I said “Not quite” in referece to your first question, not the last, just to be clear.
Actually there is lots of “evidence that supports love”
We’re not only talking about religion, but I still think this doesn’t give much of an answer. We’re agreed that sometimes people consider evidence and sometimes they don’t. But why should a belief without evidence be taken seriously? Why should people believe something that lacks evidence? Just because they like the idea, regardless of how harmful or dangerous it might be?
“Subjective evidence” isn’t evidence of anything outside your own imagination & desires. It’s just using different words to say “I made it up” while pretending there’s some chance it’s real.
There is the general feeling here that believing in souls is dangerous. If you are American, I can only imagine this is because you were (or are?) faced with islamic terrorism and you are nagged by christians. And yes, Christianity and Islam have been used for the most horrible excuses.
But here’s a thought, have you ever studied the correlation between crime and religion? It seems not much has been written about it and the little there is doesn’t prove any correlation. A field of study wide open to exploration, if anyone is interested in pursuing academic studies. 
I found this comment to be interesting: The Splintered Mind: Religion and Crime
No, I think that for the most part it’s a harmless belief. But it’s true that incorrect beliefs can be harmful to the believer. That applies to beliefs like snakehandling, fradulent cures for diseases, divine rights, and plenty of others. This is not just about souls.
Didn’t you say that people who believe in souls will torture and massacre people by the millions with absolute conviction that they are doing good? Did you mean people as in everyone? So everyone who believes in souls is a Hitler? I believe in souls, so you are accusing me of torturing and massacring people by the millions with absolute conviction that I am doing good? This line of thinking from a person who believes in facts and is not at all subject to imagination…
I don’t make up things that happen to me, things happen and I interpret them.
Applying the correct causation to events is something that humans are very poor at doing, and for good reason.
If one is unsure of the presence of an intelligent agent, there is survival value in assuming its existence.
To assume a bump in the night is some agent up to no good helps you survive, even if it is just a book falling off a shelf.
But without evidence of agency the reality is that there was none, no matter how much it warms your heart to believe there was.
And yes, read several of the other threads in here, The catholic church is quite willing to induce suffering on a broad scale because they believe they are doing good. To some of the church suffering is actually holy and a way to be closer to god.
That is where being a “true believer” in any movement becomes dangerous, Hitler though he was doing the right thing, as did Stalin.
They may have also been sociopaths, but those true believers who followed them were not, they believed they were doing good just as a Catholic nun believes she is doing good by forcing the poor to died needlessly painful deaths.
Does this mean all people who believe in a particular mythology will become murderous? NO, but it is necessary to have a blind faith to get the vast majority of humans who are by their nature good to do truly bad things.
“Let god sort them out” is one way to convince these otherwise good people to do an act they would normally not do, it is not the only method.
What little has been done on the subject indicates that increased religiosity leads to less ethical behavior, increased crime and social dysfunction; which is I’m sure why so little research is done on the subject. We can’t admit that religion is a force for evil in the world, after all; the falsehood that religion is good is more important than the lives and welfare of human beings.
Whether or not your hands are personally dirty you are supporting the attitudes and habits of thought that do create immense amounts of death and suffering across the world.
Believing in things according to "subjective evidence " IS “making things up”, at best.
A very nice psychiatrist once suggested to me that I make the experiment, and become a believing Christian for a month, to see if it made me any happier.
I chose not to…but, to be honest, it does seem like a valid experiment, if only in an entirely subjective sense. No double-blind, no control, almost zero statistical significance… But you could think of it as trying out a new anti-depression medicine for a month, to see if it makes any difference. Also subjective and poorly controlled, but it could, nevertheless, make someone’s life better.
(Next on my list is to become a believer in Kali for a month, and murder several people to please her; who knows, it might improve my life quite a bit!)
I’d even defend that! I know neo-pagans, for instance, who make up their own rituals and pretty much invent their own mythos. They write about new guardian and guiding spirits, etc. They practice a very much “make it up as you go” kind of theology.
It’s really rotten science…but as far as theology goes, it’s not too much worse than any other.
Heck, I know people who worship, and pray, and perform rituals, to Elbereth, the Elven Queen that J.R.R. Tolkien made up for The Lord of the Rings. I’ve also met people who at least talk as if they pray for protection against Cthulhu, the way Christians pray for protection against Satan.
Making things up has a venerable role in the history of all major religions!
(I was gonna compare Joseph Smith and Mohammed, but decided I’d rather not have to go into hiding…)
Not unless you do your research.
You begin as a novice and slowly move up through the ranks. It may take years before you advance to the role of strangler.
Francis Galton, discoverer of fingerprints and believer in eugenics, applied science to everything in his life. This led him to ask why churches bought insurance and why missionary ships had to pay the same rates as shipping vessels. Surely, he reasoned, if the insurance companies (who kept charts on everything) noticed that missionary vessels were safer, then their rates would be less? Due to several other arguments, Galton became an atheist.
However, as an experiment, he decided to try to convince himself that God was real. He began to worship a Mr Punch doll. After a suitable time of offering sacrifice and prayer to Judy’s husband, Galton stopped the experiment. He did confess that for years later, he felt a certain reverance whenever he saw a Punch.
All the above is from the excellent Strange Lives And Peculiar Notions. A great book I can’t find on my shelves or in my closet right now.
I can’t have my information-age instant gratification? I can’t, like, go to the Universal Life Church, pay 'em $30, and become a Panjandrum of the Phansigars?
(Which is exactly how I became the ULC’s first “Sexton.” I asked if they offered that title; they said, “We do now.”)
Is that “weird science” or “mad science” or just a really, really nifty and insightful way of approaching the nature of reality?
Anyway, what could Lord Punch offer you? Do you just pray not to get whacked with your wife’s distaff?
This real olde tyme religion! You want to be a jemhaddar*, you work for it!
All of the above. Galton also claimed to have once consciously shut down his breathing reflex. Then he panicked when he realized what would happen if he couldn’t get it started again.
ETA * Yup, that’s where DS9 got the word from.
I have no religion, I follow do dogmas, I have no church, I don’t preach ideas. You have never met me. You don’t know me, you don’t know what I do or don’t do. You don’t understand what I think. So anything you say I do or don’t do is your speculation or product of your imagination.
Unless you are deliberately misleading us, we can gather quite a bit of information about what you think from what you post here.
Dream state or not, and it probably is, sounds pretty damn good to me. It seems to show that the brain prepares itself for death before dying. Not gonna complain there.
Not for lack of trying. I think you’ve said more about what you don’t think than what you do think.
The Bible, which would be the guide to Christianity, is very susceptible to all sorts of interpretation. Don’t you think it is pausible that, in being so prone to interpretation, man can base his belief in demonizing humans and openly calling for barbaric practices if that is how he wishes to interpret the wholy scriptures? Religion is a man made institution, it’s basic purpose should idealy be a moral guide to people, a way to perfect the soul (for those who believe in souls anyway), but since it is men made and interpreted by men, than doesn’t the fault of it’s negative practice fall upon men?