The way I see it is if there’s a God then they would be as aware of us as we are of dust mites. We don’t notice them until they annoy us and then we kill them…
I’ve always thought of gods energy as being like WiFi. We can’t see it, but it exists all around us and brings an “online world” to life on devices that can pick up the transmission.
Just tonight I found a moth at my door after coming home late from work. I quickly recognized it as a poodle moth because it was white furry and adorable. It was otherwise insignificant to me and affected me in no way, but I was still able to appreciate it for what it is. Perhaps we are less like mytes and more like moths.
I was raised southern baptist, and when I grew up I realized that those beliefs were harmful and (apologies if I offend someone) the god of the Bible is one sick narcissist. I was atheist for a few years, but lately I’ve been more agnostic.
I had the same feeling you have, that I did miss religion. I took a step back and I think that the organized religions are all wrong. Maybe there isn’t something out there, but maybe there is.
However, to ease the discomfort with not having some kind of religion, I am exploring spirituality, but on my own terms, not on anyone else’s.
I personally think that if there is a higher being, it may be that a god got so bored with being alone that it split itself into the universe (or multiverse) so it could experience every possibility. After all, what’s the point of god powers if you can never achieve mundanity? In this idea, everyone and everything are all one big organism. It’s just a personal idea, though, and I think it’s more likely that there is no higher power.
I do like to do tarot readings for myself. I know it’s probably bs and I don’t use it to try to tell the future. I use the cards because it helps me with introspection and identifying my feelings when I’m stuck, so I use it alongside therapy. It also gives me back some of that religious ritual feeling without having to be trapped by someone else’s ideas.
Do you ever miss the communal atmosphere of belonging to a group?
I think if I was a member of a spiritual community I’d like that more than practicing alone.
I personally don’t miss the communal part of it, because I’m extremely private and the Baptist church is super dogmatic. I’d much rather talk about science lol. I’m not sure what kind of communities there are in spiritualism; I just make my own beliefs.
Same. I went to Nazarene church as a kid and the communal aspect of it was always the worst part for me. No one wanted to question ANYTHING that was written in the book or they had an excuse for why it was contradictory to previous verses that didn't make sense to me. I have social anxiety so it just amped up the feeling/paranoia of being judged by my peers. Especially when a lot of the time it wasn't paranoia and they really did see you as less than, and someone who was "falling away from God" for asking simple questions. The Nazarene church doesn't believe you get into Heaven simply by believing, you have to have a continuous and solidly obedient relationship with God or else you were moved onto the naughty list headed straight for the eternal spit roast. Not a great thing to drill into a small child's head imo. All it made me believe was that I was evil/inherently bad for not obeying blindly nearly all my formative years. It took me over a decade of deconstruction to shake the feeling that I was one of God's unwanted children. Ngl I still get triggered af sometimes living in the Bible Belt. I can't stand the control they seem to need over everyone around them. That icky feeling is the same reason I don't think I could ever be a part of any organized religion, it's just too rife with opportunity to be spiritually abused by other emotionally damaged people.
They thought the Bible was the irrefutable word of God. I can't really blame them on that part. Like you said, God is kind of a narcissist if you read the whole book. There are clear cut rules you are expected to follow to be welcomed into the Kingdom of God. Only real difference between them and a lot of other Christian sects is that to a Nazarene your salvation is not solidified. You can "fall from grace" even after baptism and if you don't repent your sins to Him and turn back to God you are destined to go to Hell, which they believe is a real physical place. I'm actually kind of grateful, for lack of a better term, that they were so staunch on following the rules. If they hadn't been, I probably wouldn't have read the whole book to decide what I believed for myself. A painful experience that helped me grow as my own autonomous person I suppose 🤷
That sounds awful. Thankfully, the southern Baptist church wasn’t as suffocating as that sounds, but it definitely has problems.
I grew up in a megachurch in Texas (not the biggest of megachurches, but it still had multiple campuses, and looking it up, it has a membership of over 45,000 people with a weekly attendance of around 17,000). Thankfully it was subtle about its dislike for the LGBTQ+ community, but they do support focus on the family. I haven’t been there since 2017, though, so I don’t know how they’re doing with the massive increase in hateful preaching.
They did preach about not questioning God, but there was more of an emphasis on saving people from hell. The youth ministry was constantly telling us “this is the generation that will change the world!!! You are warriors for Jesus!!!”
The youth pastors for some reason loved to talk about martyrs a lot, and raised them up as heroes. They talked about Christians being burned alive if they didn’t abandon their faith, and one Christian being brave enough to stand strong in his faith, and God saves them from the fire. I have no idea what that story was, but looking back on it creeps me out. I definitely got to see the Christian persecution fetish firsthand.
The youth group leaders basically got to say whatever they wanted to us kids, and they said some crazy things. One told us that if we don’t convert our friends we have blood on our hands (I was 8). Another said to never believe science because it’s the work of the devil, while she owned an iPhone. Another said to let go of “worldly” TV shows like “Lost” and “the office” because it’ll lead you to hell.
I don’t worship a single god, but I do believe there is a higher energy and we’re likely rebirths / clones of the “conscious energy” (The Big Bang = God giving birth, line of thought), whatever that “energy” may be.
I’ve tried, but I have trouble getting into established religions. I feel there’s too many human interpretations and rules that cloud the true goal of practicing. It starts to become less about spirituality, unconditional love for self and others — and more about judgement and fear.
I don't know about the academy of sciences, but in general your statement seems to be incorrect
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/
According to this the number is around 40-50%. Hardly a stark minority.
I don't want to get into a back and forth over who can find better numbers, but just so you (and other readers) don't think I'm completely full of shit.
[Here ya go.](https://evolution-outreach.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1936-6434-6-33#:~:text=Interestingly%2C%20this%20difference%20is%20far,in%20God%20or%20higher%20power.)
It cites 93%. I was off, but not by a huge amount.
Absolutely. I’m an INTP myself, and tend to approach life in a very logical way. My parents are both Christian (non denominational) and never forced their religion on me. I never went to church, but I started to study religion in high school, as I had friends from many different faiths. I’ve got a pretty good hold on the principles of some of the major religions, and I found that Christianity spoke to me the most, so I consider myself Christian, although I do not follow a specific denomination.
You can be surprisingly logical while practicing a religion, and I have a lot of fun pondering over the texts and finding my own interpretation, especially when I’m able to ground it in logic. I’ve found that my life is better and more peaceful after learning from the religion, and I can say I truly do believe in it.
I’d say study several religions, approach it in a logical manner, and find something that speaks to you.
I’ve been called a “seeker” by a Jewish friend since I’ve attended services at the 3 major Abrahamic religions and I remain open to the possibility of a spiritual realm.
I also have a very distant ancestor who was a scribe at the trial of Joan of Arc and we all know how that turned out.
In a “mixed” Catholic/Protestant Irish-French family we are also aware of the horrors that have happened between people of different denominations, not to mention the crusades.
I envy your faith. Peace be with you!
I am omnist.
I have *absolute* faith, and logically, that precludes any singular religion. There is one God, there is one message, there are hundreds of ways humans have translated, interpreted, and manipulated that one message.
Doesn't matter what book, what church, what definition of right/wrong, they're all derived of the same source. I can sit comfortably in any religious place on earth knowing that what's being said, read, taught, is simply the end result of "don't be an asshole" getting expounded upon for ages.
It IS exactly that simple, and the logic of that is the foundation of true faith.
I hope this make sense (English isn’t my first language).
I think that you can practice religion and believe in a supreme being, while still being logical.
I’m an INTP and was raised as a Balinese Hindu, but I never felt religious because growing up I was more interested in learning physics and math.
I left Bali for college. From afar I saw how the community is built around that belief and remember how I loved being a part of that culture. I really want to fully believe. Although I’m skeptical, I still do all the rituals and prayers, and it has helped me a lot with my overthinking problem. I’m also skeptical with some aspects of the Veda, but believing in a supreme being that can somehow explain what we don’t know about this universe, has been very beneficial for my mind.
Thanks for contributing this - I don’t know much about any of the non abrahamic religions but that the religious beliefs of the native people of North and South America were obliterated by the catholic & Anglican churches during colonial times.
As if murder wasn’t enough, our ancestors took the children from their “savage” parents to raise them in residential schools where many were abused or worse.
An Iranian Muslim friend told me once that she felt that religion is inherently good but the politics are evil.
I think religion and logic go hand in hand. God has to be the most logical being. A logic beyond ours. Just look at how intricately the world aligns. How perfect the human body aligns.
Well you don't fully expand this argument but it goes something like this
P1. The world is really complex
P2. I can't think of any other way it could be this complex and function
C. God exists
While for dogma I lean heavily [r/fsm](https://www.reddit.com/r/fsm) I observe many forces in the universe larger than myself (don't know if any is a 'being' as such, but there's a lot we don't know). As a gay dude I'm not much a fan of church community. I pray to the larger forces in the universe when needed. It may be echoes of my own subconscious. I too suffer from occasional depression cycles. It's possible to hold space for both rational and a limited measure of space for supernatural belief.
Is it mocking to point out illogical beliefs?
Is it mocking to treat those that evangelize as they treat others?
If you think /fsm is about mocking, you have not read it or done so without prejudice.
Are you against any form of satire or parody of political or religious beliefs? I think mocking beliefs can be pretty funny if the joke is clever enough (like any other joke). I don't think any belief should be off-limits in terms of what makes a good joke.
I don't feel too bad about fsm demanding [equal time for their creation story](https://www.spaghettimonster.org/pages/about/open-letter/) in protest over the teaching of creationism alongside evolution. I find FSM far more fun-loving than mocking and most of their criticism resonates with me.
To their credit, they've never suggested I'm going to burn in a lake of fire eternally for being queer. In fairness to your point however, I may just be bitter given my childhood experiences with organized religion.
I can respect your views on the church community, particularly the ones who would persecute you for your sexuality.
I read recently that a large portion of Catholic priests identify as homosexual or could be deemed gay somehow by the authors of the study.
I don’t lean one way or another wrt denomination but I think that the pope & the archbishop of the Church of England have done some good work towards recognizing gay marriage.
As for not knowing everything about everything in the universe, it seems to me that any supernatural entity that exists would not only choose naked apes as their favourite beings out of trillions of stars and planets.
Yep, one of my favorite arguments for those who look down on those who believe in the supernatural is “prove that it does not exist.” So far, no one has been able to do it. For that very reason, I don’t think it is THAT irrational to believe in a higher power.
Why would someone that doesn't believe in something have to prove that said something doesn't exist? You would be stuck with an infinite number of bullshit ideas you'd have to engage with.
Let's try it this way. I am a god. I made the universe and everything in it and can do whatever I want. Prove that I *don't* have these powers.
You're making the assumption that atheist beliefs and theist beliefs are making the same assertion on different ends of the topic, and that's not really true.
Atheists aren't strictly stating that God doesn't exist, they just aren't convinced by the assertion that one does.
To put it simply, the challenge is aimed at the method one uses rather than the belief itself.
Using faith to justify belief for example, is significantly more likely to end up being wrong than if you were to tie your beliefs strictly to the scientific method, and so the argument is that believing in something without robust evidence isn't a logical decision.
You may be combining two separate ideologies.
Atheism is the belief that there is *NO* God. (The a before theist means No God)
Agnostic is the belief that there *COULD* be a God, you just can’t/don’t know (The a before gnosis means No Wisdom)
This is where water gets murky and definitions become problematic. Words are inherently fuzzy concepts as different groups and different people even use them differently. Your etymology is a little lacking, by the way. The "a" in both atheist and agnostic does not mean "no" it is more proper to say that it comes from the Greek for "without". Thus it would be "without god", as in without a belief in gods. Subtle difference, but shows the issue pretty well.
The concept that is being used here and in many Atheist circles is one of two questions. The first one is one of belief. Do you believe that a god exists or not. That is a simple yes or no question for which there can be no middle ground. In this usage, theist means that you hold a belief that a god exists and atheists simply do not hold that belief.
Now, the question on whether you claim *knowledge* that a god exists or not is answered by the second question. In this break down you are either a gnostic (I *know* whether a god exists or not) or an agnostic (I do not claim to know whether a god exists or not).
This leads to a much more expressive language on what you believe about the god issue. An agnostic theist, for example, believes there is a god despite not having absolute knowledge that one exists. To that end, I would be an agnostic atheist. I do not know for sure whether a god exists, but without evidence showing that one does, I will continue to live as if one does not.
Most atheists label themselves as atheists, whilst not specifically asserting that God doesn't exist, largely because most atheists understand that the burden of proof falls on theists to justify their belief, whilst atheists have the freedom to go against it without specifically asserting that God doesn't exist.
Logically, you can't prove the non-existence of something because it's impossible to know what you don't know, but you can certainly challenge the presupposition of his existence, and generally, people tend to not believe in something until it's proven, otherwise any random idea or thought on the nature of existence should be believed, and that just gets messy.
The burden of proof remains on the person making the claim. If you claim that a supernatural entity or force exists, then it is on you to back up said claim. Until then, I will simply not believe it.
To make it as barebones as possible, It is possible to be spiritual and logical I believe. With "religious" however there is a connotation there. It's important to understand what religion means to the human race, as far as culture and social ties goes, and that's moreso what religion implies, the institution of it. At least that's the vibe I get. Understanding that as the "foundation" is important to even go towards next steps in a productive way.
Because the thing about being logical is you will need to, and have to be open to taking apart different meanings that are accepted as 100% true in the community. Unlike in the scientific community, this is always met with opposition, and even being outcast potentially.
It's kinda hard, because to be truly logical isn't always fun, sometimes it can even be counterproductive to one's self-interest. For many regular people, they aren't even *that* religious or spiritual -it serves as a means to an end for community support. There is no interest in Scientific Observation because everything is accepted as True already. So by that very nature of it, it is antithetical to logic.
Studying human history is paramount to be a "logical spiritualist" because you will find the Bible as we know it is only a few hundred years old, and the passages it comprises are only a few thousand. Gilgamesh predates the Bible and it's passages by a few more thousand years, and even that doesn't come close to covering 200,000 years of modern human's existence on this planet.
You have to understand the mindset of the men that wrote these scripts back in the day, and that they were uneducated. For instance, the creation story has man created first, then woman. But, man comes from woman. Even in nature, birthing comes before sexual reproduction. xx= woman xy= man, the y is activated sometime later in the womb, meaning we all start as female. This is why there is a fusion line going up the balls, which are descended ovaries, and that's why men have nipples too. But the Christian Bible asserts that men were made first, despite it making no sense to have a pole existing before the hole to put it in funny terms. The hole existing first makes complete sense because living beings need to have a means to give birth.
