Back to the Homepage
A Critical View of Traditional Religious Beliefs and New Age Beliefs:
WARNING: The main purpose
of this web page is to help you walk away from your religion
-- to
provide some reasonable justification and some confidence for those of you who are
in the process of walking away from your traditional religious belief system -- to possibly give you a little
head start by using some of the "spade work" that I have done. -- this may save you some effort and
time.
If you find this unsettling you may want to avoid this site.
If you are not in this process, viewing this website is probably a waste
of your time.
See Why this page.
(A) First, a comment on Freedom of Belief Systems: , a comment on Freedom of Belief Systems:
A greater variety of belief systems in a society tends to guarantee greater
freedom of religion, and freedom from religion for everyone. As
long as a
given belief system is not imposed on others, but freely accepted by them;
and people with that belief system are allowed to practice and promote it
without harming the freedom of others; and people outside of the belief
system are allowed to freely criticize it so that all can judge
the merits of
the system for themselves; then we have a healthy society.
(B) Now, to apply this freedom
to present a belief system and to criticize
other belief systems. Introduction and 16 items:
Since our society is dominated by the
various Christian belief systems and that 2,100,000,000 people in the world (over
30%, the largest religious grouping -- Islam has 1,300,000,000 adherents or over
than 19% -- Hindus have 900,000,000 adherents (over 13%) -- 750,000,000 Atheists
or nonbelievers (over 11%)) claim to be Christians, these are the belief systems that are emphasized in
this web site. However most of what is said applies also to all other
organized religions.
If you are so inclined: The good news is that there is nothing complicated in
personally, privately talking with your
personal God, in emotionally and intellectually admiring the
universe;
or even simply believing in the continuance of existence after death;
and in being humane. You don't need organized religion for this.
The tendency to complicate beliefs:
-- results in systems of theology that require
a clergy (religious experts) to interpret, to explain, and to debate "THE TRUTH"
for believers
-- this results in the necessity of churches, temples mosques,
synagogues, etc. to allow people to meet and listen to these religious experts;
also to help protect and bolster the belief system
-- results in more and more lavish ritual
and procedures to hold the believers in the system
-- all this requires financing,
which is a major factor in organized religious systems. Maintenance of the
power structure
of the religious institution and job security for the
clergy have priority.
-- all this results in loss of freedom of individual thought, religion by proxy,
others as intercessors to God, a person's belief system depends on others
therefore making that person vulnerable to these others, and other evils.
Why is all this necessary? Why not stick to the basics? You do not need
organized religion for socializing -- nowadays there are many other ways
of doing that.
Instead of contributing time and money to a
religious organization
you are free to personally give this time and money directly to help people that
are in need -- the poor, the disadvantaged, the sick, the handicapped,
the distraught, the weak, or to anyone of your choice (provided they are not
unwillingly imposed upon). Or, save the money for
your own future happiness. Or, both.
Surveys show that churches spend
5% or less of their donated income on charitable activities.
Some other thoughts of Organized Religion
Is there a Judeo-Christian heritage?
"The wisest people follow their own direction
And listen to no prophet guiding them.
None but the fools believe in oracles,
Forsaking their own judgment. Those who know,
Know that such people can only come to grief."
-- Euripides,
Iphigenia in Tauris, 480 BCE to 406 BCE
Further explanations:
| Pascal's Wager - The risk of NOT believing [e-mail response] |
| Religion is personal |
| God Belief - the evidence |
| Very important is the Truth of reality. |
| Do you have a story to tell about Walking Away from a traditional or other new age religion or cult? |
| Christian Issues |
| Islam Issues |
| A CANADIAN OBJECTION TO SHARIA UNDER THE ARBITRATION ACT |
| Multiculturalism in Canada |
| Islam E-mail |
| Is Religion Needed to Control Society? |
| "Leaving the Fold, A Guide for Former Fundamentalists and Others Leaving Their Religion" by Marlene Winell. An excellent book I would recommend for anyone in the process of walking away or have walked away in the past -- the effects of their former religion often linger. She spends most of the book on helping in the very important issues of emotional and psychological aspects of walking away. |
As Karen Armstrong, a former British Nun, says, Religious Literature such as the Bible and the Koran are not to be taken literally or as descriptions of reality -- they are myth and legend that say something about people's thinking in the past and suggest ways people adapted to various circumstances in the past; and may point to ways people adapt to circumstances in the present. It must be remembered that people are very good at Story-telling, at Pattern-finding, at Personal relations sensing, and at imagining things.
