Fear
Fear is an extremely effective and powerful motivator for human behavior. Which is exactly why virtually every religion operates under a rule system that inflicts horrific punishment upon anyone who doesn’t follow these religious rules. Today, countless people only continue cling to their religious faith because they are afraid of what will happen to them if they don’t.
Let’s be honest … if a person even has a hint of belief in Christianity, the threat of burning in a lake of fire for eternity is a pretty convincing reason to keep going to church on Sunday. For people motivated by fear, religion becomes little more than an eternal insurance policy. Believe … just in case it’s true.
Social acceptance
Religion plays a major role in cultures throughout the world. In America, around 3/4 of our nation claims to be Christian. So it has become the socially acceptable thing to do. If you are born into a family who practices Islam, you will likely practice Islam. If your parents are Mormons, you’ll likely become a Mormon. If you are born into a Christian family, you guessed it, you’ll likely become a Christian.
Doesn’t this seem illogical? Why does a human being’s birthplace and family play such a major role in their religious beliefs? Why do these gods allow so many people to live life without knowing the “Truth”? Christians believe 70% of the earth is going to hell and Muslims believe 80% of the earth is going to hell.
Socially acceptable or not, you can’t tell me this describes a just and loving god worthy of worship.
Hope
Let’s face it … life is tough. People die from horrible diseases. People spend their entire lives suffering from physical and/or metal disabilities. People struggle with addictions. People live without shelter, water or food and die from starvation and disease. Tragedies happen every day to good people.
For many, belief in an afterlife gives them hope. Their life on earth may be difficult, but they believe they will be rewarded with eternal happiness in paradise after death. This makes it a little easier to get out of bed each morning.
To explain the unknown
No person knows with certainty why we are here and how the universe was formed. I find it exciting that we don’t know everything. There is so much more for humans to learn and I look forward to the discoveries that are to come in my lifetime.
For others, the unknown scares them. They need to understand the unknown, and belief in a god helps them do that. If something is unexplained, they believe it is the work of their god. Many call this approach to religion, “god in the gaps”. Others would call it superstition.
Is there anything I should add to the list?
Tags: Alah, Bible, Buddist, Christian, Cling, Death, Fear, God, God in the Gaps, Hell, Hope, Jesus, Jewish, Koran, Mormon, Religion, Unknown, World
September 25, 2009 at 2:50 am |
I have to agree with all four of these reasons. I think the fear thing is the first and most effective means that religions use on the young. The bad part is that some if not most seem to change that fear into what they see love as.
September 25, 2009 at 4:07 am |
Very well done. I think you have done a great job distilling these to essentials.
I would say that the last item in your list is the widest and the other three are in fact aspects of it. For example, fear comes from not knowing with certainty what happens after one dies or if in fact there is an invisible being watching your every step, social acceptance is at its heart doing what others seem to think is right because one doesn’t know for certain what is objectively right, and hope – at least in the case of religion – is the desire for an outcome that you don’t know for certain will or won’t happen. So explaining the unknown is what is at the core of why people cling to religion and the other three points are aspects of what happens when you are filled with uncertainty – you’re afraid, you feel powerless and you seek guidance.
In this regard, this is why religion is a failed philosophy. It does not adhere to reason, independence and scientific pursuit. Instead the philosophy of religion replaces reason with fear, individuality with conformity and scientific pursuit with hope and prayer.
Anyone who takes a minute to honestly look at reality today and throughout history however will see that reason, independence and science are the keys to happiness on earth.
September 25, 2009 at 8:15 am |
Just wondering…
how do you deal with what you are afraid of?
and where do you find hope?
I know its easy to step back and critique others based on a rudimentary survey of their beliefs and practices. I wonder how you dealt with those questions that everyone has as they come of age like:
Who am i?
What am i doing here?
What am i going to do?
September 25, 2009 at 9:24 am |
I only allow myself to fear things that I have reason to fear. Then I cope with this fear in the same way everyone else does. Face the fear or run away from it. Religion is simply a coping mechanism.
I find hope in the joy of every day I have on earth. My wife, my children, my family and friends give me a reason to hope for another day. I put my hope into things I can see, hear and touch. I don’t find value in superstitious hope.
Who am I? A mammal born to two other mammals walking around on a little rock in an enormous universe.
What am I doing here? I don’t know and neither does anyone else.
What am I going to do? Enjoy my life and help those around me.
We all will die one day. Why would I waste hours and days of my life worshipping and praying to a fictional character? Just to help me cope with fear and feel better in my own skin?
Life is short, so I follow my “BE attitude”:
September 25, 2009 at 8:40 am |
A while back, I started a contributory article on de-conversion.com on this very topic. Here’s the link
http://de-conversion.com/2008/08/18/the-ties-that-bind-factors-that-make-de-conversion-difficult/
Probably several on the list could be subsumed into some of your four categories.
September 25, 2009 at 8:48 am |
Very good list. How about “Providing guidelines for living” or something like that? My personal experience in leaving the faith has made parenting much more difficult, because I don’t have some of the ready-made answers I had before, and I have had to build a new list of trusted sources of information.