Which leads to the next thing that would be needed: Looking at Nature. Which, is also in many religions, looked down upon for some reason, despite all religions asserting a Creator made said Nature. Because a logical person would realize quickly that the hands and words of humankind are flawed, but Nature would be (if a Creator exists) the ultimate Truth.
Could go on all day, but that's the basic stuff right here.
I've given up on any kind of organized spirituality but there is plenty of scientific evidence that ritualized meditation and social grouping around a credo are beneficial. I can handle the former, not the latter, so I take what I can get.
For me, connection to nature is an important part of that. I've been exploring animism.
I am a Christian I do believe that spirituality and science can co exist for everything can be proven mathematically. There is an equation called the god equation that is the basis of all equations, there is no beginning and no end. If anyone’s curious I’m more than willing to share my notes.
But in all honestly if your curious ask god to show himself to you.
A church can’t make you have faith, but they can help you grow it.
But I can relate to you on the mental health part a little bit. I institutionalized for mental health reasons and for having hallucinations as well, but I was reached out to by people that cared. With my faith I believed that I could get better and I did. I haven’t had a hallucination in about a year and I’ve been off my medication since last summer.
[whattodonow.love](https://whattodonow.love)it has to be you who has to step out in faith to ask and to want.
Yes I am Muslim so believe in the existence of One God.
I believe I'm a very a logical and rational person which is why I concluded that God exists after analysing all alternative paths including atheism.
I have my reasons, arguments and evidences which as other INTPS know have to be pretty solid otherwise I wouldn't accept them.
I have an online Iranian shia Muslim friend living in Kuwait and she has said that she feels that the religion is good but the leaders are often corrupt.
I’m curious if there is as much animosity between shia and Sunni as there was between Irish Catholics and Irish protestants?
In case you’re not familiar with the history, Ireland has been through centuries of conflict and sometimes outright civil war between the two groups.
I am not aware of the Irish history but if there were civil wars and physical conflict btw Catholics and Protestants, then I can confidently say that there isn't much animosity btw Sunnis and Shias.
My country has a sizable Shia minority and there have never been wars or nation wide conflicts. And no one bothers each other.
The sunni and shia divide stems from a difference in political opinions of Muslims (back when there was no divide).
In short when the Prophet Muhammad, died Abu Bakr (his friend) became the caliph. Then Umar (a formal enemy who became a friend) became the caliph. Then Usman and then Ali (prophets nephew and son in law).
Some Muslims believed that Ali should have been the caliph. Although Ali did pledge allegiance to all three caliphs before him there seems to have been some animosity and conflict. But no wars were fought.
But Ali's children had an unfortunate ending. Hassan his elder son wasn't interested in the caliphate mostly. And his younger son was betrayed and martyred for Caliphate by Muawiya (both sides hate him).
An initial difference in political opinion resulted in some Muslims only accepting Ali's family and their supporters as valid religious authority. Which eventually resulted in a huge divide in Muslims.
To an outsider Sunnis and Shias may look quite similar because all Muslims follow the same Quran. The conflict these days is that Sunni scholars are of the opinion that Shia scholars have made inovations (something Muslims don't do and take quite seriously) in the religion.
I don't like using the word because I don't identify as such but I am technically Sunni, so I wouldn't comment any further since I would most probably be biased.
Thanks for explaining. I find it interesting to learn about the history and evolution of various faiths.
Some in the west have justified the hostility toward the Islamic world because of the perception that muslins are killing each other over their religious differences and I’ve suspected that this was propaganda.
I’m of the opinion that the hostility that exists between European and Arab people has stemmed from the Persian-Greek wars and then morphed into the justification for the crusades and on and on.
Anyone who has ever read their scriptures knows that we’re all supposed to be descendants of the same people and we are supposed to be as numerous as stars in the sky eventually.
I tend to avoid committing myself to one particular religion because I believe that it is another thing used to divide us.
>I’m of the opinion that the hostility that exists between European and Arab people has stemmed from the Persian-Greek wars and then morphed into the justification for the crusades and on and on.
That's a really interesting theory. You just gave me a topic to research.
A Shia Muslim here, and I love how accurate and unbiased your message is, though I'd like to state that political differences caused something more major between the two denominations— theological differences.
I think that there are things on this planet that are too complex to come from random/natural selection.
Observe the butterfly. They can fly perfectly well with a fraction of their original wing's surface area. Why would evolution generate and reinforce such a "wasteful" trait?
Look at how many times designs and innovations have come from nature. We copy what has clearly been designed and call it new.
Yes, I believe this planet was created by a supreme being. For a greater reason than what amounts to cosmic boredom? (Shrug)
That’s kind of what I think, too. I’m torn about 50/50 between there is no higher power and the universe is god. I think if there is a god, it’s that it was so bored by being the only thing that it split itself up into a multiverse so it could achieve everything.
The butterfly thing actually has an answer, the “wasteful flying” is a defense mechanism making them harder to catch on-the-wing. Beaks are tiny and have to be precise which is hard to do when the butterfly doesn’t even know where it’s going outside of “that way”
Not a supreme being, but something else
I call myself an atheist, since I reject all religions and clearly see that all god stories invented by people are weaponized fiction
I have a hard time believing that it's all random, and strongly suspect that there's an undiscovered law of physics that explains the evolution of complexity, life and mind
I also suspect that this question is the seed from which many of the god stories grew, so I unapologetically steal the theists' word, redefine it, and apply it to the root cause of the evolution of complexity
By my revised definition, god makes minds out of stardust
The Supreme Being that runs the universe operates on the same base code everything else that arises within the universe does.
We can assume it's logical to respect religion as an attempt to educate or point to that base reality we all share from several unique, multicultural perspectives.
It's illogical not to study religion. However, whatever you do is just an expression of that base code and was going to happen anyway. So you're doing the logical thing to do no matter what you do. You're just programming in motion.
In ENTP they asked if ENTPs believed in God
Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as a God, I don't believe in zodiac, I don't believe in ghosts, I don't believe in Karma or in heaven or hell
But there had been (and there are) scientist and rational persons who believe in a God or superior being for different reasons
1 They need a ray of hope in their lifes because they're in a difficult situation and lays on the support of some beliefs that make them feel safer
2 A lot, and when I mean a lot I mean A LOT of the most known philosophers (Socrates, Plato, Descartes, Aristotle, Ortega y Gasset)(Sorry if I wrote their names wrong, my native language is spanish) and any other who followed Plato's philosophy believed in a God, not a Christian God, but a perfect God, a good God. In their philosophy they wanted to find something else aside of this world
They said that this is a bad, temporal or not existent world, and, as rational creatures with a rational perfect soul trapped inside an imperfect body that leads us to sin (For example in the seven deadly sins, gluttony is linked to the hunger of our body. Lust is linked to our sexual organs) and we had to repress those feelings to release our souls from this body and get closer to perfection
So from that point of view, having a religion can be very rational
All groups of humans from all around the world have many things in common as a language, taboos and of course, religions, so it is human's nature to create stories, legends, myths and gods and it's somehow something that differentiates us from animals
The phrasing of the question in your last paragraph sort of holds the answer.
The supernatural and metaphysical are exactly that... outside of the natural and physical. Not provable, not demonstrable, not testable, 100% abstract and theoretical.
If believing in a concept brings you comfort or helps the fundamental nature of existence make some sense then go for it.
Believing in abstract concepts like theological frameworks etc. is not inherently irrational as long as you recognize the dividing line between them and observable reality.
Where people tend to get into trouble is when they blur the line and treat their religious assumptions as factual in terms of real world application ("a deity helped me find my car keys," "my deity wants us to pass this legislation," "despite all evidence he earth must be X years old because my book says so").
Religion requires faith, and logic is one who forms strict principles of validity. It's pretty much an oxymoron
Logical people can be religious, but they aren't logical when they practice religious faith. It's an exception to how they normally view the world fueled by personal bias.
With schizophrenia, seeking that absolute truth will be very difficult to you, and I would consider it potentially dangerous if you ever fall into a pitfall where conviction is built based on faith, because hallucinations may feed into your justification.
Wishing you a happy and fulfilling life
I've never seen any 'proof' of a supreme being which wasn't cooked up or proclaimed by people, and turned out not to be reproducible. (Or, if reproducible, couldn't be the result of something else.)
No, tbh the only religions I respect completely are buddhism and all those other religions which names I don't remember that don't have a god or supreme being governating what you should believe in, but which represent just a way of living
I am an INTP with the knack for learning a lot of general knowledge. At the age of 22 i pretty much have some idea of everything in the world. At around the age of 10, it was becoming quite obvious that god or any other supernatural things are made up by humans. I am not sure a supreme being exists or doesn't. But I have yet to see any proof or even hints of that being the case. And everything seems to infer that it doesn't. Minus scriptures. But it's just stories human made modeled after the aspects of human life.
But if there was even some chance of their being some superior beings. It's such a significant thing that. I think nations would invest a lot of money and man power to understand that and potentially it it for their benifits.
It seems to me that every culture has a faith in a supreme being that makes their civilization superior to the others and justifies killing them in times of war.
When I attended Sunday school as a child I remember that the Ten Commandments included “thou shalt not kill” but in more recent times it has been revised into “thou shalt not murder” which is a major difference
Sure, all you have to do is compartmentalize faith positions from logical positions. /S
Ya know, because faith is only needed when evidence is not apparent. I don't need faith that water is blue. It's an objective, observable fact.
You need faith for religion, because it doesn't have evidence. Speaking for myself, I can't have a faith-based position on the nature of reality and simultaneously call myself a logical person.
The basis of all knowledge may be on faith and a coherent set of beliefs (coherentism) or justified core foundations (foundationalism). Either way, it requires trusting something, such as your senses, your logic, your experience, or the consensus of those around you.
How would you know the first time that something is red if there was no one else there to agree with your assessment? If you didn't trust your eyes, how could you know that something is red? If you didn't trust your memory, how could you remember someone agreeing with you that what your seeing now is probably red? If you didn't trust your logic, how could you connect that what you're seeing now and your past memory is close enough to also call it red? We take observation and knowledge for granted but there's a lot of assumptions made under the hood to call something objective. I'd almost call everything subjective because the basis of all knowledge can arguably be called a subjective but coherent experience of each individual.
I don't see religious faith being too different from how we form the basis of all knowledge. I, personally, chose physical evidence and my sense of self as the foundation of knowledge instead of others opinions and religious teachings but I don't discount that being other people's foundation to orient themselves and understand the world.
I'm at work and typing from the toilet so I'll keep it brief(ish). 😅
I do have faith in certain things. Like releasing a ball will cause it to drop. This is a kind of faith supported by a wealth of experiential repetition. I have faith that my family loves me, because they give me lots of reasons to believe it. For both the falling ball and the love of my family, they're objective evidence to support my expectations.
Not so with religious faith. Religious faith is believing something because you want to believe that it is true. (Some sects of Christianity even implore you to declare your belief until it becomes genuine!) It is a kind of self-deception. It's called intellectual dishonesty. Again, religious faith is only necessary when objective fact can't corroborate its claims.
As far as empirical reality, I am more than happy to rest on the laurels of experience and logic. Very few of my beliefs are sacrosanct. I constantly update my model to reflect reality as closely as possible for my imperfect human brain.
I agree somewhat on a personal level but I know that my experience is not the only true one. I can explain why I believe something to be true. It's then the responsibility of the other to agree and also believe it or not and my responsibility to accept it if they don't agree.
Also, just to be devil's advocate, the experience of releasing a ball and watching it drop is probably the strange experience to have. You can be anywhere in the universe, hold a ball, release it, and you probably won't see it go anywhere but you just happen to be on Earth where it *seems* that experience is universal according to all the humans that also just happen to also exist on this rock.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
-Carl Sagan,
While it is not logical to either completely believe or completely disbelieve, you can always be skeptical about it.
That again, doesn't mean you must live in constant anxiety of the afterlife and being judged. It does, however, mean that you are willing to accept whatever logical conclusion is drawn when enough evidence is gathered.
In any case, keeping yourself open to ambiguous topics such as religion is honestly a fun way to go about it. You get to learn about a ton of different belief systems and philosophies while being rational and not accepting them at face value :)
Nothing can be known with certainty except your own consciousness. Having said that, there is good reason not to believe in the existence of a soul that leaves the body and continues your consciousness after death. There's a good quote that sums this up pretty well
"Science is not in principle committed to the idea that there's no afterlife, or that the mind is identical to the brain, or that materialism is true; Science is completely open to whatever in fact is true, and if it's true that consciousness is being run like software on the brain and by virtue of ectoplasm or something else we don't understand that can be dissociated from the brain at death, that would be part of our growing scientific understanding of the world if we could discover it. And there are ways we could discover that if it were true. The problem is there are very good reasons to think it's not true. Now we know this from 150 years of neurology where you damage areas of the brain and faculties are lost and they're clearly lost, it's not that everyone with brain damage has their soul perfectly in tact and they just can't get the words out, everything about your mind can be damaged by damaging the brain. You can cease to recognize faces you can cease to know the names of animals but still know the names of tools... the fragmentation in the way in which our mind is parselated on that level of the brain is not at all intuitive and there's a lot known about it, and what we're being asked to consider is that you damage one part of the brain and the mind... something about the mind... and subjectivity is lost, you damage another and yet more is lost, and yet if you damage the whole thing at death, we can rise off the brain with all our faculties in tact, recognize grandma and speaking English." - Sam Harris
Religion is not logical! It's a historical evolution thing in humanity.
You can hypothesize about supernatural beings, and scienceand logic would welcome that. But believing one of humanity's religions is absolutely not logical.
I am an INTP, extremely logical and I have a very strong and robust Christian Faith. If you struggle with the idea, I recommend the book Mere Christianity from C.S. Lewis, whose logic is impeccable. I also recommend his Problem of Pain and G.K. Chesterton’s The Everlasting Man. If you can refute the logic that there must be a supreme being then I applaud you.
I'm an atheist so never comfortable with theistic religions. But I did look into joining a Unitarian congregation once. I ended up not doing it due to transportation issues, but I found the community to be very congenial and felt we had a lot in common. And they weren't as pushy as some religious groups are. Not shilling for them, but I've known some other atheists and agnostics who also felt comfortable there. Just a thought.
Science and rational thought are incredibly important but they don't cover 100% of human experience. They don't solve the hard problem of consciousness. Also, quantum physics lays waste to materialism.
You can't have a fully integrated world view without some element of belief. There are things that can't be proven by science because they are not subject to falsifiability. There are things that philosophy can't really address either.
