• Flyswat
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    Research shows that we have the innate (ie. without being externally influenced) belief that there is a higher power. So we are socialized/influenced into NOT believing in God.

    Atheism and secularism are big now but this only started to be so in the recent hundred years.

    Personally I find my religion logically making sense more than what atheistic ideologies bring forth and their misuse of science illiteracy.

    The scripture is preserved and I had the chance to learn the original language which allows to assess it firsthand.

    • Dr. Jenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’d be willing to bet humans also innately believe the earth is flat (in your day-to-day life it certainly doesn’t look like we’re on a spherical object hurling through space), but that doesn’t make it so.

      • Flyswat
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        That part of my reply was to show the that we are indoctrinated OUT of religion. Of course this does not forcibly make it true. Like for the shape of the Earth we must use our intellect and whatever is available to us to arrive to any conclusion.

    • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      It sounds like you are firmly entrenched in your religion. I’m glad you enjoy reading Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek, but it turns out people tend to skew in one of two directions: those without a propensity for analytical thought tend to skew religious - for example, the children in the study you cite - and those who think critically reject religion. There’s even a paper on this.

      If your religion brings you happiness and peace, more power to you. However, I would encourage you to rethink your ideas on logic and science illiteracy. Consider that it might actually be very difficult in a world & countless communities built around religion for someone to break away from that social norm, analyse religion objectively, and reject an idea that cannot be proven.

      • Flyswat
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        “The” Bible has been proven by Christian scholars that it was not preserved, so one should not take it as gospel.

        I agree that it is hard to break away from what you have been socialized into, be it theism or atheism, both being a religion and a belief.

        I honestly invite you to study the Quran objectively, which I did. I lived alone in a western society for the most part of my life and was obviously not subject to any social coersion. I distanced myself from what I was taught and decided to look at it from an external and critical point of view. And I discovered it to bee flawless.

        You might be thinking my judgement was clouded or doubt my intellectual abilities :D all the same reason why I invite you to undergo the same experience of rethinking your ideas and to read the Quran for yourself. Hapiness and peace are byproducts and not the goal. The goal must be the search for the truth wherever that might be, even if we dislike it.

        • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Apologies for my assumption of your holy book of choice. You realise the Qur’an is the “sequel” to the Bible, which was itself derivative of the Torah, which was based on more ancient myths, etc etc. All of them passed down verbally for generations before written, all of them changed to suit the storytellers’ needs, and all of them FAR from flawless. Historical and scientific inaccuracies aside, none of them are even internally consistent. I have difficulty believing you have applied objective, critical thought to any religious text.

          • Flyswat
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            They are incomparable.

            The Torah is a collection of stories coming from an oral tradition or songs. The earliest manuscripts are the dead see scrolls dating one or two thousand years after Moises, peace be upon him. The Jewish don’t recognise thesemanuscripts attributed to heretics.

            The Bible according to scholars is a collection of books from anonymous authors who used the names of disciples as pennames. There is no consensus amongst the different denominations regarding what books are part of “the” Bible. The earliest complete manuscript dates about 400 years after Jesus, peace be upon him, and shows differences with today’s text.

            The Qur’an is proven to be preserved, even by western non-muslim orientalists. There are carbon dated manuscripts from the time of Muhammad, peace be upon him, and the book is mass memorised by millions letter by letter with a proven chain tracing back to Muhammad. It is not possible to change the text when millions know it cover to cover by heart. Even the understanding of the meaning is not open to interpretation because there are set rules and relied upon books from the disciples, again with a tracking chain, that tell us how it was explained by the prophet and understood at the time of revelation.

            So this was an assessment of the text before delving into what it actually contains.

            Now I assume you read the Torah and the Bible, which is why you know about the internal and external contradictions.

            This is not the case for Qur’an even when it talks about various things from history to natural phenomena. I really encourage you to go past prejudice and critically study it yourself from reputable sources to actually know what it is and what it says.

            The Clear Qur’an is a good English translation. Read it and if you have any question don’t hesitate.

            • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              I don’t have to read a religious text to know it’s not true, and though you may have been lucky enough to grow up untainted by society, these books have not. The issue with going to sources so entrenched in studying religious text is that they are already tainted by the need to keep the text alive. Should they cast any doubt at all their livelihood will vanish.

              No religion has ever offered verifiable proof of any supernatural claim. Once they do I will pay attention.

              • Flyswat
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                I don’t have to read a religious text to know it’s not true

                How can you give an opinion or hold a position on something you refuse to assess?

                The issue with going to sources so entrenched in studying religious text is that they are already tainted by the need to keep the text alive

                Here you are making assumptions about the sources maybe because of Christianity and Judaism. The sources like I said are the contemporary ones and there is no room for reinterpretation in the exegesis to twist it in a way or the other due to conflicts that arised later on.

                No religion has ever offered verifiable proof of any supernatural claim

                Same can be applied to atheism which is positing that God does not exist. I assume you hold that position. If so you are not consistent in your approach.

                Should one not objectively scrutinize the claims of both sides before holding a position?

                • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Atheism is the rejection of an assertion that there is a god or gods. If any theists were able to prove the existence of a god, an atheist would (hopefully) change their mind. Rejecting all gods until their existence can be proven is hardly inconsistent.

                  I reject as true books that say the X-Men exist. Those are first hand sources, but that does not mean the stories they contain are true, even though they are more morally consistent than most popular religious texts. I have not read the X-Men but that is no reason to assume they are true.

                  Extraordinary assertions such as a devine being existing require extraordinary proof. No religions have managed to provide more than heresay, anecdotal evidence, and assumption to support their claoms. Religious reasoning is as best motivated, and hardly consistent itself.

                  My opinion is based on how world religions are used by their followers and those in power. All I see is religion used as a tools to control, intimidate, otherise, and war with any group considered “not us” - no matter the religion. I have read summaries of the Bible, Quaran, and Book of Mormon. There is nothing of note in any of them. Any possible good advice or dictate has long since been rephrased, refined, and adopted by society. The beauty of a thing is in its utility, and the use I see religion put to buy those in power is ugly. I want nothing to do with poisonous dogma, and instead choose to try making life better for those around me by direct action. Not by wishing for a god to do so, or wasting this precious life gambling that their might be something better after it ends.