Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Science Fan
Posts: 843
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by Science Fan »

The people who wrote the story of Adam and Eve and a talking snake never intended the story to be read literally. What was the description of the snake? It was smart, it walked, and it could talk. Does that remind you of someone? Like a person?

What was the snake's argument to Eve to eat the apple? It was essentially if she wanted to eat the apple, then that was the same as God speaking to her. In other words, animals follow their instincts and the snake was telling Eve that she should do the same.

Did Adam and Eve lack moral understanding before eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil? No. If so, then they could not have been justly punished for disobeying an alleged God. The tree transformed the knowledge they had of good and evil. Before eating from the tree, if Adam and Eve thought something was immoral, they would have said it was "false." They would also have said of something that was moral that it was "true." After eating from the tree, they refer to what is morally right and wrong as being "good" and "bad." So, the tree transformed knowledge of good and evil from something that was objective to something subjective.

If you put the story altogether, it is basically saying that humans can reason and are therefore not bound by their instincts in the same way that animals are. Therefore, doing what one wants cannot be a justification for moral behavior. Reason has to be relied on instead. However, even when we use our reason, it may be difficult to find out what is moral, because it is difficult for us to see moral behavior in terms of true and false.

It's the people who give these stories a literal interpretation who lie about their true meaning. Especially Christians who change the snake, which is supposed to be viewed as an animal, into the Devil.

Religions lie when they make factual claims that are obviously false, and moral claims that are absurd. However, this does not mean all religions lie. Religions that do not make claims about the world that contradict science, and simply rely on metaphorical interpretations are not lying factually to anyone.

The fact people thousands of years ago tried to make sense out of the world with little scientific understanding is something I find admirable. However, people in the 21st century who turn their backs on science to believe in a literal interpretation of ancient writings I find inexcusably stupid.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by Greta »

Loved your work, Sci Fan.

Thing is, it's easy to simply dismiss literalists as stupid but there are probably plenty of stupid people who don't believe in any of it. Why would these ones ignore the evidence of their senses? My guess is fear of annihilation at death. If they believe in miracles and fantastical things then they are not faced with the issue of brain death in their own minds.

I personally don't see anything in science that prevents the sensation of feeling of having an afterlife , for instance, due to time dilation caused by changes to the dying brain's structure - and at that point the subjective is all that matters. However, anyone hoping to reside on CloudWorld with harps amongst friendly lions and lambs will need to up their dosage.
User avatar
Greatest I am
Posts: 2964
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:09 pm

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by Greatest I am »

S F

Nicely done.

You have added to the story though.

Many who read this myth see the tree of knowledge of good and evil as the tree of all knowledge because all knowledge is subject to being good or evil. Right or wrong.

The story says that A & E's mental eyes were closed till after they ate and the scriptures say that that moment is when they --- became as Gods in the knowing of good and evil.

Can you name any knowledge, or anything really, that is not subject to good and evil?

I cannot.

Regards
DL
User avatar
Greatest I am
Posts: 2964
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:09 pm

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by Greatest I am »

Greta wrote: Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:53 am Loved your work, Sci Fan.

Thing is, it's easy to simply dismiss literalists as stupid but there are probably plenty of stupid people who don't believe in any of it. Why would these ones ignore the evidence of their senses? My guess is fear of annihilation at death. If they believe in miracles and fantastical things then they are not faced with the issue of brain death in their own minds.

I personally don't see anything in science that prevents the sensation of feeling of having an afterlife , for instance, due to time dilation caused by changes to the dying brain's structure - and at that point the subjective is all that matters. However, anyone hoping to reside on CloudWorld with harps amongst friendly lions and lambs will need to up their dosage.
True that they are not stupid, but it is also true that they put their minds into intellectual dissonance by believing something on faith alone. Further, given that Yahweh is a genocidal son murdering p****, that they adore and see as good, has them placing their moral sense into dissonance as well. No?

