Until I was in my late twenties, I was a Christian. In fact, I had attended seminary and studied for the ministry, had preached sermons, had served as associate pastor at a church, had taught Sunday school, had sung in the choir, and so on. At no time during that period do I think I was chemically imbalanced or psychologically unhinged. So I have to take issue with the form of your question at the outset.

I also feel duty bound to point out to you that a characterization like “…real, logical definite, exact, all around us truth -that god does not exist” is itself illogical. We cannot make such a claim because there is no way to demonstrate its validity. At a minimum, you must first define what you mean by the word “god.” There are some definitions of “god,” that, while they may be totally irrelevant to human experience, would be very difficult, if not impossible, to disprove. For example, I don’t think there is an “ineffable essence” at the core of reality, but I don’t think I would claim to be able to prove it did not exist. Rather I would insist on the person asserting such an entity did exist demonstrating the validity of the claim.

People believe all sorts of irrational things for all sorts of reason. Those who have been raised to think a certain way may find it very difficult to shift their mode of thinking as they get older. Others, like myself, are able to make the shift but find it takes time and effort.

Rather than being frustrated, try to be constructive. Suggest alternatives. Ask questions, not in a confrontational manner but as someone with a genuine interest in hearing what another person thinks. If you open your discussion with the attitude “I’m smart and you’re stupid. Why can’t you see that?”, you just aren’t going to have a very fruitful exchange.

Having said all of that, there are certainly some Christians who simply will not be open to even the mildest suggestion that they might be wrong or mistaken. A person who has forsworn reason will not be swayed by rational argument, no matter how well crafted or how carefully presented. in such cases, it’s probably a waste of your time and theirs to pursue the matter.

Posted: March 16th 2009

See all questions answered by George Ricker

It is not a question of imbalance, but of differences. What happens, is that these former believers change and are now able to hold different views. A more pertinent grasp would be to figure out why some can change and others just can’t. I often refer to Haidt’s five bases of morality. They are a handy tool in understanding our differences. There are folks who cleave to tradition, authority, and a sense of absoluteness. These would be the most reluctant to change. As to why many embrace religion in the first place, well, it is all around us. We are often brought up in a set of religious beliefs.

As we get older, we have already spent valuable personal resources in embracing our beliefs. Such an investment can prevent us from taking steps in the right direction, weighing us down in our continuing learning process and in our ability to incorporate new knowledge.

Just as medical doctors are searching for a way to custom make medicine, so there would be less mistakes which at present are resulting from the rather crass method of basing treatment on the average person, it is equally important to find out how to teach knowledge in a similar tailor-made-to-the-individual manner also. Until then, it will be a journey riddled with trials and errors.

I would like to point out that many atheists reject theism because there is no evidence for it, not because they know there are no gods. They keep an open mind and will examine any future evidence that would point to the existence of the supernatural and gods. In addition, atheists are not immune to rejecting reality either! I know of one adult atheist who was convinced that she was not worthy of love simply because her psychologically troubled father was unable to love her. It took a year of intensive therapy to show her how ridiculous that notion was and that, indeed, she was worthy of love.

Posted: March 16th 2009

See all questions answered by logicel

As a former Christian, this question bothers me. I was very devout when I was a born-again and I’m fairly certain I’m not chemically imbalanced. I would assume that the majority of religious fundamentalists are that way because of psychological dependencies, not chemical imbalances. That’s not my usual field of study though, so I could be wrong. It’s happened before. :-P

Posted: March 16th 2009

See all questions answered by Reed Braden