Does believing in God make one "weak"?

[Quintessence]

The crutch argument has always struck me as incredibly idiotic. Everyone, regardless of whether or not they have a self-identified religious affiliation, has a "crutch" to get through life. Everyone develops coping mechanisms to deal with stress. Everybody. Everybody has these "crutches." I strongly prefer to not refer to these crutches in a patronizing fashion, because it's disrespectful and rude. It's especially rude when a specific group of people is singled out for having them when, in fact, everybody has them. It means group A wants to rationalize that group B is inferior, and that's about it. Ironically, you could say that is one of their crutches: the need to feel superior to "those stupid theists."

Now, if we want to talk about unhealthy ways of coping with stress, that's a different discussion. We could talk about things like addictions to substances. In that case, the patronizing term "crutch" might be more appropriate, but probably still misleading.

 

[Sir Doom]

Here is what I mean by "weak".

You need a crutch to get through in life. You can't handle that the world, and by extension the universe, is incredibly cold and doesn't care about your suffering; so you cling to the idea of a God that is the creator of the universe and will end your suffering once you die.

It's the type of weakness that people like Christopher Hitchens hold in regard to Theists.

I don't believe that God cares about my suffering. Additionally, I don't believe God has any control over my afterlife. And finally, if the result of death is oblivion, wouldn't this be an end to suffering? The House is made of glass. The Stones shouldn't be thrown. Just sayin'.

 

[Quintessence]

I don't believe the vast majority of my gods care about me either. Just like I don't believe the vast majority of human beings care about me. The vast majority of them have never met me, have no clue who I am, and have absolutely no reason to care about me. So why would I assume they do? Nonsense. The gods that care about me are the ones I develop personal relationships with. And sometimes not even then, because "caring" isn't in their vocabulary. *laughs*

But hey, all theists are classical monotheists who believe in an omnibenevolent, all-loving and all-caring god. Build up that straw man! Build it nice and big, because it will look all the more spectacular when I light it on fire. Muahahahahah!

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Here is what I mean by "weak".

You need a crutch to get through in life. You can't handle that the world, and by extension the universe, is incredibly cold and doesn't care about your suffering; so you cling to the idea of a God that is the creator of the universe and will end your suffering once you die.

It's the type of weakness that people like Christopher Hitchens hold in regard to Theists.

In that case, everyone is weak. We all have some sort of driving force, be it God or philosophy or something else.

I'd say some are dependent on God, though, to that extent I'd say you could consider them "weak", as God's the only glue that's keeping the walls from coming down and crushing them.

But those people who are dependent on God have no need to be strong in that sense, because they are strong in another sense; the fact that they are faithful that God will hold the walls up, they are faithful that God is there for them when they need him most, they have a very firm sense of optimism.

 

[idea]

There are many beliefs in God (Monotheism Pan(en)theism, Monism, Polytheism, etc.), but the one thing they have in common is that they can't be proven 100%. Conversely, they can't be disproven 100%, either.

However, in recent years, so much as saying "I believe" is met with ridicule. Especially by those who adhere to New Atheism.

Ridicule is the tool of the weak - intelligent people have rational conversations. Immature, insecure idiots trying to rationalize their way out of a guilty conscience resort to name-calling sessions.

On one hand, I sort of get it; because religion has caused many atrocities.

You do know that the atheist communist regimes have killed orders of magnitude more people than any religious skirmish, right?

read through this list:
http://listverse.com/2010/06/05/10-people-who-give-atheism-a-bad-name/
Atheism is the root of the bloodiest atrocities.

 

[Sir Doom]

Forget religion vs. atheism in regards to war.

War is about power. Mostly in the form of material wealth. Everything else is window dressing. You go to war to take what is theirs or keep what is yours. There is no other reason.

 

[RGA1459]

It is not weak to say "I believe!" if you truly believe. What makes you weak is to say that you believe, even when you know deep down that you do not, for the sake of acceptance. On the same note, it is weak to say "I do not believe," even if a small part of you does believe, just to gain acceptance. The fact of the matter is that most of the "atheists" I've met didn't have any real understanding of the religions that they systematically rejected. I have heard many say "religion is the reason for all wars!". Well that is the same as saying "blacks are the reason there is crime." It is a form of ignorance. Just because all of the wars ever fought in the world happened to be fought by religious people doesn't mean the religion was at fault. It just means that the individuals who fought those wars had something in common, and I believe were at fault in the understanding of the religion that they claimed to represent. It's the same as how minority groups make up the majority of the prison system in the U.S., but we all know how ignorant it would be to say that minority groups are the reason there is crime. There are good and bad everywhere, as cliche as it may be. Now that I've brought it up, I don't think any of the violent criminals or murderers of today did what they did out of religious differences, but rather out of desperation or egotism or whatever else bad vibes go on in small minds. Ignorance is the reason there is war, and ignorance is the reason why people can't see that ignorance is the problem. This atheism trend is really, in my personal opinion, some form of desperate rebellion (against God) when the true thing to be rebelled against is ignorance (which they truly believe they are rebelling against), but which led the nonbelievers to rebel in the first place. I believe that is a classic catch 22. TBH, didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings.

