Yes, was raised Catholic and was very religious in my youth. It was actually because I was so religious that I eventually lost my faith because I looked into everything so deeply and read the bible cover to cover.
Never, never had an inkling to be, even though I had to go to Sunday school.
Yes, I was raised by a religious maniac mother and so totally indoctrinated that when I found fault with one Christian denomination I went looking for another (the true one) time and time again.
It finally took getting involved on and off with the LDS and for a (long) time being a TBM before I finally realised it was all the same shit in different wrapping paper.
Sometimes you have to hit rock bottom before you can begin to climb back out.
I am just as religious as ever, though I disagree with the basic tenets of Christianity and don’t believe in the god of the Bible.
For me, religion is not about believing this or that thing. To be religious is to be aware of the staggering implications of the mystery of reality—to live in deep awareness and appreciation. Remember that Einstein described himself as religious, even though he was an atheist with respect to an intervening god.
If I express awe for Ultimate Reality or universal consciousness, and you say that you believe in a nature capable of creating itself, what is the difference? Both are beyond our ability to understand.
The trouble with arguing over beliefs is that such arguing diverts the mind from our stark, electrifying, magnificent existence. In an ultimate sense, no one has the answer anyway.
"to be aware of the staggering implications of the mystery of reality"
Yes we have something for that, it is called science, why dress it up in mumbo jumbo?
@LenHazell53 Science is about objective truth or understanding. Science has nothing to say about our subjective values. Science does not tell us why things are as they are. Science is superficial.
@LenHazell53, @Alone
“Try and penetrate with our limited means the secrets of nature and you will find that, behind all the discernible concatenations, there remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion. To that extent I am, in point of fact, religious.” Albert Einstein
@Alone The concept of religion is a modern Western construct and its definition is by no means settled or universally accepted. This Wikipedia article goes into the subject in great detail:
@WilliamFleming "Science does not tell us why things are as they are." But that's literally what science does, once a scientific theory has been established (which is a different definition of 'theory' than the layman's term). Science actually seeks to disprove, and only once all other possibilities are eliminated through research, repeated tests from other scientists, etc. is a theory formed. Religion, on the other hand, starts from the desired end result and works backwards, filling in the blanks without evidence or proof.
@Kat I respectfully disagree. Science makes observations of objective reality and creates mathematical models that mirror those observations. Science is good at describing WHAT happens, but is silent on WHY.
The late Richard Feynman said it well in the introduction to his “QED”, a book describing probabilities for various photon paths. He said not to ask why—no one knows why and they might never know why. If students ask why they are told to shut up and compute.
Religion, on the other hand starts only with subjective experience, and promotes awareness and appreciation for life with all its mysteries. Religion is not a system of beliefs about nature. Religion is about ourselves.
Whenever religious organizations require belief in a set of dogmatic doctrines they fail to uphold the true spirit of religion.
@WilliamFleming I agree to a point. Yes, science makes observations, but that is not proof. That's merely a hypothesis that must be tested over and over again by different scientists, as I mentioned above. And sometimes, when a theory is established, the question of why is indeed answered. Take evolution, for example. We do indeed know why organisms evolve; it's an adaptation in order to survive and pass on genes so the next generations survive, and the cycle is repeated. So making a blanket statement that science cannot answer why is incorrect, imho. It might not provide feel-good fuzzies or justification for emotions, but that doesn't mean the why hasn't been answered. Or maybe I'm interpreting what you're saying all wrong, idk?
@Kat I was wrong to make a blanket statement that science does not answer “why?”. Obviously science explains why some things happen. “Why does it rain?” “Why does winter come?” etc. Science is a very valuable human endeavor, and I in no way intended to disparage science.
On the other hand, the explanations offered by science are inherently superficial. As an example, that often mentioned scientific discovery that the earth orbits the sun rather than the other way around gave many people a puffed up sense of knowing and understanding just about everything.