September 25, 2009 at 8:52 am |
Just a few observations from a polytheist here.
“how do you deal with what you are afraid of?”
By asking this question, you imply that people without a professed religion will be unable to act on their own, and won’t seek help from other sources, or take action, because with no invisible hand to take the burden off, a crushing weight would be too great.
Professing a religion does NOT guarantee God’s assistance, for God/the Gods/whichever or whoever you believe in, could actually decide it wise not to intervene.
Neither does a religion guarantee that the sufferer will act correctly (if at all) in times of trouble, because everything depends on the sufferer’s strength of will and intelligence alone.
Similarly, lack of a religion doesn’t imply that, when faced with a crisis, a person will cower in a corner helplessly, in a fetal position. Nor does it imply that nothing or nobody will help the unfortunate soul.
“and where do you find hope?”
Religion does not imply and is not needed to be an optimist. Similarly, lack of religion is not related to pessimism (although pessimism can lead one to give up religion).
“Who am i?
What am i doing here?
What am i going to do?”
By asking these questions, you assume that religion is what gives people identity, and people who do not profess any religion do not have an identity. Do you need a religion to answer these questions?
Also, you imply that a divine being is what gives people their purpose; nobody would otherwise have their own. Truthfully, tho, only people who believe in predestination will not be able to answer these questions in the absence of a commanding deity, or a hint of what their purpose of being born is.
Similarly, professing to a religion does not automatically give the faithful answers to these questions.
Most people I know, the faithful and the unfaithful, can answer the first and third questions well, but still cannot find the answer to the second one…
—-
Now, I’m not denying the fact that a religion provides some sort of spiritual insurance. It helps in the psychological sense of providing a passive friend. This “friend” might or might not provide the answers to the questions you’ve asked, but even if this “friend” doesn’t provide any answers, its easier for the seekers to formulate solutions if they are under the impression that someone is looking out for them, and they are not alone.
BUT the point is: religion or the lack thereof does NOT have any real relation to whether a person can answer the questions you have put forth.
September 25, 2009 at 8:54 am |
PS: the post above was directed at Andrew, and I have no idea how it ended up at the bottom. >_>
September 25, 2009 at 9:24 am |
Its interesting what you assume by asserting what i imply. I am not implying that there is no method of dealing with fear outside of religion. Rather, i assume that you have and use a method and i want to know how you have constructed it.
No, you do not need a religion to answer these questions of identity. We have all answered them by what we do. I am just wondering how you have answered these questions. what did that process look like for you?
thank you for your last statement, and that is what i want to discuss. Putting aside division of religious/non-religious, how do you answer these questions and deal with these basic concerns of life?
also, how is hope related to optimism? can we say they are one in the same? can a pessimist have hope?
September 25, 2009 at 10:29 am |
My apologies if I took your questions wrongly. It just seemed out of place in the context of this topic, that I’m left wondering why you even ask, and how you would respond if you find the blogger unable to answer them.
“also, how is hope related to optimism? can we say they are one in the same? can a pessimist have hope?”
I kind of lump hope together with confidence for that one: Confidence replaces the “I Hope” with an “It Will”, without visibly increasing the chances for a successful resolution. I might be wrong, tho.
It’s logical that a pessimist can have hope as well, but… my own experiences tell me this is a very, very long shot, and a pessimist’s “hope” tends to be very conservative, when it comes to hoping for the best.
September 25, 2009 at 9:33 am |
Fear – I’ll go ahead & say that people are atheists only because they fear God, especially the vengeful one described in Christianity. It’s easier to pretend no gods exist. Who doesn’t wish that after they have lived a good life all their troubles would melt away into eternal sleep? Think about it: you’ve suffered way more on this planet than you ever cared to. Atheism is an extremely comforting concept, maybe that’s why so many people cling to the delusion.
Social Acceptance – Most people are atheists because they hopped onto the atheist bandwagon & enjoy bashing other peoples’ beliefs over the anonymity of the internet. That’s why there’s a legion of them on the internet, but not so much in real life. It’s not like most atheists looked at a series of options & decided that atheism was the best for them – they were just herded onto this position like sheep.
Hope – apparently the author of this article has something against hope, so I won’t bother reading it.
To explain the unknown – A stupid & hypocritical argument considering how most standard atheist rhetoric claims that God is a bigger unknown than the universe therefore violates occam’s razor. If you think God is easier to explain than the universe you need to get help.
September 25, 2009 at 9:44 am |
I fear God, so I reject him? Seriously? Your rational comments continue.
I became an atheist because I wanted to be accepted? My wife, my family and virtually every friend of mine is a Christian. My brilliant idea was to reject my belief system to make some virtual friends on the internet? Strike two.
There have been thousands of man-made versions of this god throughout history. Which version do you want me to try to explain? I’ll explain them all in one word … fiction.
September 25, 2009 at 9:59 am |
Newsflash: I’m not applying it to you, just like your comments aren’t remotely related to my situation. Apparently over the internet you’re qualified to be an expert in psychoanalysis, therefore so am I. This is my own little analysis of atheists in general, if you will.
