God: No magic required

[lweisenthal]

Hi Max,

You are a courteous gentleman. Thanks for the constructive tone.

I wouldn't assert that theism is the single most effective means of longevity extension or the only path which leads to happiness. I am merely suggesting that it's not illogical to pursue the possibility of "conversion" to theism for benefits which have nothing to do with desire for immortality or avoidance of theoretical damnation (I write the latter as a fellow non-believer in Satan and Hell). I further suggest that it's useful to consider the plausibility of a higher order of sentient consciousness, based on up to date theories in the field of cosmology.

Beyond the above (potential for improved state of well being and physical universe plausibility), it's then simply a matter of belief: does one have it or does one not have it? With respect to proving what is "real" (or not) -- well, that has never been within the realm of possibility (proof, that is, either way) and that's where it's likely to remain, no matter how much the likes of you and I may argue about it.

I do want to elaborate on one of your points -- about the benefits of religion being relating to "social structure," and atheists lacking the benefits of similar "social structure," because there aren't generally social groups of atheists which one may readily seek out, when one moves from place to place. What is important to realize is that the theist never feels alone; the theist feels that the theistic deity is always present -- a constant companion. A companion with whom one can speak; a companion to provide backbone, comfort, and even advice (have you ever seen movies such as "Fiddler on the Roof," in which the main character Tevia is always bouncing his ideas off of God, asking for advice, counsel, and inner strength and resilience? This sounds fanciful to you, and I'm certain that you feel it's entirely illusory, in a physical world sense, but I assure you that, for the believer, it's quite real.

I'd quarrel with your assertion that non-church going believers do not enjoy the physical and emotional well-being benefits associated with theism. I told you about my own "clinical trial" of attending weekly services in three different religions. I ultimately chose the one I did because -- among several reasons -- everyone left me alone with my own meditations -- they didn't try to smother me with kindness or draw me into a social group. After more than two years of perfect attendance at the weekly services, I have yet to make a single personal friend -- only because this is what I've chosen for myself. I think that religious belief is an intensely personal matter. I try not to discuss the details of my own beliefs, because I don't want to get drawn into debates with fellow worshipers who don't agree with the way that I view the (unshared) details of our shared religion. But the community worship (with, for me, an anonymous community of believers) facilitates and reinforces my own personal communication with the higher order of sentient consciousness (whom I call "God," because it is as good a name as any other for an entity which is entirely real to me, at this point). I'll probably always be mostly a loner, socially speaking, but, as the song goes, I now feel that I'll never walk alone.

Thanks for your generous gifts of attention and time.

- Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA USA

Larry,

I agree with the point by point ('lessness) so I'll try to minimize it.

It would appear that your main thrust for theism is that it appears to extend longevity and that therefore it carries benefit.

Whilst this may be true (for a whole host of possible reasons) it is far from the only course of action you can take to achieve that. It would appear, for example, that leaving the US and moving to Japan, or the Greek Island of Crete, would have an even greater impact on your potential longevity. Those 2 regions appear to offer the greatest average longevity on the planet (and both are cultures that smoke heavily).

It is fully possible that theists are happier in their daily lives than atheists (I have no data on that) but even if this and the above are true it says nothing as to the truth of the belief itself.

I guess how important that is to you might vary. I can say I understand the lack of interest in what's real and what's imagined if it makes you happy - its just not something I aspire to.

We can therefore agree to disagree if you like. I don't really care one way or another what you or others believe as long as it doesn't impinge on others. There is, of course, a great deal we could say about that, in combination with the often expressed opinion amongst atheists that it is the more reasonable theist that provides cover for the extremist (the one with bombs strapped to his body, or the one that blows up abortion clinics and so on).

If that is true (and I am not saying it is, as yet) then your added longevity comes with a cost - one that might even be causal in the relative lack of longevity amongst non-believers. Would that cost be worth it?

Now I know you get uncomfortable with the Santa comparisons. Whilst I understand where you are coming from you need to understand that to me there is little difference in the belief's, although I was hoping to show you something else with it rather than merely getting you upset.

What I had hoped you would notice is the ease with which I defended Santa, almost to the point of making it seem reasonable from your initial attack. I pointed out he didn't live where you searched. I told you where he did live and that you can visit him. I even covered the flying issue.

Now suppose I could further point to research showing that children who belief in Santa gain benefit from it in relation to those that don't. Does that make Santa real?