Do people benefit from having a religious stage?
This is an interesting point. I was raised Roman Catholic and went to Catholic schools right up until college. Religion is a community builder, I'll give it that. We knew who we were, why we were, and where we were and there was no questioning any of these things. I think that is a good place to start for way more children than not given the gargantuan uncertainties built into the world of even the most secure child. My sense of it is that religion provides a stabilizing force to the mental processes and personality. Mental homeostasis. Religion may be the most adaptive response for a lot of personality types given conditions of high uncertainty. Its not my solution. But once I begin to suspect that the world consists of something other than me and failed attempts at me, I have to admit at adaptive responses that are not my adaptive responses.
Back to my childhood though since oddly enough I've not considered this exact point closely before. Where Catholicism began to fail was once I felt secure to step out of the certainties it offered. Oh. Silly me. Before we even get to that: did my Catholicism ever involve a belief in a personal god? No, no I can't honestly say it ever did. even when I was exploring kaballah and gnosticism in my 20s. So I went through a religious stage even though it had nothing to do with a belief in God. That is interesting, now that I can see it. Would I still use the word religious? I'm not sure I'm entitled to it although I was certainly prone to fits of dogmatism, and the sense of community that religion can offer is amazing. For me the Catholics offered something even deeper: it was family.I went to the same grammer school for 8 years. I knew who these people were and they knew who I was and even when I was rebelling it was against the family.
None of it, for me, ever involved any kind of belief in a personal God. The only thing I feel when I contemplate the existence of God is fear. If he's made us and the world the way he has there is no reason to assume that the afterlife--should the existence of God mean that an afterlife inevitably follows--would be better than this. It might be considerably worse. What would I even say to the Righteous I met in Hell? I'm sure I wouldn't even laugh at them because the first thing I'd lose in Hell would be my sense of humor.
I've got to chew on this some more because I didn't have a religious phase yet consider myself to have the benefits of community family and ethical teaching all of which are associated with religion.
Later: OK now that I'm thinking about it some more, I don't think I ever believed in Santa Clause either. Oh ho! So I'm actually claiming that even as a tiny child just old enough to understand the words of the story I never believed in the literal existence of Santa Claus. Am I really doing that? Yep. Why? Simple answer: The way the grown ups talked about Him. They were sending me all kinds of verbal and non verbal cues that they were not being literally true. Yet the holidays are something I remember being joyfully anticipated times of wonder and sharing and love. So in addition to getting the benefits of a religious stage I also got the benefits of a "Santa Clausious" stage even though neither depended on the belief in a personal god or a toy delivering elf.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Communal religious support only extends to those within that sect of a sect of a sect. As soon as one if found to now follow that particular sects rules, rituals, and behaviors then out come the stones. Humanity doesn't need fairy tales to act like social animals.
Let's not forget that simply uttering "gawwd told me I should do this," can lead members of religious communities to abuse people of that very same community, horrendously.
Interesting point! It does not take much to get some people in communities to be put in that awkward position of potentially questioning not the existence but the word of their perceived god. With the prevalent logic of theist who is to say God is not telling me things other that Prophesy for the ones who actually pay attention. still it would not be too hard to do some research before making such wild claims.
Interesting point! It does not take much to get some people in communities to be put in that awkward position of potentially questioning not the existence but the word of their perceived god. With the prevalent logic of theist who is to say God is not telling me things other that Prophesy for the ones who actually pay attention. Still it would not be too hard to do some research before making such wild claims and more convincingly pull the wool over the eyes of the sheep.
To: Vincent
Apparently, you only gave a heretical ideas upon which your arguments fall on inconsistency and irrelevancy -- very illogical. Why? It is due to the following grounds: First, you claimed that, "None of it, for me, ever involved any kind of belief in a personal God. The only thing I feel when I contemplate the existence of God is fear". In this case, it sounds confusing that you argued a disbelief in a personal, yet on your proposition, you've said that God's existence only constitutes "fear". Does it pragmatically mean that your contemplation of fearing God manifests a personal or perhaps an impersonal God?
Due to that reason, I found some inconsistency on your claim. On the first hand, I could fear God even though he is not my personal God -- that he only knows the universals and not the particulars. On the other hand, I could also fear God because he is my personal and loving God.
Moreover, you also said that, "What would I even say to the Righteous I met in Hell? I'm sure I wouldn't even laugh at them because the first thing I'd lose in Hell would be my sense of humor." Obviously speaking, this statement is a very silly one. Of course, once you are already dead, everything, including your senses would be diminish except on your soul, according to Plato. However, how could a righteous one be put in hell? Make some sense dude, I think you don't understand what's the exact meaning of a righteous person. Also, your personal opinion does not contains water. It holds no merit and unworthy of consideration.
Hoping for your argumentative response. Thank You :)
In your first paragraph you state that you KNEW who you were, why you were and where you were.
Well I'll give you the where but, you didn't and couldn't know the why or the who ( in this particular usage).
You only knew the explanations that the church fed you.
With this in mind, the whole rest of your thesis falls apart.
The best way to know just how ignorant and deluded a religious person can be is to have been one for however short a period. I find it difficult to explain a religious experience to my atheist friend who has always been an atheist. The best I've come up with is "like being high". He's quite lazy about reading books. So besides this experience that at least active atheists should have, the religious stage has no real benefits whatsoever. This scary dude Matt Dillahunty was in the church for 25 or so years and is one of the scariest (for the religious) atheists I've seen on youtube.