September 25, 2009 at 10:45 am |
The bloggers experiences seem to have disproved your claims, however. My guess is that you’re treating it as if it were an exception.
“I’ll go ahead & say that people are atheists only because they fear God, especially the vengeful one described in Christianity. It’s easier to pretend no gods exist. Who doesn’t wish that after they have lived a good life all their troubles would melt away into eternal sleep? Think about it: you’ve suffered way more on this planet than you ever cared to. Atheism is an extremely comforting concept, maybe that’s why so many people cling to the delusion.”
This is not a logical or rational way of representing the thoughts of others. Think back to lands ruled by tyrants in the past and present. I hate to drop names here, but a North Korean will not regard Kim Jong Il as non-existent simply because he’s afraid of Kim Jong Il, and it would be better not to think of Kim Jong Il.
The “Ignore it. Maybe it will go away” approach doesn’t work with objects of REAL fear. It does work with objects of imaginary fear, tho.
“Social Acceptance – Most people are atheists because they hopped onto the atheist bandwagon & enjoy bashing other peoples’ beliefs over the anonymity of the internet. That’s why there’s a legion of them on the internet, but not so much in real life. It’s not like most atheists looked at a series of options & decided that atheism was the best for them – they were just herded onto this position like sheep.”
No arguments here – this can indeed go both ways.
Unfortunately, I have to subscribe to Be’s POV, since my family started off Buddhist and I, indeed, still follow the rites out of respect. I never actually learnt the meaning of those rites until I was 15. As for acceptence – I was lucky. Buddhist philosophy is a very tolerant one.
“Hope – apparently the author of this article has something against hope, so I won’t bother reading it.”
Then you, by default, are giving a point away. >_>
“To explain the unknown – A stupid & hypocritical argument considering how most standard atheist rhetoric claims that God is a bigger unknown than the universe therefore violates occam’s razor. If you think God is easier to explain than the universe you need to get help.”
But, God is an unknown. Why do you insist that rational thought can prove it? Break the concept of God down into little, itty, bitty points, causes, whys, what is’s and all, and what you end up with is not an answer, but many more whys.
I think you need to read up on Occam’s Razor a bit. Occam’s Razor doesn’t like supernatural explanations, or explanations with no physical proof. At all.
September 25, 2009 at 11:33 am |
So your position basically boils down to the fact that you don’t think God exists. Big surprise?
Saying that it’s unknown doesn’t mean it’s not real. Science also deals with the unknown – quit cherrypicking which unknown is bad and which is not. Also, attempting to scientifically analyze an area that we agree does not have anything to do with science (beyond the first natural cause) is intellectually bankrupt.
Which is why you were using Occam’s Razor to argue that God doesn’t exist in the other blog post. So which is it? Can you use Occam’s Razor to prove the supernatural? Or can you only use it to disprove the supernatural? Can you make up your mind? And explain to me how a supernatural explanation is worse than a non-explanation? Sounds like you’re just making stuff up to suit your position.
September 25, 2009 at 7:52 pm
“So your position basically boils down to the fact that you don’t think God exists. Big surprise?”
Nope, it doesn’t. Although if you don’t believe me, I can’t really say anything to make you.
I’m just saying, I don’t know God exists. I can’t prove God exists. BUT, neither can I disprove it.
You have proof, but – sorry, I can’t agree with that kind of proof. It’s the kind of proof a philosopher will agree with, yes, but take it to Nasa and – well, at best, you don’t get thrown out. >_>
This is NOT an Atheistic point of view, as you claim.
Atheists think God doesn’t exist, full stop.
So what am I? Answer: An Agnostic.
“Saying that it’s unknown doesn’t mean it’s not real. Science also deals with the unknown – quit cherrypicking which unknown is bad and which is not. Also, attempting to scientifically analyze an area that we agree does not have anything to do with science (beyond the first natural cause) is intellectually bankrupt.”
I know what you mean, but science has a way of excluding the unknown until evidence of the unknown surfaces.
Even if scientists did agree about evidence of an unknown, you’ll quickly find that they’ll be all conservative about it; non-conservative scientists frequently become ostracized.
(Just ask Tesla.)
“Which is why you were using Occam’s Razor to argue that God doesn’t exist in the other blog post. So which is it? Can you use Occam’s Razor to prove the supernatural? Or can you only use it to disprove the supernatural? Can you make up your mind? And explain to me how a supernatural explanation is worse than a non-explanation? Sounds like you’re just making stuff up to suit your position.”
Wrong. If you did read up on Occam’s Razor, you’ll find its a double edged sword. The trouble is, it’s the EASIEST thing to turn into a double-edged sword!
One can use Occam’s Razor to argue for a supernatural cause. BUT, at the risk of the Razor being used against the supernatural cause itself, making the entire argument moot.
September 25, 2009 at 11:39 am |
You’re not applying it to me, so you are telling me that other people become atheists because they fear God?
Here is the story of how to become an atheist by Aedus logic:
A man fears God and his wrath. Since he believes God exists, he knows by rejecting God he will be sent to hell. So he decides to reject God. Death is way more comforting than eternal life. And maybe burning for eternity won’t be so bad.
