Religion v. Myth

Discussion in 'Belief and Spirituality' started by stellaluna, Mar 4, 2019.

  1. A Cup Of Tea

    A Cup Of Tea An ordinary cup of tea

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Messages:
    3,145
    Likes Received:
    483
    The question sort of assumes that the scientific evidence lead to a religions downfall, I doubt that is true.
    I hold, like most here, that science and religion is two very different things. The how/why that was alluded to earlier. But the "follower" of each can still get destructively caught up in trivialities. If, for instance, a christian church decides to hold a thing as true beyond all reason. Like homosexuality leads to natural catastrophes. Then it is likely that that church will die on that hill. BUT I don't consider that Religion, per say. Religion is not just a collection of norms and stories. Religion carries deep insight into what it is to be human.
    Rant over.
     
  2. wil

    wil UNeyeR1

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    As science plods on, unless we get evidence of raising the dead, prayers healing the sick, a supreme consciousness... Religions will continue to have issues, the philosophies could hang on.
     
  3. Ahanu

    Ahanu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,301
    Likes Received:
    138
    Augustine seems to base the entire story of Adam and Eve on historical fact - at least according to the last line he tags onto the end of a long list of various symbolic interpretations:

    "No one can stop us from interpreting Paradise symbolically as the life of the blessed; its four rivers as the four virtues . . . the fruit of the trees as the character of the righteous; the Tree of Life as Wisdom . . . . We can also interpret the details of Paradise with reference to the Church, which gives them a better significance as prophetic indications of things to come in the future. Thus Paradise stands for the Church itself . . . the four rivers represent the four Gospels; the fruit trees, the saints; and the fruit, their achievements; the Tree of Life, the holy of holies, must be Christ himself . . . . and there may be other more valuable lines of interpretation. There is no prohibition against such exegesis, provided that we also believe in the truth of the story as a faithful record of historical fact."
    (City of God 13.21)​

    Were myths understood as historical facts by the ancients? Perhaps it's a mixed bag: some did; some didn't.
     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2019
  4. Thomas

    Thomas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2003
    Messages:
    9,934
    Likes Received:
    1,096
    Thinking about it, I'm inclined to agree.

    I think this is a kind of 'faith' statement from non-religious types, who believe it to be true, but have never questioned or tested it.

    Agreed.

    Certainly science is also offering staggering and profound insights into human nature, statements that are themselves the cause of wonder — my favourite being we are actually made of 'star dust' — but such musings themselves are actually 'outside' science, as it were. The facts that science provides are just that, facts, what we make of those facts is something else.
     
    A Cup Of Tea likes this.
  5. Thomas

    Thomas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2003
    Messages:
    9,934
    Likes Received:
    1,096
    Seems so ...

    From quite early on there were discussions about the historicity of the Creation account. Some of the Fathers believed in the literal, whilst others believed in allegory, but generally all agreed that the message encompasses a truth that transcends the facts.

    Again, like the delusion and irrelevance of the science v religion debate, the myth v fact debate misses the essential point. Myth isn't about historical truths or empirical data, and never was. Myth is the fruit of the contemplation of the human condition.

    The Christian faithful, for example, are not required to believe in the literal historicity of the Creation narrative. What we are called to believe is the spiritual message — man is a created nature, that creation is essentially good, that pride led to the fall — and that was always the heart of the narrative, rather than what particular shade of green the leaves were on the trees ...

    The scribes knew that, too. Thus there is one tree in the midst, then there are two, and the literalist gets caught up in the question, and the scribe smiles at his childishness ...

    Again, echoing ACOT, I think this whole dependence on empirical data as the sole determiner of truth is a modernist fallacy, a sideshow by non-believers to validate their own arguments without their having actually validated the statement itself. Without it, they lose a substantial amount of what they perceive to be an infallible argument
     
  6. wil

    wil UNeyeR1

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Again, I'd say this is the leading downfall to Christianity in the US the requirement for children to believe this very thing without question. It made me distrust everything else heard from the pulpit. That was in the 60's and 70s in a doazen different churches in half a dozen different states literally coast to coast and from Florida to Alaska... I kept searching till the 80s before I gave up all together...

    And Catholics here OMG as a kid I watched them get hauled around by their ears by nuns and their stories of getting scripture drilled into them by rulers horrified me.

    It wasn't till I found new thought that I found there was an alternative.
     
  7. Thomas

    Thomas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2003
    Messages:
    9,934
    Likes Received:
    1,096
    Not according to the evidence. This Pew Report gives a fairly broad report. About half stop going to church because they ceased to believe in the elements of faith, rather than having to believe without question. Something like less than 20% say 'they came to dislike or distrust religious institutions or organized religion in general', but there's no mention of being required to believe without question, although no doubt some will come up with that if pushed....

    LOL, I know, I know ... it's all their fault ...

    According to Pew, among those religious 'nones' raised in a religion (49%), the main factor is a lack of faith that led them to move away from religion. This includes many respondents who mention 'science' as the reason they do not believe (flawed reasoning) including one who said "I’m a scientist now, and I don’t believe in miracles." which is another example of an illogical argument. Other references to 'common sense', 'logic' and 'lack of evidence' are equally founded on ... flawed logic ... go figure.

