
Ask HN: Why do you believe that your religion/faith/worldview is correct? - kmote00
Nearly everyone in this world holds to some central and defining philosopy or faith or religion that shapes the meaning of life for them. I would like to know: What, in your opinion, is the most compelling reason that persuades YOU to believe that your particular &quot;world-view&quot; is accurate&#x2F;true&#x2F;trustworthy? Do you base your belief on scientific reasoning? historical evidence? philosophical syllogisms? simple &quot;faith&quot;?<p>This is an honest and genuine question. Feel free to ask clarifying questions of responders, but please no trolls or religious debates. We&#x27;re just looking for a respectful exchange of ideas.
======
agitator
I think having seen all of the worst evils in the world committed in the name
of some belief, I have dropped concerning myself with anything that isn't
scientifically validated. I feel like all organized religions are just some
form of control and don't provide any benefit except for forcing an
association with a group that might not hold the same complete beliefs as I
do, but is essentially pushing those beliefs onto you by association.

One thing that kind of blows my mind still is how the engineers I work with
(some of the best most logically discerning minds) can believe in religion. It
seems counter intuitive. Maybe it's out of fear? Not sure. I used to be
religious though, and constantly thought about what makes my ancient book of
mumbo-jumbo more valid than someone elses book? And is it not messed up that
everyone is so divided and just because they were born to a culture or society
that does not believe a religion, they will all burn eternally? Seems shady to
me. Anyways, ridding my life of unfounded beliefs allowed me to realize the
value of life, empathize, and treat others equally, irrelevant of culture or
beliefs, whereas I feel like religion tries to make everyone else the "others"
who are less than.

~~~
meric
I believed the universe was full of planets before our scientists validated
it. My belief was based on the emotions I felt looking into the night sky full
of the stars. It’d be a dull life if I could not entertain thoughts and
feelings unless they were “scientifically validated”.

Be aware (just in case!) your perception of religion as merely a means of
control may be a projection of your own desire to control others, out of your
own fear of the unknown beyond what is “scientifically known”, and in doing so
have made the religious ones who are “others” who believe in something
“shady”, “others” who are less than you.

~~~
agitator
> I believed the universe was full of planets before our scientists validated
> it. My belief was based on the emotions I felt looking into the night sky
> full of the stars. It’d be a dull life if I could not entertain thoughts and
> feelings unless they were “scientifically validated”.

How old are you? ;) I completely agree with you. I love thinking and imagining
reasons for things that we do not yet have answers to. But at the same time I
recognize the probabilities of my explanations being correct. While, many
followers in organized religions blindly and devoutly believe that their
religion is the one true explanation, which is illogical to me.

>Be aware (just in case!) your perception of religion as merely a means of
control may be a projection of your own desire to control others, out of your
own fear of the unknown beyond what is “scientifically known”, and in doing so
have made the religious ones who are “others” who believe in something
“shady”, “others” who are less than you.

That's an interesting point. I've accepted that our lives are a temporary spec
of existence on an insignificant rock, and I'm oaky with that. I also believe
that we should fulfill our evolutionary purpose by propagating, improving
technology, and recording information for future generations. If I made it
seem that I think religious people are "less than" that is not how I feel. I'm
okay with anyone believing anything they want to help them get through their
day as long as they aren't harming others. My only point in that sense was the
confusion I face with people seeking evidence and facts while engineering
things and solving problems, but not applying the same scientific method to
everyday life.

A modern example I can think of when it comes to religions being a form of
control is how the republican party has a very profound base of religious
conservatives. Many of whom are working class people, but the republican party
is run mainly by wealthy elite. Most of the fiscal reforms that the republican
party espouses do not have a direct impact on the wealth of the working class,
but they republican party is able to capture all of these votes. (I have
religious family who seem to get most of their political influence from their
church). So many other historical examples of religion being a major
contributor to the success of empires and countries . The Roman empire and
Islamic empires being some examples. Helps you unify people, they are devout
because they are promised eternal salvation, etc.

