Hey hippie, go on a mission.

I have two sons on missions right now, If I thought there was something better for a 20 yr old to do, I would have suggested that to them.

-David

To know beyond any doubt that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only true Church of God upon the earth is not something that can be believed in simply because our parents and others told us. If that were the only reason that I should believe it's true, then when the stroms of life come, and the unbelieving people make fun of my testimony, which I hold sacred, and they try to belittle it and say there's no such thing, then I would end up caving in to that sooner or later. You cannot have a true testimony of this Church unless the Holy Ghost burns it into the deepest recesses of your spirit. It is something that is incomprehensible to some people who have posted on this site. Yet it is true. Only the Spirit can bear such a witness as to leave me knowing, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that this is the Church of Jesus Christ upon the earth. Whether you ask me to live for it (by attending church, serving others, and doing all I can to be a good disciple of Christ) or die for it - I shall be glad to do it. No reproach and belittling by those who do not understand such things can erase what the Spirit has imprinted on my soul. Yes, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only true and restored Church of Jesus Christ. It contains the fullness of His Gospel, just as Isaiah and all the prophets of old testified it would happen "in the last days." I invite the reader to search it out in his/her own heart and prayers. God will make the truth of it known to you - not me, or anyone else.

Hey, Big Cow,

(Wow...I feel like I should apologize after typing that.)

I read your post. It's not so far down the list. I understand your points with Chase's blog, but, in fairness, I have to admit, I did not get the same impression of him as trying to present himself as an insider.

My general impression is that he is attempting to say, "Hey, I'm human. I self-identify as a Saint. And I have things I want to share. And, by the way, did I mention that I am human?"

I have the impression that he is attempting to say to people that, whether it is he or anyone else, we should not be so quick to put one another in boxes or slap labels on them, and that an open and healthy dialogue can work wonders.
-The GMan

This is so far down the list I'm sure no one will read it, but it's good for me to think this through for myself out loud anyway, I think.

When I read your post, it irritated me. But first let me tell you what *didn't* irritate me about it:

I don't care that you have long hair. I don't care that you like to ask tough questions and disagree with Church leadership from time to time. I don't care that you only go to church when you want to. I don't care that you have a personal relationship with God that is perhaps somewhat different than the average LDS person.

The post irritates me because you have a forum to discuss Mormonism as an insider. YOU ARE NOT AN INSIDER. Great, go ahead and comment on Mormon doctrine and Utah Mormon culture; I'm sure you understand it all very well. But you don't understand what it's like to BE Mormon. Being Mormon means going to Church when you don't want to; it means sacrificing two years of your life to do something you may not want to do, and 10% of your income to purposes you only vaguely understand. Being an insider means being a part of a Mormon community and making some COMMITMENTs and contributions to that community. Being an insider means sometimes substituting faith for reason, not just when it feels good, as you seem willing to do, but also when it feels very, very bad.

These sacrifices may in the end not be necessary to have a relationship with God - it seems you believe that. They may not be necessary to salvation, or to your happiness in life. But they are necessary to understanding Mormonism. At least from the inside. So don't pretend to be something you're not. That would be dishonest - and I would hope that honesty is one tenet of Mormonism you have decided include in your own religion.

It's so refreshing to hear your story. I'm LDS and I feel like so many people only see the "Utah" side of mormonism. I was raised in Tennessee and I don't feel like the church controls my life. I'm fully active and I have faith in the church and I follow the guidelines that are set by the church. The problem is that "Utah" mormons make up their own rules and make living the gospel harder than it has to be. The Lord knows we aren't perfect and that's why we have repentance. Yes we should strive for perfection but that doesn't mean it's gonna happen. Even the prophet Gordon B. Hinckley takes the sacrament and repents every day. Yes his sins are extremely minute compared to most of us but he still has to strive for perfection everyday.

Chase, Thank you for your comments and your openness. I was baptised into the LDS church in 1999 and have been extremely thankful for my decision every moment of my life.

Thank you Mike K for your comment as well. I have found that the LDS people as a "whole" are non-judgmental. There may be some that do and for them, that is their weakness to work on.

My husband has served in Iraq twice and is LDS. He had some amazing spiritual experiences there even with all the pain and suffering.

I just wanted to say thanks for sharing and I hope and this blog will show the true nature of the majority of LDS people besides what others think of us and what they think we believe.

Chase, regarding your statement "...I would argue that a majority of LDS members are accepting and kind people, but they are constantly overshadowed by those with negative attitudes toward non-believers", I would like to agree with you strongly. I'm gay and Jewish. While there have been a couple of notable exceptions, the vast majority of the time I spend with LDS friends, or in an LDS chapel, I am welcomed with big smiles and open arms. There are enough comments above from born-again evangelistic atheists who shout the same kind of hellfire and brimstone toward those they condemn that I can honestly say that religion as a whole isn't the problem, it's overzealotry of a very few individuals.

“Merciful heavens!” as my grandmother says. It’s great to read all these responses. I’ve been camping in southern Utah for several days so, as you can imagine, I’m overwhelmed with all the comments, but pleased nonetheless.

A few responses to some of the comments:

I’m not claiming to be the only LDS Democrat. About 20% of LDS members are registered as Democrats.

LDS Americans tend to be extremely patriotic. I’m not familiar with any specific statistics of LDS members enlisting in the military, but I do know the military has made efforts to recruit return missionaries because of their linguistic skills. Several of my older brother’s friends returned from missions speaking Arabic and abruptly moved to Washington D.C. several years later to work at the “Department of Transportation”, or take office jobs at the Pentagon, etc. I have a feeling they aren’t doing paper work, if you know what I mean.

Chelsea’s comment is an extreme witness to my faith. “The church is perfect, the people are not.” I believe the Lord has entrusted his children, the human race, to fulfill his expectations to the best of their ability. Unfortunately, we all know the human race is pretty preposterous in their selfishness, ruthlessness, and egotism. The leadership of my church is in no way perfect. The people of my church are in no way perfect. But again, we are all just people, trying our best.

I can relate to the many stories about people being shunned by LDS members. Trust me, I’ve been pushed out of circles and judged within the church. However, I would argue that a majority of LDS members are accepting and kind people, but they are constantly overshadowed by those with negative attitudes toward non-believers.

Thanks so much for all the constructive comments. I wont even bother with the unconstructive comments. Well, except for “Anonymous” who made the LSD joke. C’mon dude, that joke is SO old. ;)

Hey, I stumbled on this blog through googlenews. I wanted to write a thanks for sharing. I am a black male who was definitely NOT raised in the Church, but came to know that the Church is true despite protestations and self-denial. I could not deny the Holy Spirit (Who had revealed to me some years before that Jesus is the Christ) when He bore witness to me that the Church is the true Church of God. Having attended other churches throughout the years and enjoyed many friendships therein, this was quite a revelation. (Oh,yeah...AND being of African and of Native American decent, this was quite a revelation, to say the least.) But, as I wrote above, I could NOT deny the Holy Spirit's witness. I suppose I am what one would consider "faithful" in that I attend Church meetings, and faithful in my marriage (even though I face a pending divorce), am active and loving and the sole provider and nurturer for my three children, continually gain education, strive to excel in my profession in law enforcement and criminal justice, fulfill and strive to magnify my callings, serve and love my neighbors, pray, listen, pray some more, et cetera. However, I also realize what you so plainly wrote: faithfulness has a lot to do with one's convictions. What others see on the outside may or may not be the true self: only the Lord can plumb the hearts of men. This, I know, all too well.
Hey--always remember that it can eternally be well with your soul as long as you rely upon the Lord of Hosts to be the true lord of your life. Let Him guide you as He desires, because His timetable for you is not the same as His timetable for your pewmates.
And, by the way, to Francois: I attended a fine college/university in South Carolina--the thirteenth oldest institution of higher learning on this continent, the FIRST municipal college on this continent--The College of Charleston, founded in 1770. Hey--it's older than this nation, and it doesn't have a three ring circus of a show when it comes to running debates or choosing its next president. Attending university anywhere is really what the student makes of it. Some of the best law enforcement officers I work with haven't attended any of the great universities, but they live lives in such a way that they are trusted, and our community is extremely safe and prospers, partly because of their efforts.
Shalom.
-The GMan

Brian,

Attending the best university in Utah is equivalent of attending the best university in South Carolina.

Its not saying much.

-Francois

Great post, Chase.

I appreciate the diversity you bring to the LDS Church. That, and you are attending the best university in Utah!

May God bless you as you seek to attend your meetings and strengthen your faith.

Religious thinking is the epitome of in-the-box thinking.
The box is shaped like a church.
In that box everybody nods together and thinks the same things.
Thus is everyone's belief reinforced and cemented.
The greatest lies and the most nonsensical ideas,
are irresistible in such a box.
The process is also known as groupthink;and is the same thought system
that brought down the WTC on 9/11.

Religious thinking is the epitome of thinking in the box.
The box is shaped like a church.
In that box everybody nods together and thinks the same things.
Thus is everyone's belief reinforced and cemented.
The greatest lies and the most nonsensical ideas,
are irresistible in such a box.

The middle east,and the US are maybe
the last great bastions of ancient religious superstitions,
where they continue to indoctrinate their children
into believing in the supernatural.
One day.hopefully,it will be against the law.

