A God of Misunderstanding?

[Manjusri]

Well, here we go. Another religious thread. I'm going to give a few examples that i thought about the other day, and i'd like to know what you all think of them.

I know that this theory has been stated over and over again, but i'm going to attempt to put it into a semi-understandable context.

Is god - or any religious figure for that matter - a god of misunderstandings or gaps? For an example; say you were on the toilet. You do your business but, oh no! There's no toilet paper. When you originally had walked into the bathroom you didn't care to notice whether or not there was any available.

Well now you're panicking and you just so happened to glance across the bathroom, and what do you see? A lovely roll of toilet paper staring back at you. You don't remember noticing the toilet paper when you first entered the bathroom, nor do you remember placing that toilet paper there yourself. Praise god for that toilet paper.. right? Not necessarily.

When you're in a situation that's hard for you to comprehend or reach a probable cause as to why something happened (in this case the toilet paper being in a spot where you had originally not noticed it) your neural pathways dig through your brain and subconsciously make connections to memories and knowledge within your brain.

Now assuming you're a religious person your brain is immediately (subconsciously) going to dig up memories and thoughts that you have about religion. Therefore the mysterious phenomena of not noticing the toilet paper (though you'd most likely placed it there but were too preoccupied with far more important tasks) is immediately connected, and explained by, religion.

Yes, the toilet paper example is a pretty mediocre one- nor am i saying everyone assumes that there misplaced toilet paper is the handy work of god. However the same concept can be used in real life occurrences that happen everyday.

[TL;DR] Is religion simply an excuse for things that cannot be conceptualized or understood by ones thought process? Your brain subconsciously makes connections every second, of every hour, of every day. Without you even realizing that it is happening. This is why tarot card reading is such a huge industry. The 'readers' simply make sweeping statements that can almost affect anyone, and begin to work into finer details from there on, giving more and more of an explanation for.. well, really nothing at all.

What is your opinion on this theory? Is religion merely comfort for what we cannot understand? And better yet, is that comfort necessary?

[Sir Suomi]

Well, it is true that divine beings have been used to explain things that happen in our world in the past. Back in the days before our world turned to science, people thought because something bad happened, for an example, an earthquake, it had to be some divine being that got seriously pissed off. They had no idea that it was caused by tectonic plates sliding against each other. So the idea of an angry God/Goddess helped them understand what was happening, since humanity is always striving to find out about their world.

But there are things that I think science personally cannot explain. For an example, the Big Bang Theory. I see the evidence, but personally I think that our universe just happened due to particles reacting(Or however it happened). So I think that's one of the reason's I believe in God.

So yes, humanity does use religious beings as a "crutch", but I think there are certain things that science cannot explain, and that's where my faith kicks in.

[Gigablue]

[TL;DR] Is religion simply an excuse for things that cannot be conceptualized or understood by ones thought process? Your brain subconsciously makes connections every second, of every hour, of every day. Without you even realizing that it is happening. This is why tarot card reading is such a huge industry. The 'readers' simply make sweeping statements that can almost affect anyone, and begin to work into finer details from there on, giving more and more of an explanation for.. well, really nothing at all.

What is your opinion on this theory? Is religion merely comfort for what we cannot understand? And better yet, is that comfort necessary?

I think religion is used to explain things not yet explained by science. As science grows, the amount covered by religion shrinks. I don't think this is necessary. People should accept that there are some things that we don't yet know, and we should work on finding these things out.

But there are things that I think science personally cannot explain. For an example, the Big Bang Theory. I see the evidence, but personally I think that our universe just happened due to particles reacting(Or however it happened). So I think that's one of the reason's I believe in God.

So yes, humanity does use religious beings as a "crutch", but I think there are certain things that science cannot explain, and that's where my faith kicks in.

How do you know that those things can't be explained by science? There are many things that science can't you explain, but there is no reason to think that science will never be able to explain them. Science hasn't failed before. It's reasonable to think that science will continue to explain more as time goes by.

[TigerBoy]

But there are things that I think science personally cannot explain. For an example, the Big Bang Theory. I see the evidence, but personally I think that our universe just happened due to particles reacting(Or however it happened). So I think that's one of the reason's I believe in God.

So yes, humanity does use religious beings as a "crutch", but I think there are certain things that science cannot explain, and that's where my faith kicks in.

You've stated that you 'personally' conclude things, which indicates that like all of us there are limits to your knowledge. You've concomitantly demonstrated the point that the OP made that many are content to use 'God' or 'faith' in place of 'I don't know'.

