This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Is it time to accept literal religious belief systems are intellectually bankrupt?
Is it time to accept literal religious belief systems are intellectually bankrupt given our current scientific understanding of the universe?
For thousands of years different religious belief systems have explained how the universe came into existence and appears the way it is, why we are here, how we should live, and what happens when we die.
Often these beliefs are enshrined in religious texts, from prophets, revelations, or interpreted by a priestly class. In addition to creation myths, there are laws and tribal history/mythologies, miraculous claims etc.
Today we have the benefit of being more aware of the variety of religious beliefs and science to show us that life and the universe is far more complex than most religious traditions give credit. The older religions are so often clearly products of their time and place in terms of explaining the world, what is acceptable, how we should live.
In asking this question I note at best only one of the many religious views could be literally correct and likely none are. While other foreign beliefs seem alien, strange and far fetched, if we are examine the traditions we are familiar with they too are strange. Religions are like clothes and language - artifacts of culture.
Today we laugh at the idea the world is flat, or the centre or the universe, that the sun and the moon are gods. We understand atoms and bacteria, plate tectonics and are starting to grasp the age and size of the universe, evolution and the diversity of life, the quantum.
Science better explains the universe, human behaviour. While never complete, perhaps science gives us a better basis for a rationale debate on the meaning and wonder of life and how best to live.
Do different religions support tribalism, or at least make it worse?
Are fundamental religious views holding back science and social development?
Are Deism or beliefs related to a non interventionist intelligence or creator still valid hypotheses and less damaging?
Closing Statement from Obey No1kinobe
There was an article in the paper yesterday discussing the US Republican candidates. It mentioned that over 40% of US Americans believe in the genesis stories. In the only country to put humans on the moon and holding the most powerful and technologically advanced military in human history, nearly half the population believes the universe was created in 6 days, Eden, the tree of knowledge, god walking in the garden, Adam, Eve, Abel, Cain, people living 900+ years etc.
I note many religious folk commented below that that they believe these scriptures are not meant to be taken literally.
Perhaps some literal beliefs are easy to discount. If you believe the Earth is a flat disc sitting on the back of a giant turtle flying through space, or gods routinely walking the earth, I suggest we can file these away as myth.
Key considerations for the other literal beliefs may include (1) whether humans were created as is or evolved and (2) whether the universe is about 6,000 years old or about 13 billion years old. (3) Are the other super normal/natural claims believable?
A god could have created the universe to look much older than it is. Our genetic similarity with other living creatures may just be the way we were created. But what a tenuous connection to reality this is. I suggest this is getting as close to being intellectually unsustainable as possible if not already over the line.
A literalist believes all the other interpretations are false. I suggest they are just one away from a more intellectually sustainable position. There is no proof for even a non interventionist creator.
A big question is how these seemingly nonsense stories, some with roots in the Bronze Age, are still believed today. Perhaps a topic for another conversation?
Thank you for all the thoughtful comments.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Peter Law 30+
[14] I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;your works are wonderful, I know that full well.
http://blog.acton.org/archives/27593-science-meets-divinity.html
Are we blind ?
:-)
Karen Olsen
In the end though, I don't see how one transfers that appreciation to a "you" even metaphorically. It doesn't seem to me that all this complexity and information that humans are aware of and all that is still unknown can be attributed to a "you". "You" s have faces and personalities; they have bodies. It is just not a big enough concept. I'm a bit partial to the longer but more fitting "That which cannot be named". It seems to confer the proper respect.
Peter Law 30+
It depends to a large extent on what, or who, you think you are. Are you a child of God, or are you something else? If you are a CofG then there would be a family resemblance. God might have a face & a personality, or other attributes similar to you. We as humans should be able to understand something about how He has made things; we should have similar logic.
As it happens, we do have a fair grasp on how things work, & we continue to learn.
Only one man has made a claim to be God, & he backed it up with a lot of evidence, culminating in rising from the dead. He even has a face & a personality.
If he was a liar, then we are back at the start; what are we ? And why should we just happen to understand so much science, Mathis etc. I go for the CofG hypotheses .
:-)
Karen Olsen
Judging by history I’m not ready to say we have a fair grasp on how things work. It seems like we have learned a great deal in the realm of the hard sciences but I have no concept of what we still do not know so I would hesitate to make any measure of our success. You seem much more optimistic in your assessment. Can you tell me why?
Oh space is up. I have more.
Karen Olsen
So where are we? Well I’m still at “what am I” but I don’t see it as the start. I say, “I don’t know” and move on from there. I’m guessing that you want the answer first so you are starting with a hypothesis, “I am a child of a human like God” and go from there. I’ve tried that hypothesis and some others over time but have found them unsatisfactory for my logical mind. The bottom keeps falling out when it rests on conjecture. If it works for you then you will keep embracing it. I am not so much bothered that people believe they were made in God’s image as that they make God in their own image and then put their own words in his mouth. The first seems like hubris, the second is blasphemy in my book of ethics.
