For the sake of clarity, and understanding, why don't we just all stand up and say

[Nihil]

166. Not an adherent to any religion but still a form of theist.

I posted the following about 18 months ago in the previous incarnation of R/T
in response to the topic "Why do I personally believe in God?" but it should
provide the sort of outline that I think you were asking about.

Hope it helps

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Why do I personally believe in God?" Good question.

> Is it because of tradition?

Not particularly. There have been believers in my family as there have been
agnostics and atheists. I was taught at Catholic schools but never put in
any "indoctrination" position or environment where I was not allowed to ask
questions - not by my family, not by the Jesuits who ran the church and not
by any of my teachers. I found that my questions usually led only to further
questions so I had very little of my life where I could have been said to
have been an orthodox "believer".

All that was asked was that I be as tolerant of the more unquestioning faith
of others as I would like them to be of my desire for knowledge beyond the
"take my word for it" views. On the whole, I think I've managed it. Sometimes.


> Is it because of prayer?

No. I can honestly say that I have never felt that God is "personally
listening to my prayers". I *have* appreciated the (far too rare) occasions
when I felt completely in tune with myself when meditating (or trying to
at any rate) but never viewed that moment as being "when God listened"
or other such phrases, simply as having achieved a moment of mental and/or
physiological peace. This isn't to say that I discount the possibility of
prayer (i.e., beyond the meditative or placebo effects), simply that it is
not a driver for me.


> Is it because of the social services that your church provides...

No. I do not attend a church. I give to charity both as an anonymous
individual and as a member of different organisations but don't regard
those actions as being driven by any "higher calling" than being human.


> Is it because there seem to be forces unexplainable in the world,
> and the existence of angels and demons (and deities that rule over them)
> seems to be the only possible explanation?

If you'd stopped after "world" then I might have said "Yes"

There is a part of my belief that has evolved out of a "God of the Gaps"
viewpoint but those gaps have gradually got smaller as time has moved on
so that really isn't the case any more. It certainly doesn't require me
to create or hypothesize specifics such as "angels and demons and deities
that rule over them" as even a partial explanation. (On the other hand,
if such things help others interpret their experience, who am I to say
that they are definitively wrong?)


I have no problem with the concept of the Big Bang (nor of cyclical universes
that bang/expand/contract/bang/expand/...) but find it "convenient" to posit
"God" as the initiator (the "First Cause" approach).

I've written simple programs to simulate lifeforms & natural processes and
played with other (much better) ones that have far greater detail or scope
or effectiveness (e.g., range of accuracy). Once the basic program has been
created and the initial conditions loaded, there is no action required from
me (the programmer) other than to observe the ongoing results.

That's about the level of interaction that I expect from God in my belief
system: set up the boundary conditions, press the button and watch.

It also explains why I find the Masonic view easy to accept (the existence
of a Creator but using a generic label of "Great Architect of the Universe"
rather than any specific factional name) as once all of the preparatory work,
the thought, the design, the draftsmanship has been done, there is little
(if any) interaction with the structure for the rest of its lifespan.


> Or is it something else entirely?

It is a combination of all of the aspects of my upbringing, my education,
my moving background through life, unexplained events/phenomena, everything
in toto that has defined the "me"-ness of "me" has, by definition, also
shaped my beliefs.

I have had moments that fit the "Peak Experience" descriptions (fittingly
enough, once on top of a Scottish mountain) when I knew in every element
of my consciousness how everything fitted together, interacted, related.
I've had feelings of sheer wonder at the scale of the Universe, at the
"magic" of life in hostile environments, at events that are normally hidden
from view by their timescale (either so much faster than usual perception
or so much slower) or simply their size (needing tools from a scanning
microscope up to a radio telescope).


Someone upthread phrased it as "My life experience leads me to believe"
but I'd modify it slightly to "My life experience leads me to have beliefs"
as that more closely matches the fuzziness, the lack of hard defining lines
and the lack of hard faith "just because" that I feel. There is a "something"
but I'm buggered if I can define it so I end up agreeing with the Taoist view:
"The Tao that can be spoken of is not the real Tao".