Do we need Religion (Mythologies)?

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
boatsnguitars
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2060
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2023 10:09 am
Has thanked: 477 times
Been thanked: 580 times

Do we need Religion (Mythologies)?

Post #1

Post by boatsnguitars »

One has to admire the Cognitive Dissonance of the Believer. I was thinking about how Christians will vilify and mock other religions; will call them mythology or fairy tales - then offer their own mythology as the alternative - as Truth. It must be exhausting. I know I was exhausted when I was a Christian trying to explain why the Flood in Genesis was True, but not the Greek tales. It took a specific mental gymnastic they taught me in Sunday School: If it's in the Bible, it's True, otherwise, it's a ruse by Satan!

And it always struck me how upset Christians get when I now tell them their religion is no different than all the others. How they get upset when I mock it, ridicule it, or say how worthless it is. Yet, Christians do this in spades when talking about other people's religions.

For example:
https://answersingenesis.org/world-reli ... us-christ/

Have a read through. See how the Christian carefully explains that the Greek religion was all 'just stories' but the Bible is the true word of God - while they are talking about just as fanciful tales as the Greeks told!

The kicker for me is this "Oh-so-close-you-almost-had-a-self-awareness" moment when he ends his piece:
How indeed can we expect people to understand and accept what the Bible teaches about a crucified and risen Lord if we fail to build the foundation for them to accept the Bible’s teachings about the Creator God, the one to whom we are accountable? How can they fully appreciate the suffering Savior who “was wounded for our transgressions,” who was “bruised for our iniquities” and by whose “stripes we are healed” (Isaiah 53:5) if their understanding of the origin of sin and suffering has no more truth in it than the tale of the curious Pandora who unleashed all the suffering that haunts the world?

How can they understand that the Son of God, the man Jesus Christ, was “the last Adam [who] became a life-giving spirit” if they do not believe that “the first Adam became a living being” (1 Corinthians 15:45)? Let us not lose sight of the importance of building a biblical worldview among those who are deceived by the popular lies of molecules-to-man evolution. We need to teach them the truth about our Creator.
It's almost as if he's asking himself: "How can I believe these crazy stories in Genesis if I'm not brainwashed into believing the the Christian mythology is true?"

The point is, I don't know why Christians can't see how their mythology is no different than other mythologies in history. Yes, I believed it at one point when I was young - because it was taught as truth - but just like Santa Claus, I grew to understand how adults make up lies in a misguided effort to either help or control people - or both.

What stuns me is the number of seemingly sober adults who will mock the ancient Greeks for believing Zeus had a hand in some event, then will claim God acts in some other event. They don't realize they are doing exactly the same thing, with the same level of Faith.

It has been said that there are a few things one can do to realize the truth of religion (all religion):
1. Actually read the religious texts with full understanding.
2. Study/Compare religions
3. Read about mythology and how it operates.
4. Understand fallacies, and how the brain often tricks us into thinking certain things.
5. Simply observing

However, I bet many Religionists would say they've done those things and still believe their mythology is the one, true mythology.

What methods have people seen that works to get through to Religious people?
Should we try? (Is it moral?)
Should we let them believe whatever they want, even if it means they could harm people? (That is, we could arrest them for not taking their kids to the doctor, or beating up gay people - but don't we have a responsibility to stop the ideology? And, not just acute acts of violence, but religious people - by far - deny Climate Change, and vote against policies that would help mitigate it).
Should we be subversive (join churches and plant seeds, or lead Bible Study groups)?

What advice would a Christian give to persuade other religious believers to stop beleiving in their religion? (I imagine they think getting them to read the Bible would work, but that's been tried and failed far more than it's worked. Likewise, Muslims believe their text is persuasive).

Imagine you have met a sincere believer in Greek Mythology and he has perfect Apologetics. What could or would you say to convince them they were wrong - or would you? I imagine a Muslim or Christian would use the threat of Hell, or try to persuade them that Jesus really loves them - so "C'mon!".

This is not a strange question among Christians. They actively seek to convert people. They have vast organizations to try to get people to join their religion. They have Missionaries, out-reaches, etc. Some of it works, but overall, Christianity is in decline.

