This afternoon's heated topic: Do people use religion as a crutch?

[isildur]

There's no way to tell a Christian off, because they'll just say you don't truly understand their experience. You can't argue eye-to-eye because every time they're cornered they'll pull this transcendental 'you have to experience it to believe it' garbage. Well I've been there and had the true experience, and while it's peachy, it never gets at the root of why you know what you believe.


<sigh>
Dressing an absurd generalization up in emotionally charged rhetoric doesn't make it any more legitimate. Nor does dressing a strawman in a suit make him any less a strawman. Sound Christian doctrine isn't tautological - something that you should have learned during your time in the chruch, although the fact that you didn't actually supports your claim that arguing with Christians is pointless - even though it doesn't need to be, sometimes it is simply becuase people don't put forth the effort to learn how to articulate reasonable answers.
The tactic that you point out ('if you experience it, you'll understand'/'you don't understand because you haven't experienced it') is fundamentally flawed as a rhetorical device, despite the real possibility that in any given argument it could possibly be true. Of course, nobody complained when this tactic was used in the sex discussion...

The only place where there really should be even the appearance of cyclic reasoning would be if start arguing about the source material. This is why theological debate on specific issues between somebody from any one sect and someone from outside of that sect is problematic. It is absurd to base arguements on a religious text, when the other participant does not hold the same foundational assumptions regarding said text.

 

[herself]

I think religion can go either way as far as being a crutch. I have seen many very very good people in my life that live every day to it's fullest extent, and thank God every day for everything in life they've been given, including the rough patches, as those have helped them build character. On that note, I tend to find these people are more *spiritual* than *religious* as they don't tend to believe, in my experience, as strongly in the need for a human-regulated organization as they do just for the need for people to be the best they can at any given point in time.

On the other hand, nothing makes me insane quicker than someone that likes to use God as his or her own personal martyr. &quot;God sid so&quot; &quot;God made me do it&quot; &quot;Because it would make God happy&quot; etc etc. And worse than all that is someone that brings God into a perfectly good conversation. I really don't like hearing about something untangible, invisible, and otherwise unproveable guiding your life. It's not a good enough reason for a court of law... and the God concept has been aorund for a LOOOONG time. People will be what they will be... and if they need an excuse or reason that is inexplicable for their behaviour, they will find one, whether it be God, alcohol, drugs, womanizing, workaholism... whatever... people who need a justification will always be able to find one.

Tamara

 

[Pyro]

I'm reminded of a nice quote (forgto for where though):

&quot;Religion is crap. Something good happens? Its God's will. Something bad happens? The Lord works in mysterious ways. You look in the bible? full of empty promises&quot;


I agree, too many people use religion as a crutch

<< No one ever stops to think if Atheism is just another crutch to deal with what one can't cope with or understand >>

like genocide said, athiesm (or existentialism or whatever) is for those who CAN cope with the world without blaming their misfortunes on god (same thing for happiness, its becuase of luck or hard work or both, not because god wants to reward you).

 

[obiwaynekenobi]

<< I think religion can go either way as far as being a crutch. I have seen many very very good people in my life that live every day to it's fullest extent, and thank God every day for everything in life they've been given, including the rough patches, as those have helped them build character. On that note, I tend to find these people are more *spiritual* than *religious* as they don't tend to believe, in my experience, as strongly in the need for a human-regulated organization as they do just for the need for people to be the best they can at any given point in time.

On the other hand, nothing makes me insane quicker than someone that likes to use God as his or her own personal martyr. &quot;God sid so&quot; &quot;God made me do it&quot; &quot;Because it would make God happy&quot; etc etc. And worse than all that is someone that brings God into a perfectly good conversation. I really don't like hearing about something untangible, invisible, and otherwise unproveable guiding your life. It's not a good enough reason for a court of law... and the God concept has been aorund for a LOOOONG time. People will be what they will be... and if they need an excuse or reason that is inexplicable for their behaviour, they will find one, whether it be God, alcohol, drugs, womanizing, workaholism... whatever... people who need a justification will always be able to find one.

>>


The &quot;God said so&quot; thing really pisses me off.

 

[glenn1]

<< it seems like a lot of the time people will use religion as a crutch for their problems... take unhappiness, for instance. People, rather than act positively and try to resolve their unhappy state, will simply say something like, &quot;God just doesn't mean for me to be happy now.&quot;

Similarly in the job world... say Paul doesn't get the techie job he wanted because he simply didn't have what it took. He'll say, &quot;God didn't want me to have that job because God didn't want me to go in that direction.&quot; >>



Perhaps, but a lot of those same people would be the first to recognize and thank God for any sucesses they enjoy as well. Had the situation been reversed, and Paul HAD gotten the job, chances are he'd be saying &quot;Thank you Lord for your blessings in helping me get this job.&quot;

 

[isildur]

I think the bottom line has already been addressed - most people lean on some kind of crutch because they don't want the bother with self-analysis and a serious contemplation of the apparent unity/disunity between what they observe to be real and what they believe, and between what they believe and how they live.
Many 'religious' people fall into this catagory, not because they are religious, but because they are people. Likewise, many agnostics/athiests fall into this catagory, and for the same reason.

Elita1 &amp; Optimus -

 

[isildur]

like genocide said, athiesm (or existentialism or whatever) is for those who CAN cope with the world without blaming their misfortunes on god (same thing for happiness, its becuase of luck or hard work or both, not because god wants to reward you).

Yowza, lets talk about tautologies!

 

[isildur]

That people use something as a crutch, as has been previously mentioned, does not a priori make something invalid.

Suppose I get fired today. I insist that I was a model worker, but damnit, my boss just didn't like me and has had it in for me since day one.

Is this a crutch? Could be.
Is it true? We don't know, because these two questions are essentially unrelated!

Whether or not the crutch is in accordance with external realities is not determined by whether or not the concept is being used as a crutch.

 

[yellowperil]

<< [<sigh>
Dressing an absurd generalization up in emotionally charged rhetoric doesn't make it any more legitimate. Nor does dressing a strawman in a suit make him any less a strawman. Sound Christian doctrine isn't tautological - something that you should have learned during your time in the chruch, although the fact that you didn't actually supports your claim that arguing with Christians is pointless - even though it doesn't need to be, sometimes it is simply becuase people don't put forth the effort to learn how to articulate reasonable answers.
The tactic that you point out ('if you experience it, you'll understand'/'you don't understand because you haven't experienced it') is fundamentally flawed as a rhetorical device, despite the real possibility that in any given argument it could possibly be true. Of course, nobody complained when this tactic was used in the sex discussion...

The only place where there really should be even the appearance of cyclic reasoning would be if start arguing about the source material. This is why theological debate on specific issues between somebody from any one sect and someone from outside of that sect is problematic. It is absurd to base arguements on a religious text, when the other participant does not hold the same foundational assumptions regarding said text. >>



OK, I don't know where you're going with this. What exactly are you trying to say?

1) Yes, I was generalizing, but I don't think it was absurd. Do you have a basis to say why it was absurd, and why the analogy with a strawman works?

2) Give me proof the 'sound' Christian doctrine isn't tautological. Basically there is no rational basis for choosing Christian doctrine over any other doctrine.

3) That tactic is not my tactic. It was a tactic used on me by pastors, by fellow church members who did not question their motives for their beliefs.

4) The rest of your argument will have to be explained in layman terms to someone like me who can't articulate reasonable answers.

 

[NuclearNed]

Urinal Mint,

Many Christians use religion as a crutch - which is a bad thing.

I am a struggling Christian. As in, I'll admit that I'm not perfect, but I still try to do what I think my God wants. I don't intend to sound preachy, so if I do, let me know. Keep this in mind while reading my opinion below.

