deirdre
Senior Member.
Obviously. but that's not what I was referring to.You can hate the effects of belief in non-existent things.
Obviously. but that's not what I was referring to.You can hate the effects of belief in non-existent things.
I am not a fan of big religion . I think its a scam .
Not a big deal, but I personally do not think of Buddhists as "atheists" (and actually, the about.com article you linked to also says "nontheistic" is more accurate).Actually, a "Buddhist" is a type of atheist.
http://buddhism.about.com/od/basicbuddhistteachings/a/buddhaatheism.htm
But, anyone who no longer worships the "god" Zeus...or Isis...(or any number of thousands of other "gods" in history) is also an atheist.
...but I wanted to share that some wince a bit at calling them "atheists."
Well, I've come neither to bury the Bible nor to praise it.Yes, actually. The term "atheist" has been turned into a disparaging insult, and a pejorative. When in fact, it is merely descriptive.
A simple thought exercise:
"Leprechauns" exist as soon as proof is provided. Same with "unicorns", or "bigfoot".
Absent evidence, and proof....then anything that is "believed" to exist is, by default, not a fact. When any actual proof is provided, then ANY atheist on this planet would accept it, and understand it rationally. Until then?
Since this OP is about the bible and "debunking and skepticism" shows us that the "bible" is indeed a terrible, terrible "guide" to rational seeking of actual truth.
I don't think the bible ever made that claim. did it? but I'm with NP, I'm neutral too.Since this OP is about the bible and "debunking and skepticism" shows us that the "bible" is indeed a terrible, terrible "guide" to rational seeking of actual truth.
kinda like quantum physics. its not what you know, but what Might be true : )Hmmm, interesting Thread. I personally think there is room in human endeavors for one to accept there are sources of knowledge, information, feelings and experiences that cannot be verified or explained via a scientific construct. This is the realm occupied by religion, spiritualism, intuition, belief, superstition, etc. Because no one can validate the existence of these things, skepticism would be a natural tendency. I accept the existence of knowledge derived by sources other than by scientific sources, so I feel "belief" has a place in the human experience and is an almost universal trait of human culture and may well be adaptive.
Scripture I think is the result of a need to impose some standardization of belief. It also needs to be considered sacred so it can be handed down generation to generation. My question is why has it been so successful? Why is it still with us if it has little or know value?
I've always been interested in the human psychology involved here...Hmmm, interesting Thread. I personally think there is room in human endeavors for one to accept there are sources of knowledge, information, feelings and experiences that cannot be verified or explained via a scientific construct. This is the realm occupied by religion, spiritualism, intuition, belief, superstition, etc. Because no one can validate the existence of these things, skepticism would be a natural tendency. I accept the existence of knowledge derived by sources other than by scientific sources, so I feel "belief" has a place in the human experience and is an almost universal trait of human culture and may well be adaptive.
Scripture I think is the result of a need to impose some standardization of belief. It also needs to be considered sacred so it can be handed down generation to generation. My question is why has it been so successful? Why is it still with us if it has little or no know value?
don't exaggerate there are some facts in religion.I've always been interested in the human psychology involved here...
but at the end of the day, I always remember that science and religion are less similar than apples & oranges...and don't even play on the same field.
![]()
Don't kill the messenger...(and then hide behind Canadian traffic lights)don't exaggerate there are some facts in religion.
so did you debunk the easter bunny for all the kids today? <just kiddingYes, this is a rather old post of mine. I just remembered it, and thought I would mention it for Easter, as many of the Bible excerpts were about the resurrection,
And yes, I'm an atheist.
You have to look at it from a neutral perspective.
On the one hand you have some religious zealots making up a story, several decades after the actual events.
On the other, you have the creator of the universe, incarnate in human flesh, died and risen from the dead.
So, the question is, which of those two things seems more likely?
It's just like the parlor game "Telephone" (aka "Chinese Whispers") except instead of the results being absurdly hilarious, the ancient results became "history."http://www.biblica.com/en-us/bible/bible-faqs/when-was-the-bible-written/
Word of mouth??? Where were the cameras?
(One thing always puzzles me.....When Jesus went "full time" prophet, what happened to his carpentry business?......................"Messiah my arse! I'm still waiting for my fitted wardrobes.")
Yes, oral traditions become distorted over time. But human behavior and culture traits; however, are extremely predictable. Marriage, language, beliefs (religion), music, law are almost always repeat offenders. There must be a reason for their existence in human society. They exists even in our most primitive cultures.It's just like the parlor game "Telephone" (aka "Chinese Whispers") except instead of the results being absurdly hilarious, the ancient results became "history."
Yes, oral traditions become distorted over time. But human behavior and culture traits; however, are extremely predictable. Marriage, language, beliefs (religion), music, law are almost always repeat offenders. There must be a reason for their existence in human society. They exists even in our most primitive cultures.
