is crucial in understanding the relations of religious apologetics to belief.

For all except a tiny minority the "Truth, evidence and reason" bits come after you have learned to accept the religion your parents taught you. And if we are to talk of converts, are not Mormon missionaries taught to avoid rational debates with 'investigators', and concentrate on getting them to 'feel the Holy Ghost' instead?

Chap wrote:

Panopticon wrote: Religion and beliefs in gods is a cultural phenomena. People inherit religion. Demographics show this to be true. Truth, evidence and reason have nothing to do with it.

When I was a Christian, a clever young Iranian who had been raised a Muslim pointed that out to me, saying, "You know, it's interesting that if I had been brought up by your parents I would have been a Christian, not a Muslim, and vice versa." That made a lasting impact on me, and I think it is crucial in understanding the relations of religious apologetics to belief.

For all except a tiny minority the "Truth, evidence and reason" bits come after you have learned to accept the religion your parents taught you. And if we are to talk of converts, are not Mormon missionaries taught to avoid rational debates with 'investigators', and concentrate on getting them to 'feel the Holy Ghost' instead?

Exactly.

What I find interesting is that the conversation with the Catholic priest is almost identical to the conversations I have had with Mormons. It almost has to be. Neither has more than vague feelings about why God exists, which are the result, I believe, of parental indoctrination. These feelings are very difficult to dissect because they go back to the believer's earliest memories and are inextricably connected to love of one's parents.

Panopticon wrote:These feelings are very difficult to dissect because they go back to the believer's earliest memories and are inextricably connected to love of one's parents.

And that is why it is often so horribly painful and threatening when others question them , or one begins to question them oneself.

It is also why I almost never discuss such matters with people I meet in a social context, who have not implicitly signed up to take the risks involved in reading or posting on a board like this.

Panopticon wrote:

What I find interesting is that the conversation with the Catholic priest is almost identical to the conversations I have had with Mormons. It almost has to be. Neither has more than vague feelings about why God exists, which are the result, I believe, of parental indoctrination. These feelings are very difficult to dissect because they go back to the believer's earliest memories and are inextricably connected to love of one's parents.

I believe this is the root of a lot of the emotional baggage that comes with religion, yes.

Panopticon wrote:Does anyone else out there have a better/shorter/simpler explanation?

Yes. There is no reason nor a shred of evidence that a god exists, much less that belief in one is warranted. Religion and beliefs in gods is a cultural phenomena. People inherit religion. Demographics show this to be true. Truth, evidence and reason have nothing to do with it.

Many, perhaps even most people "inherit religion", but that doesn't explain or answer a myriad of questions. Kierkegaard was an opponent of the "established church", yet in spite of, or perhaps because of, his rebellion, his writings have almost been immortalised.

For Kierkegaard, the meaning of values has been removed from life, by lack of finding any true and legitimate authority. Instead of falling into any claimed authority, any "literal" sacred book or any other great and lasting voice, self-aware humans must confront an existential uncertainty.

Humanity has lost meaning because the accepted criterion of reality and truth is ambiguous and subjective thought—that which cannot be proved with logic, historical research, or scientific analysis. Humans cannot think our choices in life, we must live them; and even those choices that we often think about become different once life itself enters into the picture. For Kierkegaard, the type of objectivity that a scientist or historian might use misses the point—humans are not motivated and do not find meaning in life through pure objectivity. Instead, they find it through passion, desire, and moral and religious commitment. These phenomena are not objectively provable—nor do they come about through any form of analysis of the external world; they come about through inward reflection, a way of looking at one’s life that evades objective scrutiny.

Philosophy of Søren Kierkegaard

For Kierkegaard, the type of objectivity that a scientist or historian might use misses the point—humans are not motivated and do not find meaning in life through pure objectivity. Instead, they find it through passion, desire, and moral and religious commitment. These phenomena are not objectively provable—nor do they come about through any form of analysis of the external world; they come about through inward reflection, a way of looking at one’s life that evades objective scrutiny.

Example: Joan of Arc - Recanting and burning scene.

I have no quibble if you feel you are "done with religion", but I still see a reason to hope, even from the example of a Catholic priest:

Life in San Salvador.