Anon,

That is interesting. Because it seems to me that at least atheists on the net follow the Pauline counsel of everyone “speaking the same thing” as well as anybody, that is, their discourse is quite homogonous. They all like to refer to the same charismatic sages (Harris, Dawkins) and tell unbelievers in Atheism to read them so they can be saved from the darkness of irrationality. So I guess it could be said they have similar evangelizing techniques, which rely on their own version of “Holy Books.”

I am not talking about all non-believers of course, but I find it hard to imagine that sociologists would not see the current “neo-atheism” phenomena as a distinct ideological social group analogous to religion.

Not to say you believe what you believe because of “group think.” I don’t think it is a very useful concept anyways because if it is a human reality it’s probably so universal (we are all social animals who display similar attributes of sociality) that it could explain everything. Concepts that explain everything can have a way of explaining nothing when making comparisons between social groups.

Neo-Atheism, like most ideologies, are not seen as ideologies by the ideologues themselves, they’re simply the way things are. Which makes the religious and irreligious not so different after all—is that such a bad thing?

Best to you!

Jd1

Chase, your post WAS refreshing. As an active member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a liberal (in spite of anyone else's definition of what a "liberal" is), and a Democrat, I appreciate hearing from you and seeing some diversity among my fellow church members. In my ward is a young African American guy who has dyed his hair electric blue and braids it in a hundred tiny "corn row" braids. He dresses in a casual, avant-garde fashion and wears a lot of chains. He often comes to church with a large Seven-Eleven cup with a dark beverage. I don't think it's root beer. I'm sure there are the "goody-two-shoes" types in our ward who find his appearance and demeanor offensive, but I find him refreshingly honest, well versed in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, able to talk intelligently about politics, doesn't appear to have one dominant, narrow view of things, and is open to all kinds of discussion and dialogue. He has studied seriously regarding the question of "priesthood and the blacks" and is interested in making constructive, reasonable contributions in priesthood and Sunday School discussions on the topic when it arises.

I'm sure that he, as has Chase, would (and does) come under personal condemnation from those who find his belief in the precepts of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints unrealistic, unacceptable, and unconscionable. The great thing about it is, these are HIS beliefs.

I always marvel when I read the criticisms in this space from those who so freely take on others' views while so vehemently promoting their own.

I know that Mormons (like their other Christian, Jewish, Protestant or unbelieving counterparts) can be arrogant, one-sided, snooty, and self-congratulatory. But there are a few of us who are sort of normal, "regular" guys and "gals," (if I can use that antiquated term) who don't really care about the length of a person's hair, the frequency with which they attend church meetings, their skin tone, or their personal religious or non-religious beliefs. We're all just people. There are some of you who would never like me after we met, and others who, in spite of my religious beliefs (or my doubts about them) would find me sort of "normal." Can't we just give that a try a little more often than at present?

Eric;

There is no atheist groupthink,because there is no atheist group.The groupthink occurs in mosques and churches and synagogues and temples where groups gather to reinforce their supersitious beliefs.

Atheists are the ones who stopped going to the groups.Atheists are the ones who backed off,and questioned the dogma.Atheists are the ones who resisted the groupthink.
Atheists are mostly just people looking for the truth,and not finding it in religions that promote belief in magic.Atheists are the ones who choose the rational over the irrational.

Yoyo,
I appreciate the slight change in tone of your final post. Since it left the ball in my court, I'll respond.

Putting aside the question of the existence of God, which does indeed require faith and therefore will not be proven unless He decides to change His approach on the matter (which I consider very unlikely since I think that there are very plausible, good reasons for how this world is set up), I will outline some reasons that I would still believe the LDS religion to be a positive in people's lives:

1. Every adult person is considered self-actualizing and self-accountable, including the responsibility to learn, grow and change day by day, year by year. The blame game is gone.

2. The council form of leadership (whether in homes and families or in churches or governments) is paramount, including differences of opinion freely expressed and discussed. Gone are tyrannical or bombastic leadership. In the LDS church, "unrighteous dominion" is regarded as seriously wrong, and unacceptable.

3. Love of others means actions, service, kindness and respect will be uppermost in how LDS treat others and reach out to alleviate suffering in the world.

4. Education throughout the world is championed as the most important means of helping shape the world for the better.

5. Humankind has been given a very important stewardship over the earth and its resources, which requires responsible, ethical, long-term planning and conservation.

6. The world is seen as a good place that can be made better as people with their many individual gifts, talents, and differences work together in a synergy that is attainable.

We ought to start today. All the best to you, kind friend.