I would very much like to hear/read your response to my thoughts. I appreciate your willingness to engage.
Obey No1kinobe 50+
Just focusing on the father part of god (not Jesus) - even the term child of god can be taken many ways including no family resemblance.
Even the masculinity often assigned god is so arbitrary.
One similarity any creator deity may have with humans is some sort of consciousness or intelligence. We don't even know this for sure. We may be the unconscious dream of something beyond our comprehension.
If there are gods I expect they are nothing like humans. Can't blame humans for anthropomorphising god. Its just the way we have evolved to think in human terms. This probably goes against primitive literal interpretations such as Zeus impregnating women. But probably should not be held against the potential existence of actual deities - god entities.
The ideas of god we have seem consistent with them being human created constructs.
If there are no gods it is best to invent invisible gods. I can see a certain fit between some god beyond our comprehension, beyond space and time, and a universe whose origins and complexity are also pushing the limits of our comprehension.
Its interesting that I see god created by man in our image (or reflecting an element of human experience e.g. looking like an animal) and you see us created in gods image.
Obey No1kinobe 50+
I believe many of our supernatural beliefs in invisible entities reflect human (and some animals) evolving to see agency behind natural phenomena where none actually exists. Lightening from the angry gods. Volcano Gods. Natural spirits. Faeries. Fertility gods. Sea gods. Even a dog will growl if it hears a noise, probably because survival is enhanced if we assume the worse - that this might be some dangerous entity - rather than assuming it's the wind.
Modern monotheism seems a lot more sophisticated than natural spirits or tribal gods. However, in the bible in Genesis and older testament whether symbolic or literal intent, god is more overtly active in human affairs, more human, more a person walking the garden of Eden, destroying cities, testing Job, speaking to kings. Most of the sophisticated thinking seems to have gone on outside of the bible, closer and closer to modern times.
Makes me think myth. I note all these entities are invisible to humans nearly all the time. A big pointer as to their actual existence. Suggest godidea evolved to suit facts. Invisibility is necesity
Some believers think he is God. Others don't. I'm not sure if the bible is a good place for evidence of the truth of the situation, but I guess you can test it from a scriptural perspective. My recall are there are some inferences - only way to father thru me etc. Not much I am God, and there is a trinity. If you take the bibical stories as gospel he certainly didn't parade around shouting I am god, I am the messiah. Most the time he acted as a man, as a guru
Karen Olsen
Peter Law 30+
I appreciate your civility & willingness to listen, this is a new experience for me on TED. One thing we need to get our heads around is that we, & the universe exist. Something absolutely astounding has happened, & we are a part of that. It totally boggles our minds & swamps our understanding. So logically, the cause of it all must be unbelievable from our standpoint.
Matthew 18:3 (NIV)
And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven."
We have to understand that we must have a degree of trust, our brains cannot work it all out. That is not to say that we go against our reason. We enter a marriage with a degree of knowledge, & some faith. Christianity is very similar, we have a relationship with Christ.
We can get some way by brainpower. We see the results of something happening; what are the possible candidates? My first 35 years of searching came up with evolution as the most likely. The trouble, from my perspective, is the lack of any hard evidence. It's a great theory, but has no 'killer punch'. Much has to be taken on faith, too much for my liking.
Romans 1:18-20 (NIV)
"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, [19] since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. [20] For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities---his eternal power and divine nature---have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."
So Paul reckons that the truth of God should be obvious to anyone examining the creation.
God is the only other candidate; but which one?
Look at it another way; which book? As you are analytical, then you will probably have to plough through lots of books. I started with the bible, so saving a lot of time.
Back later
:-)
Obey No1kinobe 50+
.
The conversation s would be of little value if we all thought the same.
Karen Olsen
Karen Olsen
Adriaan Braam 20+
I thought you were looking for information as how people look at the passage, sorry.
Peter Law 30+
I could write a book myself, but the point is that it rung true to me. History, Archeology, Experience, even the anger the very mention of Jesus invokes in people, all made me wonder.
Revelation 3:20 (NIV)
"Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with me."
Head knowledge doesn't do it. We are by nature antagonistic to our dad, & hate the thought of him telling us what to do. He loves us & wants to be part of our lives. I took up his challenge, & asked his forgiveness. My life has never been the same. Millions can testify to that. This is the faith bit, however that faith will be repaid by fuller understanding as you get aquainted.
If you check out the other Holy Books, you mostly find a distortion of the Christian Bible.
