Religious Belief is Human Nature?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
141

[quote]talldude wrote:

As a last note, if we cannot take what we can observe as being “reality” then we might as well throw everything we “know” including religion in the garbage…[/quote]

Which was their point. You accept on a religious like faith, ‘reality,’ and then live your life accordingly. As I asked earlier, who here keeps in contact with family and friends only in case they really are seperate intelligences on this actual world, in this real universe? As opposed to being the lonely delusions of some singular mind.

142

[quote]talldude wrote:<<< I understand your argument, >>>[/quote]Is that so? [quote]talldude wrote:<<< if we cannot take what we can observe as being “reality” >>>[/quote]You haven’t the first flickering clue what my “argument” is, as this last statement makes most deafeningly manifest. Please don’t go away though. Your participation is more than welcome. Bring a friend… or two.

Before you ask, please carefully read my ample posts of the last few pages. My fingers hurt.

143

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I don’t believe one scintilla of genuine knowledge is possible at all EXCEPT by faith in the one true and living God which is also the answer to the rest of your questions.
[/quote]

What a tragic way to waste your one single shot at existence. I feel nothing but pity for those who have given their lives away to fantasy, hoping for some childish eternal playtime afterlife that will never come.

[/quote]

How can you feel pity for those who find their greatest joy as religious people? You certainly can’t determine Tiribulus would be any better off if he where to lost his faith. The best thing about this study, and this thread, have been the replies. Do we keep forgetting what the study strongly supports?

Tiny portion of the population have to live as homosexuals to live happily. This is their “nature.” Huge study illustring religion as widespread nature of humanity…suddenly, the story changes. Hmmm. Don’t pity us, we’re the standard, the most accurate representation of humanity. Don’t pity us for being what our nature, our orientation, our predisposition demands. That’s now religiphobia. [/quote]

“I am genetically predisposed to be physically and emotionally attracted to men.” Just life. Not tragic.

“I am genetically predisposed to believe in, and consequently devote much of my time and income and in many cases even my life to, something that is not true.” Tragic.

That is why I pity you. Then again, you’re right that being happy is really the most important thing, and if religion makes you happy, then I guess it isn’t that bad…for you.

Or maybe I’m wrong. In which case, you in heaven and I in hell or wherever you people think the infidels go these days, I hope you would pity me as well.

144

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I can point out that what you call “proof” arises out of an inescapable dead end mindset wherein nothing is certain.
[/quote]

Where did this come from? Why dead end, where should one be heading? If you were to ask me, I would say it’s not a dead end, it’s a state of equilibrium.

145

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I can point out that what you call “proof” arises out of an inescapable dead end mindset wherein nothing is certain.
[/quote]

Where did this come from? Why dead end, where should one be heading? If you were to ask me, I would say it’s not a dead end, it’s a state of equilibrium.
[/quote]Elder forlife has quite honorably conceded that existence and reality as he knows it (he would say as I know it too) does not, indeed cannot afford him what has been the jealous, even angry longing of the human soul for all of recorded history. That being simple certainty. Do you agree with elder forlife? If so then all my answers to him are also to you. In the absence of certainty absolutely everything is the arbitrary caprice of a mass of chemicals and water… you. Including your “state of equilibrium”. If not then from whence arises your ground for this certainty?

146

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I can point out that what you call “proof” arises out of an inescapable dead end mindset wherein nothing is certain.
[/quote]

Where did this come from? Why dead end, where should one be heading? If you were to ask me, I would say it’s not a dead end, it’s a state of equilibrium.
[/quote]Elder forlife has quite honorably conceded that existence and reality as he knows it (he would say as I know it too) does not, indeed cannot afford him what has been the jealous, even angry longing of the human soul for all of recorded history. That being simple certainty. Do you agree with elder forlife? If so then all my answers to him are also to you. In the absence of certainty absolutely everything is the arbitrary caprice of a mass of chemicals and water… you. Including your “state of equilibrium”. If not then from whence arises your ground for this certainty?
[/quote]

That description of everything as “arbitrary caprice of a mass of chemicals and water” looks like a value judgement caused by the “jealous and angry longing for certainty”. Like you were saying that it simply cannot be so, there has to be a meaning.