Parker;

my closing comment

For arguments sake,let's pretend there is no god.
OK? There is no god...lets pretend.
Now,in that event,would the comments from nonbelievers seem rude and abusive? I don't think so.
They may then seem like perfectly responsible arguments.
Mother Teresa had doubt about God's existence.
Even she.And I don't blame her.She was wise to doubt,despite her lifelong belief.
Not only is there no proof of a God,there isn't even any evidence.
If there was a God,it would be evident to all,and there would be no nonbelievers.
Religious folk assume there's a God because that's what they have been told.
The fact that there is no evidence is why we are required to have faith.Faith means to believe in the unlikely. If as children we are told there is a god,and if such an idea surrounds us at home and in the community,we will believe it.It doesn't have to be true for us to believe it.It is difficult to overcome.
Why else do different people in different cultures believe different things about life?
Not because of truth,obviously,but because of what they were told to believe while growing up.
And remember,almost all atheists were once believers;but they moved on.
It's time we all moved on,before our religious cousins in the Middle East blow us all up, for God.

Thanks for the discussion Parker. Bye now.

Interesting to observe the comments of those against religious feelings and beliefs. It most often quickly reverts to playground language, if sometimes in fancier words: "naivite, boogieman, indoctrinated, hypnotized, lemmings, absurd egoism, feeble souls, ridiculous, deluded." Such playground tactics are amusing. Bully for you--but don't expect me to bullied by you, and don't think that your scoffing and disrespect elevate your believability. Quite the opposite is true. Happy reasoning and thinking to all.

Hmmm,

A hundred atheists have converged here to toss insults at people of faith and then claim that they are more moral than people with religion....

I can't say that I aspire to have my life resemble their particular version of groupthink.

The tolerant ones here have been the Mormons.

Religious thinking is the epitome of thinking in the box.
The box is shaped like a church.
In that box everybody nods together and thinks the same things.
Thus is everyone's belief reinforced and cemented.
The greatest lies and the most nonsensical ideas,
are irresistible in such a box.

The middle east,and the US are maybe
the last great bastions of ancient religious superstitions,
where they continue to indoctrinate their children
into believing in the supernatural.
One day it will be against the law.

DCM

Poor lad. You've got it bad don't you?
You're howling like someone took your Teddy Bear.
The default position on the god question is that there isn't a god.
If you are deluded enough to believe that there is a god,the onus is on YOU to prove it.
You just don't get it do you?
God is an ancient superstition with no grounding in reality.
Reality is all we got.Everything else is wishful thinking.
May the emptiness be with you.

Do any of you folks have spell check ?

Brethren and Sisters, I mean brothers and sisters, it is good to know just how diversify and great this earth is. It is big enough to hold all of us inspite all our differences and beliefs. I can say with out doubt that each one of us is molded by our prior personal experiences, those of our parents, friends, enemies, those we hate or disliked, esteemed, worship etc.. Like many of you I do have my own personal beliefs. Many are based on faith, that is believing in things that I can not see, yet I know to be true because there is an inner feeling within me that testifies to me that these things are true. Much the same way many who do not believe or accept the same for there is deep seated reasonning that tells them not to believe. Yet they will take the time to tell others that they need to let go and see things their way. Yet refuse to try that which they abhor.

Let me put it this way. A thousand people stood on the ground facing heavenward. A bird flew overhead from one direction to another. Not more than 2 people fully agreed on the type, size, weight, direction of flight, color or anything about the bird. Does that tell us something about ourselves.

Take a thousand blind men and station them on different sides of an elephant and you would receive the same as in the first illustration.

I hold each of you with great respect as to your views. No one can convince anyone else on what is right or wrong lest you or I personally decide to make that change.

We are from the same place, yet, we are different. I believe this is because we have been given the right to choose for ourselves who we are, what we are to be come and what we will do with our lives. As our lives move us forward to our desitinies, our eyes will open and we will see more of the world even from a slightly different perspective base on what has touched us or what we allow to have touched our lives.

When I was a baby I knew nothing and remembered nothing. By the time I was five I learned a few things good and bad IAW society either on my own or from others within my circle. As my circle becomes bigger and as it changes due to circumstances beyond my control, my thought process and beliefs also changes.
As I continue on my way upward, education, readings, likes and dislikes, friends, etc, etc,... continue to influence my life. When I finally decide to take control of my owm life, I made some great changes that got me to where I am today at the age of 58. It has been a wonderful, long, tedious, and at times frustrating trip.

I can say for sure at this point that I know what I want and where I am going. I have been just about everywhere, have experienced many different cultures,religions, and even at one point claim to believe in nothing. What I found is that even when I believed in nothing, I did believed in something. I believed that nothing is true about religion. That,my friends, is truely a belief.

If you wish to know what I believe in now, let me make absolutely clear and without excuse. That I believe in God the father and his son Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost. Yet, I hold each and every one of you with the most of respect for who you are and what you want to be. And, yes, I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saint. I am also a retiree who served this great nation, 5 years in the USMC and 16 years in the United States Army. Oh! I am not a republican. I am a cross over between the Democrats and a free soul. I make no assumptions about myself and will not do it with anyone else.

