Why do people reject religion? I think I know

[orcus116]

That sounds like such a typical religious cop-out theory.

[hefdaddy42]

BTW, another good reason to reject religion, or rather, Abrahamic religions: Their inherently negative outlook on humanity. As a human, you suck by default and need to dig your way out of the muck. I'm rather the "in dubio pro reo" guy: You are not guilty until you do something bad yourself.
That way I also don't have to bend over backwards in my morality when I ponder how babies can go to heaven when they haven't accepted Jesus yet

rumborak

I know that is the prevailing thought process in Christianity, but I don't know that there is any such teaching in the other Abrahamic religions.

[reo73]

That sounds like such a typical religious cop-out theory.

Explain?

[GuineaPig]

It's a very easy and comfortable way of thinking to assume that everyone who does not agree with you has some fundamental problem that prevents them from doing so.  "People reject Christianity/religion of choice because Deity X wills it" is a manifestation of that, and something many believers (and non-believers, in their own way) use as an explanation for the fact that other belief systems exist and are defended as passionately as their own.

[orcus116]

It reminds me of back when humans were dumber they attributed almost every natural event to some god or another. Is that fire? Gift from a god. A monsoon? Oh we must've angered the Rain God. In line with what GP is saying it's way easier to attribute an event or somesuch as God or a god's doing then to just think logically about it, although that's just me ignoring faith completely though that's personally how I go about it. We're at the point where we, as a species, can rationalize things unlike those humans thousands of years ago whose thought processes might not've been as developed so to just call something a will of God right away and accept that seems a bit premature and easy.

[reo73]

It's a very easy and comfortable way of thinking to assume that everyone who does not agree with you has some fundamental problem that prevents them from doing so.  "People reject Christianity/religion of choice because Deity X wills it" is a manifestation of that, and something many believers (and non-believers, in their own way) use as an explanation for the fact that other belief systems exist and are defended as passionately as their own.

Are you using the term "you" specifically in regards to me specifically as if this is the point of view I hold and am arguing, because I never said it was what I believe.  But, however distasteful it seems due to it's removal of human freewill and reasoning the doctrine of God's election has been around nearly since man himself and can't be discounted as a legitimate point of view when pondering why some believe and some reject.

[reo73]

It reminds me of back when humans were dumber they attributed almost every natural event to some god or another. Is that fire? Gift from a god. A monsoon? Oh we must've angered the Rain God. In line with what GP is saying it's way easier to attribute an event or somesuch as God or a god's doing then to just think logically about it, although that's just me ignoring faith completely though that's personally how I go about it. We're at the point where we, as a species, can rationalize things unlike those humans thousands of years ago whose thought processes might not've been as developed so to just call something a will of God right away and accept that seems a bit premature and easy.

So what you are saying is that we have a modern understanding of science that allows us to explain why geological occurances happen in the natural world, but that is not really an argument against faith because the question is still present as to how the natural world and it's order of operation came into existence in the first place. 

[GuineaPig]

It's a very easy and comfortable way of thinking to assume that everyone who does not agree with you has some fundamental problem that prevents them from doing so.  "People reject Christianity/religion of choice because Deity X wills it" is a manifestation of that, and something many believers (and non-believers, in their own way) use as an explanation for the fact that other belief systems exist and are defended as passionately as their own.

Are you using the term "you" specifically in regards to me specifically as if this is the point of view I hold and am arguing, because I never said it was what I believe.  But, however distasteful it seems due to it's removal of human freewill and reasoning the doctrine of God's election has been around nearly since man himself and can't be discounted as a legitimate point of view when pondering why some believe and some reject.

By "you" I meant individuals in general. 

[El JoNNo]

As I have said before the more humans understand the more <insert god here> recedes and is not needed. I wonder how the Christian religion will change if we ever discover another universe out side our own or if we find out we are one of many planes/membranes of existence.