Being religious should not be an excuse for being intellectually lazy, but it often is. "Because of God" demonstrably inhibits society from progressing and learning. Many right wingers such as Huckabee are telling us that the Connecticut shootings are "because of god". Each of them have different explanations for their God's will on that matter (some say it is the separation of church and state, some are saying its because we teach evolution, others are saying it's because 'God hates fags'). I would argue that since none of them can prove that they 'know' God's will, we should ignore the crazies and keep asking more useful questions such as 'why did the school's security not prevent it' or 'how did the shooter get such easy access to weapons' etc.


http://www.atheistmemebase.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/053-Creationism-because-its-a-lot-easier-to-read-one-book-than-a-bunch-of-hard-ones-bible-creationists-dinosaurs-reading-science-willful-ignorace.jpg

[FreeFall]

That's one of the appealing aspects of religion for people. It provides comfort, security and answers. How'd that happen? There's no explanation yet, so God must've willed it. How come it happened? God has a plan. Why me? God chose you. When people would be running around trying to play detective, yet come up with no sensible reason for the nonsense they can turn to God and make him the answer, the explanation and the solution.
I'm atheist, but I think it's a necessary comfort. A crying baby will calm down more if you give it its lovey. A teething toddler will feel better if you give it something to gnaw. We're still like babies in the sense that we're still crawling around exploring our earth and universe, and galaxy. There's so much out there, so much we don't know, and humans by nature hate not knowing things. So some of us need our lovey, or something to gnaw, and some find that in religion. It gives them the answers we've yet to find, and they snuggle into that and relax because they feel that they don't need to know, they just need to know God who, to them, knows all.
I don't think anything horrible would happen if there wasn't that comfort or security, but it keeps them happy and content and it doesn't hurt anyone until the extremists and intolerant come to play. So it's necessary for some, but probably not those who are trying to throw the rest of us into vats of tar.

[Sir Suomi]

You've stated that you 'personally' conclude things, which indicates that like all of us there are limits to your knowledge. You've concomitantly demonstrated the point that the OP made that many are content to use 'God' or 'faith' in place of 'I don't know'.

Being religious should not be an excuse for being intellectually lazy, but it often is. "Because of God" demonstrably inhibits society from progressing and learning. Many right wingers such as Huckabee are telling us that the Connecticut shootings are "because of god". Each of them have different explanations for their God's will on that matter (some say it is the separation of church and state, some are saying its because we teach evolution, others are saying it's because 'God hates fags'). I would argue that since none of them can prove that they 'know' God's will, we should ignore the crazies and keep asking more useful questions such as 'why did the school's security not prevent it' or 'how did the shooter get such easy access to weapons' etc.


image (http://www.atheistmemebase.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/053-Creationism-because-its-a-lot-easier-to-read-one-book-than-a-bunch-of-hard-ones-bible-creationists-dinosaurs-reading-science-willful-ignorace.jpg)

Just because I have faith, does not mean I have "limited knowledge." I love science. I love to know how and why things happen. It's just there's things that happen in life that I personally(And yes, when I say personally, this is my OPINION, I am not stating that it it or not true) that just cannot be explained.

And about the statements about the shooting, you gave a bad example. Sure, some people are truly blind when it comes to looking at the facts. But just because I don't know why the man could have possibly thought of shooting those innocent people, does not mean I think it was God "punishing us." From what you are trying to make Christians look like, would be like saying something like this:
"There are terrorists in the Middle East that are Muslim. This must mean all Muslims are terrorists." This is DEFINETLY not true. They are just a bad apple in the bunch of good apples. It's people who refuse to see any scientific knowledge, even when it's right in there face, that make Christians look bad.

So, as a summary of all that, yes, people of faith do tend to look to the heavens when a circumstance is unclear. But remember, there are still things that cannot 100% explained by science. Now, when the Big Bang THEORY becomes the Big Bang LAW, and somehow people prove that there is positively no God out there, I'll stick with my mixed up theory of Creation AND Evolution.

[nice]

That man shooting those innocent people had nothing to do with god punishing us or shit like that and anyone who says that Christian or not needs to shut the fuck up.

I personally do to think that there are some things science can and never will be able to explain so yes you could say I use god as a "crutch" if you will but like some people believe science can answer some of our biggest mysteries I'd like to believe that god can and that is my own personal opinion.

[Gigablue]

Just because I have faith, does not mean I have "limited knowledge." I love science. I love to know how and why things happen. It's just there's things that happen in life that I personally(And yes, when I say personally, this is my OPINION, I am not stating that it it or not true) that just cannot be explained.

