Why do so many people still believe in God?

[Mijin]

@msmith537

I personally believe that very few people actually believe in God, regardless of what they profess or how frequently they go to church. If people actually truly believe that God watches everything they do or say or think and judges them accordingly, they would be terrified all day long.

Yes I sometimes have the same thought.
For example, right now a lot of Muslims in Sweden are rioting over the burning of the Quran by a far-right group there. But…if they really believe that the very creator of the universe is watching us all, someone with the power to snap his fingers and make whole galaxies, and he’s a vengeful god and all that…why do they feel the need to police blasphemy, or apostates?

It’s as though, despite all of the professions of faith, at some level there is still doubt. And the external fight against the doubters really reflects their internal psychological fight.

Basically what I’m saying is that even with all our science, I think it’s arrogant to assume that we little carbon blobs of mostly water sitting on an inconsequential spec in the vast infinite universe have a true sense of their place in how everything works any more than a fish or amoeba does.

Not sure I’d go that far.
I agree with your point about levels of reality…I’ll be honest and say that my gut feeling is probably that there are levels of reality beyond what we’re aware of right now, and therefore I don’t assert that there’s no afterlife, merely that there’s no evidence for such a thing (and we should live our lives as though there isn’t one).

But there’s no arrogance to saying that we have a good understanding of many phenomena thanks to science. Science is not about arrogantly assuming anything, it’s about testing our ideas.

[k9bfriender]

@ISiddiqui

The point has been made more than a few times that certain faiths have the deity’s forgiveness of sin as a primary tenant.

Except for the things that the believer claims others will be damned for, anyway. The sins I commit are forgivable, the sins that you commit are not.

@ISiddiqui

So some folks, naturally, will try to push that as far as they can.

Right, “Jesus loves me, so it’s fine if I blow up this elementary school.”

@ISiddiqui

That does not evidence their lack of faith in a God.

Certainly gives evidence of a complete lack of respect for the rules that they claim that others should have to follow.

So, you are correct that not all “believers” who go out of their way to sin are insincere, some are just flaming hypocrites.

@Jay_Z

Suppose one of my children is murdered. If I posit that I know with dead certainty that there is NOTHING else, this is all, no God, karma, harmony in the universe exists… honestly, yes, then direct retribution becomes more compelling to me. At that point I’d seek out direct vengeance if possible.

Or a secular justice system. If someone harmed me or mine, then I would be willing to allow the state to mete out appropriate punishment. It’s a lack of a secular justice system that would lead me to seek vengeance.

[leahcim]

@k9bfriender

The argument that I have heard from pro-religious folk is that they would have no morals if they were not in fear of retribution from an all knowing god, and since they only have morals out of fear of punishment, they believe that everyone else is that way as well.

I think that misses the point a bit. Even without believing in and all-knowing god who doles out infinite reward or punishment, and also being totally empathy-less otherwise, other people certainly exist and that it’s not in our best interests to make it in their best interest to kill/maim/imprison us, which is what a rape/murder spree would cause.

Society deals out imperfect and finite punishment for bad behaviour, which can be a good deterrent, but one can still make a rational decision to misbehave if you get more out of misbehaving than you expect to be punished for it (e.g. because you expect no one to find out). Being deterred by the threat of perfect, infinite punishment does not give the same out.

People, no matter what faith they profess, act as if they fear society’s punishment, not God’s.

[Procrustus]

@ekedolphin

I think it’s important to note, in St. Joseph’s case, that the angel came to him to directly answer a decision Joseph had made, to politely and delicately divorce Mary, so as not to expose her to public disgrace.

It’s said that he “had it in mind to divorce her quietly” (emphasis mine). He hadn’t told anybody about that decision

Now I’m confused. I guess I never really thought about it, but why is Mary a virgin if they’re married?

[Mijin]

@leahcim

People, no matter what faith they profess, act as if they fear society’s punishment, not God’s.

Well that and they also just have empathy, concern for others and a desire to be a good person.

I think most religious people would not immediately go commit crimes if they found out tomorrow that God doesn’t exist. I think the idea that they behave well because god is watching is largely a personal rationalization.

In terms of society’s punishment, I think it’s complex. For sure without policing many crimes would become more common, but others wouldn’t change much. And does disapproval and ostracisation count as “punishment” or “policing”? Because they have a big effect too.