    Of seven reasons listed why people don't believe, five were logically unsound, one was closer to the truth — 'I just realised ... I don't really believe' — and the seventh was a self-affirming statement which says nothing at all, really.

    Other flawed arguments, 'More harm done in the name of religion than anything else', 'religion is personal', 'I'm open-minded', 'rational thought means religion goes out the window' etc., are all ill-founded but popular memes from the contemporary atheist debate ...
     
  8. wil

    wil UNeyeR1

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    What elements would they not believe? I am sure these elements are creation and flood and short earth and not the elements of compassion and good.Samaritans.
     
  9. Thomas

    Thomas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2003
    Messages:
    9,934
    Likes Received:
    1,096
    OK. Personally, I don't think so. There's no evidence of that on the Pew survey.

    No-one is asked to believe in a literal account of creation anyway, except a few nut-cases or 'eyes wide shut' fundamentalists. Same goes for Noah and the flood, and for the short earth theory, so really those are invalid reasons when you ascertain the actual facts.
     
  10. Cino

    Cino Big Love! (Atheist mystic)

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2018
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    254
    While I agree that some of these arguments are flawed, I also note that these are decisions of the heart more often than not, and the rational arguments are supplied after the fact.
     
  11. wil

    wil UNeyeR1

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    1,198
  12. Bhaktajan II

    Bhaktajan II Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2013
    Messages:
    671
    Likes Received:
    98
    Without "Religion" there is no meaning to life.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2019
  13. Bhaktajan II

    Bhaktajan II Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2013
    Messages:
    671
    Likes Received:
    98
    The counter argument of the above is that "What ever I do = the meaning to life"

    One argument subjective based on one's subjective whim,

    The other argument subjective based on one's choice of an objective best case scenario.

    What objective best case scenario does one religiously paint their actions on?
     
  14. wil

    wil UNeyeR1

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Why does life need meaning?

    What is the meaning that religion provides?
     
    Bhaktajan II likes this.
  15. Bhaktajan II

    Bhaktajan II Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2013
    Messages:
    671
    Likes Received:
    98
    This is a very good question.

    A grand side note is that this wil's comment seems understandable to folks with diversions up the hoosegow.

    Such questions may have never occurerd to Eskimos and Siberians and Hudson Bay and Amazonian and Congo and Austrailian natives and south sea islanders and appalachian teenagers during epochs prior to the last century.

    We take for granted how boredom was a pleasing part of life once upon a time.
     
  16. wil

    wil UNeyeR1

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Lol...statement is quite matter o fact
    As is the extension

    But when.asked to actually define...goes all politician talking in circles...

    Two simple questions
     
  17. Bhaktajan II

    Bhaktajan II Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2013
    Messages:
    671
    Likes Received:
    98
    because of self worth. You have an ego therefore you are.

    I post my statement [Without "Religion" there is no meaning to life.] to illicit any counter claim.

    I already implied that "Why a Life has meaning" in my post, Without "Religion" there is no meaning to life.

    To wit I proffered that w/o religion, one's own self-worth ego-borne persona is tantamount to a religious vocation by any other name.

    I remind all that our modern day monkey minds are amused by many fleeting whims ---a short lived life that is amused with the mundane.

    A 27 year old man [minus the first 5 years of youth and minus 9 years of sleep] had 15 years of waking hours to formulate the whole of the intelligence and social worth. Yet many of such are late bloomers to this. Yet profess highfalutin dreamscapes as holy grails.

    Short lived high statistical chance of death, famine and mental & physical & monetary & emotional harm is REAL LIFE.

    Now quickly Change the TV channel and you're all good.
     
  18. Bhaktajan II

    Bhaktajan II Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2013
    Messages:
    671
    Likes Received:
    98
    Repeat these rites (to stay linked and consistent).
    Be forewarned of 10 primary trespasses (to avoid sins).
    Accept that the Soul goes on after Death (to act for future gains).
    Pray multiple times a day (to see our haplessness and the magnanimous mercy in every moment).

    But this is for Simply Living and High Thinking Lifestyles.
     
  19. wil

    wil UNeyeR1

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    If you don't have an answer just say so.
     
  20. Bhaktajan II

    Bhaktajan II Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2013
    Messages:
    671
    Likes Received:
    98
    How many meanings of life are out there?

    If the Soul survives death and take a new birth [after death] in a new body life time after lifetime [samsara]...there is
    an unlimited number of combinations and permutations of "meanings of life" to be experienced [if one was so inclined] Right?

    Religion is for the acquisition of "artha, kama, dharma & [ultimately] moksha".

    Moksha is of two kinds: a] impersonal [nirvana] and b] personal [return home back to Godhead's entourage and pastimes].
    The first requires an acsetic path of prayer etc and b. req's love of Godhead.

    Hare Krishna, boys!
     
    Namaste Jesus likes this.

Share This Page