Regards
DL
Science Fan
Posts: 843
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by Science Fan »

Greatest I Am, When you write that, "Yahweh is a genocidal son murdering p****, that they adore and see as good, has them placing their moral sense into dissonance as well. No?" you are basing this on a literal interpretation of those ancient writings, which the authors never intended. So, insofar as you are attacking people who hold onto such literalist interpretations, you are right. However, for the Jews and Christians who do not interpret these writings literally, then there is no basis to conclude that Yahweh is a genocidal son murdering anything. Because, a non-literal interpretation rules out God having done any such act. My point above was that in criticizing religion, there is a big difference between those religious people who are literalists and those who are not, and I quite often see people ignoring these distinctions among the religious. I have no idea why, but, if I had to guess, I think it's because literalist views are simply easier to criticize.

As far as knowledge being subjective, I don't see any reason to conclude that moral knowledge is subjective. Are you saying you seriously believe that a child rapist is objectively no less moral than a person who protects a child from being raped? I doubt you really believe that.
Last edited by Science Fan on Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Science Fan
Posts: 843
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by Science Fan »

Greta: It may very well be fear of death that drives people towards literalist interpretations, although given the concept of hell, I would think this also adds to their fear of death, ironically enough.

I also agree that science has not ruled out a life after death, although I also see no scientific evidence for such. I think we will never be able to know for sure whether there is life after death, one way or the other. It's certainly extremely difficult to imagine one's self not existing, and I think this also has a lot to do with people believing in life after death.

While it may be true that not every stupid person believes in literalist interpretations of scripture, I have a feeling the number of intelligent people who hold such views are in the extreme minority. It's not just that to hold onto a literalist interpretation that one has to ignore modern science, one also has to ignore history, logic, and rationality in general. There is simply no justification for such a view of scripture.
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5688
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

Science Fan wrote: Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:03 pm Greatest I Am, When you write that, "Yahweh is a genocidal son murdering p****, that they adore and see as good, has them placing their moral sense into dissonance as well. No?" you are basing this on a literal interpretation of those ancient writings,

which the authors never intended.
Nothing personal SF as I'm a SF, which is the "why" of what follows. You have absolutely no knowledge of their intentions, all you can do is read into their words that which you choose to believe their intentions were. You have no way of knowing if they were being literal or not. That your logic allows you to supply a model that seemingly fits their words, making them figurative, does not mean it's the actual case.

Of course this doesn't mean that I disagree with your words on the matter. I just see that you didn't follow the scientific method in arriving at your conclusion.



So, insofar as you are attacking people who hold onto such literalist interpretations, you are right. However, for the Jews and Christians who do not interpret these writings literally, then there is no basis to conclude that Yahweh is a genocidal son murdering anything. Because, a non-literal interpretation rules out God having done any such act. My point above was that in criticizing religion, there is a big difference between those religious people who are literalists and those who are not, and I quite often see people ignoring these distinctions among the religious. I have no idea why, but, if I had to guess, I think it's because literalist views are simply easier to criticize.

As far as knowledge being subjective, I don't see any reason to conclude that moral knowledge is subjective. Are you saying you seriously believe that a child rapist is objectively no less moral than a person who protects a child from being raped? I doubt you really believe that.
Peace, my friend!
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by Greta »

Science Fan wrote: Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:12 pm Greta: It may very well be fear of death that drives people towards literalist interpretations, although given the concept of hell, I would think this also adds to their fear of death, ironically enough.
Only last night I saw a great interview with a visitor in a creationist museum which has sorely tempted me to engage in confirmation bias after my last post. When she disputed evolution the interviewer referred to all the evidence. What do you think her reply was? An attempt to justify her creationist belief? No, she knew she would lose.

Instead she pointedly asked him if he knew what would happen to him when he died as if it was a direct correlate to the evolution question.

He replied he did not know to which she claimed that she did know and that gave her an advantage over him (competitive insecurity). She claimed that Hell was separation from God and that the interviewer had better get himself together to avoid that fate - basically the old hellfire threat that worked on her.