[Thudlow_Boink]

@Procrustus

I guess I never really thought about it, but why is Mary a virgin if they’re married?

My understanding is that, at that time, Mary and Joseph were betrothed—more than engaged, but less than married. But I’m no expert on the marriage customs of those days; and different Bible translations use different words.

And, Catholics believe that Mary remained a virgin throughout her marriage to Jospeh; Protestants typically don’t. (IANAC and won’t attempt to explain or defend the Catholic POV.)

Did Jesus have siblings?

[k9bfriender]

@leahcim

People, no matter what faith they profess, act as if they fear society’s punishment, not God’s.

I’ve had opportunities to rape, murder, steal, and even to push all the elevator buttons with very little chance of being caught.I chose not to not based on fear of outside retribution, but based on my own morals and conscience. I may not be put into jail, but I would feel badly about what I had done.

[k9bfriender]

@Mijin

I think the idea that they behave well because god is watching is largely a personal rationalization.

It’s also an attack. “I’m good because I believe in god. You don’t believe in god, so you must not be good.”

The atheist spends time trying to understand where their morals come from, and that gives an insight into the nature of what is “good” and “bad”. A theist spends time looking through scripture to justify their morals, and you really can take any lesson at all from those ancient texts.

[Pleonast]

@k9bfriender

The atheist spends time trying to understand where their morals come from, and that gives an insight into the nature of what is “good” and “bad”. A theist spends time looking through scripture to justify their morals, and you really can take any lesson at all from those ancient texts.

Most people (whether theist or atheist) spend no time at all on self-reflection, and examining one’s morals is only a subset of that.

(There’s also an assumption that a theist is basing their beliefs on scriptures rather than cultural traditions.)

[Czarcasm]

@Pleonast

(There’s also an assumption that a theist is basing their beliefs on scriptures rather than cultural traditions.)

An assumption based on verbal statements made by theists.

[Pleonast]

@Czarcasm

@Pleonast

(There’s also an assumption that a theist is basing their beliefs on scriptures rather than cultural traditions.)

An assumption based on verbal statements made by theists.  

You need to meet more theists.

[Czarcasm]

I have met plenty of theists in my lifetime, and am currently on the Bishop’s Advisory Committee for a local Episcopal church. Most of those I have spoken to attribute the scriptures for what they believe.

[Pleonast]

Talk to some pagans.

[Czarcasm]

That is why I have used the word “most”.

[k9bfriender]

@Pleonast

Most people (whether theist or atheist) spend no time at all on self-reflection, and examining one’s morals is only a subset of that.

True, but I would argue that the atheist tends to spend more time on it, as they aren’t just going with the default cultural position. In the US, being a christian is easy, it’s just what people do. Being an atheist is what takes effort, and that effort doesn’t usually come without some self reflection.

@Pleonast

There’s also an assumption that a theist is basing their beliefs on scriptures rather than cultural traditions.

I’m not making that assumption, I don’t believe that most theists base their beliefs or morals on scriptures. I think many justify their beliefs and morals by cherry-picking the scriptures that say what they want them to say.

[RitterSport]

I’m pretty sure we’re just evolved to operate in a society, just like chimps and bonobos. Chimps sometimes essentially commit murder, but it’s rare and they can be ostracized from their troop. No one thinks that chimps believe in any higher power, and they don’t go around stealing each other’s food and raping and killing each other.

Among humans, we have terms for people with no empathy (psychopath or sociopath, I forget which), and it has nothing to do with how religious they are. Having no empathy is considered a mental illness.

Crime rates are no higher in highly secular societies – probably lower, in fact. I think this line of discussion is really a red herring.

People believe in God because their parents did and taught them to, in most cases. Until relatively recently, it was a crime not to profess to believe it the local religion, so religious belief is pretty entrenched. That really seems like the explanation to me, other than self-professed religious experiences, which are hard to test.

[Pleonast]

@k9bfriender

I’m not making that assumption, I don’t believe that most theists base their beliefs or morals on scriptures. I think many justify their beliefs and morals by cherry-picking the scriptures that say what they want them to say.

They don’t even get to the level of cherry-picking. Their justification may use the word “scripture”, but their knowledge of it is zero or worse. Which is maybe what you’re saying.