It’s a good question from whence my certainty arises, because I’m certain at the moment, there wouldn’t be any equilibrium without it. I have no idea, could it be from god? And no, I do not mock, there is a unity in all creation that can be described with the word god, if one so wishes. It could also be that that’s the only way I can get all the pieces to click, so that what I see is understandable in the light of what I don’t know :confused: That didn’t make much sense.

Anyway, it’s an equilibrium or an dead end, depending on how you wish to see it.

147

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge; Fools despise wisdom and instruction. Proverbs 1:7

Faith and knowledge are aspects of one another. They are neither identical nor independent of one another.

Once again, the faith I live in and by is not susceptible to your language. There is no free trial. It is exercised unto new life in the resurrection of Christ or wholly foreign. I cannot “prove” ANYTHING to you and have never pretended I could. I can point out that what you call “proof” arises out of an inescapable dead end mindset wherein nothing is certain. You’ve said so yourself, so why would I waste my time establishing certainty with someone who doesn’t believe it’s possible? I not only believe certainty is possible, but am also incurably persuaded that IT IS COMMANDED by the very absolute God who is it’s source.

It’s God who tells me who and what the devil is. It’s God who tells me who and what He is. It’s God who tells me who and what I AM. It’s God who tells me who and what you are. It’s God who tells me what EVERYTHING is. I know that by the indwelling living Word in my heart testifying to the written Word in my bible. You cannot know that until you repent of your rebellion, seek His mercy and believe His Son is the alone remedy for your wretched sin and death. It is not an intellectual proposition

[/quote]

Do you believe there is any danger in having absolute certainty in something that you don’t absolutely know to be true? Why or why not?

How do you know it’s god telling you these things, as opposed to your subconscious mind, or the devil? I know you believe god is the source, but how do you know this, particularly since many believers, including people posting in this very thread, disagree that god is your source?

148

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:<<< That’s now religiphobia. [/quote]People jist kill me LOL!!! How does he know he only gets one shot? How does he know ANYTHING? Elder forlife and I have been lately discussing that very thing.
[/quote]

He doesn’t know it, and is no more justified in asserting it as a fact than you are justified in asserting your belief in a god and an afterlife as a fact.

What is so hard about admitting you simply don’t know? Why act as if you do?

149

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]talldude wrote:<<< I understand your argument, >>>[/quote]Is that so? [quote]talldude wrote:<<< if we cannot take what we can observe as being “reality” >>>[/quote]You haven’t the first flickering clue what my “argument” is, as this last statement makes most deafeningly manifest. Please don’t go away though. Your participation is more than welcome. Bring a friend… or two.

Before you ask, please carefully read my ample posts of the last few pages. My fingers hurt.
[/quote]

Like I said, I understand your view, and I reject it because I think it is, for the lack of a better word, deluded.

There are multiple religions, mutually exclusive, that all like to think they “know” something through god. How can you reconcile this? I know your answer is going to be something along the lines of “god knows and I know through him” but that is the same thing everyone else is saying. Because these religions are exclusive, some people HAVE to be wrong. Who’s to say that isn’t you?

You can try to defend this any way you like, but this is an inescapable truth. I KNOW this to be true. (see what I did there?)

As I’ve pointed out before, religion is not logical. Therefore, to explain anything requiring logic with religion leads to an illogical conclusion. Knowledge, according to any reasonable definition, requires logic. If it doesn’t, then that is crossing over to the realm of belief. Maybe you feel you need the certainty that comes with that - can’t blame you on that.

150

[quote]garcia1970 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]garcia1970 wrote:
Wow! What a great discussion! Just joined today. At least it is intellectual and respectful. Here is something that you all might find interesting. It speaks to question, “Why does 80% of the world believe in a god?” It talks about memes, a term coined by Richard Dawkins in his book “The Selfish Gene.”

