Is Religion a Scam?

[4Horsemen]

Besides residual anger festering in the soul of an atheist, there is often a sense of loss, especially if a person had left the faith which is my own experience. I couldn’t get “normal.” I didn’t even realize what was missing for quite some time. I used to call religion a “crutch.” Religion, far from being a “scam” (or “crutch”) is our pathway to Truth, Morality, Wisdom, Integrity . . . God. (It seems there are plenty of reverts on CAF!)

People who grow up in atheistic families must be searching for God but unable to admit or may not even realize, at first, what they are looking for. Most probably attribute their longing as that feeling or desire for material objects, honor, riches, “love”, vicarious experiences, missing out on the true, eternal goal or just plain rejecting it. However, some children of atheistic parents become Christians. One case I think I recall is atheist, Madeline Murray O’Hare’s son who became a Christian while the other son took her place in trying to remove God from schools, city halls, municiple buildings and any public property. I’m not sure what it is in the heart of man that causes many to come to believe and others to reject God’s offer of grace.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

4Horsemen

*I’m not sure what it is in the heart of man that causes many to come to believe and others to reject God’s offer of grace. *

Perhaps there is not a single cause, but there may be many different reasons for many different kinds of people. We are not supposed to talk about that sort of thing at CA, but I think it is on everyone’s mind, and more so on the mind of reverts than anyone else.

 

[4Horsemen]

4Horsemen

*I’m not sure what it is in the heart of man that causes many to come to believe and others to reject God’s offer of grace. *

Perhaps there is not a single cause, but there may be many different reasons for many different kinds of people. We are not supposed to talk about that sort of thing at CA, but I think it is on everyone’s mind, and more so on the mind of reverts than anyone else.

Charlemagne II,

Re: the bolded lline – Are we not supposed to talk about conversion experiences, that is, particular reasons for coming to faith in Our Lord? There was a thread on that a while back. In general, though, without digging into anyone’s psyche, we could consider that people leave their atheistic philosophy or various religions and cults because of a deep-seated need to know truth, to seek and find One who is greater than themself, to worship/adore/be in awe of majesty, also, fear of death itself, fear of being lost, fear of some kind of Hell and a desire for immortality in Heaven. Like you said, there are diverse reasons for many different people.

For those who refuse the invitation from God, there must be an element of pride and attachment to sin. That may be the reason in a nutshell without talking about anyone in particular, which I hadn’t intended.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

*For those who refuse the invitation from God, there must be an element of pride and attachment to sin. *

Refusing the invitation from God is itself the only sin required for damnation, even if no other sin was committed. There can be no refusal more ultimate than atheism. That is why reverting back to God is such a moment of the highest relief and hope for those who revert.

“Everyone who acknowledges me before others I will acknowledge before my heavenly Father. But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father.” Matthew 10:32-33

“He who believes and is baptized will be saved; he who does not believe will be condemned.” Mark 16:16

“If we have died with him we shall also live with him; if we persevere we shall also reign with him. But if we deny him he will deny us.”
2nd Timothy 2:11-12

"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment.” Matthew 22: 37-40

 

[whitecrayon]

maybe some atheists, especially those who claim things like that mentioned in the opening post of this thread (that christians know that there is no god), have some serious pathological need either to humiliate christians or to utterly undermine even sincere, humble christian apologetics. if christians who explain and teach our faith can gain even a foothold with our arguments and expressions that promote christianity, the strong atheists and the angry atheists and those atheists who bash christianity and faith in general for some sort of intellectual pleasure or some sort deep need to feel superior to others are faced with real, calm debate over matters of evidence and truth, which they cannot win, given that we christians refer to real things like evidence for miracles, contact with god, solid arguments for christ’s life, teachings, miracles, resurrection, etc (the latter two in light of the fact that solid evidence exists for modern miracles), holiness of beliefs and morality and expressions and experiences, etc.

the differences we may need to understand, in some of those cases where we have the time and the expertise required to psychoanalyze an atheist or an organized and unified body of atheists, have to do with the reasons behind the atheist beliefs, the depth of indoctrination into atheism involved, the socioemotional problems exhibited by the atheist(s), and any hatred and/or rage which a few of the atheist(s) sometimes exhibit.

reacting to atheism in general, as a general or as a few different types of philosophy, and labeling and responding in kind to attacks by angry, troubled or hateful atheists, usually does not help us or them or anyone else who may be judging the interactions (whether in social groups or in intellectual places like this forum), but rather often worsens problems for all by creating further animosity or anger. those christians who have been taught and/or who have chosen to respond to atheists on their own terms, as described above, need, in my opinion, to focus on ignoring any atheist arguments or attacks or teaching atheists in the most rational and apologetic way they in which they may be able to help the atheist(s), and often we need to rely on the expertise of others, such as catholic experts, given that they may be able to do these things better than we can, as trained professionals and full-time servants of god and given that we may continually find ourselves exacerbating problems and furthering pointless debates (incluiding, apparently, occasionally in this forum).