Opinions are irrelevant in science. That's the whore reason that we have the scientific method. We can differentiate between fact and fiction, regardless of personal opinion.

JSo, as a summary of all that, yes, people of faith do tend to look to the heavens when a circumstance is unclear. But remember, there are still things that cannot 100% explained by science. Now, when the Big Bang THEORY becomes the Big Bang LAW, and somehow people prove that there is positively no God out there, I'll stick with my mixed up theory of Creation AND Evolution.

Theories don't become laws. They are two different things. A law describes a natural phenomenon, a theory explains it. Hypotheses become theories, but theories done become laws. In many ways, theories are better than laws, for one, they provide explanations, not just descriptions.

Also, there is no theory of creation. No one has ever made a testable prediction for creation, so it isn't even a hypothesis. Creationism is simply unscientific.

Lastly, no one can disprove god. You can't prove a negative. I can't disprove 100% Santa, and yet I don't believe in him. All science does is render the ides of a god unnecessary to explain the world around us.

[TigerBoy]

Just because I have faith, does not mean I have "limited knowledge."
Of course you do. Everyone has limited knowledge. Only God gets to be omniscient.

I love science. I love to know how and why things happen. It's just there's things that happen in life that I personally(And yes, when I say personally, this is my OPINION,
I get that it is your opinion. I was highlighting the fact that your 'personal' world view is a subset of available facts and knowledge. Unless you genuinely think you know everything, in which case my opinion is that you are deluded.


I am not stating that it it or not true) that just cannot be explained.

By 'it' I assume you mean some hypothetical phenomenon. Again, just because you can't explain it doesn't mean it 'cannot be explained'. Just because science cant explain it doesn't mean science will never explain it. Explaining it by 'God' until it is explained in some other way has not served religion terribly well, historically. Flat earth - nope. Earth at the centre of the universe - nope. Sun setting in a murky pond - nope. Moon as a light source - nope. Firmament over the sky - nope. Earth made before the sun - nope. Talking donkeys - nope (well not yet, anyway).


http://www.atheistmemebase.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/012-The-directionality-of-scientific-discoveries-650x487.jpg

And about the statements about the shooting, you gave a bad example.
To be clear, those are real Christians saying exactly the stupid things I reported. Perhaps you thought it was a bad example because I didn't give you links and quotes? Would that help? Up to you, this post is already pretty long, so maybe I'll list them all out in another post if you want.


Sure, some people are truly blind when it comes to looking at the facts. But just because I don't know why the man could have possibly thought of shooting those innocent people, does not mean I think it was God "punishing us."
Yes we agree. Some people are blind to facts. I am glad to hear you don't think those events were God punishing people. Clearly many other Christians do, as discussed above.


From what you are trying to make Christians look like, would be like saying something [like this:
I'm not trying to make Christians 'look like' anything. I am just factually reporting what Christian leaders have said.


So, as a summary of all that, yes, people of faith do tend to look to the heavens when a circumstance is unclear. But remember, there are still things that cannot 100% explained by science.
Yet. Some things that cannot be explained by science yet. And I see absolutely no reason to add "and therefore God" to the end of "I don't know".


Now, when the Big Bang THEORY becomes the Big Bang LAW, and somehow people prove that there is positively no God out there, I'll stick with my mixed up theory of Creation AND Evolution.
Ok so here is where you don't understand science so much. Theories do not become Laws. That is not how scientific method or terminology works. A 'law' is some repeatable observable phenomena. The 'law of gravity' is thus Newton describing what happens, not necessary how it happens. The 'how' part is where the 'theory' word comes in. A theory is a descriptive model of reality. It is an attempt to describe how something works, and scientists continually work to disprove theories by testing them against new observations, and refine the model. The laws of physics don't change, although we might learn more about them.

Your second confusion is to imply that Evolution is a theory. Strictly it is not. Evolution is an observable phenomenon and as such is a law. What you appear to be referring to is the "theory of evolution by natural selection". Darwin's theory was natural selection, Evolution as a concept pre-existed Darwin, he was merely explaining a model for how the phenomenon worked. Creationists often get confused about such things, I've noticed.

[Sir Suomi]

....... Damnit, I give up. I'm not in the mood for more religious debates on this site -_-

[Manjusri]

....... Damnit, I give up. I'm not in the mood for more religious debates on this site -_-

So just to be clear, as your standpoint throughout the topic has been all over the place.

Do you believe religion is simply an excuse for what an individual is incapable of comprehending on their own?

[Sir Suomi]

So just to be clear, as your standpoint throughout the topic has been all over the place.