[7StringedBeast]

As I have said before the more humans understand the more <insert god here> recedes and is not needed. I wonder how the Christian religion will change if we ever discover another universe out side our own or if we find out we are one of many planes/membranes of existence.

They would just say that god created that too.  That's the thing with God, it's unprovable and anything goes.

[73109]

^^^ That is the issue. No matter what happens, it can be pointed to god. I mean, I guess I can say I understand the argument that god created the earth 6,000 years ago, but the rocks were made to look as though they were 4.5 billion years old, really? Like, seriously?

[William Wallace]

Theologically speaking, if you read Romans Paul would suggest that some people do not follow God/Christ because God has not elected them to do so.  I'll let you you guys chew on that one for a while.

Utter nonsense.

[El JoNNo]

As I have said before the more humans understand the more <insert god here> recedes and is not needed. I wonder how the Christian religion will change if we ever discover another universe out side our own or if we find out we are one of many planes/membranes of existence.

They would just say that god created that too.  That's the thing with God, it's unprovable and anything goes.

Oh I know, they have been moving the bar since the idea was made up.

^^^ That is the issue. No matter what happens, it can be pointed to god. I mean, I guess I can say I understand the argument that god created the earth 6,000 years ago, but the rocks were made to look as though they were 4.5 billion years old, really? Like, seriously?

And the devil plants dinosaur bones 

Theologically speaking, if you read Romans Paul would suggest that some people do not follow God/Christ because God has not elected them to do so.  I'll let you you guys chew on that one for a while.

Utter nonsense.

I believe he may be referring to Romans 8:29. Which I don't think is what he is making it out to be if that is what he is talking about. Romans merely implies that God knows who will be saved not that he chooses. Although not much difference when your omnipotent, in many cases indifference is choosing. Many if shown that God exists will become believers and saved; if God is truly omnipotent he would know this. By doing nothing he is choosing his follower. Nice guy, especially since immortal souls are on the line.

[orcus116]

I'd feel bad for God then because the ones that always claim to be the "true believers" are usually some of the worst examples of human beings.

[reo73]

I'd feel bad for God then because the ones that always claim to be the "true believers" are usually some of the worst examples of human beings.

Really? And you have examples to back up that statement that uses the word "usually".

[reo73]

Theologically speaking, if you read Romans Paul would suggest that some people do not follow God/Christ because God has not elected them to do so.  I'll let you you guys chew on that one for a while.

Utter nonsense.

How so?

[millahh]

I'd feel bad for God then because the ones that always claim to be the "true believers" are usually some of the worst examples of human beings.

Really? And you have examples to back up that statement that uses the word "usually".

Fundamentalists, regardless of the particular religion?

[ack44]

Theologically speaking, if you read Romans Paul would suggest that some people do not follow God/Christ because God has not elected them to do so.  I'll let you you guys chew on that one for a while.

Thats pretty much the logical conclusion of having an omnipotent god. The believer is set for eternal life only because he happened to be chosen, pure luck.

[reo73]

I believe he may be referring to Romans 8:29. Which I don't think is what he is making it out to be if that is what he is talking about. Romans merely implies that God knows who will be saved not that he chooses. Although not much difference when your omnipotent, in many cases indifference is choosing. Many if shown that God exists will become believers and saved; if God is truly omnipotent he would know this. By doing nothing he is choosing his follower. Nice guy, especially since immortal souls are on the line.

Yes, Romans 8:29...also Ephesians 1:4-5, John 15:16, John 6:44, Acts 13:48 and Romans 9:15-16 and various other places in the Old and New Testament.  The Doctrine of Election or Predestination is most concisely defined by John Calvin and is not totally in opposition to freewill.  What it says is that man is broken (sinful) and given freewill will always choose sin (depravity of man).  Therefore it takes the act of God and God's choosing to pull him out of this state where man will choose God over himself.  Calvin's view also includes the "horrible decree" (this is what Calvin named it) that God chooses this for some and not for others.