with love from the father
whitecrayon

 

[4Horsemen]

There are some people, mostly what we would call religious persons, who separate the concept of religion and faith. Some actually do consider religion a “scam” or Pharisaical full of rules and doctrines. They say that the only thing that matters is a “personal relationship with Jesus Christ.” These groups are mainly Protestant non-denominational.
So it’s not only atheists who consider religion to be a scam. I suppose, too, when some people think about certain televangelists who made a lot of money and led immoral lives, they see religion as a scam.

 

[LilyM]

Tomarin

Thank you! Must have been an interesting play. George Bernard Shaw went to see it twice!

He was a theatre critic - if I was going to review a play I’d want to see it twice before I did so. After all, performances of even the same play with the same cast can be very different from night to night).

Not to mention he was a playwright himself - maybe he wanted to steal a few ideas?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Lily

*Not to mention he was a playwright himself - maybe he wanted to steal a few ideas? *

I think he was a music critic too. His book on Ibsen is a classic. I think Shaw and Chesterton were good friends even though separated by a very wide philosophical chasm. I doubt that he would have stolen any of Chesterton’s ideas. He had too many of his own he was always rushing into print.

 

[LilyM]

Lily

*Not to mention he was a playwright himself - maybe he wanted to steal a few ideas? *

I think he was a music critic too. His book on Ibsen is a classic. I think Shaw and Chesterton were good friends even though separated by a very wide philosophical chasm. I doubt that he would have stolen any of Chesterton’s ideas. He had too many of his own he was always rushing into print.

I don’t know if he was a music critic - but the story goes once he went to a club where a band was playing, the band leader recognised him and asked him what he would like the band to play. Shaw’s answer was ‘dominoes’.

And he and Winston Churchhill both had great senses of humour. Shaw had a new play opening, and sent two tickets to Churchhill for the opening night, with a note - ‘Bring a friend - if you have one.’

Churchhill’s response was ‘I’m afraid I can’t make the opening night. I’d like two tickets for the second night instead - if there is one.’

 

[haroldcrews]

There are common ways to recognise a scam. One of the common methods is that at its heart lies a deception. Atheism and Christianity both rely ultimately on faith. Christianity is honest about the reliance on faith. Atheism isn’t. Therefore atheism is much more likely to be a scam than Christianity.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

There are common ways to recognise a scam. One of the common methods is that at its heart lies a deception. Atheism and Christianity both rely ultimately on faith. Christianity is honest about the reliance on faith. Atheism isn’t. Therefore atheism is much more likely to be a scam than Christianity.

But then again a faith that pulls on the existential strings of your hopes and fears doesn’t really require evidence in-order to gain mass adherence; and I can see why one would believe that religion is nothing more than emotional blackmail; a tool for control. Some would even argue that if ones soul was truly in danger of hell, wouldn’t a loving God make that fact “self evident”? Why all this hiding behind “faith” in matters of great importance? That question needs to be answered, and it needs to be answered in a manner that doesn’t attempt to insult ones intelligence. In that context “Having faith” seems to be a weak response. I therefore think atheists do have legitimate concerns.

Naturalism - the “belief” that all is physically natural - does not argue that it has absolute evidence for that belief. It seems to me that most naturalist do admit that they have a “belief”, but that it is a reasonable belief given the evidence available. More importantly, at its root, there is an epistemic principle, the principle being that, ontologically speaking, one should admit of no more beings than is evident to the senses or is applicable to scientific investigation. Thus, given these roots, while they can choose to have extra faith assumptions that goes beyond the available evidence, they are not obligated to have any faith that goes beyond the epistemic boundaries imposed by those experiential limitations.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

MindOverMatter
*
Some would even argue that if ones soul was truly in danger of hell, wouldn’t a loving God make that fact “self evident”? Why all this hiding behind “faith” in matters of great importance? That question needs to be answered, and it needs to be answered in a manner that doesn’t attempt to insult ones intelligence. In that context “Having faith” seems to be a weak response. I therefore think atheists do have legitimate concerns. *

You have raised an interesting question regarding the “hidden God.” I think traditional Catholic theology has it that God invites us into a loving relationship, and to reveal Himself too fully would be to overcome our free will to accept or reject His love. This is a concept that atheists can hardly grasp, since they are so caught up in experiential proof for virtually everything. Scientism is the sin of putting on blinders so that you can say you have not seen God, even though for most people God reveals Himself implicitly, if not explicitly, throughout his Creation.

