How Do People Find Religion

Why do you believe what you're reading is true when time and time again institutions have been shown to be lying?

 

I think it's on aisle 11, right next to the bleach.

 

There's alot to know and alot of paths to answers.

I don't mind being exposed to as much of it as I can, still maintaining my sanity, of course.

 

IED under a Humvee ..

 

For most, it's easier to follow what you were brought up to believe, rather than to seek the truth.

 

Well for starters: It's not primarily about what one is reading but what one is believing. Finding religion seems to start with becoming aware of spirituality. Unless a person is born into a religion, but I suppose they did not look for and find religion themselves that way.

 

For the happy few 'follow what you were brought up to believe' and 'seeking (and embracing) the truth' might coincide.

 

Phone book?

 

That's a nice happy thought. Like true love!

 

To me it is not that nice that it is only for the happy few. But as long as I am included I guess I can agree with that statement (although I am not actively looking to 'find religion', at least not one to follow and limit myself to. I like to find the good stuff in all of them )

 

I'd like to meet one. I've been looking for sixty years, and the more I learn, the more B.S. I find. You know Melchizedek?

 

Have you perhaps been looking to find out that B.S.? Just because the bible 'says' this and that does not mean it has always been interpreted differently. We can all acknowledge that the historical parts are, as always, influenced by the side and mind of the writer(s). It does not have to be an issue when we are looking for the spiritual lessons in that book. Religion however, is always much more than just the most holy book of it. Especially over time. Also does not HAVE to be an issue. If we are looking for B.S. and contradictions mainly to discredit that religion or set of spiritual beliefs then you will find it. We simply need to have that urge and an opposite belief (it will make it really hard to gain understanding for those sincere religious followers. Beam in the eye etc.)

 

Ruins of Khambhat...
http://www.crystalinks.com/khambhat_dwarka.html

The Anunnaki...
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sumer_anunnaki/anunnaki/anu_22.htm

Lilith the first wife of Adam...
http://witcombe.sbc.edu/eve-women/7evelilith.html

Mahabarata Hindu record
http://www.ishafoundation.org/blog/yoga-meditation/history-of-yoga/mahabharata-stories-krishna-stories-short/

Gobeklitepe
http://gobeklitepe.info/

Baalbek
http://www.ancient.eu/Baalbek/

Nazca lines
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazca_Lines

And please try to explain this one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumapunku

This is just a little of what I'm talking about

 

It's a fun exercise to grant the events of any holy book as true. Even then, it takes nothing more than a morally sound teenager to point out the fact that when it comes to being a good/honest human being, religious folk can produce no more than an empty sack when asked to address the following point "name one terrible act that could only be committed by a non-believer that couldn't be committed by a religious person..." (I'm still waiting for a response that isn't piss-poor) Not surprisingly, there is almost no one who cannot name at least one act that could only have been committed by a person of faith.

 

I started a similar thread a while back after a couple of my friends who were never religious at all suddenly converted to Christianity.

the best I can come up with, at least in the case of my two friends, is that they were both somewhat lost and unhappy souls and had a void to fill.

I can understand it to a certain extent. I was raised as a Christian and sometimes I really miss the act of praying and believing there was a higher power who could help me find peace. I understand the need for peace but I dont really understand the ability to adjust your entire belief system in order to find it.

 

I find it interesting, that scientists are now looking for the "God gene". They think that only those that have it believe in God.

 

Are you saying that is the most important lesson you found in their holy book? That they are supposed to be so much better than you that they cannot commit 'sins' or criminal acts anymore or something? Most religious folks I know do not believe such things in the first place. The point you are making and how you are asking it is seems for a specific religious person only

I really don't understand that ability either....! But maybe if a person didn't have (strong or specified) spiritual beliefs in the first place it is easier to do so. I understand of course WHY I don't have that ability: because I have already some strong beliefs myself. You can't adjust everything if you already have some deep and sincere beliefs that would conflict with that. I think one of the issues many atheists and/or antitheists have with christians and situations like these is that it is thought that a christian has to do such a thing as adjust their entire personal belief system in order to become a proper christian. But that too seems a myth for many christians in reality

I was raised as a christian too btw, but I don't miss anything as I simply don't feel I lost anything. I in the end subconsciously replaced praying to a personification of good/creation with something that suits me more. Just because the higher power appeared not to be that abrahamic God (not in the literal sense at least) or Jesus does not mean it can't help me find peace. Even if it would turn out I found peace mainly myself I still like to thank God too. That's just me of course :-D

 

No, the most important lesson I've taken from contrasting religious texts is that mutual inconsistencies/incompatibilities are prevalent from the very get go. I.E; Heaven hates ham.

The question part of my post can be taken anyway the reader likes, that is the point. Typically, the approach is called out for being a trap to infer that all religious people exude a "holier than thou" attitude (I know yours was a joke), however, it puzzles me as to why it is so common for some on the other side of the question mark to recite an almost word for word "original thought" in my direction without even taking a shot at answering the question.

 

In order to answer that question with certainty we would of course need to know the exact opposite belief And why the institution views it as not true. Well that could just be helpful in order to determine who's right