------
mcv
I think my strongest belief is that we can never ever have any objective
evidence on whether or not God exists. I'm deeply suspicious of any attempt to
prove or disprove the existence of God.

I do belief God exists and created this universe, and as creator of this
universe, God is not subject to its laws, and therefore falls completely
outside the purview of science. This universe exists entirely because God
wants it to, and God[0] could interfere with this universe at any time without
leaving a trace, but clearly created a universe that is internally
consistent[1].

Due to not being subject to this universe, God must by necessity also exist
outside our concept of time (which is part of the universe according to
Einstein), and therefore presumably causality. This follows logically from the
above, but also conveniently solves an ancient dilemma about predestination.

I am Christian. I believe Jesus was some aspect of God that somehow became
human, to teach us and to carry our sins. I believe the Bible is for the most
part the result of divine revelation, but it has been written down by people,
usually in the context of that time, and occasionally been rewritten,
hopefully by well-meaning people.

Apart from the first paragraph, I'm not remotely sure of any of this. I'm a
fairly agnostic Christian. To claim to know the truth about God would be the
height of arrogance and hubris to me. I'm sure I'm wrong about some things,
though I believe I'm relatively close on most.

I believe this because it makes sense to me. It explains the existence of the
Bible, of Jesus, and of the religion He inspired, but it's strongly tempered
by my understanding of science.

[0] I'm reluctant to call God "he" here, because it would suggest I believe
God has gender, which I consider an silly idea. I do normally call him "he"
though. Mostly out of habit.

[1] Except maybe in Quantum Mechanics, and possibly Inflation, because the
former feels like a hack where we almost caught God in an inconsistency, and
the latter feels like a cheat to get the universe he wanted.

~~~
vanrysss
Why the Christian God, and not some other religion's ?

~~~
mcv
The Christian God is also from two other religions, but it's Jesus' teachings
in particular that appeal to me. Admittedly those teachings could be equally
valid without him being the son of God or the Messiah, but there are several
angles from which Christianity does make more sense to me than other
religions. Though I admit my knowledge about most other religions is much more
superficial.

I'm sure it also matters that I was raised a Christian, but my faith now is
not exactly the same as it was when I was young. It went through a lot of
phases before ending up like this.

------
brad0
I’ve had my worldview destroyed and changed so many times that personally I
don’t put too much weight on my current worldview. I believe I’m in the
minority though.

I believe my worldview is a tool to help me get what I want while avoiding the
things I don’t want. That’s probably the case for most people.

As my “wants” and “do not wants” change so does my worldview. Once I get the
thing I want or I can’t seem to get the thing I want then I have to re-
evaluate my worldview and/or wants.

I believe most people’s worldview is fairly static. They find something that
is good enough (they don’t suffer too much and they kind of get what they
want) and they stick with that. Problems happen when these two groups of
worldviews clash.

------
simonblack
True believers are also true non-believers. Thus, if you truly believe in the
Hindu gods, you can't also believe in the Christian or Muslim god.

It then becomes a matter of _which_ set of beliefs you espouse, and _why_. The
'why' is usually due to imprinting, in that your beliefs are the ones you were
first introduced to by your family, or close familiarity.

This also means there's is very little difference between (say) a devout
Christian and a committed Atheist, because the Atheist disbelieves in just one
more god than the devout Christian disbelieves in.

(To explain, assume there are 453 possible known deities: the Christian does
not believe in 452 of those, while the Atheist does not believe in 453 of
those.)

------
abeTom
A God who defines His paramount and most important characteristic as being
Holy not His power. The God Jehovah Jesus HolySpirit is the God who is worthy
of being called God. Scientific reasoning only proves to me the existence of
God as does historical evidence. The levels and layers of interdependent
complexities in the universe and living things in the macro and micro are
without a doubt proof of such an amazingly intelligent and powerful being.

Some things that confuse me are the stories of a global flood occurring and as
a result all humans deriving from noah. Why God seems to be amazing when it
comes to math and science and yet He spends a lot of his interaction with us
on the foibles of man because we are obviously flawed creatures ( I know that
I am ). As though He is surprised by how wretched and evil we are at times.

