Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear. - Thomas Jefferson
My thoughts on this aren't completely defined, but this is something that hit me last night.
I've heard a lot of atheists on the sight, with specific complaints against Christians who basically preach a doctrine of ignorance. And, I have to admit that I've been confronted with similiar views , such as critical thinking detracts from faith. I also have heard from people who believe that science detracts from religion.
I've been extremely fortunate in my faith, in that several of the people who have helped bring me closer to God were incredibly intelligent people. The doctrine I've been shown is one where science doesn't contradict God, it just helps us understand some of the ways in which he works. It helps us understand more of the truth. It can ectually strengthen your faith. There's plenty of unknown left to explore. You are "allowed" to question how and why things work.
I'm not really asking a question here, just putting something out there for comments.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
In the ideal, religion attracts people independent of their intelligence and ability to reason. All are welcome.
Science attracts people as a direct result of their intelligence and ability to reason. It is a small and exclusive group.
Nothing precludes a person being both a scientist and religious. However, the person who (like Jefferson) wishes to question ALL is going to have a hard time finding a comfortable place in which to worship and, simultaneously, carry out that quest. There simply aren't that large a proportion of people in a "regular" congregation who would be willing to support or encourage the endless debate over something that they (many of them) regard as settled.
Similarly, in a scientific setting, discussions of God and the ultimately unknowable aren't really the stuff of lunch-room conversation. Beyond knowing the religious affiliation of some of my professors, I don't think I can say the subject ever came up in years of professional or student/teacher interactions more than, I think, twice.
I'm thinking the best place for pursuing that kind of worship (and I do consider questing/questioning a form of worship ... in some cases) would be either a seminary or an academic program in theology/religious studies.
Or... marry someone who has an advanced degree in the subject, and is a practitioner.
Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
quote:However, the person who (like Jefferson) wishes to question ALL is going to have a hard time finding a comfortable place in which to worship and, simultaneously, carry out that quest.
I don't agree with this at all. I believe that a religious person CAN question everything. When they find a place that ANSWERS their questions, then they've found their church. Once you find a complete and whole answer to a question, you don't need to keep asking. I think that's the point in "question everything."
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
For what it's worth, the pastor in my church when I was growing up was very intelligent and welcome to questions of all kinds. He brought up some of the most troubling questions from scripture during his sermons to challenge the congregation and make them think. Very smart, very funny man, with a wonderful family.
I still turned agnostic eventually, but it wasn't from dislike of the religion or its followers.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
In his Christmas Eve homily our pastor said, in the most emphatic way possible, that blind, unquestioning fundamentalism was the enemy of real faith.
Posted by Dante (Member # 1106) on :
quote:In the ideal, religion attracts people independent of their intelligence and ability to reason. All are welcome.
I don't see eye to eye with Bob all the time, but I really like this post above.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Those who fear that "Science" disproves "God" know neither Science, nor God.
Those who preach following Ignorance leads to Enlightenment, are searching for ignorant followers.
Faith may be defined as belief without proof, and proof may be facts in evidence, but that does not mean those who search for facts are denying faith.
Nor the oppisitte. Fact does not equate to Truth. Faith is not belief without truth.
Posted by smitty (Member # 8855) on :
OK, this was probably directed at the wrong group, since we're talking about the more intelligent people here. I'm just trying to figure out where this "thinking is the work of the devil" thing is coming from. And if there is a seriously large block of people who preach / believe this.
Posted by oolung (Member # 8995) on :
I've heard abput quite a lot of scientists that came to believe in God precisely thanks to their scientific research.
Some people ask: how can you believe in God when you see how ordered and rational the world is, meaning that with such order and consistency there's no real need for God.
But others ask: how can you NOT believe in God when you see how ordered the world is. What are the chances of such order coming into existence from it's own accord?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by smitty: OK, this was probably directed at the wrong group, since we're talking about the more intelligent people here. I'm just trying to figure out where this "thinking is the work of the devil" thing is coming from. And if there is a seriously large block of people who preach / believe this.
I'm pretty sure it's coming from the White House.
Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
quote:Some people ask: how can you believe in God when you see how ordered and rational the world is, meaning that with such order and consistency there's no real need for God.
I've never heard this. Most people who give such simplistic reasons for their belief point to the chaotic universe in which "order" is a brief illusion as their evidence for there being no "God".
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
I think the problem lies in the screamers. The only religious people we actually are able to hear are those screaming at the top of their lungs that the bible is 100% literal. If you talk to true bible scholars and theologians you get a completely different response on topics such as evolution.
Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
Ok, kmbboots made me snort Dr Pepper. Posted by smitty (Member # 8855) on :
Come on Kate, don't bring that in here.... Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Tinros, I think you assume an eventual resolution which may never come. And, you also imply that the person doing the questing is going to have to move from church to church to find what they are looking for, which is pretty much what I meant.
Chris and kmboots...I wish I'd met people like your pastors during my early years. It probably would've saved me a lot of trouble.
Posted by oolung (Member # 8995) on :
KarlEd: I've never said people who say that are right, or even clever But there _are_ some that say such things (I've heard them). Or give other equally feeble arguments...
Stephan: you're sooo right Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
sorry, smitty (but worth it since I made Karl snort Dr. Pepper)
And, Bob, I know I have been very blessed. It makes me crazy that so many are have not been and have had soul-crushing experiences with religion.
And, Tinros, I think a great church is one where they encourage you to keep exploring great questions (or, as we like to say, "mysteries").
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Bob - you would have had to meet them at the right time. The pastor just before and the one just after this one were both the screaming firebrand type of pastor.
In fact, you might see this one anyway. Rick Morrell. He and his family (wife, three daughters) used to travel and sing at churches, but I haven't heard of them for years now.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
There are "Preachers" out there, not ministers, or reverends, but Preachers, who are more interested in people following them. They claim they are leading souls to Christ, or Allah, or Enlightenment, etc. But they are more interested in leading. These are the ones who fear questions, fear truth, and fear rational thought.
I call them Wolves in Shepherds Clothing.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
I think it is certainly fair to say that science does disprove some specific kinds of gods. Weather-changing-in-response-to-prayer ones, for example. Creating-the-Earth-in-six-days gods, for another.
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
I agree, King, that science does disprove some specific ideas of the nature of God. While science will not disprove the actual existence of the real God, it is probable that we all have mistaken ideas of what He is like. It's those incorrect ideas that would be disproved.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
I don't see why you couldn't have mistaken ideas that are un-disprovable. I don't offhand see how you could disprove the thesis 'God is extremely evil', but I suspect you would consider it mistaken.
Posted by smitty (Member # 8855) on :
We're not proving or disproving a thesis here. Wrong thread.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: I think it is certainly fair to say that science does disprove some specific kinds of gods. Weather-changing-in-response-to-prayer ones, for example. Creating-the-Earth-in-six-days gods, for another.
Though I obviously disagree that a rain god will answer my prayers, I challenge you to prove to me that if I make the proper sacrifice and prayer that a rain god will not do just that. Hypothetical exercise.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephan:
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: I think it is certainly fair to say that science does disprove some specific kinds of gods. Weather-changing-in-response-to-prayer ones, for example. Creating-the-Earth-in-six-days gods, for another.
Though I obviously disagree that a rain god will answer my prayers, I challenge you to prove to me that if I make the proper sacrifice and prayer that a rain god will not do just that. Hypothetical exercise.
Aren't we already having this conversation elsewhere?
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
Where? I'd like to see that.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephan:
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: I think it is certainly fair to say that science does disprove some specific kinds of gods. Weather-changing-in-response-to-prayer ones, for example. Creating-the-Earth-in-six-days gods, for another.
Though I obviously disagree that a rain god will answer my prayers, I challenge you to prove to me that if I make the proper sacrifice and prayer that a rain god will not do just that. Hypothetical exercise.