Life-forms can transmit information both vertically (from parent to child, via replication of genes) and horizontally (through viruses and other means). Malcolm Gladwell wrote, “A meme is an idea that behaves like a virus–that moves through a population, taking hold in each person it infects.” Memes can replicate vertically or horizontally within a single biological generation. They may also lie dormant for long periods of time. Memes spread by the behaviors that they generate in their hosts. Imitation counts as an important characteristic in the propagation of memes. Imitation often involves the copying of an observed behaviour of another individual, but memes may transmit from one individual to another through a copy recorded in an inanimate source, such as a book or a musical score. Researchers have observed memetic copying in just a few species on Earth, including hominids, dolphins and birds (that learn how to sing by imitating their parents or neighbors).[13]

Some commentators have likened the transmission of memes to the spread of contagions.[14] Social contagions such as fads, hysteria, copycat crime, and copycat suicide exemplify memes seen as the contagious imitation of ideas. Observers distinguish the contagious imitation of memes from instinctively contagious phenomena such as yawning and laughing, which they consider innate (rather than socially learned) behaviors.[13]

[/quote]
So how would you relate this to the conversation at hand? And welcome aboard.[/quote]

Dude, did you read your own article???

“Famed secularist Richard “Dawkins would accept our findings and say we’ve got to grow out of it,” Trigg argued.”

Rather than explain Dawkins to you, I thought you would take the time to read a little bit of his ideas.

In short, he says that since a child will learn 50% of all he will EVER know by age 12, it is safe to say that children are human sponges when it comes to listening to what their parents tell them. This is essential from an evolutionary perspective b/c most of that knowledge is VERY useful. Like “don’t jump in the fire or stay away from the cliff.”

Unfortunately, one of the things that parents say is that there is an invisible man in the clouds that created everything and knows all that you do.

Do I have to go on, or do you get the point? The book is FANTASTIC, btw. Hope you get a chance to research his work.

[/quote]

Yes your an atheist. I don’t really give a rat’s ass about Richard Dawkins so I doubt I’ll ever read his book.
So you don’t believe in God. Are you asserting that belief in God is only a product of upbringing? Therefore, what you are brought up to believe is by default incorrect?

151

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:
It’s also “natural” to assume the Earth is flat, but with a proper education it’s easy to see that this isn’t true. Humans are the most altricial animals on the planet which gives us the ability to supercede our superstitious tendencies. [/quote]
Uh, not really, no. You missed the point apparently.[/quote]

Uh, yeah really. You missed my point, it seems. From our perspective the Earth looks flat so it’s natural to assume so. Also, from our perspective, life and the natural universe looks impossible without a central planner. In both cases a greater education brings light to such things as the Earth’s shape or how weather works etc.

It’s only natural to believe in God to the extent that you are uncomfortable with what you don’t understand. [/quote]

That’s not the point at all. That’s like saying ‘yuck!’ to broccoli is human nature, and it is. But this is referring to intrinsic human behavior, not a lack of education. You did not read the article or you would not have posted this.

[/quote]

Wrong. Coming to a specious conclusion about ones environment is not analogous to ones personal dislike of broccoli. You can’t educate yourself into having different taste buds, but it’s hardly impossible to learn how weather works or what the earth is shaped like.

For example, babies are born with specific tastes (even though they will probably change over time as their senses develop), but no baby is born assuming some sort of providence is responsible for everything. This idea was invented by men in order to establish a sense of security for themselves.

I am aware, however, that there are those with a specific gene which makes them more likely to believe in God than others, but again we are the most altricial animals in existence (that we know of) and therefore are able to supersede such flaws via education. [/quote]

But that is not what is being asserted. What is being asserted is a predisposition to religious belief. Coming to a false conclusion based purely on sensory perception has nothing to do with the conversation. I am all over that senses are deceptive. Deductive reality is the only thing you can prove is real.

