Why I believe in God. Why I don't believe in God.

by The Rebel 24 Replies latest jw friends

  • The Rebel
    The Rebel

    Hi I am delighted to be apart of the community.

    having left the witnesses one of my first challenges was my believe in God. Naturally.

    i have concluded that I am alive and conscious. Now my intuition tells me God exists, but my analytical thinking tells me God does not exist. So maybe God is alive in my heart but no longer in my head.

    My questions are therefore :-

    a) now we have left the Witness community, and are hopfully developing critical thinking skills, how has this effected your beliefs in God?

    b) ido you think it wrong to dismiss intuition over analytical thinking? ( or vice versa)

  • freemindfade
    freemindfade

    When you embrace the facts and live accordingly it's awesome.

    Good not god.

    Just settle in the what we know so far about our natural world and what we keep learning. When we credit the unknown with "God" we are putting blinders on. Embrace the unknown about our world and ourselves and start really learning about who and what we are and be excited the more we replace "god" with real understanding.

  • bemused
    bemused

    Hi Rebel. I was never a Witness but I was brought up as a Christian (Catholic). I left that faith because I didn't believe in a god anymore. This is fairly typical of ex-Catholics but it seems that many Witnesses leave their religion but, initially at least, remain as Christians.

    I agree with freemindfade that it's key to accept that humans don't know everything, but are learning more and more. Don't be tempted to attribute things we don't understand yet to god.

    Regarding intuition - our sun is one star in a galaxy of at least 100 billion stars. The total number of galaxies has been estimated as up to 10 trillion. How likely is it that any god would take a personal interest in our lives? My intuition says very, very unlikely.

  • The Rebel
    The Rebel

    Thanks Freeminds and bemused...now I will talk silly. But I believe my beliefs belong to:-

    a) me

    b) my sister

    c) my brother

    d) my son

    e) my wife

    f) my granny

    g) my grandad

    h) MY DOG

    my point being, all these people I love have opinions that belong to them. Statistics tells me intuition may win. Is that not humble critical thinking?

  • StrongHaiku
    StrongHaiku

    The Rebel - Now my intuition tells me God exists, but my analytical thinking tells me God does not exist. So maybe God is alive in my heart but no longer in my head.

    What does your intuition tell you about the Loch Ness Monster? Big Foot? Fairies? The Chupacabra? Zeus? UFOs? etc.

    Intuition gets us through life pretty well on a day-to-day basis and so we learn to trust it. The problem is that it does such a good job in most cases that we get overconfident on its value. This is why we have a scientific method to test out the validity of intuitions. If your intuition is that "God is alive in my heart" (or any other belief your intuition tells you to be true), and you want to be a good critical thinker, then the next step is to develop some demonstrable evidence that can help you determine if you are right or wrong.

    The Rebel - b) ido you think it wrong to dismiss intuition over analytical thinking? ( or vice versa)

    I think this is somewhat of a false dichotomy. Both intuition and analytical thinking can be useful. Intuition can often be the beginning of great ideas. However, beliefs based purely on intuition have been (and continue to be) debunked. For example, the idea that the earth was flat, that the sun and planets orbited around it, that it was only thousands of years old, etc. was built out of intuition. People then began doing actual experiments that contradicted those intuitions.

    The problem is that we often rely on our own intuition and take it as fact without doing any homework. Intuition can be useful as a first step in asking question or developing a hypothesis. But if you want to be a good critical thinking (and intellectually honest) you then need to test it agains demonstrable evidence. And, more importantly you have to go where the evidence leads you and not the other way around.

  • millie210
    millie210

    Hi the Rebel,

    There are many viewpoints here. I would say as many as there are eyebrows!

    I picked eyebrows (instead of the usual belly buttons) because I think each of us at some point in this journey reached a point where we held more than one opinion.

    It is human nature to rush in to a nice tight well structured view point. It is because we feel more secure then.

    But free falling is not all bad so dont rush, the worst is over, the journey has begun.

  • CalebInFloroda
    CalebInFloroda

    a) Now we have left the Witness community, and are hop[e]fully developing critical thinking skills, how has this effected your beliefs in God?

    Mentally and/or emotionally acknowledging the existence of G-d is neither logical nor efficacious. If G-d exists then it stands to reason that more of a response than mere acknowledgment that there is a G-d is called for.

    An orphan doesn’t benefit much from acknowledging they have parents they have never met. The orphan can “believe” in the existence of their parents and have “faith” they are out there, but this does little to change the status of an orphan. What would actually matter is if the orphan did something about the possibility of their parents still be out there and able to be contacted. An orphan who goes out and finds their parents changes their status from being an orphan. But if upon locating where their parents can be found, the orphan desires not to meeting them but merely have faith in their existence then nothing has changed.