As mentioned, we're having this conversation elsewhere. But basically, I think it reasonable to place extremely strict upper bounds on the probability of any given rain dance that people have actually tried, working. That's good enough for me; I don't care whether the IPU grants rain or not, only about the gods that people actually assert the existence of.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: [QUOTE]As mentioned, we're having this conversation elsewhere. But basically, I think it reasonable to place extremely strict upper bounds on the probability of any given rain dance that people have actually tried, working. That's good enough for me; I don't care whether the IPU grants rain or not, only about the gods that people actually assert the existence of.
I don't see how it is possible to prove to someone with faith, that G-d or the gods don't exist.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
That's not what I said, though.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: Where? I'd like to see that.
I tend to think of it that G-d did the whole big bang, waited for humanity to evolve through the scientific laws he designed and came to us in the image that best suited humanity throughout the ages. So no single religion is "correct" but also none are nessasarily false.
Posted by Sharpie (Member # 482) on :
My ex-husband, who is trying very very hard to convert our teenaged children to Christianity, said this past fall: Science and logic are the tools of the devil. He was trying to counter one of the boys' challenges to something in the scripture that seemed contrary to science. I was simultaneously frustrated with him and sympathetic. He clearly thought this was a good argument. I'm not religious, but I wish him well in this; it is obviously very important to him.
(This is a huge challenge for me, learning how to be supportive of his efforts in a way that I'm comfortable with and supportive of the kids in their search for truth and meaning in their OWN ways. It's not easy!)
Posted by smitty (Member # 8855) on :
I don't think people realize that it's that exact sentiment that drive people AWAY from religion.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Yikes! Sharpie I really admire your patience and the sense of fairness that makes you want to be supportive in your ex-husband's relationship with your kids. I can only imagine how difficult this must be for you.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
It's that sort of sentiment that makes it so easy to assume that believers are ignorant, superstitious fools.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I am so grateful that my parents never forced religion on us. We were not even baptised until we were old enough to ask for it ourselves. They made church available and let us each choose our own path.
Four out of the six of us (so far) are very active in our respsective churches. One UCC, one Methodist, and two Catholic.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
There's a personality trait that's been called uncertainty or ambiguity tolerance, which pretty much means exactly what it sounds like. That's likely got a bit to do with it. It certainly has correlated nicely in studies of intrinsic versus extrinsic religion, which cover the differing approaches inside of religion towards learning and knowledge.
There's also the historical reasons. The Enlightenment ushered into a new epistemology that has formed the basis and the background for science and learning and thinking in general. It did so in pretty much direct opposition to the entrenched ruling and religious structures and philosophies. One of the teneants of Enlightenment thinking, tolerance or liberalism, was seen as a direct threat to religious power, which, in most places, rested on adherence to the One True Church and its dictates being enforeced by force, genreally state-derived force.
The 19th century in the United States saw a great rise in Envagelical Christianity. One of the hallmarks of this rise seemed to be an anti-intellectual bent. This came liekly from the nature of the message (that was very centered in the individual as the final arbiter of religion, and by extension all other matters), the nature of the targets of this revival, which were generally the uneducated, and the emotional tent-revival method of spreading this movement.
At the same time, the members of this movement and indeed most of the established churches were standing against a humanistic, optimistic view of the world that was spreading, especially in the U.S. There was an idea that things were getting better by the strength of human effort, the use of human ingenuity, and the expanding freedoms and toleration that was being afforded to classes of people who had been denied them up till then.
Also, there's always been a philosophical schism between revealed and discovered knowledge and between "truth" that can be demonstrated and that which cannot.
Posted by smitty (Member # 8855) on :
I'm grateful for my friends who got me back into it. My parent's didn't force it on us, but I was pretty unhappy with the last church we were regulars at.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote:I don't think people realize that it's that exact sentiment that drive people AWAY from religion.