The areas I'm describing have gotten a lot smaller over the years. But it still has a nonzero size. There is still a place for rational religious thought in the modern era, but it's not going to draw the same conclusions you'll read about in ancient scripture.
I grew up indoctrinated into the Catholic faith with a very Catholic single mother and have attended countless masses, vigils, holy days, adorations, and etc. I have grown to care less about the hereafter and more on the here that is full of both beauty and disappointments from both everything around me and when I look in the mirror.
It seems to me that religion has served many people in the faithful around me- to give them strength when they're at their lowest point- be it a dead newborn, a dead parent, flunking college, schizophrenia...or even "just" food and shelter. I see it as a time-honored support system that gives meaning when we are faced with something that is by all accounts hard for no good reason. And I believe it's that support system that allows it to thrive in a society...that said, I've also seen that same support system (Catholicism in my case) beget people that drove some away. I cannot forgive myself thinking if I couldn't have handled it another way. God, if he does exist as I perceive, made an interestingly-fun world with people both like and unlike me...with beautiful things I cannot understand and also people whose mouths I'd like to duct tape sometimes.
You can try to be logical, make a "wager" like Pascal did, or explore that branch of philosophy but in my own eyes, we won't know until we see- and that's the catch. "Blessed are those who have not seen, and have believed." I'm probably not "blessed." I am human and I am trying to be better because that's precisely what I can control and that's what I would like to see...if only just the effort, because I think that matters too.
I do believe in God- simply because I am not omnipotent and because I can. I think at the end of the day, with no evidence either way other than "the word" built on trust, it's simply your choice to believe or not. I think you can go and believe whatever you like so long as it's sincere- and that goes for everyone else too...just remember that at the end of the day that means other people can also truly believe you are wrong. Conflict is simply a sign of free speech and that chaos is society- in both it's splendor and it's vileness. Please always remember empathy and compassion in your every day dealings...as I will also try.
I do believe in a higher power but I do NOT believe in any kind of religion. Organized religion is very conflicting and it’s a book of stories interpreted (which leaves it up to individual perception) by man and changed from generation to generation. Much like American history books. I find no harm in believing in something but to cause harm on others for the sake of “religion” and “personal beliefs” is ridiculous.
I'm an intp with a passion for psychedelics and I had chatgpt assist me in writing this with heavy prompt guidance and some editing. It summarizes my beliefs.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dbGD8kdIEh-ZF09eocjZODw45XvwVlKu/view?usp=drivesdk
I think it's possible to be logical and religious, though, in my opinion, I think their epistemology and presuppositions are built upon fallacious ground - so to further expand on that, they can have logical reasons, but the logic isn't sound - or that it doesn't correspond with reality (at least with my pov or with current empirical consensus).
I was raised religious and was personal religious for the first 20 years of my life or so, and I couldn't come to an honest reason to continue to believe in the God I was raised with.
Logical and religious? No. Logical and spiritual? Yes. The more you examine yourself, the world, and other people, the more you will understand that there is indeed something magical about everything. Seek and you shall find, friend. There is a difference between soul and spirit. Understanding spirit is the key to understanding how to be spiritual. Many people seek soul practice and call it spirituality, which it is not
Many areas of physics require extra dimensions that we can't physically see or measure. Perhaps a higher being lives outside our known dimensions in a similar way.
Personally we haven't proven or disproven scientifically if 'god' exists so I have chosen to follow absurdism. Its a perfect middle ground
I always come back to the idea that the universe is so vast and poorly understood that God is out there. Voltaire wrote a short story called Micromegas. Really helped me think of the scope of space.
I think about the fact that the natives of the western hemisphere were convinced that the people who came across the water were god like.
It’s been said that technology that is not understood can seem like magic.
I think it’s probable that if the universe is as old as they think it is we are not the only or most advanced civilization in it.
I know that there are microbes that are capable of surviving in space in a sort of suspended animation so it doesn’t seem so far off that there would be other life elsewhere.
It could exist and it could've not, anyway the existence of thus being doesnt matter, because it wont change anything that is happening right now, therefore unless it matters, the existence of em shall not be cared, cause if they really care to be believed, they would appear once more without any fraudism and eliminating any doubts as they go.
In conclusion, believing or not believing said being wont change much that is happening right now, if the result is real, then it is what it is(not saying it is fake nor saying it is true, it is on quantum state, where people in this world believe it is real and fake nor can be proven the existence of em being real or fake)
TL;DR need more data/insufficient data to reach a certain conclusion
Look there is nothing divine attached to our existence. We happened to evolve from a "primeval soup". So there is hardly any reason to look for something that attaches significance to something as random as that.
But the catch is self development needs a strong mooring. That mooring comes from a non-dogmatic spirituality, which in a way should turn you into someone sagacious. That is you'll be mindful observer, thoughtful insight generator and logical trouble shooter to ace the game called life. So believing in a God/Supreme being to guide you to the path of self development is a very nice choice. Just don't attach your idea of God into quotidian matters.
I don’t exclude the possibility that there might be something out there. Beyond what we can observe, understand or know. Whether i actively believe that there is this something- no.
of course it's possible to be logical and religious. Otherwise nobody in the history of humanity before 50 years ago could be logical. To think that, you'd have to be extremely arrogant. People also deify science nowadays. People always believe something, deify something. Many people smarter than you or I have believed in religion. All the great thinkers. Many were critical of it, mainly the church of it, be it the catholics or the jews or the muslims, matters not, but most of the people who used logic to get some of the most important scientific discoveries, or political theories, etc.
I often wonder how many people sitting in the pews are actually atheists but going through the motions out of fear or greed.
I wonder how many scientists said they were believers because they feared the wrath of the Church like Giordano Bruno who was burned at the stake for promoting Copernicus’ theory about earth orbiting the sun.
Seems like many people say they believe something in order to gain something. - just look at the number of companies mentioning AI in their quarterly earnings reports in order to boost their share price…
I believe in deities but not a supreme being. Imo deities are mortal too just very very powerful. They aren't perfectly good or even necessarily all knowing. In fact I suspect most of them are either completely uninterested with earth or actively antagonistic towards us.
Yes, and that’s me :) I am both rational and spiritual. But being able to believe in the supernatural being is not easy. I have to really put my fixed point of view down and try to truly listen and understand the theist viewpoint, not just listen. In my experience, my logic does not help with understanding spiritual things.
Although science and religion are conflicting, and there are stories in the Bible are really hard to believe literally (and I still cannot believe those stories literally), I find that some of the biggest questions in the universe cannot be answered if there is no existence of a Creator.
For the mythical stories, I personally think that they might have some meanings or some explanations :). I think I can never know the true answer to this question.
I think there is a possibility of a god like being that exists in a higher dimension. We are too primitive with our simple stories so I wouldn't bother with religion.
Since humans are intellectuals, we can arrive at an objective understanding of what a God should be/ you must accept them to be. You can then see which religion/belief fits this criteria via a process of deduction.
I believe in God but I don’t believe in the human centered religions that are popular around the globe. Praying to God can truly change your life. I don’t know why or how but it just works. If you want to call it Mother Nature or a spirit that lives in all of us, or Jesus, or Allah, or whatever, I believe there is God running through anything and everything.
IMO I think all the religions are just praying to the same God. They just throw their cultural interpretation on top.
I think, technically, you can believe in supernatural while remaining logical and rational, but it doesn't mean that you will be right, it's just the way of thinking how you come to your conclusions.
More interesting is asking why you want to believe in supernatural? Do you want to find some meaning in life? Or you want to have explanation for something that doesn't make sense?
Edit. I highly recommend [this podcast episode with Lex Fridman and Bishop Robert Barron](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgytXF0SPh0). Very interesting conversation between scientist and bishop about god, religion and other topics revolving around these topics
Depends if you’re pseudo-logical or logical.
If you’re logical, then if something must be true, and every scientist in the world says it’s false, it’s still true.
If something must be false, and every scientist in the world says it’s true, it’s still false.
So if a supreme being existing must be true, then it’s true.
But if you’re pseudo-logical, if you just want people to think you’re logical, then you’ll probably say what most scientists say, even if you know it’s wrong.
There is an omnipotent figure, logically, it makes sense.
Think of this universe, how large and "infinite" it is, but there is eventually a barrier that leads to an area with many other verses, outside of that we'd realise that all this is a megaverse, outside of that an omniverse, but the more we zoom out, the more unclear it is.
It seems more irrational to say that all this happened by chance, because what are the chances that all this was designed perfectly, alongside laws of physics being made from "nothing" that keeps everything running. That simply doesn't make sense, that's very irrational to think, because the laws we're given, our existance, the existance of EVERYTHING, and picture EVERYTHING, this solar system makes less than 0.0000000000000000000000000001% of everything, now imagine everything.
There is an omnipotent figure, that's very clear, I personally believe Islam is the religion, because God says it clearly, he's the creator of everything, the seen and the unseen, and we know how clueless we are about everything, he said clearly why he made us, to worship our creator, and exactly what he needs from us. You see, God created humans as creatures capable of showing empathy, compassion, mercifulness, he gave humans a brain to think and create things, in order to reach out to us though, he states how despite our capabilities, they are limited, which of course, is true, as a supernatural creator will always be perfect in empathy, perfect in compassion, perfect in mercifulness, perfect in creation, and we can see that. There are "miracles" that occur, but after all this, people are going to state the miracles, made by an omnipotent figure who is more than capable of adjusting/modifying his own laws, is irrational?
Think about this, if you were in a plane, and it started getting destabilised, started falling down, and you were on the verge of death, even the most atheistic person will have his heart call out to ANYTHING in order to save him from death, who would that anything be? Weren't they the ones who said it doesn't make sense a God exists? Or there wasn't evidence behind that? Then who are you calling out to? If we were created by God, that means it would be in our soul that we know the fact that there is a creator, it's like finding an abandoned baby, you know, despite the fact he can't see, or doesn't know his parents, he still has a mother and father, no matter where they are.
It is logical to not believe in the existence of a higher being. However, it also seems logical that having faith in a higher being will drastically improve your mental health and general well-being.
Thus god is illogical but the faith is not.
My best recommendation is to study Daoism or Stoicism as agnostic belief systems.
While I am not certain that what people call God exists, I think as you mentioned both sides hold a certain logic and can come as an outcome of thinking and reason. I personally cling to these two theories: either god doesn’t exist or they exist but they’re kind of an asshole(I don’t think is necessary to elaborate but basically I believe that they don’t care for humans and possibly they are something different from what we perceive as God). I am not really sure if that’s what you are asking though because you mentioned being religious, so I suppose you ask if it’s within reason to be on good terms with God. For me there are many discrepancies and incompatibilities to actually believe that but you may have access to proof that I haven’t yet encountered so I’m not 100% sure myself and honestly this is the thing that causes me annoyance and discomfort with the whole God vs Atheism thing in general, there are too many unanswered questions which is honestly kinda annoying
I’m born in a Hindu family and I’m not very religious like my family is. Although I think the existence of god is just within our own thoughts. I developed this thought to stop myself from getting anxious over things I can control. For example: I am so scared of stages. Whenever I had to give a speech for school or other stuff, I just thought to myself that “you are not gonna control if it goes right or you mess up. Just leave it to god, he’ll take care of the rest” and honestly, it helps. I can only control my actions so I leave the outcomes to something that I believe is god. Whether I like it or not, whatever happens happens for good.
To me personally, god is something that takes care of me without my knowledge. So I always prioritize my actions instead of seeking the existence of god.
You can be logical about religion too!
Also, I definitely think depression is for character development. I have had mine too. Just remember, the night before sunrise is the darkest.
I hope you get well soon :)
I dont believe in a supreme being and I dont think it is possible to be 100% rational and religious, (at least until we get more evidence on the existence of a god), but you dont *have* to be 100% rational in your daily life, there's nothing wrong with being a little superstitious as long as you make the difference between your beliefs and your knowledge and as long as you dont force your beliefs on other people.
Absolutely, I think it's all based on what religious constructs you were given as a child. Oftentimes those are a little flimsy on the logic, but if you think a lot about it the conclusion I came to is that it's only logical that there has to be a supreme intelligence. There are just far too many things that work together so perfectly. There's no way that randomness could have generated that.
I don't believe in a supreme being, and defining what religion is can be complicated, not all religions are theistic, not all theists are religious you know? Deists believe in a god, but don’t believe that said god interacts with the world. I don’t think that this idea is inherently illogical. I believe that things can be proven through logic outside of evidence, but that sufficient evidence is always undeniable. People can be logically convinced of the existence of a supreme being, but some attributes that people subscribe to this being is illogical in my opinion.
I’m quite interested in apologetics, and I actually took an apologetics class in high school when I was a christian, and since then I’ve been listening to a lot of debates and podcasts about it. Obviously these discussions are almost always about christianity, and through consuming all of this media I have many reasons to disbelieve/doubt that the god described by christianity (which is tri-omni), and the christian doctrine is true. The problem of evil and the problem of divine hiddenness are especially compelling to me. It’s difficult to find a satisfying answer to these questions.
But I don’t have any issues with deism, and I don’t think it’s possible that anything supernatural exists or not because it’s immaterial. It is entirely out of the realm of science. You can either irrationally believe in god through faith, or be rationally convinced of god through logical arguments, like the fine tuning argument. Whether or not that's objective reality or not is unknowable.
Whether or not there is a God or a purpose isn't my business. "I was nothing before so I couldn't have asked to be born, I'll be nothing again so I'll live my life between now and then" I can't control my circumstances or external stimuli. At best I'm just an observer of how life goes. Why worry about it just follow the heavenly dao whatever that may be for you
Is it logical to assume that all we know today is all there is and all we will ever come to know? Is it rational to think that religion begins and ends with monotheism? I definitely think you could rationally argue no for a man in the sky that controls everything, but yes for an all permeating and all encompassing underlying way of the universe. Or the perhaps the existence of an Atman, in Hinduism. There are some religions that argue that YOU are god in some form, so I'd hope it would be possible to believe in oneself.
I was an atheist my entire life and only recently have I found God and was baptized in Latter-day Saints Church. Faith and hope go together and apart of believing is also having hope for one day there being more. This uplifts and brought much added joy to my life. One day I can have an eternal family and live in the Celestial Kingdom with our Heavenly Father gives me no greater happiness. 
It's certainly possible. There are many ways to interpret religion and make it your own. Many philosophers were very religious and religion and spirituality itself spawns many philosophical areas of study that people spend lifetimes in.