152

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:
It’s also “natural” to assume the Earth is flat, but with a proper education it’s easy to see that this isn’t true. Humans are the most altricial animals on the planet which gives us the ability to supercede our superstitious tendencies. [/quote]
Uh, not really, no. You missed the point apparently.[/quote]

Uh, yeah really. You missed my point, it seems. From our perspective the Earth looks flat so it’s natural to assume so. Also, from our perspective, life and the natural universe looks impossible without a central planner. In both cases a greater education brings light to such things as the Earth’s shape or how weather works etc.

It’s only natural to believe in God to the extent that you are uncomfortable with what you don’t understand. [/quote]

That’s not the point at all. That’s like saying ‘yuck!’ to broccoli is human nature, and it is. But this is referring to intrinsic human behavior, not a lack of education. You did not read the article or you would not have posted this.

[/quote]

Wrong. Coming to a specious conclusion about ones environment is not analogous to ones personal dislike of broccoli. You can’t educate yourself into having different taste buds, but it’s hardly impossible to learn how weather works or what the earth is shaped like.

For example, babies are born with specific tastes (even though they will probably change over time as their senses develop), but no baby is born assuming some sort of providence is responsible for everything. This idea was invented by men in order to establish a sense of security for themselves.

I am aware, however, that there are those with a specific gene which makes them more likely to believe in God than others, but again we are the most altricial animals in existence (that we know of) and therefore are able to supersede such flaws via education. [/quote]

But that is not what is being asserted. What is being asserted is a predisposition to religious belief. Coming to a false conclusion based purely on sensory perception has nothing to do with the conversation. I am all over that senses are deceptive. Deductive reality is the only thing you can prove is real. [/quote]

Deductive reasoning still has implicit, unprovable assumptions, and thus its claims are ultimately unprovable as well.

153

I have a question for those of you who are religious, and it is not intended as mockery or anything of the sort.

I am not religious. In fact, I feel nothing but disdain toward Christianity (and Judaism and Islam etc.). I say bad, and sometimes very disrespectful, things about it. I will never pray, or accept Jesus, or change my mind.

Other than this, I am a good person. I don’t lie, cheat, or steel. I am charitable.

Do you believe that I am going to hell? And, if so, what will it be like? And if not, then why be Christian if the sacrilegious get into heaven anyways?

154

See my posts here: http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/why_i_deserve_to_be_shot_in_the_head

155

[quote]smh23 wrote:
I have a question for those of you who are religious, and it is not intended as mockery or anything of the sort.

I am not religious. In fact, I feel nothing but disdain toward Christianity (and Judaism and Islam etc.). I say bad, and sometimes very disrespectful, things about it. I will never pray, or accept Jesus, or change my mind.

Other than this, I am a good person. I don’t lie, cheat, or steel. I am charitable.

Do you believe that I am going to hell? And, if so, what will it be like? And if not, then why be Christian if the sacrilegious get into heaven anyways?[/quote]

Yeah, your awful hateful, which leads me to believe it bothers you more than you lead on. As to your final destination, I have no idea. That’s your problem, not mine.

156

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:
It’s also “natural” to assume the Earth is flat, but with a proper education it’s easy to see that this isn’t true. Humans are the most altricial animals on the planet which gives us the ability to supercede our superstitious tendencies. [/quote]
Uh, not really, no. You missed the point apparently.[/quote]

Uh, yeah really. You missed my point, it seems. From our perspective the Earth looks flat so it’s natural to assume so. Also, from our perspective, life and the natural universe looks impossible without a central planner. In both cases a greater education brings light to such things as the Earth’s shape or how weather works etc.

It’s only natural to believe in God to the extent that you are uncomfortable with what you don’t understand. [/quote]

That’s not the point at all. That’s like saying ‘yuck!’ to broccoli is human nature, and it is. But this is referring to intrinsic human behavior, not a lack of education. You did not read the article or you would not have posted this.