The point is that if the Bible is not true then death may actually be the end of the story. Meanwhile, we are all descended from great survivors, life forms that wanted to live more than the ones that died out (in evolutionary terms). That need is enough that some cannot accept death at all.
Science Fan wrote:I also agree that science has not ruled out a life after death, although I also see no scientific evidence for such. I think we will never be able to know for sure whether there is life after death, one way or the other. It's certainly extremely difficult to imagine one's self not existing, and I think this also has a lot to do with people believing in life after death.
You know very well what it's like to not exist which is why you crave it every night :) You also did not experience being as a zygote and early stage foetus (at which point the sense of being would have been that of a much simpler animal). And, like children at bedtime, many of us don't want the waking state to end.

There is already evidence of life after death, generally for a matter of minutes until the brain uses up its oxygen. We don't know how long it lasts subjectively, though. As for an afterlife beyond the brain, so to speak, I wonder what might constitute evidence?
Science Fan wrote:While it may be true that not every stupid person believes in literalist interpretations of scripture, I have a feeling the number of intelligent people who hold such views are in the extreme minority. It's not just that to hold onto a literalist interpretation that one has to ignore modern science, one also has to ignore history, logic, and rationality in general. There is simply no justification for such a view of scripture.
Yes, the creationist intelligence Bell curve would be pushed a fair way to the left, I expect. Still, I know they exist because my late elder sister was a sharp and perceptive thinkers with an IQ of 132, but when she joined with the Jehovah's Witnesses she adopted their creationism and other literalist Biblical silliness. It was surprising to me at first but I came to appreciate the social and emotional gains she enjoyed by joining up. I think she died happy, quite possibly more content than if she not joined. She wanted to love and be loved more than she wanted to be right, at least in such abstract things that don't much matter in practical terms.
Dubious
Posts: 4000
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by Dubious »

Science Fan wrote: Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:12 pm I think we will never be able to know for sure whether there is life after death, one way or the other.
That uncertainty presents itself mostly as a formality of logic in the sense that the overwhelming probability of death as the THE final event is prevented by the rules of logic from tying its nearly adjacent ends into a Gordian knot of proof. Absolutes, like most speculations regarding death & god, etc., remain outside the limits of logic; hence no judgement is possible and no proof or disproof can be legitimately rendered by it.

On the other hand, our understanding of the cosmos, nature and evolution annuls any speculation by way of intent or purpose in there being an afterlife. Such extensions can only exist within the lives of creatures like us whose consciousness, existing exclusively in the will of its ceaseless momentum, not least affirmed by its autonomous dream periods, cannot fathom its ending in the unscriptured fields of zero time and zero space.

To counterbalance, we employ myth, mystery and religion as an anodyne to annihilation which needs to be effective only when and where it counts.
odysseus
Posts: 306
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2018 10:30 pm

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by odysseus »

Greatest I am
Indeed. I cannot understand how anyone can intentionally put their minds into intellectual and moral dissonance.
But dissonance is what YOU have when you bring your mentality to bear upon what is at issue, that is, religious ideas. In the mind of the believer, there is none of this. I am not a fan of foolish thinking, but it has to be understood that religion is not a set of assailable propositions; it is a redemption, a deliverance, from the terrors of being human. This kind of thing is far greater than the a trivial rebuttal. As Kierkegaard said, one should not forget that we actually exist, and this is a profound thing, deeply felt and experience, not an argument merely where true premises yield a true conclusion.

Having said this, I am the first to throw that miserable ancient book on the fire for the dreadful moral thinking it produces and its ridiculous metaphysics.

But then yet again, beneath these there is the powerful dynamic of our Being here that will not wait for rational, objective justification. It is better to try to understand the depth of suffering in our history first, to understand religion and its errant ways.
Nick_A
Posts: 6208
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by Nick_A »

Greatest I am wrote: Sun Jan 21, 2018 8:17 pm Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

People, I hope, are not foolish or gullible enough to really believe in the talking serpent and donkey of the bible nor the 72 virgins ot the Qur’an. I also hope their gullibility is not broad enough to have them swallow all the other supernatural ideas floated by religions. The ancients intelligently knew that nothing could be known of the supernatural.

http://bigthink.com/videos/what-is-god-2-2

Modern priests, preachers and imams ignore the unknowability of the supernatural constantly while lying to us about the Gods.