Further explanations:
If you are in the process of leaving your religion I would strongly
encourage you
to read your Bible (or relevant "Holy" book) from beginning to end
without any associated commentary (including this one).
Read what it is actually saying.
This is the best way to find that it is really only a completely human
work
-- interesting book, but not divinely inspired.
By doing a continuous
read you will also read verses in context.
Context is very important, especially in the OT verses that the NT verses claim
to be prophetic.
In the case of the Bible it seems to me that a
believer checking the Hebrew, Greek of
so called earlier sources (there are no originals) says that you are
doubting God of the Bible's guidance of the translators of the many different
versions of the Bible. The translators, all had access to the same
Hebrew/Greek/earlier sources as you or anyone else has. The existence
of
many versions says that the earlier sources are just as controversial as
the
various present versions. This also applies in a similar way to the other
"Holy" books.
|
Beware of "red herring" issues such as
abortion, homosexuality, prayer in schools. These divert people from the real issues of religion. |
| What constitutes a "Holy" book? What are the Criteria?-- [e-mail response] |
| An excellent source of
Biblical Errancy articles (also the Books of Mormon and the Koran) by Dennis McKinsey |
| Some Bible Pages |
| Some Koran Pages |
| Some uplifting ethical verses in the Bible -- [e-mail response] |
| Bible -- What Must I do to be Saved? by Ingersoll. |
| An Analogy of someone persuading you to believe a 'Holy Book' |
| Some Reasons Why Humanists Reject the Bible |
| Jesus Facts |
| Likeness in the Bible |
From the evidence:
(5) Also, all rituals, all ceremonies, all procedures
and methods
of doing things are man-made, not supernaturally based. Concepts such as Karma
are man-made.
Essay "Circling
the Blanket for God". Pp.241-288.
This essay makes sense regarding religious ritual and superstitious
conditioning. It explains a lot of religious "phenomena" in
terms of human tendencies toward two disorders schizophrenia and OCD.
It seems we need some ritual in our lives. Many of the things we do daily
are rituals; not performing them makes us feel uneasy. Some rituals are
vital for our existence or happiness, others may be useless, but satisfying.
Our rituals may promote confidence in ourselves -- they are activities that we
usually feel we are good at doing; making them satisfying.
(6) Each religion
seems to promote the beautiful artistic expression of their religion. In Islam, Sikhism, and
Hinduism there have been top notch talent that produced beautiful poetry, art,
sculpture and music -- all inspired by their respective religion. In
addition to religious artistry, during the last 100 years or so, secular
artistry has become admired for its beauty. In my own culture much lovely music and poetry
has been produced by Christian artists in
the past - there was a lot of talent there.
However, no matter how great these artistic achievements are does not make these
religions true!
(7) The existence of
an external, universal God and the
existence of life in the hereafter cannot
be clearly proved or disproved, however widespread God
belief is evident.
which indicates that....
Some
questions for the Theist
There is no physical evidence of the continuation
of existence after death. Also, if there is an hereafter, no one knows
anything about it, including religious figures (and their books) --
they are only guessing.
Some thoughts related to part (7):
If it were possible to absolutely prove that a god of the universe exists, it would
still
be far from proving that this god is the god of the Bible, of the Koran, etc.
It could be Krishna - The Hindu god - The one Bhagavad-Gita claims answers all
prayers directed to any god,
including Jesus and Allah.
It could be one of the ancient gods that smart and good people used to
believe was real and sincerely worshipped, such as
Isis of ancient Egypt, or Baldr, the Norse god, or Zeus or Poseidon of ancient
Greece and Jupiter or Neptune of ancient Rome.
It could be one of the many thousands of gods in the past and present that
were/are thought as the true god.
Religious history shows that people are very good at making up gods and starting
religions.
It would be interesting to see what new gods will be imagined in the future when
the present gods of the great religions
fade away.
