Thread 17910246

Why do people follow religions whose teachings they disagree with?

>>17910246 (OP)
Because the world at large informs religion, and not the other way around, despite what religious leaders will tell you. The Church is a secular institution in all but name

>>17910254
That’s basically true as a matter of sociological fact, but religious people aren’t supposed to think like that. So that doesn’t really explain these people’s mindsets.

>>17910265
Religious people aren't "supposed" to think or do a lot of things.

>>17910280
This doesn’t explain anything either.

>>17910285
For the vast majority of people, God is essentially an imaginary friend who just cosigns everything they do. Rules are basically suggestions that can be disregarded if need be. "God doesn't REALLY mean I can't have sex before marriage because I REALLY want to have sex before marriage, and even if he does mean it isn't that big of a deal, and even if it is he will forgive me. He'll judge me by my intentions rather than my actions."
People believe what they want to believe, regardless of if it is contrary to doctrine or not.

>>17910305
>People believe what they want to believe
This is obviously true. That doesn’t explain why they affiliate with groups that tell them that they’re not supposed to do that. You’re just pointing out examples of the sort of irrational behavior I’m talking about, not offering an explanation of why people behave that way.

>>17910339
If your issue is the affiliation I think there are two things confusing you here. One thing is most people are not all that informed about what the groups they are part of advocate for. Tons of Christians don't even go to church regularly, they have no idea what they are and aren't supposed to believe. This isn't just a problem for religion, plenty of people support political parties who don't want the same things as them because they just aren't that informed. In the United States for example, you can very easily find polling that shows both Democratic and Republican voters support things their parties either don't support or actively work against.
The other thing is, affiliation in this sense is, to quite a large extent, something you are basically born into. Their parents were Catholic, so they're "Catholic". Again, this is seen in politics as well. Plenty of people just vote for the same party their parents did for no reason other than that's just what they do.
In short there is not a lot of thought going on here. I'm not trying to denigrate these people, that's just what it is. It's a very passive form of belief.

>>17910339
>That doesn’t explain why they affiliate with groups that tell them that they’re not supposed to do that.
This would be an issue if they were adult converts making a conscious decision to join a specific religion after deliberation, but most people don't do that, they just absorb a sense of religious identity from their families and social contexts. Yes, if someone who personally has a bunch of personal opinions that are clearly incompatible with a certain religion studies it and then decides to join it anyway, that would be very odd indeed; but few, if any do that. They just draw "church good" from their parents and "birth control good" from wanting to fuck with no pregnancy risk and never spend a moment pondering over the contradiction, because they're not concerned with theological studies.

>>17910246 (OP)
Eisegesis is a feature of christianity, not a bug. Why is this so difficult to grasp

>>17910246 (OP)
Because these people aren't real Christians. They're LARPers

It's usually either they've been brought up that way, or they fear they'll be sent to Hell.