Do you believe religion is simply an excuse for what an individual is incapable of comprehending on their own?

In certain cases, yes.

[Browny]

Yes religions in some cases is for ignorant people to hide behind. But science is mostly theory as well some of the things such as the Big Bang Theory hints the "theory" have yet to be proven. Religion ad go can not be compared together. Religion and god are two different concepts.

[TigerBoy]

Yes religions in some cases is for ignorant people to hide behind. But science is mostly theory as well some of the things such as the Big Bang Theory hints the "theory" have yet to be proven.
No, not "as well".

A scientific theory is derived from real world observations, and aims to consistently explain phenomena that have been observed. Religion has no phenomena of the supernatural, and so there cannot be a theory. There cannot even be a valid hypotheses concerning theism. Religion doesn't apply scientific method to theism, so cannot use the term 'theory' in an equivalent way.

[Dunce]

Religion is definitely a crutch. People don't think logically about why things happen, nor do they want to. Most people who believe it are afraid or not independent enough to think for themselves.

I'm not a religious person, but I know a fair bit about science. Science cannot explain everything yet, there are still things we don't know. A lot of science is theoretical. We know about atoms, we know what they're made of, but we don't understand why electrons move the way they do. Or why they disappear and reappear. M theory suggests that the Big Bang was when to membranes of other universes collided. M theory also suggests that there are parallel universes in a membrane close to the atoms of your own body. A few years ago people would have laughed at that.
Scientists are always disproving previous theories. Newtonian mechanics was thought to describe all mechanics but now we know it doesn't.
Basically, just because we have science doesn't mean we don't have God. Science is truth, but it doesn't always fully explain. God wouldn't have made it so easy for us to prove his existence because religions are based on faith.
I personally think the universe is chance but I think it's interesting to think about. Science is a way of understanding our world, but we're only really scratching the surface.

I also don't think religion shrinks as science grows. Maybe it's following shrinks or the Popes credibility but they can be independent of each other.

[Gigablue]

Yes religions in some cases is for ignorant people to hide behind. But science is mostly theory as well some of the things such as the Big Bang Theory hints the "theory" have yet to be proven. Religion ad go can not be compared together. Religion and god are two different concepts.

Theory, when used in science, does not mean the same thing as theory, used colloquially. The colloquial use refers to a hunch or educated guess. The scientific use refers to a hypothesis which has been validated experimentally and has resisted all attempts at falsification, and which explains a natural phenomenon and why it occurs. Theories in science have been proven. They don't ever become laws or anything else.

[TigerBoy]

Basically, just because we have science doesn't mean we don't have God. God wouldn't have made it so easy for us to prove his existence because religions are based on faith.

This is flawed thinking. Your reasoning is that religion is based on faith THEREFORE god is hiding THEREFORE (implied) god can exist. You cannot conclude 'god is hiding' for any reason without asking him directly, and you would still need to convince me that you had done so AND that he agreed with you as to his reasons, therefore this statement doesn't allow us to conclude whether god can exist.

Faith only exists as a direct result of result of supposition and fantasy. Religions tend to be based on a faith that is justified by what are claimed to be deity-inspired writings that we now know have so many misconceptions about the nature of the universe that it is unreasonable to view them as anything other than the fantasies of a primitive people.

Religion exists not only as a result of faith, but also for control and power amongst other things. This suggests that your original premise above may also be incomplete or inaccurate.

Uncertainty in theories is a necessary result of scientific method: scientists are sceptical about their own findings and constantly attempt to disprove theories as a matter of routine. It is an inevitable aspect of scientific method that theories get changed, and thus neither surprising nor reason to believe in the supernatural.

Uncertainty simply implies there are gaps in our knowledge. It doesn't imply that the gaps in scientific knowledge need to be filled by anything other than more scientific knowledge.

A great many theories are very consistent with reality and thus change little. These theories do not require 'god' as part of their model.



I also don't think religion shrinks as science grows. Maybe it's following shrinks or the Popes credibility but they can be independent of each other.
Religion has already shrunk as a result of science. We already know an awful lot of material claims made in the bible and other religious works are incorrect, and have strong reason to doubt the remainder. Census data shows that religion has shrunk and continues shrinking in the UK, the US and other nations.

There are many psychological reasons to conceive of gods and the supernatural as you acknowledge, and it is demonstrably human nature to devise rationalisations in the face of scepticism (such as you have done here by claiming he/she/it is playing cosmic peek-a-boo). Ongoing claims of 'god' say everything about human nature and nothing about 'god'.