The real story is atheists become atheists because they don’t believe in superstitious theism. Fear has nothing to do with it.
September 25, 2009 at 1:10 pm |
Sigh. It would be more along the lines of “I fear God therefore I’ll delude myself into thinking he doesn’t exist.” Kind of like an ostrich sticking his head in the ground to hide from a predator – “if I can’t see them they can’t see me!” :0
Yep. Prove me wrong.
September 25, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Short of doing a scientific survey, I obviously can’t “prove” you wrong. But not only is your assumption illogical, I can honestly tell you fear of God had nothing to do with my rejection of Christianity.
Even if God is real and atheists are completely wrong, I can’t see any logic behind your assumption of fear being the motivation for Atheism. When people are afraid, they often run away. But there is no escaping an all-powerful omnipotent being. Sticking your head in the sand to ignore a god out of fear is a completely irrational conclusion.
I can tell you from experience that rejecting religious faith is very difficult. It was the most difficult thing I’ve ever struggled through in my life. And I certainly didn’t do it out of fear. I wholeheartedly believed in God my entire life when I finally realized my head was in the sand. The view of the world is much better sans the blindfold of theology and religion.
September 25, 2009 at 2:32 pm
It’s a common misconception, among believers, that atheists “reject God.” How can I reject something that I don’t believe in? What you’re describing is misotheism, the belief that a god exists, but is evil or otherwise worthy of rejection or hatred. It is a form of theism, and therefore involves faith, unlike atheism.
Similarly, the fear of a god or gods would be a form of theism, and incompatible with atheism. I cannot fear what does not, in my worldview, even exist. That would be like an arachniphobe who doesn’t believe in spiders. It’s a contradiction.
Just for the record, ostriches do not hide by sticking their heads in the sand. That’s a myth, like virgin birth, talking snakes and the resurrection.
September 25, 2009 at 2:47 pm
I should add that atheists do reject religion. Unlike a god or gods, the religion built up around the belief in deities is very real, and can be feared, hated or rejected. I can reject Islam, Judaism, Christianity or Hinduism. I cannot reject Allah, YHWH, Big-G God or Krishna, any more than I can reject Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny or the Purple and Pink Polka-Dotted Elephant.
I suppose I could reject the “concept of Santa Claus,” or the “concept of the Easter Bunny.” Those are constructions of our minds and our societies. In that sense, I could reject the “concept of God, ” but rejecting a concept cannot result from fear, because fearing an idea, independent of its believers, is also nonsense.
September 25, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Prove you wrong? You’re the one making the claim. In order to even say something so audacious as “most atheists fear God,” you need something to back it up, not us.
Of course, it makes sense that your mind would be so backwards. You believe that God exists without proof, so why shouldn’t everything be like that to you?
Unfortunately, from an outside perspective, it’s obvious that you’re just making claims out of thin air and leaving everyone else to refute a statement with no backing to begin with. This is why nobody takes you seriously.
September 25, 2009 at 8:31 pm
“Sigh. It would be more along the lines of “I fear God therefore I’ll delude myself into thinking he doesn’t exist.” Kind of like an ostrich sticking his head in the ground to hide from a predator – “if I can’t see them they can’t see me!” :0″
I think the point is, you, who claim yourself to be an expert in psychology, don’t even have the slightest inking of how people really respond to a fear stimulus.
PEOPLE SIMPLY DO NOT RESPOND TO FEAR BY IGNORING IT OR FORGETTING IT! An Ostrich sticking its head into the sand is a method of “running away”; albeit a not-quite-so-effective one. All other animals take off.
“running away” does not equate to “ignore”. One runs away from the object of his fear. To do that, one must have the object of his fear clearly in his mind – otherwise, one is essentially running away from, um, nothing.
September 27, 2009 at 8:49 am
Man you guys are dense. The point of my troll was to highlight the fact that you can’t rationalize what is already irrational behavior!
Why should people fear something that doesn’t exist? Why should people hope for something that seems like a myth and that even today’s religions can’t agree on the details of? For social acceptance – would you jump off a bridge just because everyone else is doing it? Why should people use God to explain the unknown by filling it in with an even bigger unknown?
Obviously none of these are good reasons for believing in God, just like my ostrich example doesn’t show a good alternative to hiding from a predator. Christ, the mental degeneration of atheists on this blog is becoming astounding. <_<
September 27, 2009 at 10:20 pm
“Christ, the mental degeneration of atheists on this blog is becoming astounding. <_<"
Y'know, sometimes I wonder why non-believers call out the name of God's Son. Maybe it's like Gordon Bennett.
"Why should people use God to explain the unknown by filling it in with an even bigger unknown? "
God is arguably a bigger unknown than any other unknown. If I boil it down to the simplest of arguments:
== Deiistic ==
What Created The Universe?
God.
What is God?
Dunno.
== Atheistic? ==
What Created The Universe?
Dunno.
Therefore, the Atheistic argument is arguably the simpler one (Not that I accept that, but there you go. <_<)
September 30, 2009 at 5:07 pm |
@Aedus
I am not an Atheist because I fear God. To me, the idea of a god creating everything seems illogical.