Moreover, I think atheism is not really rooted in evidential inadequacies of arguing for God, since there are plenty of evidential inadequacies for proving there is no God. Atheism is rooted in something else entirely, and Plato put his finger on it as well as anybody.

“Atheism is a disease of the soul before it is an error of understanding.”

 

[UnityofTrinity]

I also have a very dear friend who’s an atheist. He’s a bright guy, but unfortunately he is also a radical atheist who not only sees religion as a scam but also as a “virus”, the “root of all evil” and that all religious leaders are “intellectual slaveholders”(these came from Religulous by no other than the Bill Maher, it was humorous I might say, but wrong from the beginning to the end)

As I talk to him and read more books written by Hitchens or Dawkins(brilliant men), I can see their pattern of argument, which is rather repetitive and at many times, wrong.

My atheist friend once told me that I’m so infected with the virus(faith) and that he’s gonna bring me salvation(atheism). Many time he told me that Atheism need not faith, because it has logic and science on its side. But as I clearly pointed out, as many as 68% of social scientists and 61% of natural scientists believe in either God or some sort of after life. Even Stephen Jay Gould admitted that half of his colleagues are religious. One other point I showed him is that how moral relativism and atheism are paradoxical, wrong, and hypocrite. Thus I concluded that Atheism is illogical and unscientific, which brought him to say: “Logic is based on the eyes of the beholder”(which of course, is in stark contrast with any philosophers ever lived) and that even something is paradoxical, it can still be right(in contrary to the Law of Contradiction). He also claim that religion is immoral, but when I say that since you can’t define truth and to him how morality is subjective, he said “well, it’s wrong according to my POV”(I could imagine if I read a book that say “God debunk” and it only has 2 pages, the introduction, and the content which say “it’s wrong because I think it’s wrong”).

At the end, with all due respect to my Atheist friends, our brothers and sisters who have not received Christ, I would invite you to once again examine Atheism base on philosophy, purely logic. As Marcus Aurelius said in “The Meditations”, strip your belief bare and examine it from its element, then you’ll see why people become Christians.

In conclusion, in my opinion, Atheism is a religion, purely a religious practices with moral teachings(there’s no such thing as morality), patriarchs(Dawkins, Hitchens…), Sacred Texts(God’s Delusion), and Sacraments( to bash religion). But one thing truly peculiar to Atheism is that it’s the only religious faith that is dependent on other religious faith, especially Monotheistic faiths. It’s the only religious tradition that require you to bash other religions. It’s the only religious tradition that will not and can not survive without other faiths. It’s also the only faith that require you to believe in nothingness, and require its followers to preach about this nothingness to others. It’s like a person who goes out there and trying to take away the food of those who are full, then tell them that we will never be able to be full, and we will starved forever. It’s the religion of starvation.

 

[UnityofTrinity]

MindOverMatter
*
Some would even argue that if ones soul was truly in danger of hell, wouldn’t a loving God make that fact “self evident”? Why all this hiding behind “faith” in matters of great importance? That question needs to be answered, and it needs to be answered in a manner that doesn’t attempt to insult ones intelligence. In that context “Having faith” seems to be a weak response. I therefore think atheists do have legitimate concerns. *

You have raised an interesting question regarding the “hidden God.” I think traditional Catholic theology has it that God invites us into a loving relationship, and to reveal Himself too fully would be to overcome our free will to accept or reject His love. This is a concept that atheists can hardly grasp, since they are so caught up in experiential proof for virtually everything. Scientism is the sin of putting on blinders so that you can say you have not seen God, even though for most people God reveals Himself implicitly, if not explicitly, throughout his Creation.

Moreover, I think atheism is not really rooted in evidential inadequacies of arguing for God, since there are plenty of evidential inadequacies for proving there is no God. Atheism is rooted in something else entirely, and Plato put his finger on it as well as anybody.

“Atheism is a disease of the soul before it is an error of understanding.”

I remember quoting the same quote. The atheist called me “hater” and “bigot”, but when I clearly point out how they treat religious artifacts and how they insult religion, they simply called it “expressionism” and “preaching the truth”. I think you’re right, it’s not that God didn’t make it self-evident, but it’s that we as human have blinded ourselves to God, to something to obvious. This remind me of the story when the Pharisees asked Jesus for a sign and they will believe, Jesus answered: “shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so
shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”, after that was fulfilled, no Pharisees believed in Him. Even before that many miracles had been done, no Pharisees believed in Him either.

Now a day Atheists say “Show me a sign”, but even if God came down to them and show them many signs, with blindness in their hearts, they will try to convince themselves that God is not real.