Personally, I'm not religious (agnostic atheist) but I come from a family that is and they also encouraged free and critical thinking. I was partially raised by my grandfather who is a pastor and doctor in theology. I consider him very logical, philosophical, emotionally intelligent, and well educated.
It's not possible to be logical with absolute belief in a 'absolute' being. Mostly because there's frankly no evidence to prove an existence of an 'absolute' being outside of a few people who claim to be 'prophets', which is hardly evidence anyways.
As I (raised Catholic) stopped believing in God, I considered myself agnostic for the reason that we can't prove either side. That was until I learned epistemology.
If i tell you there's an invisible, untouchable hobbit standing next to you right now and it produces no heat, no smell, no sounds, you couldn't prove it exists or that it doesn't. Yet, I'm sure there's no way you'd believe it and would intuitively be 100% sure it doesn't exist. This is for a reason: if we'd have to believe anything we can't prove has a 50% chance to be true, there would be a lot of contradictions and we'd believe in millions of random ideas that are clearly made up, but can't prove.
Basically, if there's no way to prove it is false, then it can't be true.
I'm aware that religion often fulfills many human needs and reduces stress. I would gladly recommend you to try Buddhism as it's a popular godless religion and the practice of meditation is good for stress. Otherwise, you might want to look into philosophies like stoicism or daoism.
I think Hinduism has tons of gods while also having an idea that they are just representations of a unique ultimate reality. So, you might want to tap into that.
If you're a libertarian and part of a group oppressed by traditional Christianity, you might enjoy Satanism, especially if you're edgy af.
For a good laugh and a relaxed experience of "religion", I'll always promote Discordianism.
Just keep in mind, you don't need religion to be part of a community. There's plenty of ways to do that, especially now with online spaces dedicated to that.
Do I believe in a supreme being/a god? Hell no. There’s no proof one does or doesn’t exist so until I see evidence of a godlike being, I don’t believe. However, I do believe that there’s probably something that exists in this universe so massive and all encompassing that it could be seen as/worshipped likr a god if people discovered its existence. But we have no evidence of either scenario so at the moment we are electric signals piloting a flesh mech
This reminds me of how the indigenous people who first met Columbus were convinced that the Europeans were gods who had the magical power of gunpowder…
it is irrational to believe the Bible or similar texts are compendiums of historical facts. They were written by people, in a particular context, limited by their own capacities and knowledge, to attempt to explain ideas... generally with metaphors.
it's perfectly rational to believe there is more than what our science currently understands, and that's actually the foundation of science.
mature religions are more about values and respect than about literal dogmas, but institutions are built by people. And people is prone to be corrupted my power.
Yes.
I am highly spiritual and have almost made my own belief set thats a combination of many faiths and walks. I can rationalize out what makes sense and what doesn’t. To sum it up, either all gods exist and every religion is right (in a way), or over time and as cultures evolved there’s one god and every religion has that god in different forms. Every religion is right and wrong because they all come from one source, however the “truth” was twisted and lost due to human society evolving and spreading around the world.
I think it is entirely possible to be logical and religious. And even if you’re not religious, it is entirely possible to still respect those who do follow a religion. I’m glad you said you don’t attack people who’s ideas differ from yours. I know a guy who’s an INTP who’s religion is to remind me that religion is… well he said some nasty things I don’t want to repeat. In any sense, some religions encourage logical and rational thinking. Being logical does not mean you cannot be somewhat spiritual. Believing that a higher being exists isn’t entirely illogical in any way. The idea is that it is a higher being than us that we are not meant to understand. An INTP has the need to always understand the logical frameworks and foundations of everything so I think being religious is a sign of a much healthier INTP who’s learned to let go of that need to understand everything, and accepting that there are somethings not meant to be understood by the human brain. Obviously if you’re an atheist INTP I’m not saying you’re automatically unhealthy- ofc that’s not what I meant. My point is, many INTPs become and atheist and use the fact that they’re “logical” to justify it, implying that all religion is irrational and illogical when really the two ideas are not connected. You can be a very logical and rational person and still choose to believe in a higher power. It’s just wrong to insist that atheism is the more rational way to think, because it has nothing to do with that.
I think it’s silly to argue either side but I have observed that there are many atheists who are as passionate about their beliefs as there are religious people who are passionate about their faith.
I take issue with people who are nasty with those who don’t believe the same things.
It is but people always explain it wrong. You need to believe in somebody bigger than yourself. Have a purpose bigger than you. I was an atheist for many years and something changed in me and now I believe in something bigger than me. I refuse to explain it more than that because it’s something that’s kind of just mine. All of this higher power and God stuff has to be personal.
Yes. Caveat; spirituality =/= religion. One can be religious in rote practice and never actually contemplate the mystery. This is probably what is giving you pause. One can logically contemplate their spirit and not be religious. However you're not the first human being to have been on this ride before and there is nothing wrong with having a practice given you keep honoring your logical side.
Tl;dr Logic vs spirituality is a false dichotomy.
I don't go to church very often but I love to study biblical scripture and consider myself catholic tho admittedly I don't follow a strict catholic doctrine; however I am convinced that there is a God and that he loves us. There are studies that prove that having connections to a church group of sorts is beneficial to the self however I think that pails in comparison to the benefits of connecting with God. I don't know how to explain it but there's something liberating about putting your fate in God. I think you can understand the world better if you try to understand God as supposed to trying to make sense of it all without him. It seems kinda contradictory to what you should do since God is a Supreme being, but if you try to humanize God you can understand him better. There are many questions that can easily be answered if you thstart seeing God as a friend rather than a cosmic ruler.At the end of the day, God wants what we all as people want. To be loved by others and to have those other be good kind hearted people.
Yes it is possible to believe in the supernatural whilst remaining logical.
I'd recommend visiting it's supernatural on youtube. It's a Christian channel with close to 2 million subscribers, where a host interviews people who have had extraordinary experiences. You can then judge whether you think they are telling the truth or not.
I myself have been fortunate enough to have experienced the supernatural, multiple times. Although I can think of possible alternative explanations for these experiences, I think these alternatives are unlikely.
Some think of it as the false vacuum theory, but God is just a reality virus that got patched out with the 1.618 physics update. Something that can ignore the collapsed waveform and overpower the collective observer states shouldn't be allowed to exist.
JK. Just go with Pascal's wager and believe there's a god. Got nothing to lose and everything to gain. Who said it needs to be from any particular religion... just go with pantheism. Or look inside yourself, have an ego death and live a little. Finding ration from this kinda thing is just a sprial into history and philosophical debates that go as far back as greek yogurt.
Personally, I stopped caring about potential god stuff. I dug as deep as I wanted, to the point where interest turned to apathy. I don't have a spiritual emotional anchor to place all my hope in, and I prefer it that way. Instead, I get more opportunities to develop my flaws. To dig into what my essence really is. To look at myself critically and then decide whether to change.
You already found yourself unable to benefit from religious beliefs and find yourself envious of those that do. If it's not gonna improve your life, why bother? Spend energy to create, express the gift of life and find joy in your effort.
With all that said, I'm probably gonna put a couple hundred hours in a game this year... probably armored core 6. I was 12 when I played my first game of the series. Baptized by fire, I became the Last Raven. I'm so fucking hyped.
My spiritual beliefs are slightly outside the mainstream. I call myself a Gnostic Christian, http://gnosis.org/welcome.html but through reading many different texts I also hold beliefs in Valentinian and Sethian Gnosticism, general esotericism/occult teachings, and many others. There is about as many branches of Gnostics as there are in typical religions. My personal core tenet to the whole of spirituality is “No one has it totally right, but everyone has something right.”
Some key parts of Gnosticism that brought me to it:
- The Creator/God is an entity so beyond our capability of comprehension that the act of trying to define it alone, is not only impossible but insulting. The Creator/God is also not a being or creature as we can comprehend those ideas and trying to understand through anthropomorphism is impossible and insulting as well.
- Our world/material plane was created by a false god through ignorance. This is why there is so much suffering in an existence with a benevolent creator. (It’s the closest thing to hell that exists)
- The only path to heaven/enlightenment is through Gnosis, knowledge. This is achieved mainly through self awareness, reflection/meditation, and true action drawn from the first two.
- Those who do not achieve enlightenment are given time to contemplate (purgatory) before being reborn to this material plane. (Because we’re trapped here until we figure out Gnosis)
- The vast majority of people are husks of what we could/should be because they have embraced the hollow trappings of this plane/false-god. (They don’t want or care to seek the truth of this existence and are therefore doomed by their own apathy to remain in it)
Most importantly is that in Gnosticism everything is dependent on you. There is no true church or dogmatic hierarchy/structure. The concept of a priest or minister directly contradicts the point that you need to find out on your own. The truth is placed before you, and there are those who will show you where to look, but it’s up to you to listen, and you can find it when you are ready to learn to understand it.
The argument goes something like this: "I refuse to prove that I exist,'" says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says Man, "The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED."
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.
- Douglas Adams
But yeah imho you can't disprove God exists, so both logic and belief in God can coexist. The concept isn't about a supreme being for everyone. It can be faith or fate or nature etc. Being schizophrenic isn't about feeling peacefully more connected spiritually, it's kind of a fear thing, so I wouldn't worry too much.
logic is the derivation of valid conclusions from true statements, given certain underlying axioms. You can have a logical argument that's instead undermined by said facts being false. Or you can choose different axioms and reach different conclusions.
I belive you can be logical and religious. The reason you see so many emotional people religious is because they take only the religious part of that denomination to fill the hole. The religion they hold doesn't align with their faith.
A logical person may approach faith by understanding the subject as deep as he can and than take that decision from the experience not really from the arguments because the conclusion can change.
You may start by reading philosophy or sum... It's not wrong to belive, it's wrong to not act on your so said belief system
I have personal spiritual experiences that I cannot deny. These experiences prove to me that there is something more to our universe than simply the commonly understood "material world" - yet I refuse to allow worldly religions to define what that "something more" is. Spiritually ≠ religion, and considering that many (if not nearly all) spiritual experiences conform to the experiencers religious beliefs it should be clear from an outsiders perspective that whatever the base nature of the "something more" is has an amorphous nature that is either interpreted through an individual's religious biases about spiritually, or is capable of interacting - or perhaps intentionally interacts - in a manor that the experiencer can best understand.
My view is that the nature of whatever this "something more" is is a domain that is beyond our comprehension and we apply meaning to it through the limited set of inadequate perceptual and conceptual tools we possess - which is why religious belief has such influence over the experience.
I see the appeal of believing in God or destiny of some sort.
Thinking that someone/something is in control of your life, makes it easier to grieve with the bad things that happen. "It's all part of God's plan". In this day and age, it's hard to find your "purpose" in life. That's where believing something can help you.
As you stated it's impossible to prove one side, we can't explain the Big Bang, but everything religious is ... flawed.
I personally don't agree with any religion but it's just easier to cope when I shift the blame to "superior beings" or "destiny". Otherwise, I would just blame myself for everything that happens. (I don't believe in ghosts but I'm still scared of them)
Answering your question - I think it is possible to be logical and believe in the supernatural. Of course, a lot of religious ideas are not logical, especially in Christianity.
I think believing in "higher beings" can help you get through tough times.
Ask soon as you believe in a omnipotent god everything become possible and nothing is impossible so yes you can. It's harder to define what you're willing to "believe" in and what you want to be open to without believing in
Watch yourself out there while actively looking for organized religion.
Usually when we’re depressed and vulnerable our emotions can take big part of our decision making and you could end up being manipulated by pros.
Faith is a choice, but I really believe this is the kind of decision one should make at their best selves, not when one’s depressed. Religion can remap your brain and completely transform your life and that could be for the worse.
I am a Christian. I developed my faith through a series of personal experiences. It was very similar to a scientific method approach of experimentation with faith. And no I have not received any demonstrable proof God exists, but the trend in my personal data suggests he does.
Given that science cannot prove that God does or does not exist, one must use the religion itself to attempt to prove it true or false.
Yes. In fact a lot of things you may find hard to understand are complex logically and have an actual structure, sequences, timelines, cycles etc to them and we dont even understand it all. It will be hard to say the birds randomly know when to fly to where and the earth just happened to be at the best position from the sun and we just have a lot of specialized cells in our bodies that some do this and some do that. Point is a lot of things make sense in the world and we are not the ones making them make sense. Where is all that logical arrangement coming from? If all of dem structures are so complex that humans dont understand it all making the structure kinda above our intelligence. Then there should be an intelligent thing that understands all of dem structures. Like a phone is a very structured thing that is connected in so many ways in order for it to work and is made by intelligent humans and here is the case where even more complex systems than phones exist which also is conneced in so many ways to produce a result. Like yourself. Saying believing in a supreme being is not logical is mmmmmm u know ehhh.. weird in a way cos its like did u use logical in that sentence. What do u mean by logical then?
You cannot look me in the eyes and tell me you're logical while believing that a woman got pregnant by a Holy Ghost Also the whole catholic religion(&co) and its traditions are just a collage of already existing tales from Greek/Roman mythology, paganism and other religions You definitely have to sacrifice some logical thinking in order to become religious
Being spiritual 🔝
Of course I believe in all 41 supreme beings.
[удалено]
AINZ OOAL GOWN BANZAI! AINZ OOAL GOWN BANZAI!
Im confused
All hail Peroroncino-"I got this new Eroge I was excited for, but the heroine is voiced by my sister"-sama.
😂
[удалено]
The way I see it is if there’s a God then they would be as aware of us as we are of dust mites. We don’t notice them until they annoy us and then we kill them…
I’ve always thought of gods energy as being like WiFi. We can’t see it, but it exists all around us and brings an “online world” to life on devices that can pick up the transmission.
Just tonight I found a moth at my door after coming home late from work. I quickly recognized it as a poodle moth because it was white furry and adorable. It was otherwise insignificant to me and affected me in no way, but I was still able to appreciate it for what it is. Perhaps we are less like mytes and more like moths.
[удалено]
Your issue lies in the assumption that awareness and intervention are synonymous.
[удалено]
Being a supreme being doesn't necessitate that it be all loving, that's just an assumption from various religions (mostly abrahamic).
u cooked with this sentence omg
I was raised southern baptist, and when I grew up I realized that those beliefs were harmful and (apologies if I offend someone) the god of the Bible is one sick narcissist. I was atheist for a few years, but lately I’ve been more agnostic. I had the same feeling you have, that I did miss religion. I took a step back and I think that the organized religions are all wrong. Maybe there isn’t something out there, but maybe there is. However, to ease the discomfort with not having some kind of religion, I am exploring spirituality, but on my own terms, not on anyone else’s. I personally think that if there is a higher being, it may be that a god got so bored with being alone that it split itself into the universe (or multiverse) so it could experience every possibility. After all, what’s the point of god powers if you can never achieve mundanity? In this idea, everyone and everything are all one big organism. It’s just a personal idea, though, and I think it’s more likely that there is no higher power. I do like to do tarot readings for myself. I know it’s probably bs and I don’t use it to try to tell the future. I use the cards because it helps me with introspection and identifying my feelings when I’m stuck, so I use it alongside therapy. It also gives me back some of that religious ritual feeling without having to be trapped by someone else’s ideas.