@k9bfriender

True, but I would argue that the atheist tends to spend more time on it, as they aren’t just going with the default cultural position.

The atheists I know personally are culturally Christian but profess disbelief instead of belief. That is, their morals follow the general mold of American morals, but independent of anything explicitly religious. And that’s fine. Most people are decent people, flawed but empathic. The worst people I know are religious bigots who say they’re Christian but their words and actions of hate betray their false proclamations.

[P-man]

Pascal’s Wager has never made any sense to me. Since no one really decides what they believe, someone who professes belief but doesn’t actually have it is trying to fool a supposedly all-knowing deity. I have a belief in God as the ground of being, but that’s not the reason I live my life the way I do. I also identify as Christian, but don’t believe in a literal resurrection from the dead. If it were proven to me that Jesus never existed it wouldn’t change my behavior.

[Mijin]

@RitterSport

I’m pretty sure we’re just evolved to operate in a society, just like chimps and bonobos. Chimps sometimes essentially commit murder, but it’s rare and they can be ostracized from their troop. No one thinks that chimps believe in any higher power, and they don’t go around stealing each other’s food and raping and killing each other.

Yes, and I think the reason that humans think of “good” and “evil” as sort of equal and opposite things that we continually have to choose between, is because we’re somewhat in the middle of social behavior.

A species much more social than us would do what benefits the group and not think about it. A species much less would do what’s in their personal interest and not think about it.
Ok, I guess it’s also possible that they would also have “good” and “evil” but skewed far away from where we would place the line.

Anyway, since we’ve formed ever bigger societies we’ve managed to establish cultures and institutions that encourage more group-oriented behavior and awareness. Being fair to theists, they can claim part of the credit (but less than the “judeo-Christian society” crowd like to claim).

[Thudlow_Boink]

@P-man

Pascal’s Wager has never made any sense to me. Since no one really decides what they believe, someone who professes belief but doesn’t actually have it is trying to fool a supposedly all-knowing deity.

As I understand it, Pascal addressed his Wager to those who are already uncertain or torn between belief and disbelief.

[229] I look on all sides, and I see only darkness everywhere. Nature presents to me nothing which is not matter of doubt and concern. If I saw nothing there which revealed a Divinity, I would come to a negative conclusion; if I saw everywhere the signs of a Creator, I would remain peacefully in faith. But, seeing too much to deny and too little to be sure, I am in a state to be pitied…

[230] It is incomprehensible that God should exist, and it is incomprehensible that He should not exist…

[233] …Let us then examine this point, and say, “God is, or He is not.” But to which side shall we incline? Reason can decide nothing here. There is an infinite chaos which separated us. A game is being played at the extremity of this infinite distance where heads or tails will turn up. What will you wager? According to reason, you can do neither the one thing nor the other; according to reason, you can defend neither of the propositions.

Do not then reprove for error those who have made a choice; for you know nothing about it. “No, but I blame them for having made, not this choice, but a choice; for again both he who chooses heads and he who chooses tails are equally at fault, they are both in the wrong. The true course is not to wager at all.”

Yes; but you must wager. It is not optional. You are embarked. Which will you choose then?

… [here is the actual description of “Pascal’s Wager,” snipped for brevity—anyone who’s unfamiliar can look it up] …

“Yes, but I have my hands tied and my mouth closed; I am forced to wager, and am not free. I am not released, and am so made that I cannot believe. What, then, would you have me do?”

True. But at least learn your inability to believe, since reason brings you to this, and yet you cannot believe. Endeavour then to convince yourself, not by increase of proofs of God, but by the abatement of your passions. You would like to attain faith, and do not know the way; you would like to cure yourself of unbelief, and ask the remedy for it. Learn of those who have been bound like you, and who now stake all their possessions. These are people who know the way which you would follow, and who are cured of an ill of which you would be cured. Follow the way by which they began; by acting as if they believed, taking the holy water, having masses said, etc. Even this will naturally make you believe, and deaden your acuteness.—“But this is what I am afraid of.”—And why? What have you to lose?
…
[234] If we must not act save on a certainty, we ought not to act on religion, for it is not certain. But how many things we do on an uncertainty, sea voyages, battles! I say then we must do nothing at all, for nothing is certain

(Quotes are from sections 229-234 of Pascal’s Pensees)