Also, It would still be far from proving the truth of any of the "Holy Books".
If there is existence after death, the fact that a person doesn't believe in it
or does believe in it makes no difference -- it will still be there. Just because
a person does not believe or a person does believe in life after death does not
somehow
condemn that person.
This is the only life we know we will live. It is up to you to make life
pleasant and fulfilling for yourself, your loved ones (e.g. family), neighbors,
community, country, and the world now.
"50 reasons people give for believing
in a god" by
Guy P. Harrison. A
must read for everyone. I would consider this book the best of the
decade. ISBN 978-1-59102-567-2
Click
here for table of Contents
Further explanations:
| Evidence about God and the supernatural |
| The Atheist's and Agnostic's position -- [e-mail response - The fool hath said in his heart, [There is] no God] |
| GOD |
| Probabilities |
| An excellent
book: "Can We Be
Good Without God? Behaviour, Belonging and the Need to Believe." by
Dr. Robert Buckman, 2000, Penguin Books of
Canada Ltd., ISBN 0-670-89222-X Don't be fooled! There are other books by the same title -- by other authors! |
| God Module and more God Mudule |
| A Review of Lee Strobel's book "The Case For a Creator" |
| If you must believe then -- Some Thoughts on Religious Belief |
| A Compassionate God. |
"We believe that the world is
knowable, that there are simple rules governing
the behavior of matter and the evolution of the universe. We affirm
that there are eternal,
objective, extrahistorical, social neutral, external and universal truths and
that the assemblage
of these truths is what we call physical science. Natural laws can be
discovered that are universal,
invariable, inviolate, genderless, and verifiable. They may be found by
men or by women or by
mixed collaborations of any proportions. Any intelligent alien anywhere
would have come upon
the same logical system as we have to explain the structure of protons and the
nature of supernovae."
by Sheldon Glashow in a mini-essay in the New York Times (Oct. 22, 1989)
"It is important to understand that, when
a theory becomes strongly confirmed
by repeated observations and experiments, it can move across a fuzzy boundary to
become
recognized by the entire scientific community as a fact. That planets go
around the sun was
once the Copernican theory. Today it is a fact. That material
objects are made of molecules
was once a conjecture. Indeed for may decades it was ridiculed by many
physicists and chemists.
Today it is a fact. In Darwin's day there was a theory of evolution.
Today, only ignorant
creationists refuse to call it a fact. It is also important to understand
that so-called
revolutions in science are not revolutions in the sense of overthrowing an
earlier theory.
They are benign refinements of earlier theories. Einstein didn't discard
Newtonian physics. He added qualifications to Newtonian physics."
by Martin Gardner in his book
"On the Wild Side" ISBN 0-97975-713-2
(9) Science (repeat from home page): The talk about the relationship between religion and science
is a sham. Science is a non-theistic (non-supernatural or atheistic) endeavor. It has been so successful
because it is one area of endeavor that assumes there is nothing beyond
the natural. Scientists, whatever their private beliefs, assume no supernatural realm
as it applies to their profession while they are practicing it. Outside of science
they may believe all kinds of things, for instance the existence of a
three-headed-God. They may take all kinds of leaps of faith outside
of their profession -- that is their business.
I agree that some famous scientists have and do use religious (supernatural)
terms to explain some exciting science. Because of the beauty of
scientific investigation and discovery it does evoke intense emotions
in many people including myself; and emotional words are used to express these.
When expressing these in public it is important not to mislead the public
in believing they are referring to anything but the natural.
At an international colloquium at the University of
Maastricht in 1999, Paul Kurtz
reported that a large survey showed that 60% of U.S. scientists do not believe
in a God, and 40% do believe in some God. The rate of belief was much less
when considering scientists at a higher academic level. This must be one
of the
most atheistic groups in the U.S.
Ask yourself:
How far would science develop if supernatural causes (e.g. God, gods, miracles,
holy ghost, evil spirits, heaven, hell, angels, long dead deities) were acceptable
in explaining processes? The death of science would follow soon thereafter.
Science also addresses the "should". Science provides values.
Example: Most people will see the value of taking medication for
epileptic seizures (offered by science) than to exorcise an evil
spirit (used by religious specialists, especially before the advent
of modern science). The discoveries of science promote
a "should" in the ethical and moral spheres.
