Skip to main content

Many religions, a common ground

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

Stephen Roberts


The presupposition behind these phrase seems to be that any concept of God is equally arbitrary, and any believer of whatever religion base her beliefs on pure whim or blindly follows any religious tradition she received in her upbringing.

If this believer rejects other religious traditions for being incompatible with her own, she rejects these traditions because she thinks they are human-based, or devil-based: they don't originate from her god.

In order to become a full atheist she only has to realize that her beliefs are equally arbitrary to the ones she criticizes.

But these presuppositions are wrong. Not every religion sees other religious traditions as purely arbitrary. See Catholicism for example: it currently teaches that there is value in other religious traditions. There is even a line of apologetics that sees the different religions as evidence that human beings have a natural thirst for spiritual things, even when their particular beliefs may be misguided at times. Somehow people have a perception of God that is beyond doctrine.

Many religious persons these days subscribe to different forms of monotheism. It's true that some of these monotheisms are mutually exclusive in some of their beliefs; but these doesn't imply that they don't have a core of common religious experience they express according to their particular religious idiosyncrasies, that religions don't try to reach an spiritual dimension that is truly there.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Santa Claus Argument

"There's no reason to believe in God" says the atheist, "there's no evidence of his existence". "But what is the evidence that God does not exist" replies the theist. "Sure you have faith that God does not exist". "I don't have to provide evidence that God does not exist more than the evidence I have to provide to show that Santa does not exist. If you are congruent and reject the existence of Santa you should also reject the existence of God. Where's the proof that Santa does not exist?” Such is a line of reasoning popular among atheists. I call it "the Santa Claus argument". It conveys the idea that God is a fiction character. But what is the basis of this idea? It seems to be based in the idea that God does not exist. But if this is the case, this argument (sic) is question begging, because this is precisely the issue at stake. Some atheists seem to imply that God does not exist because the concept of God is a hu...
23 comments
Read more

Ten reasons why God is different than Santa Claus

Santa is an intentional fiction. God is seriously believed to exist. Santa's existence is irrelevant for the universe's existence, but if God exists she is the foundation of all existence. Santa is a contingent being, he could or not exist. If God exists, she is necessary, she could not not exist. Santa's existence is falsifiable. God's existence is not. God's existence is an issue of serious reflection for unbelievers. Santa's is not. Many famous people of high intellectual caliber believe in God. There's no serious intellectual known for her belief in Santa. There are different kind of arguments that seriously pretend to support the case for God's existence. No such arguments exist for Santa. God's invisible and inmaterial. Santa is not. Belief in God is a basic tenet of many religious organizations. There is no organization known to defend belief in Santa. There is no philosophical basis for belief in Santa, but there is for God. See also: The inv...
3 comments
Read more

Defining Atheism

There is no agreement about the definition of atheism, not even in those who call themselves atheists. Some authors say that atheism is denial of God. That is the most popular definition among non-atheists, and is often contrasted to agnosticism. Others say that atheism is lack of belief in God, and that this lack of belief doesn't necessarily imply denial of the existence of God. This is the definition that is most used by internet atheists, and is used to effectively avoid the burden of the proof. These atheists say they don't have to prove the non existence of God. Those who claim that God exists are the ones obliged to prove that God exists, no the other way around. They elevate this to a general epistemological principle. This definition of atheism as a lack of belief allows the atheist to appear neutral and ingenuous about the issue of God, without the need to call themselves "agnostics", label that is despised by atheists for being too weak. In order to disting...
3 comments
Read more