 |
INTJ |
Religion |
|
"Am I obliged to believe
every absurdity? And if not, why this one in particular?" I'm an objectivist atheist, which basically means I fit this particular definition of atheist. I have no belief in God because the evidence I have seen so far does not, in my view, warrant such a belief. On the spectrum of probability in regards to religious beliefs I'd consider myself a 5 leaning toward 6. If you're not familiar with the spectrum of probability, you can see an explanation here. Another good description of atheism in general is here. Lately I've been reading about Buddhism. Just the basics, without all the cultural trappings (like reincarnation) that have been added over 2500 years. I'm starting to think I've been a Buddhist for a while without knowing it. However, Buddhism is still a non-theistic philosophy. My parents joined the LDS (Mormon) church when I was about 3 yrs old, so I grew up Mormon. My dad only stayed active for a couple of years. My mom was what is often labeled "TBM" (true believing Mormon) for a long time, but is now more of a moderate. I received the temple endowment, had a temple marriage and have been in Mormon temples many times. After a lot of serious studying of Mormon beliefs (and how they relate to known science) and church history, and a lot of thinking about what a truly perfect "god" being would actually be like, I came to the unavoidable conclusion that Mormonism is complete bunk & I stopped participating in the religion. I officially resigned from the Mormon church a while back after being inactive for many years. My thoughts on Mormonism are here, if you're interested. I've also done some very long term serious studying of Christianity and ended up rejecting that religion as well. I think the character of Jesus in the New Testament had some wise ideas attributed to him, however history is clear that those ideas did not originate with him. There's also no evidence that he was "divine" at all. None of the 4 gospels were written by contemporaries of Jesus, the gospels were written long after he'd supposedly lived and died, the earliest dating to around 70 CE. The epistle of Peter wasn't written by the apostle Peter, it was written at a much later date. Even as a kid, all the violence in the Old Testament really bothered me. I can't see how a just and loving god would direct his followers to kill civilian women and children. Some scholars seriously question whether there was even a historical Jesus at all. For the moment I lean toward the idea that there was/were possibly a traveling preacher(s), rabbi(s) and/or political activist(s) the Jesus stories were loosely based on. I think of them as tall tales in the same vein as Paul Bunyan and John Henry, for example. Real people, but the stories about them are all either greatly exaggerated or entirely fictional. Sometimes stories about 2 or several different people are combined together into a story about just one person. Click here for a pretty succinct synopsis on the "Jesus as a historical or mythical figure" arguments. I have the same views of the Old Testament. It contains stories that are either outright fiction or embellished tall tales very loosely based on an actual non-supernatural event. It's a collection of myths adapted to the ancient jewish culture intertwined with a few real facts here and there. It was created to give a new nation a sense of identity and history. It's also an ancient political agenda. There was no Abraham, no worldwide flood, no tower of Babel, no Exodus. Historians, linguists, geologists, and archaeologists find no evidence to support any of those stories, even after hundreds of years of searching for evidence. What they do find instead is evidence that refutes the stories. The Israelis and Palestinians are fighting over a myth. I think Islam and its variants are just as silly as Mormonism. Same with the Hindu religion and its variants. Because there is as of yet no credible evidence to support the claims of any religion, I've decided the only honest, ethical, and rational thing I can be is an objectivist atheist. My family and I do just fine without being into a religion. We don't need religion to give us morals or "keep us in line". Religion is not necessary for morality to exist. See here for an explanation of this. I have a great marriage & great kids who are very ethical, compassionate, civic minded, hard working, responsible, and independent - and who also know how to think critically. We also live pretty well, for those who associate that kind of thing with "success" and hold some form of the "piety-prosperity" belief. Not saying we are perfect, by any means, but all in all we get along and are more functional than dysfunctional. Even if I did believe Jesus was divine, I don't think I could be involved in any of the organized religions around me. The vast majority of supposed Christians I've known and been exposed to throughout my life have been very hypocritical. The vast majority of non-religious people I've known and associated with over the past 20 years or so have been by far more ethical, compassionate, philanthropic and humanitarian minded than the vast majority of "Christians" I've known. If you really feel a need for religion, that's your right, just like it's the right of others to be free from religion. I view religions in general as appealing to people for one or more of the following reasons (I'm interested in hearing about reasons I haven't thought of yet - beyond the stock reply of "I prayed and god told me it's true"):