Each is a soul, true only to ones self, and will not change till one desires to change.

I have walked many footsteps and have followed in many. Now I can say without doubt, the one I walk are the one that I have chosen for my self after countless years of experience.

To all of you, may the God of my forefathers walk with you and may his spirit come upon you as it did me when I needed him most.

God Bless YA All.

Yolande wrote "demand evidence". I agree. The evidence supports the supernatural. I provided two solid examples in addition to the life of Jesus. Those examples were dismissed with the condemning fact: "it's nonsense". Being an atheist or secularist is just as much of a belief system as any other, and to assert it with absolute certainty is hypocrisy. People of that belief who earnestly search to validate or prove their position end up converting. Examples: C.S. Lewis, Lee Stroebel. The amount of evidence and history surrounding the Judeo-Christian story is incredible.

Also, you cannot cite the harm that religion has done(e.g. 9/11) unless you compare it to the same circumstances without religion(like drug vs placebo). I don't think that humans have peaceful, loving societies that are led to war and violence by religion. All together it is probably the other way around.

Finally YoYo posted "the God hypothesis seems naive in a modern world". Is there an alternative hypothesis other than "nothing exists except for what we see every day, it exists for no reason and ends for us when we die"? It is hard to live a life without a known purpose so it makes sense to make searching for the purpose a high priority even if a firm conclusion can't be reached.

Of course this has to be done with a critical mind. There is a lot of crazy religion out there but it doesn't mean there isn't a true one. We don't dismiss all of science just because of a group like The Flat Earth Society. Religion has many less checks and balances than science and so there are a lot more religious versions of The Flat Earth Society.

Yolande wrote "demand evidence". This is my point. The evidence supports God. I provided two examples in addition to the life of Jesus. If those are bad examples there are others. Being an atheist or secularist is just as much of a belief system as any other, and to assert it with absolute certainty is hypocrisy. People of that belief who earnestly search to validate or prove their position end up converting. Examples: C.S. Lewis, Lee Stroebel, myself. The amount of evidence and history surrounding the Judeo-Christian story is incredible.

Also, you cannot cite the harm that religion has done(e.g. 9/11) unless you compare it to the same circumstances without religion(like drug vs placebo). I don't think that humans are peaceful, loving creatures who are led to war and violence by religion, probably the other way around.

Yolande wrote "demand evidence". This is my point. The evidence supports God. I provided two examples in addition to the life of Jesus. If those are bad examples there are others. Being an atheist or secularist is just as much of a belief system as any other, and to assert it with absolute certainty is hypocrisy. People of that belief who earnestly search to validate or prove their position end up converting. Examples: C.S. Lewis, Lee Stroebel, myself. The amount of evidence and history surrounding the Judeo-Christian story is incredible.

Also, you cannot cite the harm that religion has done(e.g. 9/11) unless you compare it to the same circumstances without religion(like drug vs placebo). I don't think that humans are peaceful, loving creatures who are led to war and violence by religion, probably the other way around.

Parker;
Hi.Saw your Darwin quote.Its many years since I read Descent of Man.Excellent little book.
Morality didn't start with religion.As another commenter said on another thread,morality is about empathy.Empathy starts at home,and hopefully spreads to the group,or culture.
Also what they call reciprocal altruism can be seen in chimps and other mammals.Our ancestors were moral before they invented religion.
Do unto others was the only way to go,if you wanted others to do unto you.
You don't need a God to tell you that.Its simple good sense,and you survive and flourish that way.

Allow me to recommend an excellent book
,by Franz de Waal,called "Primates and Philosophers;How Morality Evolved".
Come to think of it,God was not mentioned in this study of morality;and the word religion was used once or twice,but just in passing.
The God hypothesis seems naive in a modern world.
Have a nice day.

YD,
Thanks for your thoughts. You may not "need a god," and I may not "need a god" to have ethical and moral behavior, but Darwin clearly saw a positive role that religion can play in society. Just because I have a personal knowledge about why and how all this works and where it leads, doesn't mean you would believe me. I think Darwin foresaw how history would and will play itself out, and certainly saw the need for positive social interaction that allows for differences of belief. Best to you.

Tolstoy,in his little book,'What Is Art',
says that patriotism is an evil because it sets men against each other.
I think religion is evil for the same reason.
If it wasn't for religion,the World Trade Center would still be there,
and we wouldn't be in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Think of the suicide bombers.What they believed was every bit as outrageous as what Mormons believe.
Not that Mormons believe in martydom and 72 virgins and all that.But its equally nonsensical.Both believe in the Sky God because they are told too,and all the rest of it,angels and heaven and devils and hell and so forth.
Why is it we have to be dead before we see any of this? Why do we have to be dead and buried before we can see God? Sounds like a bit of a con to me.

