Just because belief is illogical, doesn't mean logic can't be applied to it.
Most people, if they are believers, believe in the beliefs of their parents and surrounding society. A young Muslim usually doesn't become Muslim because it is the "one true religion" and he was drawn to it. Rather, it is a matter of tribalism - he is instructed in the belief system at an early age and thus accepts it. Maybe later life he professes the belief system on its own merits. For some Christians, this step is called being "born again" - coming to Jesus on your own, not because you were raised with it.
Oddly enough, the Amish have a similar practice. When you reach adulthood, you are cast out into the world, and if you decide being Amish is for you, they bring you back in (just like the Mafia - "just when I thought I was out...."). Some outsiders ("English") think the Amish are allowing their youngsters to sow their wild oats (and maybe that is part of it). But as it was explained to me, by an Amish, the main idea is that you have to join the religion as an adult, independent of any indoctrination as a youth. Otherwise, you are just being indoctrinated and are not a true believer.
And perhaps it is unfair, even so. Being raised in an isolated an insulated community, young Amish men are particularly unsuited for the outside world, particularly at age 16, when they are not old enough to drive or drink or hold a job. They are often exploited and taken advantage of. So it is not surprising that many return to the fold. The game is rigged!
The problem with belief (religious or otherwise) is that it is, if not the cause, the excuse used for most of the bad things happening in the world. The current Palestine/Israel war, for example, is being fought along ideological lines, particularly by the Palestinians, who are using antisemitism as a tactical weapon. The war, they tell young Arabs, isn't about power and control, but a religious jihad against infidels. Die for the cause and become a martyr! 22 virgins!
But the reality is that most of these wars in the world are about power and control of lands, people, and natural resources. It isn't a coincidence that Ukraine is the breadbasket of Europe and also home to huge oil, gas, coal, and mineral reserves. The minute the last drop of oil is pumped from the Middle East, no one in the West will give a rats' ass about Israel, Palestine, or the Sunni-Shia rift. Of course, there is a lot of oil there, so we will continue to "broker a peace agreement" for a good long time to come.
Even secular beliefs are used to incentivize citizens to go to war. We fight wars against Nazis and Communism - belief systems of government that are also founded in fancy, not fact. It is no coincidence that Putin pitches his war to his people as a war against "Ukrainian Nazis" as that makes it an ideological battle, and not an economic one.
People will die for belief. They won't die for cheap gasoline or bread. So you pitch your war based on belief, not logic or the real reasons you are fighting.
Even nationalism is a belief system. The new fascist President of Argentina claims the country has an historic claim to the worthless Falklands islands. The last time around, the government of Argentina started a war with the UK over these barren pieces of rock simply to distract their own population from the terrible poverty and inflation that has ravaged the country for decades. We complain about 10% inflation, Argentinians have lived with 100% inflation - or far more - for a long, long time.
When in doubt, start a war - voters won't vote a wartime President out of office. How do you think George W. won a second term?
But getting back to logic and belief, a reader writes that they believe in God because they read it in the Bible. I read Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer but I still don't believe in Santa Claus. Just because someone wrote something down in a book doesn't make it true, even if that is the "holy book" of your chosen religion. It doesn't mean it is false, either, at least not entirely.
The documents that eventually became the New Testament weren't written until 40 years after Jesus' death. So you have to wonder how accurate they are. And the discrepancies in the resurrection story between the various disciples is one sign of this. Of course, some historians argue that minor discrepancies in historical accounts are actually a sign of veracity as each observer has their own view of things, their own memories, and of course, their own prejudices.
What we call the Holy Bible today was largely worked out the the first council of Nicaea over 300 years after Jesus died. Books were left out, others added, still others edited. There were not just one Bible, but several (as Ned Flanders illustrates above), particularly as translations and edits were made in the subsequent centuries and millennia. Today, many think the "King James" version is the accurate rendering of the original work, and some even think that Jesus was a white guy who talked in King James English! But such is not the case.
I think the real power of belief isn't in blindly following what was written down, but in understanding what was written, and why - and then thinking through the logic of belief. You must come to the belief system on your own, not merely be indoctrinated into it or claim "I read it, I believe it" - particularly when what you read contradicts what else you read in the same book.
The big dichotomy in the Bible is between the New and Old testaments. The Old Testament is basically a book of Judaism and its history. In that book, God is a pissed-off vengeful person, determined to smite his own creations if they ever so much as talk back. He is a very insecure God.