    To disbelieve in G-d is pretty much the same thing. It means nothing to disbelieve in that which doesn’t exist. I don’t believe in the boogey man, but that is easy to say and do because there is no such thing as “the boogey man.” Saying that you don’t believe in a G-d that you also believe is fiction is like saying you don’t believe that Scarlett O’Hara was ever a real person. Scarlett O’Hara was never, ever a real person, so it does little to claim a disbelief in someone that was never ever there to believe in to begin with.

    What rarely if ever gets discussed is disbelieving in a G-d one knows is there. What also gets talked about rarely is how one can disbelieve in something that doesn’t exist since it has to exist on some level in order to be rejected. And there’s also the subject of why “belief” in things or the lack of “belief” has any bearing on their existence.

    That being said…

    b) Do you think it wrong to dismiss intuition over analytical thinking?

    I cannot see the value of my intuition as it was my “gut feelings” that got my caught up with the Jehovah’s Witnesses in the first place. I was one of those who claimed to have found a “ring of truth” in their teachings—and it does seem to have that if you don’t know any better. I was just a teenager at the time, anyway.

    But I also know that you can’t go through life being analytical about everything. I can attest to the truth behind the illustration of the lover who demands proof of your love for them. When they ask “do you love me?” you won’t get far in proving to them that you do if you only offer analytical evidence. A scientific report offered to your sweetheart won’t get you that romantic evening you were hoping for in such a situation.

    The whole G-d concept is like that. It isn’t about being scientific. But one cannot approach it honestly without using reason and critical thinking. It’s a holistic sort of thing.

    I think Christianity and the Western world and society that came from it has convinced too many people that the G-d concept is an “either/or” scenario. You “either” believe in G-d and leave behind all reason “or” you dismiss G-d because when you accept reason and likewise dismiss everything else it means to be human, like using intuition.

    Sorry, but my “either/or” days of living a life of ambiguity intolerance and compartmentalization are over. That is the JW way of doing things.

    Life has to be accepted and lived and embraced on its own terms. That means you can’t let preconceived ideas interfere with your “tasting things for yourself.”

    Accepting G-d does not mean rejecting analytical thinking. Just ask the Roman Catholic priest that developed and introduced the big bang theory, Georges Lemaître. Do you know how many atheists I’ve spoken to who have no idea that a theist developed this now widely embraced theory?

    And rejecting G-d does not mean that one rejects spirituality or the transcendent. Many non-theists employ various approaches to life which can be described as spiritual. Some religions like Buddhism and Judaism even allow for adherents to be atheist. The idea that atheists somehow stop being as human as the rest of society or give up culture or ritual is totally absurd.

    It’s all about balance.

  • Heaven
    Heaven

    TheRebel... begin by looking at what you base your belief on. Does it hold up to scrutiny? You are in for some major sifting work.

    How have you reconciled with the issue of theodicy?

  • StrongHaiku
    StrongHaiku

    CalebInFlorida - Accepting G-d does not mean rejecting analytical thinking.

    I would agree. Accepting God does not mean rejecting analytical thinking completely. However, what it does say is that one can be a strong analytical thinker in one topic (e.g. cosmology, biology, etc.) but not use analytical thinking on pet beliefs. In other words, we can be really smart in some areas and really dumb in others and that does not make us entirely smart or dumb.

    CalebInFlorida - Just ask the Roman Catholic priest that developed and introduced the big bang theory, Georges Lemaître. Do you know how many atheists I’ve spoken to who have no idea that a theist developed this now widely embraced theory?

    Sure. It is possible to use analytical thinking to develop a demonstrable and testable hypothesis in one area and still be wrong (and illogical) in another area or discipline. The idea of the big bang originated with a theist, but it did not graduate to a scientific theory until we had evidence. There are a number of theists who have developed (and continue develop) very useful hypothesis and theories in various disciplines of science. However, I have yet to see one of them develop a testable hypothesis on the existence of God with the same rigor and analytical thinking (backed with evidence) as they develop other hypothesis and theories.

  • DJS
    DJS

    The Rebel,

    Take your time. Becoming an atheist was a decades long process for me, including when I was a Dub. There isn't any hurry. What I would tell you is important to do as soon as possible is to begin making your mind over so that you become as much of an empiricist as your personality will allow.

    Intuition has its place. It is also wrong a lot of times. No one ever brags about how their intuition was wrong; we only hear the successes. Rely on empirical data and develop an evidence based mindset for your decisions and you will almost certainly fare better in life. And, perhaps more importantly, you won't waste so much time and energy in useless emotional endeavors such as religion, god, what's up with girls, you know - those things which are impossible to actually understand.

    Good luck.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit