Tests of faith: Religion may be a survival mechanism. So are we born to believe?

Guardian ^ | February 24, 2005 | Ian Sample

[sevry]

So why do so many people believe?

Yeah - so what, evolution explains this? Nobody can even explain evolution. I dare anyone to try.

Obviously this author has never heard of CS Lewis. He wrote, Mere Christianity. Obviously this author never heard of 'Jack' Chesterton. He wrote the Everlasting Man - and, Orthodoxy. All three books cover the subject, and explain the basics.

[no more apples]

"What I find more plausible is that rather than religion itself offering any advantage in evolutionary terms, it's a byproduct of other cognitive capacities we evolved, which did have advantages," says Boyer.

Religion a byproduct? No wonder he'll never figure it out.

[RWR8189]

Next step: "Rehabilitation"

Don't worry, we're here to help you...

[jocon307]

rd, I don't have time to read this whole piece, but it seems like it might go along well with your very good post of earlier this AM.

[StonyBurk]

I beleive we are Born to serve/worship God/the Creator.
When we do not honor our mother and father--when we do not
know them--when we reject them --none of the above have ever
produced happy - or healthy individuals. All one need do is look at the evil Charles Manson, Margaret Sanger,Kinsey,
Hitler, Marx,Jeffrey Dahmer,John Wayne Gacey the common thread to each is their broken relationship with their parent.The answer must be YES we are Created to believe in God.

[anniegetyourgun]

"The fastest growing religions in the US are the Mormon church and Scientology, both popular, according to Boyer largely because they are new."

"For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear." 2 Tim. 4:3

[Desdemona]

They just can't get their minds out of the labs.

Scientists who think like this don't get it and never will.

[A. Pole]

One thing is sure - atheists and agnostics have fewer children on average than is needed to reproduce. They are doomed to die out.

[AlbertWang]

"Will science be the death of religion? "

Oddly, I find science confirms my belief in an intelligent Creator.

[almcbean]

Stupid article. It's a circular argument. This author obviously starts with a naturalism worldview, and uses the presumption of evolution to establish that we evolved religion.
It is just as reasonable to infer that our Creator, who made us to be in relationship with him, created in us a desire to seek Him.
One more thing. This notion that the only way to know something is through science is disingenuous. I've never seen Mt. Everest but I'm comfortable that it exists

[Mobilemitter]

Here's another good one.

2Tim-3:

13 "But evil men and impostors will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving, and being deceived."

A Canadian behavioural neuroscientist doing some serious navel gazing is not too surprising. That anyone would consider it noteworthy is more alarming.

The one characteristic which serves such self enlightened individuals is that they are in fact, as the above scripture reference illustrates, themselves deceived. Their perception of perception is their own deception, but it is sincere. So being deceived, they continue to deceive.

While yet being in darkness they seek to define light.

[Hegemony Cricket]

Yeah, when will the atheists realize they don't have a prayer? :-)

[lafroste]

"If you look at three- to five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of whether they have seen or heard what they've done.

This is essentially the same argument presented in Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis, where he cited this same behaviour as an innate sense of right and wrong and argued that moral law must be of a spiritual origin. Others call it conscience.

Your observation that this article's argument is circular is dead on. They must grasp at any straw to cling to the belief that they are the highest moral authority. One wonders if any of these guys have simply asked Him, in private, with humility. Somehow I get the impression that it has never even occured to them.

[anniegetyourgun]

Yep. I happened across a "discussion" of "black leaders" on CSPAN this morning. Most were "men of the cloth." It was stunning to see people with such tremendous gift for oratory....with absolutely nothing to say. Despite their stated agenda of "coming together" - it was clear their purpose was to flog a certain brother in Christ, whom they hate. And we know what scripture tells us about those who claim to know Him, and yet hate their brother.....

[stuartcr]

I think it all depends on how God designed the individual, and what He has planned.

[DaveyB]

...By definition, faith demands belief without a need for supporting evidence...

Would this "belief" include say denial of metaphysics and God? Or perhaps that a "belief" in naturalism or dare I say it evolution. Evolution is believed with less evidence than there is for the existence of God.

[snarks_when_bored]

One thing is sure - atheists and agnostics have fewer children on average than is needed to reproduce. They are doomed to die out.

You've got evidence to suggest that religious people who have kids never have kids that aren't religious? That would be interesting to see.

What seems to be true is that religious parents often have one or more offspring who aren't religious, and non-religious parents often have one or more offspring who are religious. So it's unlikely that either those who are religious or those who are non-religious are going to disappear from the species.

[almcbean]

I have had a change of heart, this guy is right. The "stupid" creationists have simply evolved to a higher level than those subhuman Darwinists who still hold allegiance to science uber alles. But don't fear you evolution fundamentalists, there's still time for you to evolve. (I hope that some of you have evolved a sense of humor)