In varying rates religious groups do evolve over time to accept certain
science and
secular ethics that were considered sinful and evil at one time. An example of
science is Darwinian Evolution.
This acceptance by a religion is usually conditional, partial and forced by circumstance,
never easily or voluntary.
Unlike religion, games, government, traffic rules, fashion of dress
which are made by humans,
the rules of science are not. They are discovered by observation, reason
and experiment.
Newton didn't invent the law of gravity.
Biologists didn't "construct" the DNA helix; they observed it.
The orbit of Mars is not a social construction.
Einstein didn't make up relativity. These are part of an objective
reality, not dependent on man.
| Scientists whose belief system requires the supernatural |
| An example of a changing religious belief system |
Principles that enhance life such as principles of compassion (to feel with),
love, self-giving, respect, honesty, responsibility, kindness,
knowledge, enjoyment of life, decreasing suffering, etc. are
Good principles, to be promoted, whereas
murder, stealing, hurting are usually evil.
Where these principles conflict you must
weigh the possible consequences and decide which ones take priority.
Selfishness is not an evil as such.
The vast majority of people are
innately "GOOD to others near them"
be they religious, freethinkers, agnostics, atheists or whatever. People's
basic humanity to others often is evident in spite of cumbersome religious
beliefs they may purport to hold.
About 1% of the population that are psychopaths I would consider likely "Evil to
others"
-- extreme examples are Stalin and Clifford Olson, the serial killer.
In groups the highest percentage number of psychopaths ( about 3.4%) are found
in religious leaders and corporation CEO's.
Generally in various degrees, people naturally need to be loving, caring and
supportive of others, and to be loved, cared about and supported by others.
Religion is not needed, may even be a hindrance to these human qualities.
The Golden Rule as presented in Confucianism is a good guide for all:
"Do not unto others that you would not have them do unto you"
(Analects, 15,23).
Similarly, in the Jewish tradition. Rabbi Hillel in 10
AD: "What is hateful to you, do not
to your fellowmen. That is the entire Law; all else is commentary."
(Talmud, Shabbat, 31a).
OR in Buddhism: "Hurt not others in ways that you
yourself would find hurtful". (Udana-Varga,5, 18)
OR in Hinduism: " Do naught unto others which cause you
pain if done to you". (Mahabharata, 5, 1517)
Possibly, with care, you could use "Do unto others as
you would have them do unto you" -- because the other
person may not like done to them what you like or want done to yourself.
Example: I love my wife of 47 years. She is a wonderful woman in more
than a million ways.
Our often life threatened, multiply-physically disabled daughter is wonderful --
she is
intelligent, has a very good disposition, good sense of justice and
fairness.
(I don't wish a disability for anyone, and it would be better if our daughter
did not
have hers. Thank scientists for pain killers.) We love, belong to and care for
each other (cat included).
The Golden Rule is even innate in other animals than humans. We have
inherited our morality
through evolution. It is part of our make-up.
Talking about good and evil related to morality: Three excellent books
concentrating (not Orangutan and Gorilla,
that are the other 2 Apes) on Chimpanzees, Bonobo, and humans are: By Frans
De Waal, a Dutch Primatologist:
(1) "Our Inner Ape" - a Leading Primatologist explains why we are who
we are.
(2) "The Age of Empathy" 2009
(3) "Primates and Philosophers, how morality evolved"
Reading these has given me a much better understanding of morality and how human
morality is well established
especially in Apes, but also in other animals. Morality has also evolved, as
Darwin (but not Huxley and many others) insisted.
An aside: Did you know the Bible never ever mentions the words "moral,
morality or ethics"?