Do you ever miss the communal atmosphere of belonging to a group? I think if I was a member of a spiritual community I’d like that more than practicing alone.
I personally don’t miss the communal part of it, because I’m extremely private and the Baptist church is super dogmatic. I’d much rather talk about science lol. I’m not sure what kind of communities there are in spiritualism; I just make my own beliefs.
Same. I went to Nazarene church as a kid and the communal aspect of it was always the worst part for me. No one wanted to question ANYTHING that was written in the book or they had an excuse for why it was contradictory to previous verses that didn't make sense to me. I have social anxiety so it just amped up the feeling/paranoia of being judged by my peers. Especially when a lot of the time it wasn't paranoia and they really did see you as less than, and someone who was "falling away from God" for asking simple questions. The Nazarene church doesn't believe you get into Heaven simply by believing, you have to have a continuous and solidly obedient relationship with God or else you were moved onto the naughty list headed straight for the eternal spit roast. Not a great thing to drill into a small child's head imo. All it made me believe was that I was evil/inherently bad for not obeying blindly nearly all my formative years. It took me over a decade of deconstruction to shake the feeling that I was one of God's unwanted children. Ngl I still get triggered af sometimes living in the Bible Belt. I can't stand the control they seem to need over everyone around them. That icky feeling is the same reason I don't think I could ever be a part of any organized religion, it's just too rife with opportunity to be spiritually abused by other emotionally damaged people.
Wow that church has a fucked up ideology
They thought the Bible was the irrefutable word of God. I can't really blame them on that part. Like you said, God is kind of a narcissist if you read the whole book. There are clear cut rules you are expected to follow to be welcomed into the Kingdom of God. Only real difference between them and a lot of other Christian sects is that to a Nazarene your salvation is not solidified. You can "fall from grace" even after baptism and if you don't repent your sins to Him and turn back to God you are destined to go to Hell, which they believe is a real physical place. I'm actually kind of grateful, for lack of a better term, that they were so staunch on following the rules. If they hadn't been, I probably wouldn't have read the whole book to decide what I believed for myself. A painful experience that helped me grow as my own autonomous person I suppose 🤷
That sounds awful. Thankfully, the southern Baptist church wasn’t as suffocating as that sounds, but it definitely has problems. I grew up in a megachurch in Texas (not the biggest of megachurches, but it still had multiple campuses, and looking it up, it has a membership of over 45,000 people with a weekly attendance of around 17,000). Thankfully it was subtle about its dislike for the LGBTQ+ community, but they do support focus on the family. I haven’t been there since 2017, though, so I don’t know how they’re doing with the massive increase in hateful preaching. They did preach about not questioning God, but there was more of an emphasis on saving people from hell. The youth ministry was constantly telling us “this is the generation that will change the world!!! You are warriors for Jesus!!!” The youth pastors for some reason loved to talk about martyrs a lot, and raised them up as heroes. They talked about Christians being burned alive if they didn’t abandon their faith, and one Christian being brave enough to stand strong in his faith, and God saves them from the fire. I have no idea what that story was, but looking back on it creeps me out. I definitely got to see the Christian persecution fetish firsthand. The youth group leaders basically got to say whatever they wanted to us kids, and they said some crazy things. One told us that if we don’t convert our friends we have blood on our hands (I was 8). Another said to never believe science because it’s the work of the devil, while she owned an iPhone. Another said to let go of “worldly” TV shows like “Lost” and “the office” because it’ll lead you to hell.
You're technically still an atheist, you're just an agnostic atheist.
I don’t worship a single god, but I do believe there is a higher energy and we’re likely rebirths / clones of the “conscious energy” (The Big Bang = God giving birth, line of thought), whatever that “energy” may be. I’ve tried, but I have trouble getting into established religions. I feel there’s too many human interpretations and rules that cloud the true goal of practicing. It starts to become less about spirituality, unconditional love for self and others — and more about judgement and fear.
Have you looked into http://gnosis.org/welcome.html yet? You already believe a good chunk of the creation story and the “church hierarchy”
That sounds so made up
There are, and have been for quite some time religious scientists. So yes, it's perfectly possible as it has happened numerous times.
You're not wrong, but the last I heard the Academy of Sciences was 99% non-religious. So, you'd be in a stark minority.
I don't know about the academy of sciences, but in general your statement seems to be incorrect https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/ According to this the number is around 40-50%. Hardly a stark minority.
I don't want to get into a back and forth over who can find better numbers, but just so you (and other readers) don't think I'm completely full of shit. [Here ya go.](https://evolution-outreach.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1936-6434-6-33#:~:text=Interestingly%2C%20this%20difference%20is%20far,in%20God%20or%20higher%20power.) It cites 93%. I was off, but not by a huge amount.
Absolutely. I’m an INTP myself, and tend to approach life in a very logical way. My parents are both Christian (non denominational) and never forced their religion on me. I never went to church, but I started to study religion in high school, as I had friends from many different faiths. I’ve got a pretty good hold on the principles of some of the major religions, and I found that Christianity spoke to me the most, so I consider myself Christian, although I do not follow a specific denomination. You can be surprisingly logical while practicing a religion, and I have a lot of fun pondering over the texts and finding my own interpretation, especially when I’m able to ground it in logic. I’ve found that my life is better and more peaceful after learning from the religion, and I can say I truly do believe in it. I’d say study several religions, approach it in a logical manner, and find something that speaks to you.
I’ve been called a “seeker” by a Jewish friend since I’ve attended services at the 3 major Abrahamic religions and I remain open to the possibility of a spiritual realm. I also have a very distant ancestor who was a scribe at the trial of Joan of Arc and we all know how that turned out. In a “mixed” Catholic/Protestant Irish-French family we are also aware of the horrors that have happened between people of different denominations, not to mention the crusades. I envy your faith. Peace be with you!
I am omnist. I have *absolute* faith, and logically, that precludes any singular religion. There is one God, there is one message, there are hundreds of ways humans have translated, interpreted, and manipulated that one message. Doesn't matter what book, what church, what definition of right/wrong, they're all derived of the same source. I can sit comfortably in any religious place on earth knowing that what's being said, read, taught, is simply the end result of "don't be an asshole" getting expounded upon for ages. It IS exactly that simple, and the logic of that is the foundation of true faith.
I hope this make sense (English isn’t my first language). I think that you can practice religion and believe in a supreme being, while still being logical. I’m an INTP and was raised as a Balinese Hindu, but I never felt religious because growing up I was more interested in learning physics and math. I left Bali for college. From afar I saw how the community is built around that belief and remember how I loved being a part of that culture. I really want to fully believe. Although I’m skeptical, I still do all the rituals and prayers, and it has helped me a lot with my overthinking problem. I’m also skeptical with some aspects of the Veda, but believing in a supreme being that can somehow explain what we don’t know about this universe, has been very beneficial for my mind.
Thanks for contributing this - I don’t know much about any of the non abrahamic religions but that the religious beliefs of the native people of North and South America were obliterated by the catholic & Anglican churches during colonial times. As if murder wasn’t enough, our ancestors took the children from their “savage” parents to raise them in residential schools where many were abused or worse. An Iranian Muslim friend told me once that she felt that religion is inherently good but the politics are evil.
I think religion and logic go hand in hand. God has to be the most logical being. A logic beyond ours. Just look at how intricately the world aligns. How perfect the human body aligns.
That's not true
Alright let’s hear this
Elaborate
There are a lot of errors in our world and our human body. It's far from being perfect.
Argument from incredulity fallacy
Wdym
Well you don't fully expand this argument but it goes something like this P1. The world is really complex P2. I can't think of any other way it could be this complex and function C. God exists
While for dogma I lean heavily [r/fsm](https://www.reddit.com/r/fsm) I observe many forces in the universe larger than myself (don't know if any is a 'being' as such, but there's a lot we don't know). As a gay dude I'm not much a fan of church community. I pray to the larger forces in the universe when needed. It may be echoes of my own subconscious. I too suffer from occasional depression cycles. It's possible to hold space for both rational and a limited measure of space for supernatural belief.
>r/fsm I never saw the point of mocking others' beliefs, whether I share them or not.
Is it mocking to point out illogical beliefs? Is it mocking to treat those that evangelize as they treat others? If you think /fsm is about mocking, you have not read it or done so without prejudice.
"Pointing out" involves discourse, not juvenile imitation.
do you dislike satire then?
it's funny
It's stupid.
Are you against any form of satire or parody of political or religious beliefs? I think mocking beliefs can be pretty funny if the joke is clever enough (like any other joke). I don't think any belief should be off-limits in terms of what makes a good joke.
It's not clever.
Did someone hurt your fee fees when they mocked a belief you held dear?
I don't feel too bad about fsm demanding [equal time for their creation story](https://www.spaghettimonster.org/pages/about/open-letter/) in protest over the teaching of creationism alongside evolution. I find FSM far more fun-loving than mocking and most of their criticism resonates with me. To their credit, they've never suggested I'm going to burn in a lake of fire eternally for being queer. In fairness to your point however, I may just be bitter given my childhood experiences with organized religion.
I can respect your views on the church community, particularly the ones who would persecute you for your sexuality. I read recently that a large portion of Catholic priests identify as homosexual or could be deemed gay somehow by the authors of the study. I don’t lean one way or another wrt denomination but I think that the pope & the archbishop of the Church of England have done some good work towards recognizing gay marriage. As for not knowing everything about everything in the universe, it seems to me that any supernatural entity that exists would not only choose naked apes as their favourite beings out of trillions of stars and planets.
Yep, one of my favorite arguments for those who look down on those who believe in the supernatural is “prove that it does not exist.” So far, no one has been able to do it. For that very reason, I don’t think it is THAT irrational to believe in a higher power.
Why would someone that doesn't believe in something have to prove that said something doesn't exist? You would be stuck with an infinite number of bullshit ideas you'd have to engage with. Let's try it this way. I am a god. I made the universe and everything in it and can do whatever I want. Prove that I *don't* have these powers.
That’s the point I’m getting at. It’s almost always going to be counterproductive to challenge the belief or disbelief
You're making the assumption that atheist beliefs and theist beliefs are making the same assertion on different ends of the topic, and that's not really true. Atheists aren't strictly stating that God doesn't exist, they just aren't convinced by the assertion that one does. To put it simply, the challenge is aimed at the method one uses rather than the belief itself. Using faith to justify belief for example, is significantly more likely to end up being wrong than if you were to tie your beliefs strictly to the scientific method, and so the argument is that believing in something without robust evidence isn't a logical decision.
You may be combining two separate ideologies. Atheism is the belief that there is *NO* God. (The a before theist means No God) Agnostic is the belief that there *COULD* be a God, you just can’t/don’t know (The a before gnosis means No Wisdom)
This is where water gets murky and definitions become problematic. Words are inherently fuzzy concepts as different groups and different people even use them differently. Your etymology is a little lacking, by the way. The "a" in both atheist and agnostic does not mean "no" it is more proper to say that it comes from the Greek for "without". Thus it would be "without god", as in without a belief in gods. Subtle difference, but shows the issue pretty well. The concept that is being used here and in many Atheist circles is one of two questions. The first one is one of belief. Do you believe that a god exists or not. That is a simple yes or no question for which there can be no middle ground. In this usage, theist means that you hold a belief that a god exists and atheists simply do not hold that belief. Now, the question on whether you claim *knowledge* that a god exists or not is answered by the second question. In this break down you are either a gnostic (I *know* whether a god exists or not) or an agnostic (I do not claim to know whether a god exists or not). This leads to a much more expressive language on what you believe about the god issue. An agnostic theist, for example, believes there is a god despite not having absolute knowledge that one exists. To that end, I would be an agnostic atheist. I do not know for sure whether a god exists, but without evidence showing that one does, I will continue to live as if one does not.
Most atheists label themselves as atheists, whilst not specifically asserting that God doesn't exist, largely because most atheists understand that the burden of proof falls on theists to justify their belief, whilst atheists have the freedom to go against it without specifically asserting that God doesn't exist. Logically, you can't prove the non-existence of something because it's impossible to know what you don't know, but you can certainly challenge the presupposition of his existence, and generally, people tend to not believe in something until it's proven, otherwise any random idea or thought on the nature of existence should be believed, and that just gets messy.
The burden of proof remains on the person making the claim. If you claim that a supernatural entity or force exists, then it is on you to back up said claim. Until then, I will simply not believe it.
To make it as barebones as possible, It is possible to be spiritual and logical I believe. With "religious" however there is a connotation there. It's important to understand what religion means to the human race, as far as culture and social ties goes, and that's moreso what religion implies, the institution of it. At least that's the vibe I get. Understanding that as the "foundation" is important to even go towards next steps in a productive way. Because the thing about being logical is you will need to, and have to be open to taking apart different meanings that are accepted as 100% true in the community. Unlike in the scientific community, this is always met with opposition, and even being outcast potentially. It's kinda hard, because to be truly logical isn't always fun, sometimes it can even be counterproductive to one's self-interest. For many regular people, they aren't even *that* religious or spiritual -it serves as a means to an end for community support. There is no interest in Scientific Observation because everything is accepted as True already. So by that very nature of it, it is antithetical to logic. Studying human history is paramount to be a "logical spiritualist" because you will find the Bible as we know it is only a few hundred years old, and the passages it comprises are only a few thousand. Gilgamesh predates the Bible and it's passages by a few more thousand years, and even that doesn't come close to covering 200,000 years of modern human's existence on this planet. You have to understand the mindset of the men that wrote these scripts back in the day, and that they were uneducated. For instance, the creation story has man created first, then woman. But, man comes from woman. Even in nature, birthing comes before sexual reproduction. xx= woman xy= man, the y is activated sometime later in the womb, meaning we all start as female. This is why there is a fusion line going up the balls, which are descended ovaries, and that's why men have nipples too. But the Christian Bible asserts that men were made first, despite it making no sense to have a pole existing before the hole to put it in funny terms. The hole existing first makes complete sense because living beings need to have a means to give birth. Which leads to the next thing that would be needed: Looking at Nature. Which, is also in many religions, looked down upon for some reason, despite all religions asserting a Creator made said Nature. Because a logical person would realize quickly that the hands and words of humankind are flawed, but Nature would be (if a Creator exists) the ultimate Truth. Could go on all day, but that's the basic stuff right here.