"Nones" are the fastest growing religious group. Perhaps because people are too informed to believe in Bronze Age mythologies - they now have other mythologies to latch on to. Or, they are comfortable knowing mundane truths. Or, comfortable not knowing and not caring about the Meaning of Life, and if there is an Afterlife, etc.

There is, after all, a beauty in minimalism, and enjoying the Simple Life. We don't need heroic tales of supernatural Good vs Evil battles to fulfill our lives. We just need a few friends, family, a good drink and some time to appreciate what we have. All the rest seems overly complicated.

So, debate: Ought society move, willingly, to a Post-Religious(mythological) world, or, like Joseph Campbell suggests, do we needs Myths?
“And do you think that unto such as you
A maggot-minded, starved, fanatic crew
God gave a secret, and denied it me?
Well, well—what matters it? Believe that, too!”
― Omar Khayyâm

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 8460
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 986 times
Been thanked: 3654 times

Re: Do we need Religion (Mythologies)?

Post #111

Post by TRANSPONDER »

1213 wrote: Thu Jul 27, 2023 4:48 am
TRANSPONDER wrote: Wed Jul 26, 2023 8:45 am ...God could have stopped the whole thing before it even started. An omniscient God would have knows he'd repent afterwards and swear never to do it again, even with a populace that were no better than before. You have two options, it seems, either God went agead with what he knew would go wrong, or He didn't know, and is working blinds. Apart from of course the whole thing is just a tall story.
I think the correct option is:
God knew what will happen, but thought this is the best way, even though it is sad at some point.
TRANSPONDER wrote: Wed Jul 26, 2023 8:45 amNow the other thing. Yes, that is the only answer - God told Moses what had happened. So why do you suppose God told Moses that He had made the sun and moon after the earth? Did he lie?
Obviously God told it, because that is how it went. He didn't lie.
First off, I noted a remark about inbreeding. This is a genetic Problem (barrier, bottleneck) that means that two of each from the ark (even supposing they survived and didn't die of starvation) the gene pool would lead to disorders that would have made the species inviolable, and would be detectable in the DNA today. It isn't. This is why not only is it genetically unfeasible, the DNA evidence refutes it. Your suggestion that inbreeding can explain super rapid evolution is ..let me select the words very carefully....a non -starter.

Now then, so are you saying that the earth was made, and then the light that switched on and off like a day, morning and evening (that is what the Bible says - read it yourself) but the sun and moon hadn't yet been made? There are not many YE creationists are as science denialist as that. I won't tell you the YE excuse, but I'm surprised you didn't go for it but appear to deny Everything instead. Which is fine O:) I reckon there are a few Bible -believers who are reading your posts with disbelief. As much as mine.

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 6002
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6652 times
Been thanked: 3222 times

Re: Do we need Religion (Mythologies)?

Post #112

Post by brunumb »

1213 wrote: Thu Jul 27, 2023 4:48 am
brunumb wrote: Wed Jul 26, 2023 6:33 pm What happened to the original pair? ....
Same as what happened to Noah's family.
I think you should at least provide some sort of account for how the changes occurred, why they happened so quickly, and how the variations ended up distributed in their own environments with no intermediates anywhere in sight. You have basically answered nothing, so you have no case of any merit. You could just as well have said "Magic!".
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11598
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 337 times
Been thanked: 379 times

Re: Do we need Religion (Mythologies)?

Post #113

Post by 1213 »

brunumb wrote: Thu Jul 27, 2023 6:57 pm I think you should at least provide some sort of account for how the changes occurred, why they happened so quickly, and how the variations ended up distributed in their own environments with no intermediates anywhere in sight. You have basically answered nothing, so you have no case of any merit. You could just as well have said "Magic!".
If we look what are the differences in family Ursidae, it seems main difference is color. Other difference seems to be size. If you know some other meaningful difference, please tell what it is.

The differences in size can come just from the nutrition. And the differences in coloring can come also from nutrition and environment. I think it is same as with humans, for example in sunny regions color can be darker.