Some people need these types of things. I just don't find myself in need of any of it. I'm confident I'm intelligent enough to figure out my own way, and I've done a pretty decent job of it thus far. I also enjoy figuring things out for myself. And I believe that just because we may not have the answers for some things yet through science, that doesn't mean these things automatically need to be credited to supernatural powers. As an INTJ, I don't have really high social needs. We are viewed as highly independent and/or autonomous people - the most independent of all personality types. Why do so many people get so up in arms and offended when someone says they don't believe in a god or even just the same particular religion? I'd like to put forth a little thing called "cognitive dissonance." The classic example (which I read some time ago, but can't recall the particular document right now in order to give proper credit,) is a person with a cheating spouse or partner. Presented with evidence of the spouse's infidelity, the person is forced to decide between their beliefs built on past expressions of love from the spouse and their shared interdependence and the additional beliefs consistent with new and painful information indicating that the spouse has been sexually unfaithful to them. The conflict between these beliefs results in what psychologists call “cognitive dissonance”. When this occurs, the stronger belief system suppresses the weaker. The more that the person with a cheating spouse fears the consequences of the infidelity, the more likely they are to deny evidence pointing to it. The irrationality is obvious to the person's friends. If the situation was reversed – and it was one of this person's friends faced with the same evidence, he/she could easily perceive it and draw the correct conclusion. But his/her brain does not function rationally when the evidence threatens to destroy a relationship so central to his/her personal beliefs. He/She cannot “see” the evidence because his/her unconscious mind fears it. Apply this to religion. The more someone fears the consequences and/or ramifications of realizing their religious belief is false, the more likely they will deny evidence pointing to it. I think this explains well why so many religious people refuse to read anything that is anti-religion, yet they'll condemn and criticize the writings without ever having read them. Think of the words of Shakespeare "Me thinks thou dost protest too much." As long as you're willing to respect my right to my beliefs, I can respect your right to yours. However, please understand that there is a difference between respecting someone's right to a particular belief and respecting the actual belief, which I can't automatically do. And it also doesn't mean I must refrain from writing about my beliefs, which I may do from time to time on my blog. I have one thing to say to people who want to tell me they "know" there is a god or that their particular brand of religion is "true." Unless your god has personally appeared to you and you've walked and talked with him (and it's certain that you aren't suffering from a psychotic break or a brain tumor) then you don't know anything for sure. You have religious faith. Religious faith is believing in things you haven't seen. You may have strong faith, but it's still faith. If you "knew", you wouldn't have faith. And having a strong feeling about something doesn't fit the definition of "knowing." So please, be honest with yourself and with others and admit that what you have is a strong belief and that belief and knowledge in this case are not the same thing. Here's another document that says it even better. Religious people like to say "there are no atheists in foxholes." There's no truth to the saying. I've been hanging out with non-religious people for close to 20 years now and neither myself nor any of the non-religious that I've personally known have suddenly become religious when faced with a tragedy or near tragedy. I had surgery late summer of 2008 and it never occurred to me to think about a god other than to wonder if the religious people I know were going to ask me if I prayed just in case or something like that (and then I chuckled about it). I have a happy life and I'm at peace and happy with who I am as a person and how I live my life. I'm not at peace with all the injustices I see in the world around me, but I consider that a good thing, not a bad thing. Books: What I consider the best
of all the books I've read on these topics. I will add more as
I discover them.
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Copyright
© 2008, KW Comments? Questions? Email me (Civil disagreement/debate is fine but please no preaching, testimonies, or hate mail) |
|||||||||||||||||