"Good deeds, in the Bible, are almost always connected with heavenly
reward, "God's will", avoiding punishment or with
a missionary agenda. Most "Christian charity" is given to prove
the superiority of Christianity or to win converts,
not because human life is good, valuable and worthy of respect in its own
right." Dan Barker
| A Book: What Science has to say about morality --
good and evil. The best book on Ethics and morality
I have read. "The Science of Good and Evil, Why People Cheat, Gossip, Care, Share and Follow the Golden Rule" by Michael Shermer. ISBN 0-8050-7520-8 |
| Does morality need a belief in God? |
| Ethics Compared |
| Bible Ethics are
Situational Ethics page -- some associated pages: (a) Sexism, (b) Kill or Murder? (c) Biblical God Murders, (d) Slavery, (e) Degrading Children, (f) Sabbath, (g) Faith and Reason, (h) Science, (i) Bible?, (j) Flat Earth, (k) Inerrancy, (l) Patriarchs, (m) Poverty, (n) Commandments, (o) Jesus, (m) Some Other Bible issues -- some Bible verses: Genesis 22:17 |
| Some Non-theist Core Principles -- Humanist Principles |
Religious people generally tend to be less moral then
atheists:
(1) The Dark Side of
Faith - Los Angeles Times
(2) Journal of Religion and Society - the original research paper mentioned in the above link Where there are a column list of Figures you click on each one to see separate charts for different factors mentioned in the paper.
(3) A related topic: Alternatives to evolution - are they scientific?
(4) Some of the stats used in the paper.
(11) A "nothing experience can
be very intense". Many intense religious
experiences in all the different religions and intense non-religious experiences
may only be mind experiences and do not give evidence their religion or
belief system is true. However, it is evident that many people, if not most
people, have a need to experience intense feelings.
Intense concentration and involvement in something other than yourself
is healthy. Finding meaning in life is very important to most people.
These experiences or involvements can be private and/or public. This is shown in people's
intense participation: in sports, games, hobbies, sex, romance;
in reading (novels, poems, scholarly works, etc.); in watching "gripping" movies
or TV;
in personally helping others, in accomplishing a worthwhile thing,
in solving meaningful problems, in relevant learning, in working on
a worthwhile project, in scientific discovery; in computer programming, in hiking, gardening and
other nature activities; in relating to others. In causes such as radical
fundamentalism (Jewish, Islam, Christian, Hindu, Sikh, and any other New Age
religion); nazism, communism, capitalism, socialism, or any other "ism";
New Age. In personal religious experiences. In Charismatic type of
religious service or political event. In drugs. In natural and man-made
catastrophes. You can probably think of many other ways.
It is important to realize that you , as a
person, have some choice
and control in what endeavor you will experience these intense
feelings --
intense involvements -- find meaning and purpose in life.
Many of these activities also raise a person's self-esteem.
Indeed, mystical experiences occur in people of all religions, also in
people of no religion. As Charles Templeton states, "Mystical experience
has added no insights to our knowledge of God or Christian doctrine.
The experience is not uniquely religious: the poet Henry Wadsworth
Longfellow
could go into a transport at will merely by repeating his name aloud."
(See 'Books' below)
It is important to realize the method you use is your
choice. Organized
religions does not have a monopoly on prayer or any other way of
introspection, in spite of what they say. Organized religion is completely
unnecessary here.
I am not against private prayer -- it can help people sort things out in
their brains. Example: It can help make one be more compassionate and loving to
the sick person you are praying for, so your better behaviour to that person could
possibly help in healing.
(15) Reason and Faith
| A page comparing reason and faith |
| The Problem of Evil and a personal benevolent God |
| Suffering and Pain, the Bible, and Jesus |
| Vegetarianism and the pervasiveness of pain and suffering and death |
Alternatives to
evolution - are they scientific?
I don't see how "Intelligent Design"
is supposed to help science. To me it seems useless and a detriment to the
continued investigation in science -- a "giving up". It is
generally negative about science and very little positive, except to say that
"God did it" - quite useless as a science.
See an excellent article by Dan Barker re: including ID it in a Science curriculum:
http://ffrf.org/news/2005/bushID.php
Also Just
a thought
See Links and books below
(18) A real, substantial and
positive basis
Reality is grounded in
science (including evolutionary biology) and the basis of morality and ethics in
"what is good is that which enhances life", "what is evil is that
which destroys life"; and in the innate, natural inclination of most people
toward this good, and the realization of a few inclined to this evil -- an
evolutionary outcome. The rest is unnecessary. There is no
supernatural realm in reality except in ones imagination.
O. Hooge, Canada
Back to the Homepage