September 30, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
Actually, the idea of a god existing at all seems illogical to me.
September 25, 2009 at 9:40 am |
All four were reasons I clung to religion even AFTER I knew I didn’t really believe it. Fear and Social Acceptance were the strongest factors that I stayed longer than I really should have.
I let go of the Social Acceptance first… as I made new friends, this became a much easier proposition.
I let go of Fear last… it is a STRONG emotion, and one that, as you said, will keep you clinging to religion. For me the Fear was mixed with Guilt… I still have moments where the Fear or Guilt will show their faces, but now I recognize them, and why it is happening, so I just move on.
Anyway… the only thing I would add to your list is Guilt… but I think that stems from Fear.
Great post!
September 25, 2009 at 10:01 am |
Religion has had thousands of years to perfect exactly how to manipulate people. These four reasons pretty much encompass every ethos argument possible rather neatly.
September 25, 2009 at 10:37 am |
I am a Christian and I don’t fear a God who has sacrificed his son to save me. As for social acceptance, being a Christian in Southern California is to be a member of just another religion – we are one of the most diverse areas of the planet. There is no social benefit to being Christian or Buddhist or whatever. I suppose things are different in South Carolina, but not here.
But I agree that hope and facing the unknown are important. All humans look for hope and answers to big questions. What does rationalism offer for this? Only uncertainty, or at best, statistical probability.
People are Christians because it is worth something to be so.
September 25, 2009 at 5:27 pm |
“People are Christians because it is worth something to be so.”
This is a social rationale. It’s worth is entirely determined by the people who you worship with. I know what you’re referring to and I very much had that experience when I was a Christian.
Also, please don’t use the “without God, life is meaningless” or that “atheists are really all just nihilists” justification. I know that’s not what you said, explicitly, but it’s a derivation of the same source.
I feel more content and purposeful now than when I was a theist. By no means would I say that being a theist means you have to be depressed. Far from it. I’m just saying that the notion that atheists are unhappy or have nothing to live for is, quite frankly, a dirty lie, and I’m disappointed every time I hear it perpetuated.
If I was actually happy as a Christian, I would have stayed Christian, but the whole thing depressed me. Probably the most depressing thing of all was believing that people I had known were in hell based on nothing more than bad luck. There were a number of times when I just thought to myself, “Why am I here? I’m saved, I’m not going to hell, why bother going on?” And there was never any answer.
Now, I can say with certainty that there isn’t any higher reason for being here. My life is what I make it and this is it. My life is infinitely more precious to me now than when I was Christian. My interactions with people are that much more important to me, as well. It becomes even more necessary for me to get involved in my community because just praying to God about it didn’t do anything. If I wanted something to change, I had to be the one to do it.
So, if you wouldn’t mind, please have a little respect with the people you’re talking with. It’s common courtesy.
September 25, 2009 at 10:35 pm
“If I wanted something to change, I had to be the one to do it.”
Christ founded the church and then left it up to us. Our church works in the community – we don’t leave it all up to God.
So, if you wouldn’t mind, please have a little respect with the people you’re talking with. It’s common courtesy.
That goes both ways. Having been told repeatedly on this site my beliefs are nothing more than superstitous ignorance, I guess I’ll just back off ’cause its obvious rationalists have all the answers.
Right.
September 26, 2009 at 8:15 am
Paul, sometimes you just have to think of it this way:
Perhaps God revealed to them a different Truth.
Also, I think no atheist or other-believer claimed to have all the answers. As far as I know, the last three people I’ve talked to, who claimed to have all the answers we needed were: A Deiist, a Christian, and another Christian. >_>
September 27, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Chicken:
“Perhaps God revealed to them a different Truth.”
Well that is just the thing, isn’t it? If God reveals a truth, would a rationalist accept it? As I see it, no. Rationalism only accepts truth that comes by reason, observation or experience.
Rationalism supplies such answers as it can fashion from facts and logic. Lacking those, rationalism witholds the answer. But for humans, that will never be enough.
September 27, 2009 at 2:36 pm
If a god was revealed through reason, observation or experience, then any rationalist would accept that revelation. For some reason, the gods, these supposedly perfect beings, choose to communicate through such imperfect means. Personally, if I can’t discern a god-given revelation from indigestion, then I’m going to lean toward indigestion. In the past, “prophets” leaned toward the divine.
Believers like to wear their acceptance of the irrational as a badge of honor. That’s what I’m talking about when I say that pride is one of the reasons people cling to religion. The pride of being one of the illuminated. The pride of knowing something that others can’t know. It’s why all discussions between theists and atheists will ultimately boil down to the difference of faith. You’ve got it. We don’t. We can’t switch it on, any more than you can switch it off.
September 27, 2009 at 7:20 pm
Frog:
“It’s why all discussions between theists and atheists will ultimately boil down to the difference of faith. You’ve got it. We don’t. We can’t switch it on, any more than you can switch it off.”
Exactly right.
September 25, 2009 at 10:23 am |
Great article. I think you hit the nail squarely on the head. All of those reasons are why I stayed in it for so long.
September 25, 2009 at 10:31 am |
As a Christian, I would add identity to the list.