[/quote]

Wrong. Coming to a specious conclusion about ones environment is not analogous to ones personal dislike of broccoli. You can’t educate yourself into having different taste buds, but it’s hardly impossible to learn how weather works or what the earth is shaped like.

For example, babies are born with specific tastes (even though they will probably change over time as their senses develop), but no baby is born assuming some sort of providence is responsible for everything. This idea was invented by men in order to establish a sense of security for themselves.

I am aware, however, that there are those with a specific gene which makes them more likely to believe in God than others, but again we are the most altricial animals in existence (that we know of) and therefore are able to supersede such flaws via education. [/quote]

But that is not what is being asserted. What is being asserted is a predisposition to religious belief. Coming to a false conclusion based purely on sensory perception has nothing to do with the conversation. I am all over that senses are deceptive. Deductive reality is the only thing you can prove is real. [/quote]

Deductive reasoning still has implicit, unprovable assumptions, and thus its claims are ultimately unprovable as well.[/quote]

No it doesn’t. Where did you get that? Assumptions aren’t deduced, they are inferred. Second, there are many more deductive arguments that Cosmology which is what you are thinking of. And like I have said before, if you can find even one instance where one of the premises of cosmology aren’t true, then you have debunked the argument. Nobody has ever done that…

157

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

See my posts here: W? - Politics and World Issues - Forums - T Nation
[/quote]

Okey-dokey :confused:

E: It’s a stupid question, the original one that I didn’t quote. Of course I’m going to hell, there can be no doubt about it.

158

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
I have a question for those of you who are religious, and it is not intended as mockery or anything of the sort.

I am not religious. In fact, I feel nothing but disdain toward Christianity (and Judaism and Islam etc.). I say bad, and sometimes very disrespectful, things about it. I will never pray, or accept Jesus, or change my mind.

Other than this, I am a good person. I don’t lie, cheat, or steel. I am charitable.

Do you believe that I am going to hell? And, if so, what will it be like? And if not, then why be Christian if the sacrilegious get into heaven anyways?[/quote]

Yeah, your awful hateful, which leads me to believe it bothers you more than you lead on. As to your final destination, I have no idea. That’s your problem, not mine.[/quote]

That’s awfully christian of you. So it’s every man for himself is it?

I was brought up as a Jehovas Witness, and my parents and sister still are JWs. Luckily JW’s don’t teach this nonsense about a fiery pit where unbelievers will burn for all eternity. I don’t see how any man of any faith could believe in such a thing. A heavenly father that tortures his wayward children for eternity? The very idea of it is completely ridiculous fear-mongering.

I can’t stand it when so called “christians” hint that someone is going to hell. Hell as in fiery chasm of infinite torture. If this does not reflect your view of what hell is, then I apologize for assuming. I have little knowledge of Catholisism(sp?).

159

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:<<< It’s a good question from whence my certainty arises, because I’m certain at the moment, there wouldn’t be any equilibrium without it. I have no idea, could it be from god? And no, I do not mock, there is a unity in all creation that can be described with the word god, if one so wishes. It could also be that that’s the only way I can get all the pieces to click, so that what I see is understandable in the light of what I don’t know :confused: That didn’t make much sense. >>>[/quote]Yes it did make sense, but it IS arbitrary and capricious. The paragraph above is summed up with “because that’s the way I like it”. I’m not mocking either BTW.

160

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:<<< It’s a good question from whence my certainty arises, because I’m certain at the moment, there wouldn’t be any equilibrium without it. I have no idea, could it be from god? And no, I do not mock, there is a unity in all creation that can be described with the word god, if one so wishes. It could also be that that’s the only way I can get all the pieces to click, so that what I see is understandable in the light of what I don’t know :confused: That didn’t make much sense. >>>[/quote]Yes it did make sense, but it IS arbitrary and capricious. The paragraph above is summed up with “because that’s the way I like it”. I’m not mocking either BTW.
[/quote]

Okey :slight_smile: but it’s not that I like it, I accept it.