Parker;

I'm not sure what your point is with the Darwin quotes,unless you're trying to tie morality and ethical behavior to religion.
I think Darwin here is talking about sensible social behavior.
His first paragraph talks about what it takes for a tribe to jell and thrive,and the importance of morality.The second paragraph seems optimistic about the future in that regard.
Darwin came from a religious family,and had considered becoming becoming a parson at one stage,so I've read.
In his later years,he somewhat regretted that his theory of Evolution weakened the position of religion;not just among the population,but in himself too.It taught him that god was unlikely,where before he had been a believer,like most people.This apparently really bothered him.

There was morality before religion.Even apes know that 'you scrub my back,I'll scratch your back',is a good idea.Apes have to get along like people have to get along.Belonging to a group is great survival strategy.

Doesn't say anything about a god.We do not need a god.Darwin showed that Adam and Eve is a fairy story,and that we are descended from lower life forms,and have arrived at this place and time because of evolution.
Respectfully,
YD

Darwin wrote in "Descent of Man": "With increased experience and reason, man perceives the more remote consequences of his actions, and the self-regarding virtues, such as temperance, chastity, &c., which during early times are, as we have before seen, utterly disregarded, come to be highly esteemed or even held sacred. I need not, however, repeat what I have said on this head in the fourth chapter. Ultimately our moral sense or conscience becomes a highly complex sentiment-originating in the social instincts, largely guided by the approbation of our fellow-men, ruled by reason, self-interest, and in later times by deep religious feelings, and confirmed by instruction and habit.
It must not be forgotten that although a high standard of morality gives but a slight or no advantage to each individual man and his children over the other men of the same tribe, yet that an increase in the number of well-endowed men and an advancement in the standard of morality will certainly give an immense advantage to one tribe over another. A tribe including many members who, from possessing in a high degree the spirit of patriotism, fidelity, obedience, courage, and sympathy, were always ready to aid one another, and to sacrifice themselves for the common good, would be victorious over most other tribes; and this would be natural selection...

"We compare the weakened impression of a past temptation with the ever present social instincts, or with habits, gained in early youth and strengthened during our whole lives, until they have become almost as strong as instincts. If with the temptation still before us we do not yield, it is because either the social instinct or some custom is at the moment predominant, or because we have learnt that it will appear to us hereafter the stronger, when compared with the weakened impression of the temptation, and we realise that its violation would cause us suffering. Looking to future generations, there is no cause to fear that the social instincts will grow weaker, and we may expect that virtuous habits will grow stronger, becoming perhaps fixed by inheritance. In this case the struggle between our higher and lower impulses will be less severe, and virtue will be triumphant."

Darwin wrote well. He explained natural selection as regards the advance of civilization well. We can learn from him, and hope for the advance he spoke of.

Chase;
You seem like a hip young dude.You probably sit up nights playing Charlie Parker and Coltrane albums while puffing on reefers.That's cool.I can dig it.

I'd like to recommend a few books you might like;

"Why I Am Not A Christian" by Bertrand Russell.

"The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins.

"The End Of Faith" by Sam Harris.

Seriously,you owe it to yourself to check out at least one of them,to help you as you go forward from here.
Those of us who grew up without religion see it as quite ridiculous.That's the perspective from the outside looking in.
To be on the inside is to be part of a groupthink.
To be on the inside is to be in the box that academics tell us to think outside of.
The above books will help you regain a truer perspective of existence and the cosmos.especially the Russell.
Good luck and happy reading.
Zoot

Paddy Hourihane,

Good post, its really funny and wonderfully sarcastic.

Thanks for that, you made my day.

Chase.Get your hair cut.You are a disgrace to your religion.

Chase

You are a man after me own heart.Loosening your connection to Mormonism is a brave move.
Maybe you should now consider moving closer to God by becoming a Roman Catholic.
There really is a God y'know,and he favors the Pope.
It is not your fault that you were handicapped by being born into the Mormon faith.You are young enough to move on.
God will forgive you for that which is no fault of your own.
Ignore the atheists amongst us.They are without the truth.They will all burn in the great fire that lies in wait.It will be fun to watch them writhe and scream.I wouldn't miss it for the world.God has fun with dead atheists.
I'm not sure about dead Mormons.But at least they believe.That is the main thing.
God be with you my son.

Why are Chase's delusions published in the Washington Post?

The Post's website should be ashamed for publishing such drivel.

Thanks Yoyo for all those great Einstein quotes.
Well worth reading.But don't hold your breath if you expect the religiously deluded to actually read them.Most will not be remotely interested in what really intelligent people think,or write.
They've got the disease called faith.And faith means never having to make sense.