There is an interesting book by Christian author C.S. Lewis named &quot;The Screwtape Letters&quot;. It is fiction based on Christian faith. It is about two demons who are discussing and criticizing Christianity. One thing in this book that impressed me was the statement that God is like a father watching his baby (Christians). When the baby tries to walk on his own (i.e. Christians try to &quot;grow spiritually&quot, God couldn't be prouder and happier.

Using this analogy, it strikes me that many people who call themselves Christians aren't trying to &quot;walk&quot;. They expect God to carry them around while they stay in an immature &quot;baby&quot; state. My belief is that God wants us to be spritually mature individuals who are responsible for our own lives. I think God wants to be in the role of the guy who catches us when we fall, but only if we ask him to.

My eyebrows raise a little whenever I hear someone say (as some Christians do) that everything that happens to them is God's will. God gives us the autonomy to run our own lives. And if we believe that God is a good God, then we should also believe that bad things (pain, suffering, etc.) are not his will (I'll expand and argue this more if you ask me to). When people say that everything that happens to them is God's will, they are in essence saying &quot;I haven't taken the needed steps to insure my own destiny, therefore I am going to blame God.&quot;

Again, I hope this wasn't too preachy. But if you want to hear more, I'm sure I could go on for days.

NuclearNed

 

[raven82]

sometimes.

 

[Athanasius]

Answer: Yes


&quot;Abusus non tollit usum.&quot; &quot;The abuse does not abolish the use.&quot;

As Optimus and Elita1 have already stated, anything can be abused or used as a crutch.

In fact, to abuse something, or to use it in an inappropriate way, is perhaps the essence of evil. Evil does not create, it only perverts. In Christian thought, only God is intrinsically, absolutely good, and He has no opposite. Nothing is evil or bad (even Satan) in the same sense that God is &quot;good.&quot; Every other personality in existence is only relatively good or relatively bad depending on how it uses the &quot;good&quot; that God loans to it as a gift.

Satan is the ultimate example of this in Christian thought: he is what some would call the epitome of evil, but he is only that because he uses his incredible intelligence, will, and beauty in a way that is self-absorbed. But, intelligence, will, and beauty are in and of themselves good things.

Hence, most of what we see that causes the greatest evil, or inflicts the greatest abuse, or is used as the most co-dependent crutch, would also be the greatest source of good if it were used properly.

Nuclear power would be a good example.
Or religion, or politics, or drugs, or authority.

&quot;Abusus non tollit usum&quot;

 

[Red Dawn]

<< This afternoon's heated topic: Do people use religion as a crutch? >>

Beats me, I consider myself lucky enough not to believe in any form of religion so I honestly couldn't tell you.To me Religion would seem like a burden. Of course I'm sure there are those who consider themselves lucky to believe in it. I guess it all comes down to ones perspective.

 

[RossGr]

Of course many people use religion as a crutch, but then there are many people out there that need crutches, why is that a bad thing? IF you can live without crutches, whether that be drugs, religion or what ever your particular obsession may be you would be a rare human.

Elita1, I tend to disagree with your view of Atheism as just another believe system. Why? well first of all most &quot;Atheists&quot; are a lot better at telling what they do not believe then what they do believe. Many of them are simply closet christians who are in denial, they cannot seem to let loose of the christian concepts of god, sin, and heaven/hell other then to deny their belief in them.

I personally tend to view the whole spirtual path issue from a different perspective. I do not see a path but a plane with many paths, each path has different pitfalls and obstacals. If you choose a &quot;blazed&quot; path (represented by any of the major religions) you have good chance of reaching the &quot;other&quot; side, what ever that may be. True atheist are those who venture out into the unexplored regions of the spirtual plane. It takes a remarkable human to blaze a new path.

 

[WordSmith2000]

Religion is not a crutch, it is a coping mechanism. Just like positive reinforcement or drug therapy, it helps a person get thru the day.

It also can be a source of strength.

Remember a crutch is used to help you walk; without one you could not get anywhere.