 

[WyattDerp]

I know weak thinking when I see it. How else should I call it? "Not really making any sense"? or maybe "If the world was a logic puzzle, these people would not make it?" If calling something weak makes me a jerk, then I'll be that jerk. It's not that I consider myself "strong" or anything, everybody has their weak pionts and moments. That doesn't mean I don't see weak moments in others, or feel obliged to call it anything else. At least not in a thread which is directly asking me.

You do know that the atheist communist regimes have killed orders of magnitude more people than any religious skirmish, right?

[..]Atheism is the root of the bloodiest atrocities.

^ That's such a weak argument. Sophistry in general is perfectly weak.

 

[chinu]

My question to all of you is: does believing in God actually make one weak?

Yes, believing in God makes one weak, because its impossible to believe in a thing which one has not seen yet, its like weakening our own self, But, believing in Theism makes one strong, because its possible to believe in theism by seeing another theist, and it makes one strong.

Most of the people in this world who seems to be theists are follwing false theists that's why they seems to be weak. Its easy to get God, But its very difficult to get true Theist in this world.

 

[muizz99]

If I have headache, I will pray to God to get rid of that headache. But, god scattered the medicines in the world. You need to find the cure first. If I say "God, remove the pain now! As in now!" I think its impossible. Just like in education. If ye dont learn, then ye illiterate. If evolution is true, then god made evolution by his power.
So, believing in god doesn't make you weak. It makes you stronger. And more comfortable. And not making you stupid or lazy person.

 

[rusra02]

There are many beliefs in God (Monotheism Pan(en)theism, Monism, Polytheism, etc.), but the one thing they have in common is that they can't be proven 100%. Conversely, they can't be disproven 100%, either.

However, in recent years, so much as saying "I believe" is met with ridicule. Especially by those who adhere to New Atheism. On one hand, I sort of get it; because religion has caused many atrocities in the past. However, the very same people who are against the dogma of religion become dogmatic themselves.

My question to all of you is: does believing in God actually make one weak? This can also go for other beliefs such as reincarnation, magic, the afterlife, etc.

We are all weak and frail, if we are but humbe enough to admit this.The Bible refers to humans as "a mist appearing for a little while and then disappearing." (James 4:14) Trees and turtles outlive us by centuries. Relentlessly, we walk toward our grave, as if condemned men. No, belief in God, IMO, shows moral courage, especially to profess it publicly.

 

[BurnPhoenix]

There are many beliefs in God (Monotheism Pan(en)theism, Monism, Polytheism, etc.), but the one thing they have in common is that they can't be proven 100%. Conversely, they can't be disproven 100%, either.

However, in recent years, so much as saying "I believe" is met with ridicule. Especially by those who adhere to New Atheism. On one hand, I sort of get it; because religion has caused many atrocities in the past. However, the very same people who are against the dogma of religion become dogmatic themselves.

My question to all of you is: does believing in God actually make one weak? This can also go for other beliefs such as reincarnation, magic, the afterlife, etc.

In my experience, everyone believes in something, whether it's widely accepted or not is a different matter. Even believing in nothing is a belief in itself.

I do not think that having beliefs in a God or otherwise makes people weak, on the contrary, admitting that belief despite others opinions does show a strength and conviction. Often the beliefs help people cope with various issues and hardship in their lives and an outlet for them to show their appreciation for the good things.

Ultimately, everyone follows their own path to enlightenment, if your belief helps you to be a better person and live your life then I fail to see how it can be a weakness.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Ridicule is the tool of the weak - intelligent people have rational conversations. Immature, insecure idiots trying to rationalize their way out of a guilty conscience resort to name-calling sessions.


You do know that the atheist communist regimes have killed orders of magnitude more people than any religious skirmish, right?

read through this list:
10 People Who Give Atheism a Bad*Name - Listverse
Atheism is the root of the bloodiest atrocities.

Now that's some rich irony.

 

[ChristineES]

It is not weak to say "I believe!" if you truly believe. What makes you weak is to say that you believe, even when you know deep down that you do not, for the sake of acceptance. On the same note, it is weak to say "I do not believe," even if a small part of you does believe, just to gain acceptance. The fact of the matter is that most of the "atheists" I've met didn't have any real understanding of the religions that they systematically rejected. I have heard many say "religion is the reason for all wars!". Well that is the same as saying "blacks are the reason there is crime." It is a form of ignorance. Just because all of the wars ever fought in the world happened to be fought by religious people doesn't mean the religion was at fault. It just means that the individuals who fought those wars had something in common, and I believe were at fault in the understanding of the religion that they claimed to represent. It's the same as how minority groups make up the majority of the prison system in the U.S., but we all know how ignorant it would be to say that minority groups are the reason there is crime. There are good and bad everywhere, as cliche as it may be. Now that I've brought it up, I don't think any of the violent criminals or murderers of today did what they did out of religious differences, but rather out of desperation or egotism or whatever else bad vibes go on in small minds. Ignorance is the reason there is war, and ignorance is the reason why people can't see that ignorance is the problem. This atheism trend is really, in my personal opinion, some form of desperate rebellion (against God) when the true thing to be rebelled against is ignorance (which they truly believe they are rebelling against), but which led the nonbelievers to rebel in the first place. I believe that is a classic catch 22. TBH, didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings.