My parents, grandparents and my ancestors as far back as I can trace were all Lutheran. I don’t have to “shop” for a non-denomination church where I feel “comfortable”. I can’t just stop being who I am.
And this community of saints, as we say, offers examples of what to expect and how to cope. My ancestors lost half their children to (now easily curable) childhood disease – but they had the church to console them. I have observed my grandparents – and others in our congregation – in their dying process and have seen the strength they have received from their faith.
Conversely I have also observed friends and family as they successfully raised families and found contentment in their lives and their faith has played a part in this too. I suppose you could argue that the same advantages would be available in any community, with or without the religion – perhaps so. But the long history of Christianity among my family and friends is a tremendous asset – why try to recreate what is already working well?
September 25, 2009 at 10:32 am |
Why does a human being’s birthplace and family play such a major role in their religious beliefs?
Partially, it’s like having an accent or dialect. If the people around you sound a certain way, chances are you’re going to sound a lot like that. A person born in Scotland will have a Scotch accent, and a people born in New England will sound much different from people born in the Dirty South (their own name for it, not mine). But that applies at all stages of life: Though I only lived in Pittsburgh for four years, I’m still prone to saying “daaan” and “a’nat.”
The real reason it’s so intertwined with birthplace and environment is that because religion has to be learned. Someone has to teach it to you. Those someones are parents and, by extension, the local church community. Whatever church your family goes to, that’s what you’ll be. Same with the rest of the world: Islamic family? Islam. Hindu family? Hindu. Wiccan family? Wiccan. Etc, etc, etc…
The only time this cycle is interrupted is when you get into the messy business of Evangelical Missionaries. I don’t even want to get started on those people…
Childhood Indoctrination makes me sick. I think people should raise their kids like I’m raising my son: To be a free thinker, and to make choices for themselves after they gather information and points of view.
September 25, 2009 at 10:45 am |
“Childhood Indoctrination makes me sick. I think people should raise their kids like I’m raising my son: To be a free thinker, and to make choices for themselves after they gather information and points of view.”
I guess public schools could be considered government-sponsored indoctrination centers for rationalism. Some Christians – and I am not one of them – would argue that to give all possible points of view the public schools should include religious instruction. Perhaps you will take your son to church services so he can make up his own mind about it.
I want to wish you well in raising your son – it is the most important job you will ever have. But as a parent whose kids are grown I can tell you that one day your son will decide to make his own decisions and it will come sooner than you think. And what will be shocking to you is that you will no longer be able to control that process – at best you can only influence it.
So just be ready for the day your son comes home and tells you he is going to a church event because a cute girl he knows will be there… ;=)
September 25, 2009 at 11:56 am |
Pride. The shear unwillingness of a human to admit that they’re wrong. To be wrong is one thing, but to admit to it? The shame. The ignominious shame of it! No No. Better to stand by previous convictions in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence than budge an inch.
Pride will make us humans do funny things. I’ve seen respected scientists cling to disproved hypotheses rather than admit to being wrong.
September 25, 2009 at 12:02 pm |
I would put pride in the category of social acceptance. But it probably should have it’s own place on the list.
Fear and pride played a large role in delaying my rejection of Christianity. When you’ve believed something your entire life, it is a scary thought to admit your wrong. And pride helps keep you from admitting it to yourself.
September 25, 2009 at 12:12 pm |
Did anybody mention “habit” as a reason to cling to religion? I guess that could fall under the second heading. What about pride?
September 25, 2009 at 12:27 pm |
Why did I cling to religion for so long even though I never really believed? (I have been openly atheist for the past three years, and I am over 30).
In my case was probably laziness. I didn’t care about religion; it was not something important in my life. My social life was very active outside any religion group, and I’ve never been afraid of stuff I can’t see or sense. Hell was always a lie.
Only until recently I started paying attention to the world problems and started noticing how religion was behind of many issues. I started reading about history, religion and war, and I realized that god and religions are mere human invention to keep others oppressed.
Suddenly what I suspected all along came as a fact: god does not exist (at least not the ones humans fabricated).
Yes, I would add to the list laziness, many people cling to religion because they don’t care to understand or study what they believe. They would never read Ingersoll or Russell or Lee Strobel or D’Souza or Hitchens, etc. (I throw Strobel because reading Christian apologetics push me further in my atheism).
September 25, 2009 at 12:31 pm |
Good points, “The Blue Frog” and “Brian”.
Humans are creatures of habit. And by nature we are typically lazy when it comes to things we don’t want to deal with. Very common behavior patterns to perpetuate religious belief and involvement.
September 25, 2009 at 12:33 pm |
I must add, many christians don’t even read the bible. They only listen to one verse every Sunday.
September 25, 2009 at 1:04 pm |
Amazingly, Sunday sermons never talk about the ugly and ridiculous parts of the Bible. Only warm and fuzzy Jesus stories are safe sermon material.
Churches know how to keep asses in the pews and money in the offering plate. Lot’s about Jeezus’ grace and not much about God’s genocidal wrath, the lawful mistreatment of women and the slaughter of everyone and anyone who didn’t follow the rules Yahweh.