DCM

There's simply no evidence of a supernatural world outside of Hollywood. The actual supernatural world is our imaginations,where anything and everything exists.
Demand evidence. You sound so desperate to believe,I guess nobody can make you see reality.
Your reports of "miracles" are nonsense,and not even close to being evidence.
Repeat after me...there is no god,and there is no supernatural world.
There is life after religion,even if there is no life after death.

George Miller wrote:

So, you live in the United States according to Kenny? This country is a democracy, of the people, by the pople and for the people, not of Kenny alone, for Kenny alone, much by Kenny alone.

Get a clue and let people live their lives. I disagree with Chase but he is entitled to coexist with narrow minds like you.
---------------------------------------

I can't be "saddened" there are entire groups of people that actually believe the ridiculous? Especially in terms of Mormonism, it'd be difficult to make up a more silly religion, even if you tried.

I never said I can't "coexist" with believers, the only option is to ignore them and fight them when their religion might effect me.

And by the way, their views do effect me personally, whether its resistance to stem cell research, evolution debates that make our entire country look backwards, or having a President who thinks "God" is on our side...

Its difficult not to be disheartened when millions of people based their worldview and morality on bronze-age text from a desert.

The Free Speech Movement set off the counterculture of the '60s which all too often was more Holy Roller than Bay City Rollers. The free-flow of emotion, and wildness with drugs was all too much like gibbering in tongues and handling snakes. No wonder, since many children of fanatic evangelical upbringing, fled home in the false hope of finding freedom and found their way to the West Coast. The Free Speech Movement was about freethinking. Trusting your feelings as a first thought, leads to gut level reflex choice in line with training because that's a return to emotional comfort. No one has the answer for your life, your challenge is to find your own understanding; a flexible best fit for your present circumstance and situation. Good Luck, a lot of people are stuck in a no-win situation with no escape, where they take the deal handed to them hoping they are not being set up for a fall.

Kenneth,

So, you live in the United States according to Kenny? This country is a democracy, of the people, by the pople and for the people, not of Kenny alone, for Kenny alone, much by Kenny alone.

Get a clue and let people live their lives. I disagree with Chase but he is entitled to coexist with narrow minds like you.

Kenneth,

So, you live in the United States according to Kenny? This country is a democracy, of the people, by the pople and for the people, not of Kenny alone, for Kenny alone, much by Kenny alone.

Get a clue and let people live their lives. I disagree with Chase but he is entitled to coexist with narrow minds like you.

Philisophical arguments for and against God are worthwhile, but it is not reasonable to limit the debate there. To say that supernatural events have not occurred is not reasonable or based on any fact. The appearance of Mary and miracle at Fatima was witnessed by 70,000 people including journalists. Mexico converted to Christianity virtually overnight following Guadalupe(sp?). Yes we may be able to explain them someday but the question remains, why? We can explain the phychology and neurology of love and to someone who hasn't experienced it, they can look down on it. So is it real or not? Jesus definitely existed, and it is reasonable to say that his life changed the world more than any other historical event. That doesn't validate a religion or say he is God, but it can't be discounted. We can figure out every single physical law and it still doesn't answer why. To say there is no reason or we can't know is as much as a cop out as someone who declares complete certainty about a religion. Nothing expands the intellect like studying religion.

Yoyo,
I am totally fine with your atheism, and the euphemisms that you use and quote from Einstein (the last line you quoted) to defend your position. (I was surprised to read that from Einstein, as he usually uses non-judgmental language with dignity and stimulated thought.)

My reality is just different than yours, or encompasses different areas such that they don't overlap in all cases. What you think you see in the LDS religion is somewhat like thinking you see the whole iceberg when you only see what is visible to you--it goes so much deeper that you have no idea what you're talking about. I don't fear death at all, nor do the people around me--not one tiny bit.

What amuses me is that extending Darwinism or Dawkinism to millions of possibilities of life in the universe and to millions of years of time in both directions, yields a progression that is the basis of the theory of evolution that would of course project beings somewhere in the universes and somewhere in time who are far more knowledgable and far more loving than the most knowledgable or loving of any beings who are living among us.

But I'm sure your atheism serves you well, so enjoy your journey into the unknown, and so will I but joyfully and wonderingly at the same beauty and truths that Einstein spoke of, just in more directions. Regards.

Parker
Don't mean to rub it in,but in the Einstein quote,I do agree with the old guy where he says on the last line,"such notions are for the fears or absurd egoism of feeble souls".
As an atheist,that is how I see most religious people.Scared of death and wanting to believe anything that says there is no death.And wanting to believe in a big old white bearded God in the sky to take care of them when they "die".
But for many of us,religion has no more credibility than astrology,or spiritualism,or crystal ball gazing.
God seems to be an absurd hypothesis that is totally irrational,in an otherwise rational universe.
Which surely is why Einstein rejected it.