Now, it would be interesting to study, what are the actual differences in DNA for example in the family Ursidae. Unfortunately I don't have that exact information, which is why I can't exactly point does the change come from DNA, or is it basically the same DNA, but just in different setting to suit the situation the best way.

Epigenetics show that parts of DNA can be activated differently, which means the DNA is the same, but it functions in certain conditions differently and so can cause different outlook. I think it can be possible that for example in the Family Ursidae this is the case, they are basically the same, but their DNA is activated little differently, because different environments/food. This is why the outlook is little different. And this means, there is no meaningful evolution, only different variations of the same.

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11598
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 337 times
Been thanked: 379 times

Re: Do we need Religion (Mythologies)?

Post #114

Post by 1213 »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Thu Jul 27, 2023 8:17 am ...This is a genetic Problem (barrier, bottleneck) that means that two of each from the ark (even supposing they survived and didn't die of starvation) the gene pool would lead to disorders that would have made the species inviolable
So, are you saying that if for some reason we would now have only two bears (male and female), they could not get offspring and they would die?

Maybe it is so, but, in Biblical point of view, everything was good at the beginning and everything has after that slowly degenerated. During the flood period all species may have been more resistant for the harmful effects of inbreeding, which is why the result was not the same as it could maybe be nowadays.
TRANSPONDER wrote: Thu Jul 27, 2023 8:17 am Now then, so are you saying that the earth was made, and then the light that switched on and off like a day, morning and evening (that is what the Bible says - read it yourself) but the sun and moon hadn't yet been made? There are not many YE creationists are as science denialist as that. I won't tell you the YE excuse, but I'm surprised you didn't go for it but appear to deny Everything instead. Which is fine O:) I reckon there are a few Bible -believers who are reading your posts with disbelief. As much as mine.
Why do you think light can't exist without sun and moon?

It seems to me that you think you are the Science. I think it is wrong. If people don't agree with your opinions, it is not science denial.

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 8460
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 986 times
Been thanked: 3654 times

Re: Do we need Religion (Mythologies)?

Post #115

Post by TRANSPONDER »

1213 wrote: Fri Jul 28, 2023 4:29 am
TRANSPONDER wrote: Thu Jul 27, 2023 8:17 am ...This is a genetic Problem (barrier, bottleneck) that means that two of each from the ark (even supposing they survived and didn't die of starvation) the gene pool would lead to disorders that would have made the species inviolable
So, are you saying that if for some reason we would now have only two bears (male and female), they could not get offspring and they would die?

Maybe it is so, but, in Biblical point of view, everything was good at the beginning and everything has after that slowly degenerated. During the flood period all species may have been more resistant for the harmful effects of inbreeding, which is why the result was not the same as it could maybe be nowadays.
TRANSPONDER wrote: Thu Jul 27, 2023 8:17 am Now then, so are you saying that the earth was made, and then the light that switched on and off like a day, morning and evening (that is what the Bible says - read it yourself) but the sun and moon hadn't yet been made? There are not many YE creationists are as science denialist as that. I won't tell you the YE excuse, but I'm surprised you didn't go for it but appear to deny Everything instead. Which is fine O:) I reckon there are a few Bible -believers who are reading your posts with disbelief. As much as mine.
Why do you think light can't exist without sun and moon?

It seems to me that you think you are the Science. I think it is wrong. If people don't agree with your opinions, it is not science denial.
:D You carry right on with the personals, they hurt you, not me.

I would rather remind you of what the Bible actually says,


Gen. 1.3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.


This is clear. Daylight, alternating with darkness of night, was made before the sun and moon. The excuse that it was some cosmic brilliance NOT to do with day and night is ignorance of the Bible or denial. Which is it?

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. 11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.


This the dividing of the waters (Likely adapting the dividing of Tiamat in the Babylonian myth) appearance of earth and sea plus vegetation was accomplished. Then...

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.


...after the making of earth, continents and even plants, only then, the Bible says, were the stars, planets sun and moon made. This is perfect sense with the Babylonian sky dome based on the old Sumerian muth and also the Egyptian sky goddess arched over the earth god. It's a bit fey that they (and YE Creation Biblical apologists, too) think that light isn't associated with anything to make it, but they thought up this idea of little lights trundling around the inside of the dome, just so humans could reckon days. All done just for us.