That planetary model is just that—a model useful for many purposes, but it is no answer to the deeper questions of why. The model depends on gravity. Why do masses attract? The planets are said to orbit in space—what is space? What is motion? Motion depends on time but no one seems to understand time, and quantum gravity theory has it that time doesn’t exist. For that matter, what are these massive objects that are said to orbit the sun. A particle of matter is said to exist only as a cloud of probabilities until it is observed, upon which it “collapses” into a “thing” with a particular location.
The upshot is that humans don’t know the meaning of the word “exist”. All our experiences are framed by conscious awareness, and we don’t understand what that is or how it arises. By corollary we don’t even know what we ourselves are. The most reasonable response to reality IMO is a sense of abject ignorance and bewilderment.
Yet there is a dazzling light beyond the horizon. There is SOMETHING of immense value to this reality experience of ours. We can’t see it directly or understand it with our matter/space/time model, but there is an ultimate reality, electrifying and staggering in its implications.
i had what i call my religious year, which is an inaccurate description but it's short anyway. i was raised in a secular jewish household, and while we had a strong cultural identity and celebrated the major holidays, we never even mentioned the minor ones, nor talked about religion; i never even knew if my folks believed in god until i was an adult and had moved away from home and someone asked me. (i didn't know the answer so i called them long distance to ask them, and they were annoyed that i paid for a long-distance call for such a silly question!) so when i was 14 i decided i wanted to go to shul every friday night and take bible study classes on sundays. there wasn't even a real synagogue in my city; shul was just an ordinary house with two kitchens. it was pretty cool and i liked the rabbi, who, if i recall, was young. i found the other people my age kind of... i don't know, weird in some way. i didn't really relate to them. i didn't think anything of that; i didn't relate to many people my own age, jewish or otherwise. bible class i LOVED! i don't know if a christian could imagine this, but bible class wasn't about brainwashing or even convincing anyone of anything. it was like studying law, but law for the iron age. the case i remember best, and barely remember at that, was that of the two travelers on the narrow mountain pass. one was on foot and one had a donkey and a cart. the issue was which one should pass on the outside and which on the inside (nope, i don't remember the answer, or the reasons why, but they were deeply considered reasons). it wasn't a parable; it didn't represent anything except how to use logic and kindness together to figure out how to treat each other as human beings. but after a year of this i realized that i didn't want to hang out with the other people at the shul. then i began to examine everything my folks had ever told me (they hadn't told me any of what i'd learned over the past year; there was a different trigger, nothing to do with religion, that made me do this reexamination) and came to the conclusion that there was no god. that was the end of my religious year. that's all there ever was.
by the way, i go to shul when i am well enough, on the high holidays and some other times, not often, sometimes not for years, sometimes a couple times in the same year. i enjoy it. i feel no pressure, i just take the "god" parts as figurative, and i enjoy the sermons a lot. (no fire and brimstone in shul! i remember one sermon about recycling!) maybe it's BECAUSE i rarely go. i like the music, too. i sure do like the food on break-the-fast! it's not an unpleasant place for an atheist.
g
Hell, I was a youth pastor for a bit. Kinda got encouraged to leave after I taught that doubt should be okay. Apparently, questioning the sky daddy is a big no-no for the Pentecostal types.
Yes, I was in a Pentecostal church once and walked out when the Pastor sent around the offertory with the words "I don't want to hear that bag chink, I want to hear it rustling.
As far back as I can remember until I was the age of 14. Then I started seeing things and understanding things that didn’t add up. It was later when I was 25 that I actually read the Bible cover to cover. Twice. I was not impressed. I could not believe my parents were trying to convince me to believe the content of its pages.
Was raised Catholic, always had my doubts. Used to stare at the crucifix and wonder who the hell would do that to their own son? I never understood confession...wouldn't an all knowing God know my sins and whether or not I was sorry for them? So many questions!
Not to the point at which I had any difficulty breaking away; I was nominally Anglican... I think until the next census, I still technically am... but I never had anything beyond a casual belief in it all. It was only when I started to engage with the American evangelical wing that I began to care.