Evolution just seems to be the self generative and adaptive mechanistic
process by which God seems to build complex from the simple. I think that
doing it this way is harder than to just produce fully formed complex systems
whole cloth. It is actually a more thought out and elegant method of producing
robust survivable beings.

Just as an aside, it almost seems to me that when he created this universe, He
first started with what a human needs to be in order to have dexterity
(fingers etc..), intelligence, communication (vocal cords) and so on. Working
backwards creating a physical programming language(dna,rna) that synthesizes
molecules tailored exactly so for biochemical systems, to atoms to subatomic
particles and the forces/fields that govern/marshal these discrete particles.

Amazingly, these 92 elements had to be created in generations of stars and
neutron stars as only the simple element hydrogen existed.

sorry for rambling on.

~~~
agitator
Crediting our lack of understanding of the universe to a higher power is like
assigning thunder and lightening to Zeus. Now we know better.

~~~
owebmaster
Do we? The definition of an atom in the 1900s was wrong, but it was science at
the time. In 50 years, a lot of scientific definitions will radically change
but people keep saying that science > religion.

~~~
Garvey
I imagine, because science will change to reflect the new evidence, religion
doesn't...

------
pizza
I'm an agnostic (because agnosticism >> atheism in terms of empirical
strength), and the extent of my theological beliefs is: only an atheist can be
a true christian [0] and Matthew 10:34:

> "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send [or
> bring] peace, but a sword."

As for religion, I think it's mostly a vessel for 'naturally' (socially)
selected rituals, and the spirituality is tacked on after the fact [1]

[0]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1X_hwUEPelQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1X_hwUEPelQ)

[1] [https://medium.com/incerto/we-dont-know-what-we-are-
talking-...](https://medium.com/incerto/we-dont-know-what-we-are-talking-
about-when-we-talk-about-religion-3e65e6a3c44e)

------
mbrock
I think faiths and ideologies are group identities that pass me by since I'm a
perpetual outsider.

There are books and sayings and thoughts that I really appreciate and like to
think about... And I definitely have some personal biases, motivations,
desires... But I don't have a worldview that I could write down, and my views
on many things are marked by confusion, doubt, or pluralistic appreciation.

Here's one quote I like, by Paul Goodman:

 _Behavior is more graceful, forceful, and discriminating without the
intervention of the state, wardens, corporation executives, central planners,
and university presidents. These tend to create a chronic emergency that makes
them necessary. In most cases, the use of power to do a job is inefficient in
the fairly short run. Extrinsic power inhibits intrinsic function. "Soul is
self-moving," says Aristotle._

I tend to agree with that based on experience, but then, I'd also have to add
that it's a biased statement. Of course sometimes the state improves things,
the executive inspires, the planner gets things done, and the university
president has courage and wisdom...

Of all the spiritual traditions, Zen is the one I've been most interested in,
but as soon as you find some dogma in Zen, someone comes and slaps you.

Basically my worldview is that of a cosmic know-it-all without any concrete
suggestions. And then I just try to do whatever's in front of my nose to do,
as Henry Miller once said:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYL3mB3rAfU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYL3mB3rAfU)

I also like imaginative, powerful, crazy manifestos, like Hakim Bey's
"Temporary Autonomous Zone".

[http://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/taz.htm](http://www.sacred-
texts.com/eso/taz.htm)

And rather than join some political party, I'd rather be at home reading
Spinoza, Simone Weil, Huangbo, Van Gogh's letters, anthropology, McLuhan...

Sometimes I try to figure out, like, is private property good or evil? I just
don't know, man. There's so many ins and outs.

------
tboyd47
The main reasons I hold my belief in the religion of Islam to be true are its
compatibility with common sense and the overwhelming amount of outside
evidence in favor of it.

Unlike other religious groups that define faith as something you engage in
_despite_ facts (a "leap of faith"), I see it as a return to objectivity and
reason that is, first and foremost, based on facts.

The first fact I am referring to is the utter helplessness and dependency of
mankind on forces outside our control, and the seemingly perfect ordering of
everything in the natural world to our advantage even though cosmically we are
only a speck of dust and a blip in time.

The second is the existence of individuals throughout history who succeed
against all odds in calling their people to worship a wise Creator whom they
claim to be sent by, and whose teachings become guiding principles in the
minds of billions of people of different races, cultures, and languages.

There are many, many more signposts but these are the most obvious.

Specifically about Islam, I researched the religion before I embraced it and
found the exact opposite of what its detractors say. I found a moral teaching
superior to all others containing no contradictions with science or reason.
Every theological or moral problem that used to trouble me had an answer in
Islam, and not only that, but usually in the most ancient sources.

The clarity and "take it on face value" character of Islam was very satisfying
to me in a time of my life I was experiencing a lot of confusion. There are no
baffling paradoxes in Islam, or ranks of mystic knowledge to climb. It's about
accepting simple truths, like the Oneness of God, reality of death, etc. into
your heart in deeper and deeper ways, and a sense of communion based on that
that transcends millenia and unites continents.

Also, as a side note, there's a very important fact that atheists / agnostics
