Do you think that understanding a religious belief requires abstract thinking?

Question

Do you think that having a religious belief (no matter what kind) requires abstract thinking?

It seems to me overly siimplistic to reject religion. And that maybe people who readily reject it aren't able to appreciate the abstract nature of it.

It's kind of like a rock song. You can hear the rock song and think nothing. Or you can really -hear- the song and see the layers of instrument and the wonderfully harmonius nuance laden lyrics. And when you -really hear- the song, you know the meaning. You will try to describe it to others, but unless they listen to it with an open ear, they will never hear it. I think religion is kind of like that.

What do you think?

Answer 1

Believing in a God requires abstract thinking. Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the confidence in things not seen.

Answer 2

lol obviously if you can hear the rhythm and the instrumental and the harmonius sound is somewhere laying in the backround
ANYONE could aknowledge it
but can you really represent this and compare it to faith?
but the thing with christians is
there is NO song so how is there any music to hear?
(its a metaphor)

Answer 3

abstract thinking? NO! It requires very clear, precise and objective thinking, and a lot of common sense. Unfortunately, there are few out there capable of such rational thought. Emotion aways seems to get in the way.

Answer 4

One has to use the abstract mind to interpret the symbolism and metaphor that are conveyed in religious ideas. The logical mind can only make literal interpretations which tends to over simplify spiritual ideas into absolutes and then into dogma.

Answer 5

"those are of an completely diverse measurement to the problem in communicate" there is not any evidence that such issues exist. the element approximately math/technological know-how is its testable. Do you have confidence that the bridge you're driving on wont fall apart? Do you have confidence the development you're in to stay status. All of those have been finished via "writing some equations on paper". Math isnt basically numbers. it works. a hundred% of the time. If it didnt artwork, it wouldnt be math. If the numbers didnt have actual international purposes, we wouldnt use them. technological know-how isnt just about math. this is approximately experimentation. ought to we be incorrect? specific. yet once you drop a ball one thousand cases and everytime it falls to the floor, why might desire to you anticipate the 1001st time it is going to fall up? Why have confidence in some thing that has by no potential been stated, whilst the thoughts have been stated. it relatively is staggering I suggested stated. the vast bang the end results of it are observable. we are able to calculate trajectory, and use math to go into reverse it. IT ISNT basically NUMBERS. it works. Take a physics a hundred and one classification. carry out a little math to confirm how long it's going to take to end some thing. Then try it for your self. it works. "Why do you reject the theological virtues? Why do you utilize technological know-how to contradict them?" We dont reject virtues. We comprehend the virtues. besides the undeniable fact that the distinctive function(s) of religion (treating human beings like the type you opt for for to be dealt with...dont think of theres to any extent further) are no longer unique to faith. specific missionaries help feed human beings, yet atheists can help feed human beings without making them hear to us approximately supernatural claims. Why might desire to the begining of our existance be illogical? Why does it would desire to be supernatural? What information, ANY information, makes you even evaluate that some thing exists that hasnt been stated? "isn't it illogical to attempt to apply 'good judgment' to describe some thing that's no longer in reaction to good judgment?" it relatively is staggering. Theism is illogical. We use our good judgment to point that out. thank you for proving our factor.