The New Testament is about Christianity - which is why "full gospel" churches are so full of it. You can't go rooting around in the Old Testament for teachings of Christ as he doesn't appear until the second act. And as I noted before, I believe the New Testament is like a software upgrade - Bible 2.0. It "overwrites" bad data from the Old Testament - replacing "an eye for an eye" with "turn the other cheek," for example. You can't have it both ways - they contradict one another!
The two books are incompatible and cannot be reconciled, unless you look at the Old Testament as what came before and the New Testament as how to fix it. Jesus came to Earth to straighten things out, in particular, how people were worshiping God - as some vengeful hatemonger who wants to smite all the time. In the New Testament, God sacrifices for us with his only son. He isn't smiting Romans or Jews, but rather turning the ultimate cheek.
Sadly, most of this is lost on this new generation of Christo-fascists, who decry the Sermon on the Mount as "too soft" and want to go back to the old days of smiting. For them, Christianity is just a tribe you join - or were born into - and everyone else, even fellow Christians of a different stripe, are the enemy. This is how we start wars. Stay tuned for that.
Belief can be based on blind faith in the teachings of a religion, but logic can also be applied to belief. The logic of "turn the other cheek" can be seen in the nonviolent protests of Gandhi and MLK. Rather than fight a system that was far more powerful than they were, they shamed their opponents into capitulation. If they had tried to attack the systems they were fighting, head-on, they would have been dismissed as "terrorists" and nothing would have changed - much as nothing has changed with respect to the Palestinians, and nothing will, so long as they engage in terrorism (and their leaders know this, which is why they keep engaging in terrorism - the status quo is what they actually want).
Similarly, things like "the golden rule" (which is not in the Bible, but Jesus sort of hints at it) are not just blind beliefs but a logical way of thinking. If I find someone's wallet in the street and return it to them, that does not profit me directly. But if, as a society, we all did the right thing, our society would benefit as a whole and we would all see a benefit from this. So belief, in this instance, logically makes sense. But again, it seems today the loudest voices of those claiming to be Christian, are the greediest people on the planet. "Gimme! Gimme!" they say, particularly their pastors who line their nest with donations from the faithful.
There is much in Bible - or the Torah or the Quran that makes sense logically, and much that either makes no sense or cannot be logically analyzed. To people who want arbitrary and strict rules in their lives, the latter are preferred. "The Bible says so, so I must...." The problem is, of course, the Bible says a lot, and some unscrupulous pastors can twist the words to say what they want to say.
I recounted before how I heard a radio preacher while travelling across Texas one night. He spent nearly an hour analyzing "Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged" and came to the conclusion that what it really meant was that since Christians were, in fact, perfect in every way, their job was to go around judging people. I turned it off before he started reworking "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone." Start throwing, Christians! After all, you are perfect and without sin, right?
That is the justification used by today's violent Christians who are itching for a religious war. They use the old Testament (which is not Christianity) to justify "smiting" anyone they don't like. But of course, they themselves are the chosen ones and can do no wrong. (Lest you think I am picking on Christians, bear in mind that fundamentalists of every religion feel the same way - even Buddhists!) The Christian doctrine of forgiveness is right out the door. And when one of their own is found to be less-than-perfect (which happens far more often than you'd think!) they are the first to toss 'em under the bus.
This is not true Christianity, it is merely Tribalism. But then again, for the vast majority of the world, religion and tribalism are the same thing. Us against Them. People who are different than us should be avoided - or destroyed. And it will destroy our country in short order - perhaps the planet.
There are some things to admire in every religion, and other things that should be ignored or even shouted down. As I noted in another posting, Jefferson cut-and-pasted "the good parts" of the Bible into his own "Jefferson Bible" belief system. And if that sounds like heresy, bear in mind the Council of Nicaea did the exact same thing, about 1700 years ago, creating their own Bible from various books, saving some, discarding others, and editing it all. And that was not the last time such edits occurred.
I think you have to look at the overall belief system in its entirety and then use logic to see if any of it makes sense, or whether some parts just advance others' agendas. And you have to keep in mind that religions were started by man, not God, and holy books were written by men, not God. God does not hold copyrights!
Maybe some of it makes sense. Then again, you end up with things like Jesus stealing horses, which makes no sense to me. I think you can safely discard that part.
But some of the rest is worth keeping, as Jefferson figured out.
