Discussion in 'Religion' started by davewhite04, May 5, 2019.
What dictionary do you use?
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
For which purpose? The compact Oxford fits well into suitcases; the outdated Webster makes a good doorstop; the newer, even bigger one is kept under the office window and a favourite napping place for cats; Clombo's Canadian is an excellent fact-checker, the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations is a good source of placards and The Devil's Dictionary by Ambrose Bierce is funny; the respective dictionaries of superstition, Saints and Greco-Roman mythology, geography and symbols are good for quick reference. Then there are the French, German and Spanish dictionaries, obviously; one for abbreviations, a glossary of scientific terms and one of Latin phrases. I think that's all.
I forgot Fowler, Chivalry, philosophy and Modern English Usage.
I use google.
I have a dictionary on my phone. I use it more than any other app.
One wonders why the prospect of a god having a son does not seem unbelievable.
One wonders how the proposition of three gods as a result does not seem unbelievable.
One wonders how a myth can be accepted as true when the decent evidence shows otherwise.
When will humans evolve to pass the barrier of superstition.
Why in an effort to find meaning or purpose must humans look in areas built on fantasy.
If religion was removed with what would superstitious humans grasp to fill the hole?
Why are humans so susceptible to superstition?
Such questions presume superior religious knowledge than the faithful.
Confusion over the Trinity is a symptom of human frailty.
When evolution requires the separation of sentimentality from creativity, or something approximately like that.
Allegory and witness. Beyond that, well, okay, the, "Oh, please," above was me groaning and rolling my eyes at the notion that you might somehow be utterly unaware of human psychology.
And, seriously, even in today's scientific world, people still get freaked out by dreams.
It isn't so much an insistence on some notion of hard reality, but, rather, the determined underestimation of human function. When we get down to how one feels, that includes accommodation and assimilation of information. We come back to allegory and witness. Allegory? Okay, how about, data compression?
I just always wonder at these ostensibly rational, anti-religious questions that forget what it's like to be a human being.
If I suggest the question is self-condemning, it is intended to illustrate something particular: I've asked atheists, for years, about this, and get nothing but worthless at best static. I really don't understand, when it comes down to objective reality, the absurd hatred of the religious: Around Sciforums, for instance, there just isn't much of an answer; in fact, the question upsets atheists.
Think of it this way, for a moment:
What would the superstitious fill the gap with?
― How about rational philosophy?
What rational philosophy?
― Isn't that the job of the ostensibly rational?
It's true, your question isn't without its abstract value, but in practice, it just doesn't seem to do much.
Because they're human.
Here is an interesting link I had read a bit of on another forum about a book called Antiquities of the Jews written by Flavius Josephus that is said to contain two references of Jesus of Nazareth and one reference of John the Baptist. According to the wiki the present authenticity of the book is in question though.
Not contempory to Jesus' lifetime.
So it was written or edited afterwards?
probably never (IMHO)
I wonder if it is the creativity and ability to hypothesise or speculate that also lends power to superstition in humans... as well as maybe the need to classify and find patterns in everything
That's the beginning of both science and religion. Because weather is active (i.e. things change, move and make sounds) behaves in an orderly way, it's easy to imagine volition behind its activity. The same goes for water, fire and heavenly bodies. So it's easy to imagine that the minds (in pre- and early historic cultures, those were perceived as separate entities) directing those entities were similar to the human mind; that the motivation of those entities was similar to humans'.
The great appeal of that notion is to the desire for control.
You can't negotiate with the universe, or physics, or fate or nature - they do not care, cannot care what happens to you. If you put a human face on those elemental firces, you can bribe or beg or cheat or blackmail them to give you what you want or spare you harm. It's just a matter of figuring out what they want and learning the right incantation, the right sacrificial offering, the right formula.
So the very clever dishonest guy comes up with a plan that can't fail: I'll tell them what the gods want: if things work out, I'll take the credit; if things go wrong, I'll tell them it's because of all their sinning. [How can you be sure they'll sin?] (Easy: I'll make rules that are impossible to follow.)
Jehovah was a very human god in those days. He spoke directly to his favourite patriarchs (Lot, Noah, Moses), played practical jokes on them (Abraham, Jonah, Job) got mad and reconciled, etc.
The Jesus deal is not so different from the Isaac deal. "I am irate. Make me a sacrifice!"... "Uh, never mind. Here, kill this."
How is that any more unbelievable than the infallibility of 11-year-old popes whose daddy bought them the office? Seems early Catholics were so intimidated, they'd pretend to believe anything. In practice, they pick out the bits that work for them, give the rote responses, confess their misdemeanours, buy the candles and sleep though the rigmarole.
If you want to badly enough, you can ignore reality. (See US climate/foreign/economic/domestic policy)
In practice, you simply put you Faith in one compartment and practical life in another.
You're fine, unless they slop over, in which case you might accidentally kill your bipolar child with an exorcism.
When their standard of living is such as to relieve them of anxiety.
It doesn't have to. Lots of people find meaning and purpose in their occupation, community effort, charity, art, scholarship, invention or personal relationships.
As long as there's a hole, something unwholesome will fill it.
Heal the holes and superstition won't have any place to lodge.
Because they're afraid to grow up. As long as they have a daddy to protect them, punish them, tell them what to do and want and think, they don't have to fend for themselves.
Mmmmm maybe just knowledge...as much or as little that is required...
Perhaps confusion could be laid at the feet of an unbelievable plot. How deep does ones understanding of the proposition need be to reject the notion as unbelievable. Acceptance of the three god thing is perhaps a clear sign of something...I will refrain from a label as it will not be kind or generous.
Your response would seem to be determined by preconception perhaps inhibiting a considered reply.
I have a novel idea.
