Fear of God

by Satanus 43 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  AllAlongTheWatchtower

  "Is it possible to experience something so realistically in ones own mind that it would appear to come from some distant, greater force?" - Jeanniebeanz

  Good question. I am often mystified by how people maintain faith in the divine, with no evidence to substantiate it, and quite a bit to refute it. There are of course, those who were raised that way, many of us here can relate to that, and know that makes it more difficult to question. Question we do, however, or most of us wouldn't even be here. So what holds the others? Putting aside those who are involved with their beliefs to a freakish extent, most religious people are perfectly rational, intelligent, kind people, with nothing wrong with them.

  I find myself wondering if any research has ever been done to differentiate between theist/nontheist brainwaves or DNA or anything like that. It seems doubtful, but then again, many studies have been done along that same line in an attempt to find differences between homo/hetero sexuals, so why not?
• 

  Satanus

  JB

  Is it possible to experience something so realistically in ones own mind that it would appear to come from some distant, greater source?

  This puzzles me also. I think it is possible, actually common. But, not always, imo. Unless the fractal/holographic thesis is an actuality. If it is in effect, then we all carry the whole universe inside us, and access to it is as close as james thomas always says.

  AATW

  if any research has ever been done to differentiate between theist/nontheist brainwaves or DNA or anything like that.

  Think i stumbled accross a statement on that, ie i think there was.

  LT

  What is gained?

  How do you mean?

  S
• 

  tetrapod.sapien

  hey AATW,

  There is a book called The God Gene by Dean Hamer. But it should be noted that the concept deserves some skepticism, and that the book was published before colleagues finished submitting their papers to scientific journals. from the review on amazon by Scientific American:

  By page 77 of The God Gene, Dean H. Hamer has already disowned the title of his own book. He recalls describing to a colleague his discovery of a link between spirituality and a specific gene he calls "the God gene." His colleague raised her eyebrows. "Do you mean there's just one?" she asked. "I deserved her skepticism," Hamer writes. "What I meant to say, of course, was 'a' God gene, not 'the' God gene." Of course. Why, the reader wonders, didn't Hamer call his book A God Gene? That might not have been as catchy, but at least it wouldn't have left him contradicting himself. Whatever you want to call it, this is a frustrating book. The role that genes play in religion is a fascinating question that's ripe for the asking. Psychologists, neurologists and even evolutionary biologists have offered insights about how spiritual behaviors and beliefs emerge from the brain. It is reasonable to ask, as Hamer does, whether certain genes play a significant role in faith. But he is a long way from providing an answer.

  The concept of a god gene to atheists, is of course, mouth-watering. it would be amazing to say: "wow, i'm an atheist and science shows that i have evolved (actually: mutated. religious people could still kill all the atheists in the world) one step "futher" than all those crazy religious people." and i have to admit, i would use the same tactic in defending my own atheism. it would be a boon to my argument. but it is a bit premature, and might not even be true in the end. and even if it really gained scientific acceptance in the future, the debate would simply shift from that, back to the age old nature vs. nurture debate.
• 

  LittleToe

  Didier:Good response.

  To put it another way - fear only fear itself; banish fear with love, yet treat it like ann old friend; yet never be so bigotted as to dismiss it entirely.

  Gwen:Aint that the truth!
  
  Btw, enjoyed seeing Harold's other baby (Honda) on the other thread

  Jeannie:If you were talking merely about chemically induced emotions, maybe. How do you write it off like that when it's over a prolonged period of time, and involves others, and is more than just some "feelings"?

  AATW:The difficulty there is that you're only talking out of your own experience. There's abundant anecdotal evidence testifying to it. It leaves me with the question "why would the Divine work solely on a one-to-one basis?". The only answer I can speculatively offer is that maybe the Divine likes to keep it personal and tailored, rather than clone-like and standardised (as the JWs and scientists alike would wish)

  S:You mean you've not accessed that record?

  Regarding "what is gained", I was refering to the beiever. What do they gain by their belief?

  Tetra:I'm not ignoring you, I'm just giving you a break, for a change
  Good post.