It’s not like there are only two religions on earth. If there were, by picking one of them you would have a 50% chance of being correct (assuming that at least one religion is true, when in fact, it is possible that they are all false). In reality, there are twenty major world religions and many more nativist religions. By picking one religion, you are rejecting all the others. And since your religious affiliation is very likely to have been determined, or at least heavily influenced, by the faith choice of your parents, isn’t the statistical likelihood of your religious choice being the one true faith very, very low?
And as we learned in the last post, once someone has made a faith choice and has then been indoctrinated in that faith choice for years, in particular if this indoctrination started in their childhood, even overwhelming contradictory evidence rarely causes them to change their minds.
So with this inherent bias towards our parents’ belief system, how can each of us evaluate our worldview, whether it be a religious or a non-religious worldview, to see if it stands up to scrutiny? I suggest John Loftus’ Outsider Test for Faith:
The outsider’s attitude when it comes to examining other religions is one of informed skepticism:
- It assumes one’s own religious faith has the burden of proof.
- It adopts the methodological-naturalist viewpoint whereby one assumes that there is a natural explanation for the origins of one’s religion, its holy books, and its extraordinary claims of miracles.
- It demands sufficient evidence, scientific evidence, before concluding a religion is true.
- Most importantly, it disallows any faith in the religion under investigation, since the informed skeptic cannot leap over the lack of [sufficient] evidence by punting to faith.
Gary: I added [sufficient] to point number four because I seriously doubt that any Christian will agree with the statement that their belief lacks (any) evidence.
End of post.