dismiss too easily, which is the answering of prayers. Until you yourself have
been in dire need, prayed for something improbable, then received it from a
direction you didn't expect, you can't understand the effect that experience
has. It's easy just to say, "you're imagining it," or, "confirmation bias."

I am not the type of person to enjoy religious flame wars, just posting for
those who are curious.

------
john_teller02
Sri Ramakrishna said that all religions are just different path to the same
divinity. Just like we call water by different names in different languages
but ultimately they all mean the same liquid that quenches thirst , similarly
different religions also lead to the same quenching of our spiritual thirst.
Sri Ramakrishna not only said that but he practiced reaching enlightenment
through different religions.

------
yesenadam
> Nearly everyone in this world holds to some central and defining philosopy
> or faith or religion that shapes the meaning of life for them.

Is that a fact? Seems like a false assumption to me. Unless you just mean
whatever deeper beliefs everyone has, whether aware of it or not, but it seems
you're making a stronger claim. For example, I'm in Australia, and I'd say 95%
at least of the people I've met in my life aren't among this "nearly
everyone".

------
ajeet_dhaliwal
The answer to this has some (however minimal) overlap to 'why do you believe
object oriented programming is a good idea?'

------
NumberCruncher
Your religion/faith/worldview has not to be correct, until it works for you.

A lot of people believe the world was created by God and he placed the fossils
into the ground to test our faith. Are they right? It doesn't matter much
until it works for them.

------
j_s
In no small part because any alternative is inconceivably unbearable.

------
muzani
Muslim here. I'm open to being convinced. In fact, if you want to convince me,
my inbox is open. I think it is possibly the most important question to decide
on, so I'd appreciate honest discussion. Most online discussions are rarely
civil because they're a little dishonest.

IMO, there is always going to be lack of evidence for or against. Agnosticism
is logical, but I would rather just pick something and experiment with it.
There's a theological/philosophical aspect of belief. But in the end, there
will always be too little evidence and we have to pick something.

Theological reasoning:

1\. First, it's not a problem we can solve. We're too busy living our lives,
working 40 hours a day. Tech and society in the last 3000 years hasn't helped
us with the problem at all. It's almost certain that someone in the past has
figured it out, with all the nobles spending their time on something. It's
possible some knowledge was destroyed, but for the most part, it's best to
work with existing frameworks.

2\. Religions are at their best as soon as they become popular. After a few
generations, they become corrupted as they're an easy way to seize power. So
be wary of anything that wasn't part of the original teachings.

3\. I think a God is inevitable. You have all these planets out there, some
billions of years older than ours. Even if a God didn't create the universe,
it's likely that one life form has spawned a godlike entity, at least compared
to ours.

4\. I don't believe that God is infinitely omnipotent or omnipowerful. But
relatively so. As in God might be able to destroy Earth in seconds, but that
doesn't necessarily mean he can teleport or possess people.

5\. Multiple gods are unlikely, because they'd be conflicted if ruling the
same space. If there are other gods, they might be governing other planets or
universes. But it doesn't matter. In the case of humans, it's likely that
there is one God governing us.

6\. If God doesn't care about us, then there is no purpose to this exercise.
Earth would be accidental, like an old can of soup which bacteria somehow
developed from, and we would be the bacteria. If God doesn't care, then there
will never be enough evidence to work from and this could well be the case.

7\. But the Abrahamic God really seems to care.

8\. If God cared, he would at least let us know before destroying us for being
infidels. Hence the Prophets - Jesus, Moses, Muhammad, etc.

9\. Muhammad was also an outstanding individual, very brilliant and lucky.
He's either a genius or divinely guided. Not a lot of people go from being an
outcast in his 50s to building an empire that conquers Byzantine Rome and the
Persians.

Practical reasoning:

1\. Pascal's Wager.

2\. A variation of Pascal's Wager: I can't see a situation where I'd be
happier in life, as an atheist. The Buddhism approach of "life is
suffering/impermanent" seems to be the logical outlook. A life as an atheist
would mean living in constant existential crisis. I donate, without anyone
seeing my donations, because I feel God would reward me for it. Maybe God
doesn't actually care, but it makes my life pleasant to think he does.
Religion acts as a placebo. Why would I want to remove a placebo if it works?

3\. The Prophet Muhammad and his companions were great role models. People
seem to point out his marriage life as a negative, but the other 99% of his
life were great. Very honest, friendly, forgave enemies, very down to earth
despite their power. If Muhammad says believe in Allah, then I'd do so.

4\. I think life has to be anchored on to something. Should I take Job A or
Job B? Which brings me closer to God? Is Job A more sinful? Sinful isn't just
sex, drugs and murder. It can be subtle things like usury, which is
profitable, and very well respected.

5\. If God cares that we believe, then we should be fine asking for things.
God has near unlimited resources; we could basically ask for anything without
annoying him, and the act of prayer is also an act of worship because it
demonstrates our faith.

6\. Completely anecdotal, but Allah answers my prayers. I pray for money, I
receive quite a lot of money. I pray to meet people for guidance, I get to
meet people who give guidance. I pray for parking, a parking spot opens up. I
pray for a banana in the desert, someone gives me a banana the next morning.

