Jump to content

Trying to reconcile my love for science and religion


Recommended Posts

If an old text says that the world is like this or like that then what possible difference could its age make to it's truth or falsity?

 

 

Time: “I’m so gay”

 

If that was written in 1940/50 it would mean I’m happy but a few years later it would mean I’m homosexual.

 

Culture: “I had faggots for lunch”

 

In one culture that would mean I ate an offal meatball in another it means I attacked a homosexual.

 

To add to the ambiguity translate the above into a language that has no word, or concept, for an offal meatball.

 

Given that how can anyone possibly fully understand a book written in a different language and culture, centuries ago?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I wonder if you have really given this much thought.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with believing in God, so long as you don't base your scientific conclusions on that belief. My signature is applicable here: As long as you don't mix the two up,

There's no need to look at alien species to test the universality of specific religions; we have already observed on Earth that religion can't spread without human impetus. There were no Jews in ancie

Posted Images

 

Given that how can anyone possibly fully understand a book written in a different language and culture, centuries ago?

New testament: nearly 2 millennia ago, Greek.

 

Torah, 1st half of Old Testament: compiled 3 millennia ago, in Hebrew, during the times of David and Solomon, but includes Moses/Exodus from 300 years prior.

 

Greek translations of Tanakh/OT about 2 millennia ago, which serve as basis for most modern translations.

 

Epic of Gilgamesh: 4 millennia ago, cuneiform.

Edited by MonDie
Link to post
Share on other sites

New testament: nearly 2 millennia ago, Greek.

 

Torah, 1st half of Old Testament: compiled 3 millennia ago, in Hebrew, during the times of David and Solomon, but includes Moses/Exodus from 300 years prior.

 

Greek translations of Tanakh/OT about 2 millennia ago, which serve as basis for most modern translations.

 

Epic of Gilgamesh: 4 millennia ago, cuneiform.

 

 

Indeed, however that doesn’t give anyone carte blanche for complete dismissal, context often allows limited understanding and it certainly doesn’t mean the books are wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn’t expect such a question from you but, OK, let me ask you this, if not for emotional stability/tranquillity what is religion trying to teach?

So, for example, the Catholic church (among others) is trying to teach the emotional stability and tranquillity that comes from having unwanted children.

 

Seriously?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, for example, the Catholic church (among others) is trying to teach the emotional stability and tranquillity that comes from having unwanted children.

 

Seriously?

 

 

Things done in the name of religion doesn’t always equate with its intention. If a recipe isn’t followed properly the result can be unpalatable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, for example, the Catholic church (among others) is trying to teach the emotional stability and tranquillity that comes from having unwanted children.

 

Seriously?

Or having a wanted child, concieved at 15 due to poor sex education, taken away by nuns because you're unmarried, and being forced to spend your adulthood in silent repentance, locked away in a Magdalene laundry. Edited by MonDie
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Things done in the name of religion doesn’t always equate with its intention. If a recipe isn’t followed properly the result can be unpalatable.

When you are talking about a central belief of the world's largest Christian group, it's hard to say that their intention is anything other than what they bring about- especially when they have been teaching the same view for centuries. The Pope condemning contraception is not "in the name of religion". It is religion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Pope condemning contraception is not "in the name of religion". It is religion.

 

 

How can it be?

 

Catholicism may be the largest version of religion but it’s by no means the only one, therefore the Popes views can’t represent all of religion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you shifting the goalpost, or conceding?

 

I didnt expect such a question from you but, OK, let me ask you this, if not for emotional stability/tranquillity what is religion trying to teach?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

How can it be?

 

Catholicism may be the largest version of religion but it’s by no means the only one, therefore the Popes views can’t represent all of religion.

How fortunate, then, that I didn't say it was.

Religion is the reason for a lot of unwanted pregnancies.Obviously, it's not the only reason, and not all religions oppose contraception.

Yet there is still a lot of heartache that the Pope (and others like him) are directly responsible for and which (were it not for religion) they could stop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet there is still a lot of heartache that the Pope (and others like him) are directly responsible for and which (were it not for religion) they could stop.

 

 

Or maybe find another excuse, but how is that religions fault?

Edited by dimreepr
Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you seriously saying the the Pope's objection to the use of contraception isn't religious?

 

 

No, what I’m saying is his understanding of religion is flawed; if a chef buggers up a recipe is it the recipes fault?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does that mean that there is some sort of idealised RELIGION that is independent of actual religions as they are practised?

 

If so, how can we find out what this RELIGION is?

Obviously, we can't ask the people like the Pope.

On much the same grounds we can't ask any human.

I guess we could ask God- if anyone had His email address (and assuming He exists).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet we ignore what was done directly by oppressive nuns in Magdelene laundries. There's a United Nations report on it. They not only didn't hold happiness as fundamental, but mostly seemed rather indifferent to suffering. Yet they were clearly practicing some kind of religion.

 

Psychologists have identified several psychological manifestations of religiosity: intrinsic, extrinsic, quest, and fundamentalism mainly. The first three are mostly independent of one another.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because the Pope doesn't get it doesn't mean humanity can't and god doesn't have to exist for the book to be real.

My contention is that the Pope would have more chance of "getting it" without the books or religion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My contention is that the Pope would have more chance of "getting it" without the books or religion.

 

 

TBH I think the current pope, pretty much, does get it but he’s hamstrung by the politics of the institution and therein lays the problem. On an individual bases I think religion mostly helps it’s the institution that hinders people’s lives.

 

There are many people whose lives have been profoundly affected by religion becoming better for it like Richard Coles a vicar who’s openly gay and living with his partner, that’s progress at least.

 

Denying people the opportunity of betterment is as bad as denying people the opportunity of education.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not trying to defend such atrocities nor am I trying to defend religion (I'm an atheist) I'm defending peoples right to choose.

The right to choose does not conflict with attempting to persuade others of your own viewpoint.

 

TBH I think the current pope, pretty much, does get it but he’s hamstrung by the politics of the institution and therein lays the problem. On an individual bases I think religion mostly helps it’s the institution that hinders people’s lives.

 

There are many people whose lives have been profoundly affected by religion becoming better for it like Richard Coles a vicar who’s openly gay and living with his partner, that’s progress at least.

 

Denying people the opportunity of betterment is as bad as denying people the opportunity of education.

You could contend that, while the propensity for religion is not fundamentally malevolent, religion is hijacked by the power-hungry. Throughout history people acquired power by claiming to be godly or chosen, but maybe these were just manipulative, narcissistic sociopaths. After all, the communist dictators sought to supress religion, but they were no better.

 

Here's a sample from a psychopathy questionnaire.

Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory-Short Version: A Further Test of the Internal Consistency and Criterion Validity (Colins, Noom, VanderPlasschen, 2012)

I have the ability to con people by using my charm and smile (4) .64

I am good at getting people to believe me when I make something up (5) .61

I have talents that go far beyond other people’s (8) .34

It’s easy for me to manipulate people (9) .64

When I need to, I use my smile and my charm to use others (14) .59

I am destined to become a well-known, important and influential person (16) .31

Link to post
Share on other sites

religion is hijacked by the power-hungry.

 

 

This doesn't contend my point, it reinforces it.

It’s not religion but the institution of which there’re many.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"No, what I’m saying is his understanding of religion is flawed; if a chef buggers up a recipe is it the recipes fault?"


If somebody is following that chef's orders, shouldn't we be concerned for them? Does forwarding excuses for their naivety help, or hurt?


What if in the end, these people only feel robbed and cheated because of how they were manipulated?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.