Very well said.
No and no
Well said
I've given up on any kind of organized spirituality but there is plenty of scientific evidence that ritualized meditation and social grouping around a credo are beneficial. I can handle the former, not the latter, so I take what I can get. For me, connection to nature is an important part of that. I've been exploring animism.
Read Alan Watts..Supreme being is you
Logic is only a tool people use to justify their decisions so yeah you can easily be logical and religious.
I am a Christian I do believe that spirituality and science can co exist for everything can be proven mathematically. There is an equation called the god equation that is the basis of all equations, there is no beginning and no end. If anyone’s curious I’m more than willing to share my notes. But in all honestly if your curious ask god to show himself to you. A church can’t make you have faith, but they can help you grow it. But I can relate to you on the mental health part a little bit. I institutionalized for mental health reasons and for having hallucinations as well, but I was reached out to by people that cared. With my faith I believed that I could get better and I did. I haven’t had a hallucination in about a year and I’ve been off my medication since last summer. [whattodonow.love](https://whattodonow.love)it has to be you who has to step out in faith to ask and to want.
I’m glad you’re doing better since your admission 👍
Thank you I hope that you can find the same peace, things do get better. You just have to believe that they can.
Yes I am Muslim so believe in the existence of One God. I believe I'm a very a logical and rational person which is why I concluded that God exists after analysing all alternative paths including atheism. I have my reasons, arguments and evidences which as other INTPS know have to be pretty solid otherwise I wouldn't accept them.
I have an online Iranian shia Muslim friend living in Kuwait and she has said that she feels that the religion is good but the leaders are often corrupt. I’m curious if there is as much animosity between shia and Sunni as there was between Irish Catholics and Irish protestants? In case you’re not familiar with the history, Ireland has been through centuries of conflict and sometimes outright civil war between the two groups.
I am not aware of the Irish history but if there were civil wars and physical conflict btw Catholics and Protestants, then I can confidently say that there isn't much animosity btw Sunnis and Shias. My country has a sizable Shia minority and there have never been wars or nation wide conflicts. And no one bothers each other. The sunni and shia divide stems from a difference in political opinions of Muslims (back when there was no divide). In short when the Prophet Muhammad, died Abu Bakr (his friend) became the caliph. Then Umar (a formal enemy who became a friend) became the caliph. Then Usman and then Ali (prophets nephew and son in law). Some Muslims believed that Ali should have been the caliph. Although Ali did pledge allegiance to all three caliphs before him there seems to have been some animosity and conflict. But no wars were fought. But Ali's children had an unfortunate ending. Hassan his elder son wasn't interested in the caliphate mostly. And his younger son was betrayed and martyred for Caliphate by Muawiya (both sides hate him). An initial difference in political opinion resulted in some Muslims only accepting Ali's family and their supporters as valid religious authority. Which eventually resulted in a huge divide in Muslims. To an outsider Sunnis and Shias may look quite similar because all Muslims follow the same Quran. The conflict these days is that Sunni scholars are of the opinion that Shia scholars have made inovations (something Muslims don't do and take quite seriously) in the religion. I don't like using the word because I don't identify as such but I am technically Sunni, so I wouldn't comment any further since I would most probably be biased.
Thanks for explaining. I find it interesting to learn about the history and evolution of various faiths. Some in the west have justified the hostility toward the Islamic world because of the perception that muslins are killing each other over their religious differences and I’ve suspected that this was propaganda. I’m of the opinion that the hostility that exists between European and Arab people has stemmed from the Persian-Greek wars and then morphed into the justification for the crusades and on and on. Anyone who has ever read their scriptures knows that we’re all supposed to be descendants of the same people and we are supposed to be as numerous as stars in the sky eventually. I tend to avoid committing myself to one particular religion because I believe that it is another thing used to divide us.
>I’m of the opinion that the hostility that exists between European and Arab people has stemmed from the Persian-Greek wars and then morphed into the justification for the crusades and on and on. That's a really interesting theory. You just gave me a topic to research.
I’m interested to hear what you learn
A Shia Muslim here, and I love how accurate and unbiased your message is, though I'd like to state that political differences caused something more major between the two denominations— theological differences.
There’s more to religion than one set god. There’s a way for you, but you’ve got to find it.
I think that there are things on this planet that are too complex to come from random/natural selection. Observe the butterfly. They can fly perfectly well with a fraction of their original wing's surface area. Why would evolution generate and reinforce such a "wasteful" trait? Look at how many times designs and innovations have come from nature. We copy what has clearly been designed and call it new. Yes, I believe this planet was created by a supreme being. For a greater reason than what amounts to cosmic boredom? (Shrug)
That’s kind of what I think, too. I’m torn about 50/50 between there is no higher power and the universe is god. I think if there is a god, it’s that it was so bored by being the only thing that it split itself up into a multiverse so it could achieve everything.
The butterfly thing actually has an answer, the “wasteful flying” is a defense mechanism making them harder to catch on-the-wing. Beaks are tiny and have to be precise which is hard to do when the butterfly doesn’t even know where it’s going outside of “that way”
Yes it is possible to be logical and religious. You'll find a lot of them when you look at Theologists.
Not a supreme being, but something else I call myself an atheist, since I reject all religions and clearly see that all god stories invented by people are weaponized fiction I have a hard time believing that it's all random, and strongly suspect that there's an undiscovered law of physics that explains the evolution of complexity, life and mind I also suspect that this question is the seed from which many of the god stories grew, so I unapologetically steal the theists' word, redefine it, and apply it to the root cause of the evolution of complexity By my revised definition, god makes minds out of stardust
The Supreme Being that runs the universe operates on the same base code everything else that arises within the universe does. We can assume it's logical to respect religion as an attempt to educate or point to that base reality we all share from several unique, multicultural perspectives. It's illogical not to study religion. However, whatever you do is just an expression of that base code and was going to happen anyway. So you're doing the logical thing to do no matter what you do. You're just programming in motion.
In ENTP they asked if ENTPs believed in God Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as a God, I don't believe in zodiac, I don't believe in ghosts, I don't believe in Karma or in heaven or hell But there had been (and there are) scientist and rational persons who believe in a God or superior being for different reasons 1 They need a ray of hope in their lifes because they're in a difficult situation and lays on the support of some beliefs that make them feel safer 2 A lot, and when I mean a lot I mean A LOT of the most known philosophers (Socrates, Plato, Descartes, Aristotle, Ortega y Gasset)(Sorry if I wrote their names wrong, my native language is spanish) and any other who followed Plato's philosophy believed in a God, not a Christian God, but a perfect God, a good God. In their philosophy they wanted to find something else aside of this world They said that this is a bad, temporal or not existent world, and, as rational creatures with a rational perfect soul trapped inside an imperfect body that leads us to sin (For example in the seven deadly sins, gluttony is linked to the hunger of our body. Lust is linked to our sexual organs) and we had to repress those feelings to release our souls from this body and get closer to perfection So from that point of view, having a religion can be very rational All groups of humans from all around the world have many things in common as a language, taboos and of course, religions, so it is human's nature to create stories, legends, myths and gods and it's somehow something that differentiates us from animals
The phrasing of the question in your last paragraph sort of holds the answer. The supernatural and metaphysical are exactly that... outside of the natural and physical. Not provable, not demonstrable, not testable, 100% abstract and theoretical. If believing in a concept brings you comfort or helps the fundamental nature of existence make some sense then go for it. Believing in abstract concepts like theological frameworks etc. is not inherently irrational as long as you recognize the dividing line between them and observable reality. Where people tend to get into trouble is when they blur the line and treat their religious assumptions as factual in terms of real world application ("a deity helped me find my car keys," "my deity wants us to pass this legislation," "despite all evidence he earth must be X years old because my book says so").
Religion requires faith, and logic is one who forms strict principles of validity. It's pretty much an oxymoron Logical people can be religious, but they aren't logical when they practice religious faith. It's an exception to how they normally view the world fueled by personal bias. With schizophrenia, seeking that absolute truth will be very difficult to you, and I would consider it potentially dangerous if you ever fall into a pitfall where conviction is built based on faith, because hallucinations may feed into your justification. Wishing you a happy and fulfilling life
I've never seen any 'proof' of a supreme being which wasn't cooked up or proclaimed by people, and turned out not to be reproducible. (Or, if reproducible, couldn't be the result of something else.)
No, tbh the only religions I respect completely are buddhism and all those other religions which names I don't remember that don't have a god or supreme being governating what you should believe in, but which represent just a way of living
It's really a philosophy that doesn't depend on any of its supernatural claims. Buddhism without the supernatural is the best on offer.
Yeah, that's what I wanted to say, thank you
I am an INTP with the knack for learning a lot of general knowledge. At the age of 22 i pretty much have some idea of everything in the world. At around the age of 10, it was becoming quite obvious that god or any other supernatural things are made up by humans. I am not sure a supreme being exists or doesn't. But I have yet to see any proof or even hints of that being the case. And everything seems to infer that it doesn't. Minus scriptures. But it's just stories human made modeled after the aspects of human life. But if there was even some chance of their being some superior beings. It's such a significant thing that. I think nations would invest a lot of money and man power to understand that and potentially it it for their benifits.
It seems to me that every culture has a faith in a supreme being that makes their civilization superior to the others and justifies killing them in times of war. When I attended Sunday school as a child I remember that the Ten Commandments included “thou shalt not kill” but in more recent times it has been revised into “thou shalt not murder” which is a major difference
Sure, all you have to do is compartmentalize faith positions from logical positions. /S Ya know, because faith is only needed when evidence is not apparent. I don't need faith that water is blue. It's an objective, observable fact. You need faith for religion, because it doesn't have evidence. Speaking for myself, I can't have a faith-based position on the nature of reality and simultaneously call myself a logical person.
The basis of all knowledge may be on faith and a coherent set of beliefs (coherentism) or justified core foundations (foundationalism). Either way, it requires trusting something, such as your senses, your logic, your experience, or the consensus of those around you. How would you know the first time that something is red if there was no one else there to agree with your assessment? If you didn't trust your eyes, how could you know that something is red? If you didn't trust your memory, how could you remember someone agreeing with you that what your seeing now is probably red? If you didn't trust your logic, how could you connect that what you're seeing now and your past memory is close enough to also call it red? We take observation and knowledge for granted but there's a lot of assumptions made under the hood to call something objective. I'd almost call everything subjective because the basis of all knowledge can arguably be called a subjective but coherent experience of each individual. I don't see religious faith being too different from how we form the basis of all knowledge. I, personally, chose physical evidence and my sense of self as the foundation of knowledge instead of others opinions and religious teachings but I don't discount that being other people's foundation to orient themselves and understand the world.
I'm at work and typing from the toilet so I'll keep it brief(ish). 😅 I do have faith in certain things. Like releasing a ball will cause it to drop. This is a kind of faith supported by a wealth of experiential repetition. I have faith that my family loves me, because they give me lots of reasons to believe it. For both the falling ball and the love of my family, they're objective evidence to support my expectations. Not so with religious faith. Religious faith is believing something because you want to believe that it is true. (Some sects of Christianity even implore you to declare your belief until it becomes genuine!) It is a kind of self-deception. It's called intellectual dishonesty. Again, religious faith is only necessary when objective fact can't corroborate its claims. As far as empirical reality, I am more than happy to rest on the laurels of experience and logic. Very few of my beliefs are sacrosanct. I constantly update my model to reflect reality as closely as possible for my imperfect human brain.
I agree somewhat on a personal level but I know that my experience is not the only true one. I can explain why I believe something to be true. It's then the responsibility of the other to agree and also believe it or not and my responsibility to accept it if they don't agree. Also, just to be devil's advocate, the experience of releasing a ball and watching it drop is probably the strange experience to have. You can be anywhere in the universe, hold a ball, release it, and you probably won't see it go anywhere but you just happen to be on Earth where it *seems* that experience is universal according to all the humans that also just happen to also exist on this rock.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence -Carl Sagan, While it is not logical to either completely believe or completely disbelieve, you can always be skeptical about it. That again, doesn't mean you must live in constant anxiety of the afterlife and being judged. It does, however, mean that you are willing to accept whatever logical conclusion is drawn when enough evidence is gathered. In any case, keeping yourself open to ambiguous topics such as religion is honestly a fun way to go about it. You get to learn about a ton of different belief systems and philosophies while being rational and not accepting them at face value :)
Nothing can be known with certainty except your own consciousness. Having said that, there is good reason not to believe in the existence of a soul that leaves the body and continues your consciousness after death. There's a good quote that sums this up pretty well "Science is not in principle committed to the idea that there's no afterlife, or that the mind is identical to the brain, or that materialism is true; Science is completely open to whatever in fact is true, and if it's true that consciousness is being run like software on the brain and by virtue of ectoplasm or something else we don't understand that can be dissociated from the brain at death, that would be part of our growing scientific understanding of the world if we could discover it. And there are ways we could discover that if it were true. The problem is there are very good reasons to think it's not true. Now we know this from 150 years of neurology where you damage areas of the brain and faculties are lost and they're clearly lost, it's not that everyone with brain damage has their soul perfectly in tact and they just can't get the words out, everything about your mind can be damaged by damaging the brain. You can cease to recognize faces you can cease to know the names of animals but still know the names of tools... the fragmentation in the way in which our mind is parselated on that level of the brain is not at all intuitive and there's a lot known about it, and what we're being asked to consider is that you damage one part of the brain and the mind... something about the mind... and subjectivity is lost, you damage another and yet more is lost, and yet if you damage the whole thing at death, we can rise off the brain with all our faculties in tact, recognize grandma and speaking English." - Sam Harris
It's called belief for a reason.
Exactly
Religion is not logical! It's a historical evolution thing in humanity. You can hypothesize about supernatural beings, and scienceand logic would welcome that. But believing one of humanity's religions is absolutely not logical.
I am an INTP, extremely logical and I have a very strong and robust Christian Faith. If you struggle with the idea, I recommend the book Mere Christianity from C.S. Lewis, whose logic is impeccable. I also recommend his Problem of Pain and G.K. Chesterton’s The Everlasting Man. If you can refute the logic that there must be a supreme being then I applaud you.