September 25, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Ah yes, I forgot about the “y’all are going to hell” baptist teaching. That is one group that gets way too much joy out of casting eternal judgement on people.
September 25, 2009 at 2:37 pm |
B, you just haven’t been to the right churches. Baptists (including my inlaws and family) soak up the really gory and violent parts of the Bible. It reinforces their belief that the people who “persecute” them by rejecting their religion, are headed for a bad end.
September 25, 2009 at 3:32 pm |
Perhaps, A Sense of Belonging ?
September 25, 2009 at 7:12 pm |
I suggest an expansion of the “Social acceptance” category to “Social connection” or “Community”. The phrase “social acceptance” suggests a one directional respect from a group to a member. But the reverse, equivalent respect from a member to the group may also be important.
In reading some blogs of former Christians I have noticed a few comments about missing some social aspect of being part of a congregation. While having no interest in the god-worshiping aspect of church, the person misses hanging out with others of a like philosophy, or a sense of common response to a crisis, etc.; which I suppose can be summed up as community.
Religious congregations do provide community (interpersonal connections, support, occasional help, etc.) which has nothing to do with worship and which is something like a very extended family. Various items from LeoPardus’s list fall in this category and maybe other things that have been or will be mentioned in these comments.
Or maybe “Social acceptance” and “Community” are two separate categories.
September 25, 2009 at 8:09 pm |
Well, for “social acceptence” part, there’s an interesting Chinese idiom known as Three Men Make A Tiger. The gist of it is that, in the absence of any evidence, multiple witness accounts do not necessarily make anything true.
And yes, the argument can be used both for and against Atheism.
The idiom tells a tale of a mercenary who lost his repute searching for a tiger that eyewitness reports claimed was stalking the town. The eyewitnesseses were lying, but were never discovered nor taken to task.
September 25, 2009 at 10:07 pm |
Ignorance. They haven’t been educated about how the world works according to testable hypotheses, so they say “goddidit”. A close correlate is laziness. They don’t want to take the time to educate themselves, so they say “goddidit”.
September 26, 2009 at 6:07 am |
“What am I doing here?”
The same thing as any tree, pebble, subatomic particle or energy field: existing. To even assume that there is a “reason” or “purpose” strikes me as rather superstitious. Existence does not imply any single cause, and structure does not imply any sort of consciousness.
September 26, 2009 at 11:09 am |
Well done BEattitude !
The basic underlying premise of every religion ever known, from Evangelical Christianity to Buddhism to the worship of the ancient Egyptian Goddess Isis, is that there is something innately wrong with us. We are born wrong somehow. If not, then why would we need to learn how to propitiate gods, seek “salvation” from god(s) or attempt to achieve the “enlightenment” of the Buddha?
How can a sweet newborn baby have anything morally wrong with it? And yet that is the premise of all religions. From the moment of birth, we set about “fixing” the things that are wrong with this infant. The concept of Original Sin is the epitome of that foolishness. Before the umbilical is even cut, a true Christian accepts wholeheartedly that the little bugger is already a sinner. Unbelievable? Not at all, if you accept the concept of salvation.
This of course is the basic tenet of Christianity and a good many other ancient religions. We need to be “saved” from some ghastly fate after death. And the only way to achieve this salvation is through various self-deprecating rituals: bowing, kneeling, fasting, abstaining from sex and/or drink and/or whatever, repetitive prayers, sacrificing animals, donations to the “priests” of the religion (this one is always enthusiastically encouraged), asking for forgiveness for your human foibles, and so on. In some religions the sacrificing included other humans and everyone accepted such barbarity as necessary to please their deities, although why any deity would relish the death of a human is beyond me.
The Jewish tradition is often referred to as guilt-based. One comedian said it best: “All religions are the same. They are all based on guilt. They just have different holidays.” Funny, yes, but not really. Not if you take this stuff seriously.
September 26, 2009 at 4:24 pm |
There’s more to the pride aspect than just social acceptance. There’s the pride of belonging to a group that has all the answers. Religion basically starts with an answer, and reformulates the questions to match. That’s what apologetics is all about. Reason starts with a question and tries to find the best answer. You can’t do that in a religious context, because there are answers, some of which may be valid, which cannot be considered because they are heretical. It’s arrogance-by-proxy, and it’s intellectually dishonest.
So no, Paul M., we don’t have all the answers. We have a bunch of questions and we’re curious enough to look for the answers, and humble enough to know that all those answers aren’t likely to be found in one book. Especially a book written by Bronze-age nomads and a loosely-organized group of Levantine neo-Platonists.
September 26, 2009 at 6:20 pm |
[...] The four reasons people cling to religion. Fear Fear is an extremely effective and powerful motivator for human behavior. Which is exactly why virtually every [...] [...]
October 6, 2009 at 6:54 am |
i just love your blog and your thinking – which i completely agree. what a wonderful yet simple list.
October 28, 2009 at 7:56 pm |
The Bible claims to be, God’s (The First Cause) communication with his creation. When we examine the evidence of the scriptures do the facts “Correspond” with reality?
So I Thought ?
Self-Evident Truth?