Hi Parker;
Best I can do at such short notice is this one from "The World as I see It."
The first part of the first sentence says it all;

"A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate,of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty,which are only accessible to our reason in their their most elementary forms...it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude;in this sense,and in this alone,I am a deeply religious man.
I cannot conceive of a god who rewards and punishes his creatures,or has a will of the type of which we are conscious in ourselves.
An individual who should survive his physical death is also beyond my comprehension,nor do I wish it otherwise;
such notions are for the fears or absurd egoism of feeble souls".
Albert Einstein
"The World As I See It." published by Quality Paperback Books.NY.1990.
page 5

I got about as much faith in LDS as I do in LSD.
In fact I'd prefer the latter.

Yoyo,
I think you have put words into Einstein's mouth that he did not say by saying, "But he also knew that nobody could know." Where are the exact words that provide that meaning? I'm not trying to hold your feet to the fire, but I don't think that was either the intent or the meaning of Einstein's remarks. How could he know that "nobody could know", yet not know all knowledge that is possibly knowable in the universe? Kind regards.

Parker
Thanks for your response.
You mention Einstein's "humility as to not knowing everything in the universe".
Yeah,I like that too.
A great yet humble man.He knew he didn't know.
But he also knew that nobody could know. He knew that you and I could not know.
But you think you DO know.That's the difference between you and Einstein.
I would guess that Einstein was smarter than you and me.He saw no reason to invent a god.
Never having been indoctrinated into a religion, Einstein's assumption seems to me quite sensible.
Besides,inventing gods is what we do,and always have done.Remember Apollo,Zeus,Aphrodite and the all the other gods we invented?
Why should your god be any more real than any of them were?
regards..yoyo

John Griffith;

I enjoyed your little essay very much. You make a lot of sense. I liked your advice to Chase,in the sentence, "suspend your immunity to reason".
Nicely put.I hope Chase gives it a shot.But my guess is it will be too difficult.
The impact of indoctrination on a child's mind,is overwhelming.The child becomes,in effect,programed,and believes in the "truth" of the program,whatever it is;whether Muslim,Mormon,Jew,Hindu,Buddhist or Christian.
Chase may be an exception and can open up to reason,and see what a more interesting world awaits him if he can totally dump the god hypothesis.Like Einstein quoted above.

Laurie in KC,
Thanks for such a balanced, helpful perspective.

Yoyo,
I enjoyed the quotes from Einstein. I think reason, science, nature, and the "immutable laws" of the universe (or universes) are compatible with my beliefs, and I suspect Einstein showed a humility as to not knowing everything in the universe; also, I doubt that he had studied or understood LDS theology, so his dismissal of religion as he had heard it taught would not include dismissal of what I believe. I don't know if you've studied it deeply enough to form an informed opinion. If so, we differ in our opinions. But I respect yours, and commend you for speaking without hesitation about your beliefs. Thanks, and may the wisdom of the ages be yours.

Laurie in KC

Hi Laurie.Nice town KC.Bird was born there.

I dont see any snide remarks on this thread.
I see remarks praising the main article,and others panning it. That's life Laurie.We are not all lemmings.
If one is raised on religion,and perhaps surrounded by it,it may be surprising to realize that there are lots of folk out there who simply do not believe.
I'm one of those folks.
Religion,frankly, disgusts me.
Mainly because its so implausible,and so clearly wishful thinking.Plus...it seems the only way to believe is to be indoctrinated in childhood.
Then it sticks like patriotism sticks.
It becomes who we are.Our identity.

Religious thinking is the epitome of thinking in the box.
The box is shaped like a church.
In that box everybody nods together and thinks the same things.
Thus is everyone's belief reinforced and cemented.
The greatest lies and the most nonsensical ideas,
are irresistible in such a box.

The middle east,and the US are maybe
the last great bastions of ancient religious superstitions,
where they continue to indoctrinate their children
into believing in the supernatural.
One day it will be against the law.

One is often told it is a very wrong thing to attack religion,because religion makes men virtuous. So I am told;I have not noticed it.
Bertrand Russell
"Why I am Not a Christian"
pp19.

Einstein also said:

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

The above quote is from a letter Einstein wrote in English, dated 24 March 1954. It is included in " Albert Einstein: The Human Side", edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, and published by Princeton University Press. Also from the same book:

"I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it."

Einstein again

No Will or Ought,by Albert Einstein
The sense of the religious, which is released through the experience of potentially nearing a logical grasp of these deep-lying world relations, is … a feeling of awe and reverence for the manifest Reason which appears in reality. It does not lead to the assumption of a divine personality—a person