[William Wallace]

I believe he may be referring to Romans 8:29. Which I don't think is what he is making it out to be if that is what he is talking about. Romans merely implies that God knows who will be saved not that he chooses. Although not much difference when your omnipotent, in many cases indifference is choosing. Many if shown that God exists will become believers and saved; if God is truly omnipotent he would know this. By doing nothing he is choosing his follower. Nice guy, especially since immortal souls are on the line.

This is a different subject, but I don't think anybody dies without an opportunity to be saved. In that case, indifference(not the word I'd use) is not choosing.

As I have said before the more humans understand the more <insert god here> recedes and is not needed. I wonder how the Christian religion will change if we ever discover another universe out side our own or if we find out we are one of many planes/membranes of existence.

They would just say that god created that too.  That's the thing with God, it's unprovable and anything goes.

Who are "they"? And why would "they" say that? I'm a Christian and wouldn't say that. And, no, not everything goes. In this case, there is a text that we can study to see if it provides accurate information. If it doesn't, fine. But it's incorrect to say that the goal post is always moving.

[Perpetual Change]

If there is a heaven, I'd say God probably gives good people one last chance after they're dead. I'd imagine the conversation God has with the souls of well-meaning agnostics and atheists goes something like this:

God: Hey.
Deadguy: God? Is that you.
God: Yes, it's me. Do you believe in me now?
D: I, uh, am I dreaming?
God: No. Do you believe in me now?
D: Well, uh, how do I know I'm not--
God: Listen. You've lived a decent life. You've helped others and made genuine attempts to make the world a better place. You fell short sometimes, but you always tried your hardest to live up to the standards you'd set for yourself. Because of that, I'm willing to you in, even though you spent most of your life ignoring and/or denying me. But here's the thing-- you've got to believe in me and in the place where you're currently at. We have all of eternity ahead of us, and we are not spending that time on existentialism.

[Bombardana]

If there is a heaven, I'd say God probably gives good people one last chance after they're dead. I'd imagine the conversation God has with the souls of well-meaning agnostics and atheists goes something like this:

God: Hey.
Deadguy: God? Is that you.
God: Yes, it's me. Do you believe in me now?
D: I, uh, am I dreaming?
God: No. Do you believe in me now?
D: Well, uh, how do I know I'm not--
God: Listen. You've lived a decent life. You've helped others and made genuine attempts to make the world a better place. You fell short sometimes, but you always tried your hardest to live up to the standards you'd set for yourself. Because of that, I'm willing to you in, even though you spent most of your life ignoring and/or denying me. But here's the thing-- you've got to believe in me and in the place where you're currently at. We have all of eternity ahead of us, and we are not spending that time on existentialism.

 

[rumborak]

This is a different subject, but I don't think anybody dies without an opportunity to be saved. In that case, indifference(not the word I'd use) is not choosing.

Jeez, could you bend the thing even further

I have a hard time imagining that a Yanomamo living in the 17th century getting much "chance" to be saved. How can you be saved when you never heard of Jesus?

The question is rather, why doesn't Jesus present himself to everybody in their lifetimes to have a chance of being saved? Seems Jesus relies on cultural promulgation, and thus doesn't care too much for the "collateral damage" of people who never hear of him.

WW, that kind of thinking is yet another reason to reject religion. The forced insertion of weird ideas to make reality work in the framework of religion.

rumborak

[El JoNNo]

Hey! The post moved again.

[rumborak]

There's maaaaaaannnny reasons to reject religion. Pointing out another one is just a natural consequence of this thread.

rumborak

[Ħ]

This is a different subject, but I don't think anybody dies without an opportunity to be saved. In that case, indifference(not the word I'd use) is not choosing.

Jeez, could you bend the thing even further

I have a hard time imagining that a Yanomamo living in the 17th century getting much "chance" to be saved. How can you be saved when you never heard of Jesus?