~~~
mycat
For a muslim, I would suggest to be extra careful with choice of words
describing God especially with point No. 3 and 4.

I don't know if I understand what you really meant to convey (your context,
nuances, etc.), but you would not want to accidentally commit subtle shirk and
invalidate your faith without even noticing.

We don't think about God. We think about God's creations instead.

~~~
muzani
With regards to point 4, the 99 names of Allah supports this. It's very
precise on which parts Allah is powerful at, e.g. The Creator, The Raiser of
the Dead. There is still omnipotence, just not infinitely so.

Also if you look at wording, it's things like "Most Merciful" rather than
infinitely merciful.

~~~
Kareeeeem
Dear Muzani, I want to refer you to these verses. There are many like it.

وَلِكُلٍّ وِجْهَةٌ هُوَ مُوَلِّيهَا ۖ فَاسْتَبِقُوا الْخَيْرَاتِ ۚ أَيْنَ مَا
تَكُونُوا يَأْتِ بِكُمُ اللَّهُ جَمِيعًا ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ
قَدِيرٌ - 2:148

بَدِيعُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ ۖ وَإِذَا قَضَىٰ أَمْرًا فَإِنَّمَا يَقُولُ
لَهُ كُن فَيَكُونُ - 2:117

And you have overlooked other attributes, such as al-Qadir.

I also want to say that translations often lack the complete meaning of the
original text. We can't base our theology upon a translation such as "Most
Merciful".

------
mabynogy
The more an idea is operational the more it is correct.

