Religion (or lack thereof) and Autism/Asperger's?

Post Reply New Topic

Autistics tend to prefer logic, and evolution is more logical, than an invisible God, zapping us up from no-where.

I'm not against the idea of God, I'm agnostic, there just isn't that much proof.

I was raised Catholic, and thus far I remain a practicing Catholic. All the life seems too complicated to me to be a product of nothing.

Just yesterday my pastor was giving a very interesting sermon about the relationship between religon and science, and how religion is meant to describe the "why" in existance, and science explaining the "how". I for one have never really understood how one could actually disprove the other, when they answer very different questions. I mean, I could take a car apart and figure out how each piece and component works together, but do I really know why it was made? Do I know the story behind the design, the goals of the man who thought of them, the life of the man who drove it? If I took a person apart, found out which veins fit together, but I still know nothings of his goals and dreams. The real problem to my eyes is that most atheists assume that they either know everything to such an extent that they can say without a doubt that there is no guiding hand, or that they know the woes of the world and their causes and effects so well that they know they could do better with it then any potential supreme being that may or may not exist, and thus he surely must not because they know everything. I'm sorry, but from my viewpoint, I think that the common atheist is generated mostly by arrogance, because they always seem to be sure that they have everything that is completely figured out. I also get a bit sick of how religion is blamed for all social ills, but that's another arguement.

There's no proof to disprove him either. And in ways, there is some proof. It is, I admit mostly circumstance, but people find evidence for anything in everything. For example, we still don't know how exactly Life began, all we know is that somehow, minerals and elements formed together to create a single cell organism that set out with a singular purpose of recreating itself as much as possible. It came complete with some sort of system to randomize it's characteristics when it did recreate. We don't know why or how the Big Bang happened, but we see it's by-product all around us today. Could it not be that the verse in the Bible that says "And God said 'Let there be light' and there was light" be referring to the Big Bang in a way that our ancestors could understand? While I know that this isn't at all conclusive, you also have to remember an important part of Christianity; God does not simply reveal himself to us, because then there is no faith i him, and without faith it is not a true love. I can't really go into depth about that here, but just think about it. If the Lord explained everything scientifically in the Bible, he would have to provide all the science, and all the advancement so our ancestors could understand. We never would have been allowed to find out for our own. And if we all knew, without a doubt, that God was real and that God was exactly this way, then we never would have made the choice to believe in him, and we never would have made a decision that mattered. Ultimately, you have to remember that the Lord knows all, he can tell what each action that ever has or will be made will do, and how to work it all towards His plan. There is no way we can ever truly understand the depth of his plan and His actions, so we must acknowledge our limit, and trust in the being that created us to work toward our good. I have, it's just your choice to make, if you want to or not.

Im not religious, never really have been. Despite what all those christians say, I believe that my brain was not wired towards spirituality. And in the past few years, I have sometimes because suspicious of the motives of some christians. I do have a good # of chrisitian friends but still.

Which is I'm agnostic .

I'm skeptic/agnostic

I can understand "religion" as a set of traditions, rituals of individual person - that's OK

but

I'm absolutely against "religion laws" or "forcing anyone to religion", because religion is just an opinion, and "opinion" is not equal to "truth"

Interestingly, Christ was very against religion himself during his life. He said it was more important to focus on faith than religion, and is the major reason that he would often come in conflict with the Jewish temple leaders.

Some brains are wired to spirituality more, others less.

...

Last edited by tall-p on 14 Aug 2012, 6:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Ok. What does this have to do with the current conversation though?

If you dont believe in science I challenge you to take everything science has created, i.e. cell phones, computers, cars, houses, clothes, tools(this involves anything used as a tool or weapon no matter how primitive so not even any bows, arrows, knives, or rope), air conditioning, heaters, blankets, dressers, games, television, cities, roads, usable elctricity, running water, medical equipment of any kind, and discard it right away, and never use it again and see where you are in life. I'm serious, if you don't believe in science you don't deserve to use anything science creates. Everything about our lives science has created since we learned to utilize fire, what you are expressing is the most amount of ignorance I have ever seen exhibited by a human and I suggest you get psychiatric help to cure you of your religion.

The fact your on a computer completely contradicts your whole argument btw, just thought you should know.

I have only two Gods, Reason and Logic

I'm agnostic and I'm interessted into religion and religous cluture, espessially judaism what I've studied for a while at university.

I've also attended on regular basis religous events, but not anymore.

I haven't read the 22 pages of this thread, but to the OP: I am a Buddhist because the meditative discipline helps me to deal with my anxiety and I find the evidence that Buddhist praxis seriously improves people's lives and tolerance of negativity compelling. it's hard to look at pictures of Buddhist monks who have self-immolated without thinking "even if the people who think I'm going to hell are right, if I developed my meditation practice to that level, I would be at peace in hell." Buddhism is completely compatible with the scientific method and works harmoniously with my Earth Science studies, and as I was (at the time) the only person I knew who came to the conclusion that Buddhism was ideal for me, I have little worry about whether or not I arrived at my worldview because of peer-pressure or inculturation.

I am interested in Quakerism as well, since I am a pacifist and that is more or less what I am "ethnically", but I don't attend services. there are atheist and Buddhist Quakers both even in the small meeting (fewer than 20 people) here in little rock, and I like their focus on social justice and community that transcends dogma.

How does science dictate what one DESERVES? Wouldn't that be a moral or ethical conclusion?