Frubals for this post. Welcome to the RF.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

The fact of the matter is that most of the "atheists" I've met didn't have any real understanding of the religions that they systematically rejected.

Sounds like you haven't really met that many atheists then. Or, like many religious folks, you wrongly assume that atheists don't understand religion. However, the facts show that atheists tend to know more about religion than most religious people, so your arguments which follow from your misguided premise have little value.

 

[MoonWater]

For those in this thread who have said that believing in god makes one weak(I believe there's been a couple) Tell me, would you consider Joan of Arc weak? What about Martin Luther or Martin Luther King Jr., or st. agnes? What about the myriad of pagans who chose to be burned at the stake or hanged rather than denounce their gods? Would you consider all of them weak? After all they all believed in God.

 

[jonman122]

For those in this thread who have said that believing in god makes one weak(I believe there's been a couple) Tell me, would you consider Joan of Arc weak? What about Martin Luther or Martin Luther King Jr., or st. agnes? What about the myriad of pagans who chose to be burned at the stake or hanged rather than denounce their gods? Would you consider all of them weak? After all they all believed in God.

I'm fairly certain most of the "pagans" that were burned did not believe in the god of the bible. They believed in other gods or their own gods (this generally meant classical greek or roman gods), which is why they were labeled as pagans rather than christians. Clinging to your religion when the people around you are openly hunting people of your religion and murdering them in plain sight is a little shortsighted, for your family and others. It's courageous and I'd almost say honourable, thus not weak, but they weren't thinking about bringing the knowledge they contained in to the future, even if it cost them their pride and ultimately their lives.

As for Joan of Arc, I'd say she was a very strong individual and I don't think anyone here would claim otherwise, but the likewise christian leader of the french that handed her over to the english for execution, he was weak. It's hard to label a group as weak because there are always individuals who will stand out among the crowd.

Now all of this being said, I think the only way I'd call being religious in some way weak was if someone was using religion or God as a crutch while not actually believing in any of it. I don't mean the people using it to stop their families from excommunicating them, I think that takes a lot more real strength than anyone who hasn't had it happen realizes, but the ones who do it just to feel better about themselves and like the congratulations other people give them for their decision to be religious rather than actually believing in any of it.

I feel the same about religious people who profess to be non-religious who do this.

 

[Me Myself]

Yeah, this is why I'd like some more objective criteria laid out by the OP as to what "weak" means. It'll help structure the discussion.

Absolutely

I think that belief can make a person exceptionally strong. Belief represents purpose for many. When a person has a purpose, they have motivation, energy, etc.

I would more readily agree that irrational belief simple makes one irrational. But I would argue that all humans are irrational to some extent.

I would say that both atheism and theism have the potential to be both empowering or weakening depending on the person and the context.

Ultimately, it is simply more up to how they use the belief in God than the blief in itself.

A belief in Hod can be a restraint for ones potential, or the most useful motivation to achieve it.

It truly depends on context.

 

[Me Myself]

Sounds like you haven't really met that many atheists then. Or, like many religious folks, you wrongly assume that atheists don't understand religion. However, the facts show that atheists tend to know more about religion than most religious people, so your arguments which follow from your misguided premise have little value.

Technically, he was not objectively wrong on what he said, or at least not for what I can tell.

I thought the same as you the moment I read that. Atheists do tend to be more informed for what I understand the data to be at least in US, but he didnt say all or most he said "most I ve met " and for that inclusion alone it could be read that he was saying that there are definitely some atheists around that ignore what they reject, and that claim in itself is not an extraordinary claim at all.

Just sayin.

 

[Me Myself]

The crutch argument has always struck me as incredibly idiotic. Everyone, regardless of whether or not they have a self-identified religious affiliation, has a "crutch" to get through life. Everyone develops coping mechanisms to deal with stress. Everybody. Everybody has these "crutches." I strongly prefer to not refer to these crutches in a patronizing fashion, because it's disrespectful and rude. It's especially rude when a specific group of people is singled out for having them when, in fact, everybody has them. It means group A wants to rationalize that group B is inferior, and that's about it. Ironically, you could say that is one of their crutches: the need to feel superior to "those stupid theists."

A crutch is a tool of empowerement.

I find it extremely ironic that someone would say a crutch is bad.

Now if the question was if believing in god was a SIGN of weakness, then the crutch argument would at least be on merit enough to be debatable. By now it is plain non existent.

I mean if x person could only leave drugs by believing he was taking a magic pill made of rainbow farts and fairy dust, and SHE DOES leave biologically addictive sustances after using such placebo, did this belief empower her or depower her?

Obviously empowered her.

Now even further as you very well say we all have our crutches. When I walk I use my legs as my crutches. So what?

Ultimately, we ll believe in what we feel comfortable, and wether it empowered us or not can be judged by the fruits.

As fruits go, not all seeds will carry fruit on all soil. Nor all people's body's react the same to such fruits.

Same is with beliefs.