See, that's the problem. It drives some people away from religion, but it appeals to a significant number of people too. It's simple group dynamics. The people more favoably disposed to questioning and uncertaintly are driven away, while at the same time those who lean away from it are drawn in. You get a separation of groups and the norms of and comparative environment provided by the intolerant group serves to reinforce and strengthen the intolerance of it's members.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
You have two (for starters) ideologies that fight the concept of reason in religion. One is that of a hierarchical church where power is concentrated in an educated elite. The more ignorant the masses, the more easily controlled.
The second is a rejection of the first, but ends up having a simliar effect. It is a rejection of anything that requires education (as the province of the elite) as un-democratic.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
boots, I'd add to that list the desire of many of the masses to be ignorant and to have justification for being so. That plays a pretty important role too.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Yup.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
and I now have "Give Me That Ol' Time Religion" stuck in my head. Geez.
Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
Logically, there's room for all questions Though the answers are not known
A closed mind will leave you empty Use your mind to use your soul
-Five Iron Frenzy
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
On faith and questioning:
The university I attended for my upper division work has a Mennonite Brethren Biblical Seminary attached to it, and a number of my professors had attended it or other noted seminaries as part of their educational experience. Some of them talked about it quite a bit, as most of my classes had several students who were planning on going on to seminary. More than one of them (the professors, that is), serious and dedicated Christians all, maintained that anyone who goes through a biblical or theological seminary program and does not seriously question their faith and the existence of God at some point has neither a brain nor a soul.
In other words, the consensus was that there is no real faith without serious questioning and examination of that faith.
Posted by Pinky (Member # 9161) on :
quote:The doctrine I've been shown is one where science doesn't contradict God, it just helps us understand some of the ways in which he works. It helps us understand more of the truth. It can ectually strengthen your faith. There's plenty of unknown left to explore. You are "allowed" to question how and why things work.
Exactly! It is as if God had invented a game when He created the world. There are rules, for example gravity, and everybody and everything must follow his rules. (It just doesn't work if you try to ignore them.) The tasks of science are to name them and to think of ways to use this knowledge. (Well, that's probably the way I might explain it to a child, if the question ever comes up.)
It bothers me that most people I know in "real life" tend to stifle the diskussion pretty soon. Most of the time, it seems to me that a lot of people, believers and non-believers, are just too lazy to think about it anymore. They made up their mind, and that's it. Posted by Pinky (Member # 9161) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: Tinros, I think you assume an eventual resolution which may never come. And, you also imply that the person doing the questing is going to have to move from church to church to find what they are looking for, which is pretty much what I meant.
Chris and kmboots...I wish I'd met people like your pastors during my early years. It probably would've saved me a lot of trouble.
Yup.
Okay, maybe this sounds strange now, but regarding "churches", I'm quite satisfied with this forum. Can anyone of us ask for more? In addition to friends and family and other people in "real life", there are over 9000 kindred spirits with whom you can discuss almost everything!!!
Just a thought... Posted by smitty (Member # 8855) on :
Pinky, you're awful happy go lucky for a guy that helps The Brain try and take over the world every day.
Posted by Sharpie (Member # 482) on :
In the case of my ex, I find myself wanting to give advice, which I'm not sure is the right course. I want to say to him:
"I know what you want for them; you want them to have a relationship with God, you want them to know He cares for them, forgives them, etc. So maybe that's what you should talk about. Tell them you feel for them in their struggles at school, that you pray for them, that maybe God could walk beside them. Tell them about the things that YOU talk to God about. Tell them that God helps you when you are afraid or uncertain."
Because certainly they are not responding to his discussions about intelligent design and biblical literalism and all the other "logical" arguments that they have at the dinner table...
Posted by Pinky (Member # 9161) on :
quote:Originally posted by smitty: Pinky, you're awful happy go lucky for a guy that helps The Brain try and take over the world every day.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
I don't think people realize that it's that exact sentiment that drive people AWAY from religion.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)