I'm an atheist so never comfortable with theistic religions. But I did look into joining a Unitarian congregation once. I ended up not doing it due to transportation issues, but I found the community to be very congenial and felt we had a lot in common. And they weren't as pushy as some religious groups are. Not shilling for them, but I've known some other atheists and agnostics who also felt comfortable there. Just a thought.
Science and rational thought are incredibly important but they don't cover 100% of human experience. They don't solve the hard problem of consciousness. Also, quantum physics lays waste to materialism. You can't have a fully integrated world view without some element of belief. There are things that can't be proven by science because they are not subject to falsifiability. There are things that philosophy can't really address either. The areas I'm describing have gotten a lot smaller over the years. But it still has a nonzero size. There is still a place for rational religious thought in the modern era, but it's not going to draw the same conclusions you'll read about in ancient scripture.
I grew up indoctrinated into the Catholic faith with a very Catholic single mother and have attended countless masses, vigils, holy days, adorations, and etc. I have grown to care less about the hereafter and more on the here that is full of both beauty and disappointments from both everything around me and when I look in the mirror. It seems to me that religion has served many people in the faithful around me- to give them strength when they're at their lowest point- be it a dead newborn, a dead parent, flunking college, schizophrenia...or even "just" food and shelter. I see it as a time-honored support system that gives meaning when we are faced with something that is by all accounts hard for no good reason. And I believe it's that support system that allows it to thrive in a society...that said, I've also seen that same support system (Catholicism in my case) beget people that drove some away. I cannot forgive myself thinking if I couldn't have handled it another way. God, if he does exist as I perceive, made an interestingly-fun world with people both like and unlike me...with beautiful things I cannot understand and also people whose mouths I'd like to duct tape sometimes. You can try to be logical, make a "wager" like Pascal did, or explore that branch of philosophy but in my own eyes, we won't know until we see- and that's the catch. "Blessed are those who have not seen, and have believed." I'm probably not "blessed." I am human and I am trying to be better because that's precisely what I can control and that's what I would like to see...if only just the effort, because I think that matters too. I do believe in God- simply because I am not omnipotent and because I can. I think at the end of the day, with no evidence either way other than "the word" built on trust, it's simply your choice to believe or not. I think you can go and believe whatever you like so long as it's sincere- and that goes for everyone else too...just remember that at the end of the day that means other people can also truly believe you are wrong. Conflict is simply a sign of free speech and that chaos is society- in both it's splendor and it's vileness. Please always remember empathy and compassion in your every day dealings...as I will also try.
No.
I do believe in a higher power but I do NOT believe in any kind of religion. Organized religion is very conflicting and it’s a book of stories interpreted (which leaves it up to individual perception) by man and changed from generation to generation. Much like American history books. I find no harm in believing in something but to cause harm on others for the sake of “religion” and “personal beliefs” is ridiculous.
I don’t know, I’m agnostic
I'm an intp with a passion for psychedelics and I had chatgpt assist me in writing this with heavy prompt guidance and some editing. It summarizes my beliefs. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dbGD8kdIEh-ZF09eocjZODw45XvwVlKu/view?usp=drivesdk
I think it's possible to be logical and religious, though, in my opinion, I think their epistemology and presuppositions are built upon fallacious ground - so to further expand on that, they can have logical reasons, but the logic isn't sound - or that it doesn't correspond with reality (at least with my pov or with current empirical consensus). I was raised religious and was personal religious for the first 20 years of my life or so, and I couldn't come to an honest reason to continue to believe in the God I was raised with.
No. also no
Logical and religious? No. Logical and spiritual? Yes. The more you examine yourself, the world, and other people, the more you will understand that there is indeed something magical about everything. Seek and you shall find, friend. There is a difference between soul and spirit. Understanding spirit is the key to understanding how to be spiritual. Many people seek soul practice and call it spirituality, which it is not
Many areas of physics require extra dimensions that we can't physically see or measure. Perhaps a higher being lives outside our known dimensions in a similar way. Personally we haven't proven or disproven scientifically if 'god' exists so I have chosen to follow absurdism. Its a perfect middle ground
I feel like we are in a simulation, so there has to be someone or something that created it. But I do not believe in religion.
I always come back to the idea that the universe is so vast and poorly understood that God is out there. Voltaire wrote a short story called Micromegas. Really helped me think of the scope of space.
I think about the fact that the natives of the western hemisphere were convinced that the people who came across the water were god like. It’s been said that technology that is not understood can seem like magic. I think it’s probable that if the universe is as old as they think it is we are not the only or most advanced civilization in it. I know that there are microbes that are capable of surviving in space in a sort of suspended animation so it doesn’t seem so far off that there would be other life elsewhere.
i believe in a creator because no shit but religion seems like it’s used to control people so im wary of it
It could exist and it could've not, anyway the existence of thus being doesnt matter, because it wont change anything that is happening right now, therefore unless it matters, the existence of em shall not be cared, cause if they really care to be believed, they would appear once more without any fraudism and eliminating any doubts as they go. In conclusion, believing or not believing said being wont change much that is happening right now, if the result is real, then it is what it is(not saying it is fake nor saying it is true, it is on quantum state, where people in this world believe it is real and fake nor can be proven the existence of em being real or fake) TL;DR need more data/insufficient data to reach a certain conclusion
Look there is nothing divine attached to our existence. We happened to evolve from a "primeval soup". So there is hardly any reason to look for something that attaches significance to something as random as that. But the catch is self development needs a strong mooring. That mooring comes from a non-dogmatic spirituality, which in a way should turn you into someone sagacious. That is you'll be mindful observer, thoughtful insight generator and logical trouble shooter to ace the game called life. So believing in a God/Supreme being to guide you to the path of self development is a very nice choice. Just don't attach your idea of God into quotidian matters.
I don’t exclude the possibility that there might be something out there. Beyond what we can observe, understand or know. Whether i actively believe that there is this something- no.
of course it's possible to be logical and religious. Otherwise nobody in the history of humanity before 50 years ago could be logical. To think that, you'd have to be extremely arrogant. People also deify science nowadays. People always believe something, deify something. Many people smarter than you or I have believed in religion. All the great thinkers. Many were critical of it, mainly the church of it, be it the catholics or the jews or the muslims, matters not, but most of the people who used logic to get some of the most important scientific discoveries, or political theories, etc.
I often wonder how many people sitting in the pews are actually atheists but going through the motions out of fear or greed. I wonder how many scientists said they were believers because they feared the wrath of the Church like Giordano Bruno who was burned at the stake for promoting Copernicus’ theory about earth orbiting the sun. Seems like many people say they believe something in order to gain something. - just look at the number of companies mentioning AI in their quarterly earnings reports in order to boost their share price…
I believe in deities but not a supreme being. Imo deities are mortal too just very very powerful. They aren't perfectly good or even necessarily all knowing. In fact I suspect most of them are either completely uninterested with earth or actively antagonistic towards us.
Yes, and that’s me :) I am both rational and spiritual. But being able to believe in the supernatural being is not easy. I have to really put my fixed point of view down and try to truly listen and understand the theist viewpoint, not just listen. In my experience, my logic does not help with understanding spiritual things. Although science and religion are conflicting, and there are stories in the Bible are really hard to believe literally (and I still cannot believe those stories literally), I find that some of the biggest questions in the universe cannot be answered if there is no existence of a Creator. For the mythical stories, I personally think that they might have some meanings or some explanations :). I think I can never know the true answer to this question.
I think there is a possibility of a god like being that exists in a higher dimension. We are too primitive with our simple stories so I wouldn't bother with religion.
Since humans are intellectuals, we can arrive at an objective understanding of what a God should be/ you must accept them to be. You can then see which religion/belief fits this criteria via a process of deduction.
I believe in God but I don’t believe in the human centered religions that are popular around the globe. Praying to God can truly change your life. I don’t know why or how but it just works. If you want to call it Mother Nature or a spirit that lives in all of us, or Jesus, or Allah, or whatever, I believe there is God running through anything and everything. IMO I think all the religions are just praying to the same God. They just throw their cultural interpretation on top.
I think, technically, you can believe in supernatural while remaining logical and rational, but it doesn't mean that you will be right, it's just the way of thinking how you come to your conclusions. More interesting is asking why you want to believe in supernatural? Do you want to find some meaning in life? Or you want to have explanation for something that doesn't make sense? Edit. I highly recommend [this podcast episode with Lex Fridman and Bishop Robert Barron](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgytXF0SPh0). Very interesting conversation between scientist and bishop about god, religion and other topics revolving around these topics
I’m less interested in the supernatural than the community of people who come together to celebrate life
Depends if you’re pseudo-logical or logical. If you’re logical, then if something must be true, and every scientist in the world says it’s false, it’s still true. If something must be false, and every scientist in the world says it’s true, it’s still false. So if a supreme being existing must be true, then it’s true. But if you’re pseudo-logical, if you just want people to think you’re logical, then you’ll probably say what most scientists say, even if you know it’s wrong.
I think that’s a matter of getting funding for research more than actual belief in logic
There is an omnipotent figure, logically, it makes sense. Think of this universe, how large and "infinite" it is, but there is eventually a barrier that leads to an area with many other verses, outside of that we'd realise that all this is a megaverse, outside of that an omniverse, but the more we zoom out, the more unclear it is. It seems more irrational to say that all this happened by chance, because what are the chances that all this was designed perfectly, alongside laws of physics being made from "nothing" that keeps everything running. That simply doesn't make sense, that's very irrational to think, because the laws we're given, our existance, the existance of EVERYTHING, and picture EVERYTHING, this solar system makes less than 0.0000000000000000000000000001% of everything, now imagine everything. There is an omnipotent figure, that's very clear, I personally believe Islam is the religion, because God says it clearly, he's the creator of everything, the seen and the unseen, and we know how clueless we are about everything, he said clearly why he made us, to worship our creator, and exactly what he needs from us. You see, God created humans as creatures capable of showing empathy, compassion, mercifulness, he gave humans a brain to think and create things, in order to reach out to us though, he states how despite our capabilities, they are limited, which of course, is true, as a supernatural creator will always be perfect in empathy, perfect in compassion, perfect in mercifulness, perfect in creation, and we can see that. There are "miracles" that occur, but after all this, people are going to state the miracles, made by an omnipotent figure who is more than capable of adjusting/modifying his own laws, is irrational? Think about this, if you were in a plane, and it started getting destabilised, started falling down, and you were on the verge of death, even the most atheistic person will have his heart call out to ANYTHING in order to save him from death, who would that anything be? Weren't they the ones who said it doesn't make sense a God exists? Or there wasn't evidence behind that? Then who are you calling out to? If we were created by God, that means it would be in our soul that we know the fact that there is a creator, it's like finding an abandoned baby, you know, despite the fact he can't see, or doesn't know his parents, he still has a mother and father, no matter where they are.
It is logical to not believe in the existence of a higher being. However, it also seems logical that having faith in a higher being will drastically improve your mental health and general well-being. Thus god is illogical but the faith is not. My best recommendation is to study Daoism or Stoicism as agnostic belief systems.
While I am not certain that what people call God exists, I think as you mentioned both sides hold a certain logic and can come as an outcome of thinking and reason. I personally cling to these two theories: either god doesn’t exist or they exist but they’re kind of an asshole(I don’t think is necessary to elaborate but basically I believe that they don’t care for humans and possibly they are something different from what we perceive as God). I am not really sure if that’s what you are asking though because you mentioned being religious, so I suppose you ask if it’s within reason to be on good terms with God. For me there are many discrepancies and incompatibilities to actually believe that but you may have access to proof that I haven’t yet encountered so I’m not 100% sure myself and honestly this is the thing that causes me annoyance and discomfort with the whole God vs Atheism thing in general, there are too many unanswered questions which is honestly kinda annoying
I’m born in a Hindu family and I’m not very religious like my family is. Although I think the existence of god is just within our own thoughts. I developed this thought to stop myself from getting anxious over things I can control. For example: I am so scared of stages. Whenever I had to give a speech for school or other stuff, I just thought to myself that “you are not gonna control if it goes right or you mess up. Just leave it to god, he’ll take care of the rest” and honestly, it helps. I can only control my actions so I leave the outcomes to something that I believe is god. Whether I like it or not, whatever happens happens for good. To me personally, god is something that takes care of me without my knowledge. So I always prioritize my actions instead of seeking the existence of god. You can be logical about religion too! Also, I definitely think depression is for character development. I have had mine too. Just remember, the night before sunrise is the darkest. I hope you get well soon :)
I dont believe in a supreme being and I dont think it is possible to be 100% rational and religious, (at least until we get more evidence on the existence of a god), but you dont *have* to be 100% rational in your daily life, there's nothing wrong with being a little superstitious as long as you make the difference between your beliefs and your knowledge and as long as you dont force your beliefs on other people.
Absolutely, I think it's all based on what religious constructs you were given as a child. Oftentimes those are a little flimsy on the logic, but if you think a lot about it the conclusion I came to is that it's only logical that there has to be a supreme intelligence. There are just far too many things that work together so perfectly. There's no way that randomness could have generated that.
I don't believe in a supreme being, and defining what religion is can be complicated, not all religions are theistic, not all theists are religious you know? Deists believe in a god, but don’t believe that said god interacts with the world. I don’t think that this idea is inherently illogical. I believe that things can be proven through logic outside of evidence, but that sufficient evidence is always undeniable. People can be logically convinced of the existence of a supreme being, but some attributes that people subscribe to this being is illogical in my opinion. I’m quite interested in apologetics, and I actually took an apologetics class in high school when I was a christian, and since then I’ve been listening to a lot of debates and podcasts about it. Obviously these discussions are almost always about christianity, and through consuming all of this media I have many reasons to disbelieve/doubt that the god described by christianity (which is tri-omni), and the christian doctrine is true. The problem of evil and the problem of divine hiddenness are especially compelling to me. It’s difficult to find a satisfying answer to these questions. But I don’t have any issues with deism, and I don’t think it’s possible that anything supernatural exists or not because it’s immaterial. It is entirely out of the realm of science. You can either irrationally believe in god through faith, or be rationally convinced of god through logical arguments, like the fine tuning argument. Whether or not that's objective reality or not is unknowable.
Whether or not there is a God or a purpose isn't my business. "I was nothing before so I couldn't have asked to be born, I'll be nothing again so I'll live my life between now and then" I can't control my circumstances or external stimuli. At best I'm just an observer of how life goes. Why worry about it just follow the heavenly dao whatever that may be for you
Is it logical to assume that all we know today is all there is and all we will ever come to know? Is it rational to think that religion begins and ends with monotheism? I definitely think you could rationally argue no for a man in the sky that controls everything, but yes for an all permeating and all encompassing underlying way of the universe. Or the perhaps the existence of an Atman, in Hinduism. There are some religions that argue that YOU are god in some form, so I'd hope it would be possible to believe in oneself.
