faith & religion

[Tristessa]

@tristessa: i would be interested in reading your explanation, and to know about how your religious switch impacted your way of perceiving everyday things.

I'll try, as briefly as possible, hoping this makes any sense:

There are some universal constants, like economy, war, philosophy or religion. The word religion wasn't a known concept when ancient cultures venerated their deities more than 4,000 years ago, and religion wasn't such a problematic topic 'till the middle ages with the crusades.
Before, Hebrews had introduced the monotheistic idea of Yahvé. They moved very often, this way they started to spread their religion to other people. Later on, christians were persecuted in Rome, they became martyrs and they developed the christian sense of identity. Other people felt pity for them and became christians, this religion grew hugely. They joined and became so powerful that persecutions stopped. They were able to build great cathedrals and basilicas. The people in front of the government were christians also and the religion started to mix with politics.
Rome was an empire, and they had enormous influence in every place they touched. Even some asiatic provinces were totally or in part christians. And I mean both empires, as you know, the catholic and the orthodox. And even tough the orthodox fell, the people from it moved to the catholic empire. Both empires had the same religion in the roots and they were so important that their falls set the beginning of the middle age and the beginning of the modern age, respectively.

With all this talk I want to show you that (from my point of view) catholicism or/and christianism became so powerful and important because of a series of chances (history).

I definitely think that this religion is fantastic, is really charming and way too interesting. It's also one of the best stablished.
I believe in Jesus, in a way that I'm sure he did exist. He was intelligent and, intelectually, he was prepared enough for the big challenge of convince the people (and the entire world, at least the world that was important for them back then) that he was the son of the only God. He wasn't just a prophet. He was a narcissit indeed.

I think is egocentric to believe we were created by a superior being. Superior beings have always been the ones that created everything we are not able to explain rationally. And is very easy to believe that they put special attention on us when creating the world.
I can't explain either the origin of the universe, I'm eager to know the answer. But I don't feel the need of a God for support my self- conscience.

My way of perceiving things since I became atheist have changed clearly. Before, I thought I was too lucky because I lived in a world full of magic and precious things (I was a little girl). When something bad happened, I didn't blame God, I thought that because the world is not heaven, bad things may occur sometimes. The evilness was natural and all the evils will receive their punishment.
I hadn't the time as a catholic to mature my conception of the world. So now, obviously, I know we don't live in a world full of magic, and I have to face that fact every morning. And I know bad things and evilness won't be punished. I can amaze of beautiful things, but now I know that they are just nature or Art, not God. And I think the most important is that I know (or I think), there is no other life and if I don't live this one the way I want and the way I like, I won't have any other chance. So I've been trying to get rid of prejudices and I'm trying to learn, read, feel, see, etc. as much as I can. Especially read and learn because that's what I like the most, and there won't be a heaven (or hell) where I'll can do these things, waiting for me.

Hope you didn't fell asleep.

 

[rahvin]

The logic itself is not faulty, the REAL reasons because of that logic ( fear ) are the ones faulty.

on the one side, i'm of the opinion that - even if a god is man-made - "fear" alone is not enough to warrant for its creation. the need for an organized method to a chaotic world, maybe.
on the other, you can only raise the stakes so high with labeling some reasons as faulty, i.e., the ppl you're talking to have to agree on the fundamentals of logic as a concept. for instance, i cannot prove to someone that their assumption that black = white is faulty if they don't share with me the conviction that a equals a, and if a equals a then a does not equal b. by trying to invalidate a system from the outside you merely risk being told that the system does not want to obey the rules you assume as true.

To me, it is just avoiding whats not right in front of you by saying "it could be and you cant prove it, even knowing i cant see it i still think it could be there"

i guess it's time to point out that i do not think that god might exist as a bearded old face in the sky, or as a willing, benevolent anthropic entity. this to me would feel like pondering over the existence of seven-headed hydras: all evidence accepted by my system points to the contrary. what i do think is the origin of the universe and the conscious mind being shrouded in mystery, the presence at some point of a non-manmade postulate (a thing that pre-existed the universe and defined consciousness of the self) is still a possibility.
honestly, i do not think this would involve fear or straying from the laws of nature/physics, since i assume this would be the laws of nature/physics, and also fear. but let's not get into the whole "rahvin's philosophy" thingy, for the sake of you all. i don't even particularly see logic or rationality or science telling me this is at odds ends with what is manifest. i actually find this guess does not need any act of faith to be considered viable.
as for those who rely on a belief, on the other hand, that's more of like a feeling, and one i have no experience of.

@tristessa: even admitting christianity got so wide-spread because of a series of chances, i fail to see how this would either prove or disprove anything regarding the existence of god itself. it seems natural that if god does not exist, christianity spread because at the time it embodied core values the ppl felt like agreeing on. and if god does exist, on the other hand, it also seems natural that a "true" religion would be closer to the "true" needs of mankind and therefore win - or at least be ahead of the pack - in the long run. if you followed the rest of the debate you know by now i'm no believer, so please don't think i've got a theory to prove. i merely find all physical-world-based motivations for god's non-existence easy to dispose of since everything can also be explained as being part of god's will or an effect of its doing.
it seems to me god is a pretty big wildcard in this discussion: it is inherent to its (supposed) nature to be able to do away with objections that rely solely on tangible experience, as for someone who believes in god there is no tangible experience but that which comes from it.

rahvin.

 

[Naku ist krig]

@hyeana: It is nice that you don´t think me as a hypocrite..

 

[Tristessa]

@ravhin: I'm not saying that disproves God's existence. I'm saying that for me is a compelling reason to be an atheist.

 

[rahvin]

@ravhin: I'm not saying that disproves God's existence. I'm saying that for me is a compelling reason to be an atheist.

sorry, i thought since you said you were sure about god's non-existence that the subjects were somehow related. may i ask what is the reason for such a certainty, then?

rahvin.

 

[Tristessa]

Guess I have to agree with you since I am not able to explain why I'm so sure: my atheism is an irrational act. But I have to add that I thought about it for so long to strictly consider my own conclusion an irrational act.

 

[rahvin]

Guess I have to agree with you since I am not able to explain why I'm so sure: my atheism is an irrational act. But I have to add that I thought about it for so long to strictly consider my own conclusion an irrational act.

i'm not exceptionally baffled by atheism itself: some even associate lack of belief with the conclusion that god does not exist. i'm just curious as to how a wholly materialistic point of view deals with a "no doubt" issue.

rahvin.

 

[Northern Lights]

I gotta admit I've not had the energy to read through the whole thread, just parts of it, but I will offer my oh so humble opinions on the subject anyway...

Does God really exist? Who knows, I don't. Until there's absolute evidence of it (not wishing to refer to the deity in question as a "he" or a "she") either existing or NOT existing, I will remain undecided...
I don't believe in organized religion. IMO religion is like communism, sure it all sounds nice in theory but it's impossible in practice. Most religious leaders have a tendency to want to control the minds of their followers - so instead of having faith in God, religion turns into being about following the rules and regulations that the so holy scripts and various high priests have set up. And if you don't follow the rules... then shame on you, you will be regarded as an outcast. To me, some religious followers just don't see the forest for all the trees...
There's nothing wrong about having faith. What I object to is the narrowmindedness that often comes with this strong faith, mostly due to the fact that people think they have to act in a certain way, instead of thinking for themselves...
Blah I could go on forever but I don't really feel like developing my thoughts any further right now.