The question is rather, why doesn't Jesus present himself to everybody in their lifetimes to have a chance of being saved? Seems Jesus relies on cultural promulgation, and thus doesn't care too much for the "collateral damage" of people who never hear of him.

WW, that kind of thinking is yet another reason to reject religion. The forced insertion of weird ideas to make reality work in the framework of religion.

rumborak

Actually, I would say that Christianity is able to relate to all people of all cultures.  Cultural integration, not promulgation.

[rumborak]

That's not my point. WW says everybody gets a chance to be saved in their lives, my point is, how can you be saved as a 10th century pre-Columbus Amerindian? There is no possible way to hear of the way for salvation, and clearly Jesus doesn't care enough to enable you to be saved.
And my further point is that it's exactly these moral contortions Christians do that creep me out about them at times. I'll have none of that, thank you very much.

rumborak

[j]

This is a different subject, but I don't think anybody dies without an opportunity to be saved. In that case, indifference(not the word I'd use) is not choosing.

This is completely ridiculous.

-J

[7StringedBeast]

One thing that bothers me about people who like to push their religion on others, is when they say its all a part of God's plan.  If there is a God, he has no master plan.  What people don't realize is that God's plan is always done in reaction to something.  So the God's plan these people speak of, is just hindsight.  It's hypocritical as well, because people who try to push their religion on others, don't agree that it's in God's plan for some people not to be religious.  It's not part of God's plan for people to have abortions or be gay.  It's so pick and choose of what everyone believes God's plan is.  It's either all or nothing.  I choose nothing.

[William Wallace]

This is a different subject, but I don't think anybody dies without an opportunity to be saved. In that case, indifference(not the word I'd use) is not choosing.

Jeez, could you bend the thing even further

I have a hard time imagining that a Yanomamo living in the 17th century getting much "chance" to be saved. How can you be saved when you never heard of Jesus?

The question is rather, why doesn't Jesus present himself to everybody in their lifetimes to have a chance of being saved? Seems Jesus relies on cultural promulgation, and thus doesn't care too much for the "collateral damage" of people who never hear of him.

WW, that kind of thinking is yet another reason to reject religion. The forced insertion of weird ideas to make reality work in the framework of religion.

rumborak

It's your preconceptions about Christianity, not Christianity itself, that create the need to bend reality. If God truly cares about us, wouldn't it make sense that people would at least be granted the opportunity to find the truth?

[rumborak]

Of course it would. But, tell me then how the 17th-century Yanomamo could be saved had they only chosen? How do you learn about a 1st-century Palestinian when nobody has made it to the New World yet?
(please don't tell me they all had dreams about it and all chose to reject it. Or something)

rumborak

[reo73]

Of course it would. But, tell me then how the 17th-century Yanomamo could be saved had they only chosen? How do you learn about a 1st-century Palestinian when nobody has made it to the New World yet?
(please don't tell me they all had dreams about it and all chose to reject it. Or something)

rumborak

It's the difference between God's General Revelation and his Special Revelation.  All people regardless of place in history, origin, or culture live under his General Revelation and there are means for Salvation by General Revelation.  Only those who have been given the "Word" are able to reject his Special Revelation.

[orcus116]

Well that's convenient.

[El JoNNo]

There's maaaaaaannnny reasons to reject religion. Pointing out another one is just a natural consequence of this thread.

rumborak

Oh I was agreeing with you. I was merely refering back to what I said about the religious moving the goal post.

It's your preconceptions about Christianity, not Christianity itself, that create the need to bend reality. If God truly cares about us, wouldn't it make sense that people would at least be granted the opportunity to find the truth?

Why would this God make anyone find truth? This is one of the most ridiculous things about religion, faith. Why isn't this god present for all to see.  The  requirement of faith is more akin to a mentally ill person toying with with it's pets.

[reo73]

Well that's convenient.

Explain?