Do you feel the big boy religions: Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism are basically not "advantageous"?They exist, but are often radically different to those concepts in the modern Western world. They most likely exist (in some form) because they are advantageous to the success of a society.
Do you feel the big boy religions: Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism are basically not "advantageous"?
What has changed?Not any more.
What has changed?
Hmmmmm, I think the Franciscans may disagree with your premiss. It is my understanding they have a tradition of teaching critical thinking. The Catholic Church was the protector and repository of Western Civilization during the dark ages; St Patrick is revered for such efforts I thought? This would no doubt include scientific skepticism.Rather a big (off) topic. But basically science and public education give people answers. And society in general has evolved away from religion as the primary motivator and provider of moral codes. Since religion is at odds with science it's now a divisive force.
But the issue here is how the Bible does not encourage free-thinking and questioning - that in itself is a significant disadvantage of religion over nonreligion.
Hmmmmm, I think the Franciscans may disagree with your premiss. It is my understanding they have a tradition of teaching critical thinking. The Catholic Church was the protector and repository of Western Civilization during the dark ages; St Patrick is revered for such efforts I thought? This would no doubt include scientific skepticism.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role_of_the_Catholic_Church_in_Western_civilization
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Patrick
Hmmm, me thinks it is difficult to isolate the cannon from the values, philosophies, practices and traditions of the religions they are the foundations of.But my point was specifically about the Bible.
just to play devils advocate... as we have all seen here at Metabunk, some people aren't capable of critical thinking even when the facts are pointed out to them. Maybe jesus ( or matthew?) was just trying to make people feel bettr about themselves and basically saying, "it's ok if you don't know to ask you can trust me, i'll be your brain".But my point was specifically about the Bible.
(One thing always puzzles me.....When Jesus went "full time" prophet, what happened to his carpentry business?...)
What I was wondering, is what the Bible's advice or opinions on Skepticism and Debunking might be...
The resurrection of Jesus is the cornerstone...
I am glad you cited this book as upon reading the opening lines of this thread I was going to suggest it in particular as perhaps the most relevant. However, I would have to vehemently disagree with respect to your interpretation of it. I feel such an interpretation also lacks historical context.The Bible does not always look kindly upon seeking wisdom.
Could you expand as to the difference between these two, as Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, and others may see them as essentially identical.So I feel it can quite safely be argued that the Bible is very anti-sceptic. "Knowledge" and "Wisdom" consist largely of knowledge of God's will, and not knowledge of the world.
They were cast out for disobedience but you raise a very good point. In fact, one could explore this particular book in itself, within the framework of your question, rather than attempt to encompass the entirety of the bible, as it is perhaps the archetypal or exemplar tale concerning the very points you raise in this topic. We even have within it the tree of knowledge, the metaphor of all metaphors. For sure, disobedience aside, the underlying, direct problem resulting from the eating of the fruit concerned the enabling of ability to differentiate between good and evil. Within the human story this can be seen as representing the moment we became cultural entities with 'agency', in a sense that we understand ourselves to this day. Why was the acquisition of this particular piece of knowledge the crux of the very first tale in our collective human story? It is a very curious tale.The foundational story of the bible is that of Adam and Eve, who are cast out of paradise for the very skeptical act of seeking knowledge - a type of knowledge that the bible warns against.
he had to abandon it once he sawed the Truth."termites"?
"swarms of locusts"?
"dry-rot"?
And yes, this is me being facetious....
On reflection, the cornerstones are light, logos, and Noahide law. The narrative concerns free will, between Noahide law and the 'adversarial' philosophy of 'do as thou wilt'.
Is gov. really so different than religion? Just a different set of 'primarily' men telling us what we can do, and what we can say, and what we can eat. it's all one half a dozen of the other, imo.IMO it is a false dichotomy that those are the only 2 options.
There are many cases know of societies having laws and rules of behavior without them coming from the x-ian god (or the hebrew or islamic versions) - and in the case of buddhism there is no god at all - but karma is a bitch!
Your comparison of the 2 as if they are the only optoins is, IMO, typical of hte closed mindedness engendered by the circular belief that the bible is the word of god therefore everything in the bible is true because it is the word of god.
There are societies that have barely encountered outsiders in centuries. Not sure what your point is there, I'm afraid. I see no false dichotomy but perhaps I was unclear. By 'do as thy wilt' I did not mean exercise one's right of choice in all things including matters of no particular consequence as well as morally grey areas. I meant act within the constraints of Noahide law, or transgress it, at one's will. A binary option, and the short essence of the bible, I'd say.IMO it is a false dichotomy that those are the only 2 options.
There are many cases know of societies having laws and rules of behavior without them coming from the x-ian god (or the hebrew or islamic versions).
Really, how did you come to that conclusion?Your comparison of the 2 as if they are the only optoins is, IMO, typical of hte closed mindedness engendered by the circular belief that the bible is the word of god therefore everything in the bible is true because it is the word of god.