 

[4Horsemen]

This remind me of the story when the Pharisees asked Jesus for a sign and they will believe, Jesus answered: “shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so
shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”, after that was fulfilled, no Pharisees believed in Him. Even before that many miracles had been done, no Pharisees believed in Him either.

Another great sign given humanity was when the Lord spoke to Ahaz telling him to ask for a sign, but Ahaz thought it was tempting the Lord. But God said in answer, "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son shall call his name Immanuel. (Is.7:10-15)

Now a day Atheists say “Show me a sign”, but even if God came down to them and show them many signs, with blindness in their hearts, they will try to convince themselves that God is not real.

That is like the gospel parable Jesus told about the stewards being sent by the owner of the fields to check on things. They were, of course, killed. Then the owner said that if he sent his own son, they will listen. But we know the son was killed. This story is a foreshadowing of the treatment of the Only-Begotten Son of God.

Actually, I think every miracle in the Bible is a sign. There are those who received it and those who rejected it. Maybe the atheist should ask for a sign but with a humble and contrite heart in Spirit and in Truth. God will not delay to grant His graces on all who trust Him.

 

[4Horsemen]

Re: Atheists and religion as a scam:

Atheists don’t like to characterize atheism as a religion. Rather they say it’s the absence of religion. In one sense that’s true because as something is the opposite of nothing/nothingness, and darkness the absence of light, religion may be said to be the opposite of irreligion or disbelief the absence of belief. So it could be said that atheism is the absence of religion. However, I do like the comparison of atheism as a religion or what I would call pseudo-religion by UnityofTrinity:

Atheism is a religion, purely a religious practices with moral teachings(there’s no such thing as morality), patriarchs(Dawkins, Hitchens…), Sacred Texts(God’s Delusion), and Sacraments( to bash religion). **But one thing truly peculiar to Atheism is that it’s the only religious faith that is dependent on other religious faith, especially **Monotheistic faiths. It’s the only religious tradition that require you to bash other religions. It’s the only religious tradition that will not and can not survive without other faiths. It’s also the only faith that require you to believe in nothingness, and require its followers to preach about this nothingness to others. It’s like a person who goes out there and trying to take away the food of those who are full, then tell them that we will never be able to be full, and we will starved forever. It’s the religion of starvation.

So atheism is like a vapor that vanishes when compared to Christianity. Also, “the religion of starvation.” It leaves one empty and fruitless. Atheism cannot answer the metaphysical questions “What does it mean to be real and what is the ultimate reality?” St. Thomas Aquinas answered by saying that to be real means to actually exist. Some atheists aren’t even sure about the reality of their existence. The biggest mistake atheists, IMO, make is to believe that whatever exists can only be apprehended by the senses or what can be demonstrated in a laboratory. There is no room in their minds for the abstract ideas of what God is, what the soul is, what love is. Even the pagan philosophers, such as Homer, Cicero, Plato and Aristotle, had the conviction of things that cannot be seen.

As for the ultimate reality, we can come to know God exists through our reason, partially, but more fully through revelation. God is “I am Who Am.” Without belief in God, atheists seek for an earthly Utopia, but one that will suit their own ideas. This is why atheism is a poison that has infected the human race and destroyed many souls. With the truth on the side of Christianity, Christians know that the Church will triumph over all errors.

 

[UnityofTrinity]

Many times as I’ve seen, most Atheists are those who either angry with the Church(or their religion) or simply want to rebel against the moral obligation of religion. To them, the only way to escape from bondage is to escape from all moral obligations(as to an overweight individual say that the only way to escape obesity is to escape a diet). In the end, it not only doesn’t truly liberate one’s soul, but even brings him down deeper into the abyss of darkness.

To my Atheist friends, one day, sit down and imagine all of your ideas and beliefs are written in a book, imagine their own explanation for things such as morality, the order of the universe, and the uniqueness of human. Think hard my friends, you’ll see many flaws. Before you say we religious don’t think and blindly follow our religion, you must agree that many of the best thinkers in the world are religious. Even I question my faith everyday, and only find myself stronger rooted. If Christianity is wrong, then I must say it is much more logical than Atheism.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Unity

*Now a day Atheists say “Show me a sign”, but even if God came down to them and show them many signs, with blindness in their hearts, they will try to convince themselves that God is not real. *

Well said. Blindness of the heart. Atheists don’t see God because they don’t want to see Him.

 

[LifeIsAbsurd]

Is Religion a Scam?

It’s borderline, but no. If you put $50 into the coffer, pray a friend is cured, and your friend is not in fact cured, there’s no refund. Then again, they never promised a refund.

 

[JackVk]

It’s borderline, but no. If you put $50 into the coffer, pray a friend is cured, and your friend is not in fact cured, there’s no refund. Then again, they never promised a refund.

But nobody says you have to.