If all humans could grow up in an environment where religion was entirely absent I bet so many fears would never manifest. How can you expect to have good mental health when kids are brainwashed with fear of hell and taught nonsense about sex.
I would like to think being human equates with having a brain that enables rational thought. Religions first job is to take away that ability from its victims. Victims are told to have faith, and verses in holy books provide sound bites to offer to those who offer a rational observation, .change is feared.
I think religion seeks to destroy humaness...thinking for yourself, determining a healthy morality and sexual relations, all very human stuff ...well seek any religions input and think about your findings.
I suppose my job then is akin to pointing out the punch line in a joke that one does not get.
The joke when explained will not be as funny.
And I will not
bother... Too much...but... Consider that studying stuff has a way of sanitizing things such that the fundamental proposition becomes lost in memorising detail. Let me say this..religion presents a lie and those at the top use it to justify assert grabs and those at the bottom use it to avoid personal responsibility. Truth is nowhere to be found ...I find that unacceptable and below what our privileged position as humans offers.
And for me it's not hatred..it is a frustration that we are living in the past, and for so many harbouring a belief that ancient folk just knew more about the universe than we do today.
I suggest it comes from exposure to superstition at a young age...
I have seen kids grow up that are not afraid of the dark or ghosts or snakes etc for the simple reason their parents did not put rubbish in their heads.
Humans like many creatures learn from the behaviour of their parents. It is a pity that all humans do not present a rational example.
Superstition exists because it is taught as first choice, the need to find patterns etc is corrupted by an early dose of superstition.
Imagine a world where a basic scientific methodology was taught such that when an enquiring mind asks questions it seeks truth rather than just making stuff up...and above all to build in an acceptance of one fundamental reality...we don't always have an answer...but having no answer in not licence to make up one..that is lieing and is wrong. Just stop teaching superstition and it will go away.
I have noticed.
So many humans are damaged beyond repair by the age of five, the left overs damaged before their teens...few survive having something screwed in their head.
AKA the human tragicomedy
I don't believe this for a minute simply because humans need to classify and categorize things.
making stuff up is also done in science, except it's called "hypothesis" and in science, they devise ways to test to either validate or falsify it while attempting to remove bias.
the problem isn't in the making things up as an answer, IMHO, it's in the accepting the made up [x] as an answer without testing and validating it. Personally, I like to delineate between "religion" and "faith". Faith is the belief in something without evidence whereas religion is the codified set of rules one uses to judge oneself and others to determine standing within a sect or group of peers.
and IMHO only, religion is the real daemon as it teaches how to manipulate others, judge without cause or context and it's used to control large groups of others (usually leading to a small select group that receives special privileges while the rest of the group pays the price).
There is that need. I contend such need can be better satisfied without any input from superstition.
And there can be no better way to classify and categorise than by using scientific method.
The superstitions that imprison humans is an embarasement and I suggest that may cause your attempt to somehow offer an excuse to make me feel better. Too many folk profit from not calling it out...superstition is only necessary to promote a bad way of doing things
Rather than approach stuff on the basis that folk can think what they like why not insist that sure that is acceptable if, and only if, that can show their claims to be valid and as close to truth as we can manage.
Education is perhaps the key so why not start by banning religious indoctrination and substitute all those lessons with science lessons and the teaching of critical thinking skills so that even the folk regarded as trash, by those who put themselves above, have the ability to listen to a preacher seeking contributions for his third private jet, can sit back and determine that they are listening to a scoundrel full of BS.
I know the sales department of the jet company will be the first now to champion freedom of religion and regard free education as un American.
I often wonder if there could be a planet out there where they dont tolerate BS...I hope there is..and perhaps that is a more realistic hope than some made up human God holding the key to morality and being able to give victims a whole new eternal existence.
Yes but do not think I am happy with such an approach.
I have never made a secret that I do not particularly like the big bang theory ...mainly because the church was somewhat preoccupied with the common pagan notion of a cosmic egg and in usual fashion, I expect, decided that as other pagan ideas once stolen fitted nicely and well received by the victims, that a cosmic egg was a great idea. And then once the idea seemed like an acceptable notion for creation they diligently proved the idea correct. Have we found how the universe was created...er well no..we only understand how it evolved from something incredibly small that grew at a rate beyond comprehension to the billions of billions of billions of galaxies we observe and our maths can explain how such a seemingly impossible happening did..now in fact..happen. My approach would be to first observe the back ground radiation and then work out what it was..the theory slammed all the doors all at once...and somehow that is good science.
So now any alternative research will not be funded and any alternate idea is rejected as crackpot.
What is wrong with an eternal universe, apart from not leaving a job for a creator and all the baggage humans carry to accommodate such a notion.
And critical to scientific method is falsification...now I ask this question without knowing the answer, something I just do not do, but can the big bang theory be falsified?
And I too observe folk speculating on what came before the big bang, and upon multi universes...well lots of stuff that is as speculative as asserting a god created it all and had a son and now there is three of them, but their presence in the world has nothing to do with my call for a rejection of superstition and sensible universal education.
Oh you can make a long list of the negatives.
Built on make believe is a good place to start.
Considering the crushing effect on humans subjected to brain washing from day one.
The various sexual hang ups leaving folk totally screwed,..think of those poor folk raised with the brain washing finding they are not "normal" and will be tortured in hell for eternity because they are not attracted to the opposite sex.
Think of the uninformed pregnancies within the brainwashed community.
And of course the power and the hypocracy.
Anyways the thread is about a made up human god, clearly a knock off of various fore runners, modelled on astrology and Sun worhship created by a clever Roman family to maintain an empire without as many troops... Let's talk about that..very interesting and plenty of evidence...
But don't get me started...I have already wasted too much head space...it offers me nothing... But thanks for the chat..I very much appreciate some human contact.
Separate names with a comma.