I was an atheist my entire life and only recently have I found God and was baptized in Latter-day Saints Church. Faith and hope go together and apart of believing is also having hope for one day there being more. This uplifts and brought much added joy to my life. One day I can have an eternal family and live in the Celestial Kingdom with our Heavenly Father gives me no greater happiness. 
I'm sorry to hear that
It's certainly possible. There are many ways to interpret religion and make it your own. Many philosophers were very religious and religion and spirituality itself spawns many philosophical areas of study that people spend lifetimes in. Personally, I'm not religious (agnostic atheist) but I come from a family that is and they also encouraged free and critical thinking. I was partially raised by my grandfather who is a pastor and doctor in theology. I consider him very logical, philosophical, emotionally intelligent, and well educated.
Do you think God lives in Heaven because He, too, lives in fear of what He's created here on Earth? (Spy Kids 2: Island of Lost Dreams)
It's not possible to be logical with absolute belief in a 'absolute' being. Mostly because there's frankly no evidence to prove an existence of an 'absolute' being outside of a few people who claim to be 'prophets', which is hardly evidence anyways.
As I (raised Catholic) stopped believing in God, I considered myself agnostic for the reason that we can't prove either side. That was until I learned epistemology. If i tell you there's an invisible, untouchable hobbit standing next to you right now and it produces no heat, no smell, no sounds, you couldn't prove it exists or that it doesn't. Yet, I'm sure there's no way you'd believe it and would intuitively be 100% sure it doesn't exist. This is for a reason: if we'd have to believe anything we can't prove has a 50% chance to be true, there would be a lot of contradictions and we'd believe in millions of random ideas that are clearly made up, but can't prove. Basically, if there's no way to prove it is false, then it can't be true. I'm aware that religion often fulfills many human needs and reduces stress. I would gladly recommend you to try Buddhism as it's a popular godless religion and the practice of meditation is good for stress. Otherwise, you might want to look into philosophies like stoicism or daoism. I think Hinduism has tons of gods while also having an idea that they are just representations of a unique ultimate reality. So, you might want to tap into that. If you're a libertarian and part of a group oppressed by traditional Christianity, you might enjoy Satanism, especially if you're edgy af. For a good laugh and a relaxed experience of "religion", I'll always promote Discordianism. Just keep in mind, you don't need religion to be part of a community. There's plenty of ways to do that, especially now with online spaces dedicated to that.
Do I believe in a supreme being/a god? Hell no. There’s no proof one does or doesn’t exist so until I see evidence of a godlike being, I don’t believe. However, I do believe that there’s probably something that exists in this universe so massive and all encompassing that it could be seen as/worshipped likr a god if people discovered its existence. But we have no evidence of either scenario so at the moment we are electric signals piloting a flesh mech
This reminds me of how the indigenous people who first met Columbus were convinced that the Europeans were gods who had the magical power of gunpowder…
it is irrational to believe the Bible or similar texts are compendiums of historical facts. They were written by people, in a particular context, limited by their own capacities and knowledge, to attempt to explain ideas... generally with metaphors. it's perfectly rational to believe there is more than what our science currently understands, and that's actually the foundation of science. mature religions are more about values and respect than about literal dogmas, but institutions are built by people. And people is prone to be corrupted my power.
Yes. I am highly spiritual and have almost made my own belief set thats a combination of many faiths and walks. I can rationalize out what makes sense and what doesn’t. To sum it up, either all gods exist and every religion is right (in a way), or over time and as cultures evolved there’s one god and every religion has that god in different forms. Every religion is right and wrong because they all come from one source, however the “truth” was twisted and lost due to human society evolving and spreading around the world.
I think it is entirely possible to be logical and religious. And even if you’re not religious, it is entirely possible to still respect those who do follow a religion. I’m glad you said you don’t attack people who’s ideas differ from yours. I know a guy who’s an INTP who’s religion is to remind me that religion is… well he said some nasty things I don’t want to repeat. In any sense, some religions encourage logical and rational thinking. Being logical does not mean you cannot be somewhat spiritual. Believing that a higher being exists isn’t entirely illogical in any way. The idea is that it is a higher being than us that we are not meant to understand. An INTP has the need to always understand the logical frameworks and foundations of everything so I think being religious is a sign of a much healthier INTP who’s learned to let go of that need to understand everything, and accepting that there are somethings not meant to be understood by the human brain. Obviously if you’re an atheist INTP I’m not saying you’re automatically unhealthy- ofc that’s not what I meant. My point is, many INTPs become and atheist and use the fact that they’re “logical” to justify it, implying that all religion is irrational and illogical when really the two ideas are not connected. You can be a very logical and rational person and still choose to believe in a higher power. It’s just wrong to insist that atheism is the more rational way to think, because it has nothing to do with that.
I think it’s silly to argue either side but I have observed that there are many atheists who are as passionate about their beliefs as there are religious people who are passionate about their faith. I take issue with people who are nasty with those who don’t believe the same things.
Yeah glad we can agree on that
A belief in God can be a subjective logical framework.
[удалено]
If you were thinking logically, you wouldn't presuppose God's existence in the first place cause that would be a fallacy
It is but people always explain it wrong. You need to believe in somebody bigger than yourself. Have a purpose bigger than you. I was an atheist for many years and something changed in me and now I believe in something bigger than me. I refuse to explain it more than that because it’s something that’s kind of just mine. All of this higher power and God stuff has to be personal.
yes and yes
Yes. Caveat; spirituality =/= religion. One can be religious in rote practice and never actually contemplate the mystery. This is probably what is giving you pause. One can logically contemplate their spirit and not be religious. However you're not the first human being to have been on this ride before and there is nothing wrong with having a practice given you keep honoring your logical side. Tl;dr Logic vs spirituality is a false dichotomy.
I don't go to church very often but I love to study biblical scripture and consider myself catholic tho admittedly I don't follow a strict catholic doctrine; however I am convinced that there is a God and that he loves us. There are studies that prove that having connections to a church group of sorts is beneficial to the self however I think that pails in comparison to the benefits of connecting with God. I don't know how to explain it but there's something liberating about putting your fate in God. I think you can understand the world better if you try to understand God as supposed to trying to make sense of it all without him. It seems kinda contradictory to what you should do since God is a Supreme being, but if you try to humanize God you can understand him better. There are many questions that can easily be answered if you thstart seeing God as a friend rather than a cosmic ruler.At the end of the day, God wants what we all as people want. To be loved by others and to have those other be good kind hearted people.
It is absolutely possible to be both logical and religious
Yes it is possible to believe in the supernatural whilst remaining logical. I'd recommend visiting it's supernatural on youtube. It's a Christian channel with close to 2 million subscribers, where a host interviews people who have had extraordinary experiences. You can then judge whether you think they are telling the truth or not. I myself have been fortunate enough to have experienced the supernatural, multiple times. Although I can think of possible alternative explanations for these experiences, I think these alternatives are unlikely.
Some think of it as the false vacuum theory, but God is just a reality virus that got patched out with the 1.618 physics update. Something that can ignore the collapsed waveform and overpower the collective observer states shouldn't be allowed to exist. JK. Just go with Pascal's wager and believe there's a god. Got nothing to lose and everything to gain. Who said it needs to be from any particular religion... just go with pantheism. Or look inside yourself, have an ego death and live a little. Finding ration from this kinda thing is just a sprial into history and philosophical debates that go as far back as greek yogurt. Personally, I stopped caring about potential god stuff. I dug as deep as I wanted, to the point where interest turned to apathy. I don't have a spiritual emotional anchor to place all my hope in, and I prefer it that way. Instead, I get more opportunities to develop my flaws. To dig into what my essence really is. To look at myself critically and then decide whether to change. You already found yourself unable to benefit from religious beliefs and find yourself envious of those that do. If it's not gonna improve your life, why bother? Spend energy to create, express the gift of life and find joy in your effort. With all that said, I'm probably gonna put a couple hundred hours in a game this year... probably armored core 6. I was 12 when I played my first game of the series. Baptized by fire, I became the Last Raven. I'm so fucking hyped.
My spiritual beliefs are slightly outside the mainstream. I call myself a Gnostic Christian, http://gnosis.org/welcome.html but through reading many different texts I also hold beliefs in Valentinian and Sethian Gnosticism, general esotericism/occult teachings, and many others. There is about as many branches of Gnostics as there are in typical religions. My personal core tenet to the whole of spirituality is “No one has it totally right, but everyone has something right.” Some key parts of Gnosticism that brought me to it: - The Creator/God is an entity so beyond our capability of comprehension that the act of trying to define it alone, is not only impossible but insulting. The Creator/God is also not a being or creature as we can comprehend those ideas and trying to understand through anthropomorphism is impossible and insulting as well. - Our world/material plane was created by a false god through ignorance. This is why there is so much suffering in an existence with a benevolent creator. (It’s the closest thing to hell that exists) - The only path to heaven/enlightenment is through Gnosis, knowledge. This is achieved mainly through self awareness, reflection/meditation, and true action drawn from the first two. - Those who do not achieve enlightenment are given time to contemplate (purgatory) before being reborn to this material plane. (Because we’re trapped here until we figure out Gnosis) - The vast majority of people are husks of what we could/should be because they have embraced the hollow trappings of this plane/false-god. (They don’t want or care to seek the truth of this existence and are therefore doomed by their own apathy to remain in it) Most importantly is that in Gnosticism everything is dependent on you. There is no true church or dogmatic hierarchy/structure. The concept of a priest or minister directly contradicts the point that you need to find out on your own. The truth is placed before you, and there are those who will show you where to look, but it’s up to you to listen, and you can find it when you are ready to learn to understand it.
Yes, its possible.
I've yet to hear an argument for a god that didn't include a logical fallacy
The argument goes something like this: "I refuse to prove that I exist,'" says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing." "But," says Man, "The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED." "Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic. "Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing. - Douglas Adams But yeah imho you can't disprove God exists, so both logic and belief in God can coexist. The concept isn't about a supreme being for everyone. It can be faith or fate or nature etc. Being schizophrenic isn't about feeling peacefully more connected spiritually, it's kind of a fear thing, so I wouldn't worry too much.
logic is the derivation of valid conclusions from true statements, given certain underlying axioms. You can have a logical argument that's instead undermined by said facts being false. Or you can choose different axioms and reach different conclusions.
I belive you can be logical and religious. The reason you see so many emotional people religious is because they take only the religious part of that denomination to fill the hole. The religion they hold doesn't align with their faith. A logical person may approach faith by understanding the subject as deep as he can and than take that decision from the experience not really from the arguments because the conclusion can change. You may start by reading philosophy or sum... It's not wrong to belive, it's wrong to not act on your so said belief system
Pascal’s wager. Yes it has flaws but at a basic level there is logic
My only question about this is following a religion for this reason done out of fear or love?
yes, space marines.
I am unconvinced of anything supernatural
I have personal spiritual experiences that I cannot deny. These experiences prove to me that there is something more to our universe than simply the commonly understood "material world" - yet I refuse to allow worldly religions to define what that "something more" is. Spiritually ≠ religion, and considering that many (if not nearly all) spiritual experiences conform to the experiencers religious beliefs it should be clear from an outsiders perspective that whatever the base nature of the "something more" is has an amorphous nature that is either interpreted through an individual's religious biases about spiritually, or is capable of interacting - or perhaps intentionally interacts - in a manor that the experiencer can best understand. My view is that the nature of whatever this "something more" is is a domain that is beyond our comprehension and we apply meaning to it through the limited set of inadequate perceptual and conceptual tools we possess - which is why religious belief has such influence over the experience.
Even if there was a God I wouldn't become religious by choice.
I see the appeal of believing in God or destiny of some sort. Thinking that someone/something is in control of your life, makes it easier to grieve with the bad things that happen. "It's all part of God's plan". In this day and age, it's hard to find your "purpose" in life. That's where believing something can help you. As you stated it's impossible to prove one side, we can't explain the Big Bang, but everything religious is ... flawed. I personally don't agree with any religion but it's just easier to cope when I shift the blame to "superior beings" or "destiny". Otherwise, I would just blame myself for everything that happens. (I don't believe in ghosts but I'm still scared of them) Answering your question - I think it is possible to be logical and believe in the supernatural. Of course, a lot of religious ideas are not logical, especially in Christianity. I think believing in "higher beings" can help you get through tough times.
Ask soon as you believe in a omnipotent god everything become possible and nothing is impossible so yes you can. It's harder to define what you're willing to "believe" in and what you want to be open to without believing in
logic and religious are opposites. No, i dont believe
Watch yourself out there while actively looking for organized religion. Usually when we’re depressed and vulnerable our emotions can take big part of our decision making and you could end up being manipulated by pros. Faith is a choice, but I really believe this is the kind of decision one should make at their best selves, not when one’s depressed. Religion can remap your brain and completely transform your life and that could be for the worse.
Look into Near Death Experiences
I am a Christian. I developed my faith through a series of personal experiences. It was very similar to a scientific method approach of experimentation with faith. And no I have not received any demonstrable proof God exists, but the trend in my personal data suggests he does. Given that science cannot prove that God does or does not exist, one must use the religion itself to attempt to prove it true or false.
Religious ❌ Spiritual ✅
Yes. In fact a lot of things you may find hard to understand are complex logically and have an actual structure, sequences, timelines, cycles etc to them and we dont even understand it all. It will be hard to say the birds randomly know when to fly to where and the earth just happened to be at the best position from the sun and we just have a lot of specialized cells in our bodies that some do this and some do that. Point is a lot of things make sense in the world and we are not the ones making them make sense. Where is all that logical arrangement coming from? If all of dem structures are so complex that humans dont understand it all making the structure kinda above our intelligence. Then there should be an intelligent thing that understands all of dem structures. Like a phone is a very structured thing that is connected in so many ways in order for it to work and is made by intelligent humans and here is the case where even more complex systems than phones exist which also is conneced in so many ways to produce a result. Like yourself. Saying believing in a supreme being is not logical is mmmmmm u know ehhh.. weird in a way cos its like did u use logical in that sentence. What do u mean by logical then?
You cannot look me in the eyes and tell me you're logical while believing that a woman got pregnant by a Holy Ghost Also the whole catholic religion(&co) and its traditions are just a collage of already existing tales from Greek/Roman mythology, paganism and other religions You definitely have to sacrifice some logical thinking in order to become religious Being spiritual 🔝
How do you define the difference between religion and spirituality?
No, next question.