I do not want to believe that we are as gullible as some people seem to be.

Why then do you think we knowingly pay and suport priests, preachers and imams, perpetual liars in my view, to lie to us?

Regards
DL
We support them for the same reason we support crooked politicians. We are gullible. To make matters worse, if they did tell the truth we wouldn't vote for them. We need to be lied to. We could never support the truth. It is too insulting.

Someone writes a book: I'm OK, You're OK. That will sell even though it is a lie. If the author had written "I'm an Idiot and You're an Idiot" no one would buy it even though it is more true. Human nature.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by Greta »

If everyone is an idiot then everyone must logically be okay since there are no non-idiots to make the rest of us look bad.

Okay-ness and idiocy are compatible in the case of immaturity, which is obviously the case given how incredibly quickly change has come for humanity in evolutionary and geological time scales. It's not as though humans have had much time to becomes accustomed to its position, not least because our position is so dynamic. So "glitches" such as religious literalism, untrammelled hedonism and childishly self-indulgent "leadership" are still occurring for now.
User avatar
-1-
Posts: 2888
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:08 am

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by -1- »

To knowingly accept a lie has three necessary parts: 1. a motivation to accept the lie. 2. The ability to accept the lie. 3. The ability to explain a lie and turning it into a non-lie by logical means.
1. The motivation has been best expressed by Osgart:
Osgart wrote: They are addicted to alternative realities, even though it's just fantasy. They are addicted to having answers to every ultimate question. They want eternal life very badly, that they forsake objective reality. They insulate themselves from reality as it is. They desperately want significance.
They come from situations of despair.
As an atheist, I also want significance, I come from a situation of despair, I'm addicted to thinking the reality we experience is reality, and I'm addicted to have answers to questions, although my questions may be different from the ultimate questions.

However, I do not want eternal life. The notion of having an eternal life causes the most despair in my life.

2. the ability to accept the lie is a function of not so very smart people. It is not so much an ability to accept a lie, but rather the inability to see that an utterance is a lie. "So... the serpent walks, talks, and philosophizes. What's strange about that? They do it with trained serpents in movies, so it's true, it's not a lie."

3. The ability to explain the lie and turning it into a non-lie is the function of smarter people. "The serpent talking is a symbolism of Eve being convinced by instinctual desires to eat the fruit of the forbidden tree."
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by attofishpi »

osgart wrote: Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:42 am They are addicted to alternative realities, even though it's just fantasy. They are addicted to having answers to every ultimate question.
It's called, being wise. Seek an ye shall find. Don't seek and remain with the unknown.
osgart wrote: Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:42 amThey want eternal life very badly, that they forsake objective reality.
Yet you negated the binary condition, seek and ye shall find. Not wise at all. In fact I will go so far as stating that it rules out the true meaning of being a 'philosopher'.
osgart wrote: Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:42 amThey insulate themselves from reality as it is.
Yet once it's found 'it' IS reality.
osgart wrote: Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:42 amThey desperately want significance.
Not ants are we. Remain ignor_ant?
osgart wrote: Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:42 amThey come from situations of despair.
Ridiculous.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Religious lies. Why do we knowingly accept them?

Post by Dontaskme »

Nick_A wrote: Sun Feb 18, 2018 6:24 am
We support them for the same reason we support crooked politicians. We are gullible. To make matters worse, if they did tell the truth we wouldn't vote for them. We need to be lied to. We could never support the truth. It is too insulting.

Someone writes a book: I'm OK, You're OK. That will sell even though it is a lie. If the author had written "I'm an Idiot and You're an Idiot" no one would buy it even though it is more true. Human nature.
Just having fun with words.

I'm OK, You're OK'' being a pack of lies is the truth.

I AM the last idiot. :D
Post Reply