At one time to me Christianity was now I know differenty so the fact of the Bible was TRUTH no I know differently
At one time people believed the earth was flat but today we know it’s a sphere. Someone might say you see truth has changed.
The world was a sphere even when people believed it was flat. Truth did not change, rather we changed from holding a false belief to a true one. Our belief now corresponds with the facts.
Things appear to be true only for some people but not for others.
‘All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.’
— Arthur Schopenhauer
Man is what he believes.’
— Anton Chekhov
‘I think, therefore I am.
Science and reason.
But I’m not an atheist.
Science and reason have led me to Deism.
Nothing in nature is left to chance
Everything comes from the Divine.
Never find fault in things
You do not really understand.
The enemy you wish to destroy
Often proves to be your truest frie
cin3@me.com
October 28, 2009 at 8:51 pm |
Cindy, I went through a Deist phase, and while I won’t try to talk you out of it (sharper minds than mine found Deism to be a suitable explanation for the Universe) I will tell you that any god who can live within the bounds of our Universe ends up being indistinguishable from nothingness. You can always say that god is the rules that make up the Universe, as Einstein did, but that’s essentially pantheism, which is simply atheism by another definition. If everything is god, then god lacks any distinguishing characteristics, and thus ceases to be either relevant or definable.
October 28, 2009 at 9:51 pm |
Deist for me is not a phase if U compared GOD to Christianity or revealed religion I would consider myself Atheist too, come to this discuussion tomorrow night
Lewis
lewis@sullivan-county.com
The obvious truth: Energy costs will increase due to new environmental safeguards in the bill, but no one truly knows by how much. Yet another truth: Congress must act or the EPA will, and the agency cannot take economics into the equation. That’s why business, after dragging its feet and denying for decades that global warming exists, is getting on board. Industry might not welcome a carbon cap, but some leaders fear an EPA regulation would be even more restrictive. We definitely want more clarity on the potential costs, but a carbon-cap-and-trade plan is a good way to begin reducing carbon emissions…
The full editorial is here. They don’t care about costs, they can afford it and think it’s worth it. The simple fact is the Progressive left wants this and their reporting on this has been totally one-sided and they don’t deny it. That is why the press is worthless on these issues. This endorsement matched their reporting exactly. They never presented any dissenting views at all. One question that must be asked is why has the EPA got such power in the first place?
Environmentalism is Religious in Nature by Lewis Loflin
Lou Dobbs calls environmentalism a ‘religion’
I was a christian I am not fallen lost or a christ Jesus hater or anything like that ,we all need to wake up and smell the roses we have been taught misinformation That why as believers and non-believers we might try to understand each other let be a part of this I do hope you can mark your calendars and remember to be on the call.
When: Thursday, October 29, 7:00 p.m. Pacific Time
10:00 pm EST
Call In Number: (914) 338-0452
Time Zones: http://www.worldtimeserver.com (Pacific is the same as California)…
http://www.travelmath.com/time/
This one seem to be easier to understand + travel time and …….
October 28, 2009 at 10:10 pm |
I’m sorry if it seemed like I was saying you were going through a phase. That’s not the case. I was referring to my own experience.
October 28, 2009 at 10:21 pm |
I know perceptions ……..
It really does not matter my mind is FREE, as you believes yours to be , TOO Good Night
November 25, 2009 at 1:03 pm |
[...] http://thebeattitude.com/2009/09/24/the-four-reasons-people-cling-to-religion/ [...]
March 26, 2010 at 5:47 pm |
Has making this website allowed you to cope with fear or answered any questions? Why did you make this site if you have no reason to make this site? After all, we are just wandering around, waiting for nothing to happen, right?
Looking for answers to questions which, you say, are impossible to answer is a cry for help.
I could give you the answers, but that would take away your ability to search for yourself and find truth… if that is what God will accept, and in doing so will take away the reward you would deserve for making the effort or opening yourself up to the possibilities. Do you want the answers or are you trying to justify your absence of effort? I have a better idea. Ask for help through prayer, and then if God doesn’t answer it, it will be His fault for not answering and absolve you of your lack of effort. But when He does answer, not IF, it will be your lack, not His. I think you know this. Because if we find truth we have to do something about it. I have found that those you deny God are really saying, ” too much trouble” Really?
March 26, 2010 at 8:54 pm |
Did you come here with the hope of doing God’s work?
Did you come here with the hope of gaining brownie points from God, by taking a jab at an unbeliever?
If you could give me the answers but refuse to, you are doing nothing constructive. You’re like one of those bystanders who do nothing at an accident scene but watch the carwreck, and by doing so, you’re also technically getting in the way of anyone being saved, by indirectly convincing them that God and his servants are useless gits. <_<
Take this not only in terms of yourself, but of God as well. His input doesn't matter if he's giving none at all, or if he's giving it in a manner similar to yours – unconstructive rethoric.
March 26, 2010 at 10:16 pm |
Actually, it appears that theBRattitude is no longer looking for answers because, after long study, he has worked out the matter to his own satisfaction. Now he is explaining how he reached his conclusion. Indeed, having found what he considers to be the truth, he is doing something about it.