There are 150 or so flood stories; therefore skeptics deduce there wasn't a flood. Go figure!
The Koran claims to be an update of the Bible, but the two books are totally at odds. Muslims demote Jesus to prophet.
Jehovah's Witnesses demote Jesus to Archangel.
All the Christian cults demote Jesus, deny the virgin birth etc.
God is a Spirit, out with time & space, we have a similar eternal component. We are in kindergarten to make our choices. Jesus came to pay the price for our freedom. He now inhabits a human-like body in eternity. We can too; it's awesome! It has to be.
:-)
Obey No1kinobe 50+
Adriaan Braam 20+
This article is more than 2000 so I'll give you a link to our interpretation. I hope you find the time.
Best regards
http://webhome.idirect.com/~abraam/studies/Who_is_Jesus.pdf
If any questions, do please let me know.
Karen Olsen
I have explored some interpretations of the Bible but, to be honest, I have little interest in exploring it more. Perhaps it was a book meant for the priesthood filled with symbolic meaning that somehow made it into the hands of millions of uninformed lay people, I do not know. I've also read a bit on different takes on Jesus including did he even exist. The thing is, i just don't put so much emphasis on the Bible. To me it is a book written by men, translated by men, and it is an expression of their thought and beliefs and political agenda. For me Jesus is the Jesus in my head, an imaginary person who was a comfort to me when I was a child. A virtual port in the storm. For some reason I call his name when I an really frustrated. Perhaps some would call it swearing but maybe I'm just need some of that peace energy right away. I don't have much interest in the Jesus of the Bible. I don't think anybody died for my sins. That evil concept was probably one of the things that moved me away from the Bible.
As I said, if you have something direct to share that would be welcome. I won't be able to respond any more as I will not be at a computer until next week. As they say, Adios
Peter Law 30+
"Its interesting that I see god created by man in our image (or reflecting an element of human experience e.g. looking like an animal) and you see us created in gods image."
Genesis 1:26 (NIV)
"Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”"
I don't just make it up. Note God uses the plural "our image".
"Even the masculinity often assigned god is so arbitrary."
Our spirits are sexless, but in this life we are assigned sex. I imagine so that we can learn about love, service, forgiveness, & such emotions which make up a close male/female/ child relationship. Adam was a man, as was Jesus; God refers to himself as father. He is the head, in the same way, the man should be the head of the house. He loves us & provides for us, just as we should do for our spouse & children. It is not supposed to be a hierarchy, it should be an equal partnership. Jesus said we should be "one flesh" with our wife. Mankind warps everything & then blames God.
I confess I'm not sure about sex in eternity, but there will be no warping. So I reckon God is male because of Jesus, & because of his role. BTW Christians are also called the bride of Christ, that feels a bit weird, but I'm getting used to it :)
"The ideas of god we have seem consistent with them being human created constructs. "
Only if you buy into a self creating universe, & ignore the empirical evidence in the bible. There are lots of constructs about, I grant you, but these mask a basic truth. No-one forges a £9 note, only something genuine is worth forging.
Jeremiah 9:6 (NIV)
"You live in the midst of deception; in their deceit they refuse to acknowledge me,” declares the Lord.
:-)
Obey No1kinobe 50+
I'm not saying you made it up. It comes from the bible.
You see the bible as the key handbook for life.
You see it as having some sort of authority or truth
I see it as a man made compilation.
One of thousands of religions, sects, beliefs systems what have you.
I suspect never the twain shall meet.
If the bible says god made man in the image of a primate or a pumpkin...
If it said we should kill naughty children
That the colour blue is the best one
I still wouldn't take much notice except where it affects the behaviour of believers that impacts the lives of others.
If the bible says it is so - it doesn't mean anything to me it terms of truth or fact or authority
Same buddhist texts, hindu, whatever.
No issue examining it. But it is not a statement of the facts of the universe as accepted in my view and a few billion others.
No issue discussing the tenants of the religion and referring to the texts. But some statement from a religious text has little validity as to nature of man and god etc unless you are a believer.
I'm waffling on.
I can see how from the perspective of one belief system you would interpret things the way you do.
Sure some elements of behaviour by the religious might be contrary to the views of others based on the same book.
If Jesus had been a woman no one would have listened to him at the time. She probably would have been married at 13, kids by 14.
Actually you could probably accept the cultural perspective of religion rather than they are forgeries deliberately there mislead without impacting your core beliefs about Jesus, creation etc.
Perhaps we are in 2 completely different bubbles.
I'm not saying your beliefs are inconsistent with the bible.
I just don't see the bible as an absolute authority on anything
I don't see Christianity as particularly special compared to any other of the major religions today.
Your beliefs, or another relgious view could be correct
I see no errors of logic in my world view either.