Now, can you still deny that the sun was made before the earth? If you do, we willfollow that bup, but if you accept that this is not what happened, why is God telling Moses what is wrong? If it said 'Then god took away the clouds and revealed the great orb that made the light and days, morning and evening', that would be a great 'science in the Bible' point. But it tells a wrong thing (unless you deny cosmological science) and I don't know how you explain that God wouls misinform Moses when telling him everything was created.

Personals aside O:) you can surely understand why the better explanation is that Genesis is a myth, that fits with the Babylonian snowdome cosmos, and reflects the ideas of men, not the knowledge of gods. ·

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 6002
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6652 times
Been thanked: 3222 times

Re: Do we need Religion (Mythologies)?

Post #116

Post by brunumb »

1213 wrote: Fri Jul 28, 2023 4:28 am
brunumb wrote: Thu Jul 27, 2023 6:57 pm I think you should at least provide some sort of account for how the changes occurred, why they happened so quickly, and how the variations ended up distributed in their own environments with no intermediates anywhere in sight. You have basically answered nothing, so you have no case of any merit. You could just as well have said "Magic!".
If we look what are the differences in family Ursidae, it seems main difference is color. Other difference seems to be size. If you know some other meaningful difference, please tell what it is.

The differences in size can come just from the nutrition. And the differences in coloring can come also from nutrition and environment. I think it is same as with humans, for example in sunny regions color can be darker.

Now, it would be interesting to study, what are the actual differences in DNA for example in the family Ursidae. Unfortunately I don't have that exact information, which is why I can't exactly point does the change come from DNA, or is it basically the same DNA, but just in different setting to suit the situation the best way.

Epigenetics show that parts of DNA can be activated differently, which means the DNA is the same, but it functions in certain conditions differently and so can cause different outlook. I think it can be possible that for example in the Family Ursidae this is the case, they are basically the same, but their DNA is activated little differently, because different environments/food. This is why the outlook is little different. And this means, there is no meaningful evolution, only different variations of the same.
Try your same reasoning with some other animals. Was the platypus unique and on the ark? How did it get to Australia and how is it that there are none anywhere else? How many different species of birds were there on the ark. Did the thousands of vastly different species all come from a few pairs that were on the ark? The problems with the ark story just mount up and up until anyone with an open mind should see the impossibility of it all.
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 8460
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 986 times
Been thanked: 3654 times

Re: Do we need Religion (Mythologies)?

Post #117

Post by TRANSPONDER »

1213 wrote: Fri Jul 28, 2023 4:29 am
TRANSPONDER wrote: Thu Jul 27, 2023 8:17 am ...This is a genetic Problem (barrier, bottleneck) that means that two of each from the ark (even supposing they survived and didn't die of starvation) the gene pool would lead to disorders that would have made the species inviolable
So, are you saying that if for some reason we would now have only two bears (male and female), they could not get offspring and they would die?

Maybe it is so, but, in Biblical point of view, everything was good at the beginning and everything has after that slowly degenerated. During the flood period all species may have been more resistant for the harmful effects of inbreeding, which is why the result was not the same as it could maybe be nowadays.
TRANSPONDER wrote: Thu Jul 27, 2023 8:17 am Now then, so are you saying that the earth was made, and then the light that switched on and off like a day, morning and evening (that is what the Bible says - read it yourself) but the sun and moon hadn't yet been made? There are not many YE creationists are as science denialist as that. I won't tell you the YE excuse, but I'm surprised you didn't go for it but appear to deny Everything instead. Which is fine O:) I reckon there are a few Bible -believers who are reading your posts with disbelief. As much as mine.
Why do you think light can't exist without sun and moon?

It seems to me that you think you are the Science. I think it is wrong. If people don't agree with your opinions, it is not science denial.
Quite apart from the fossil evidence not suporting the idea, two basic bears would be able to breed of course, but in a few generayions the problems of inbreeding would start. It would show up in all the descendants today, and of course the various types brown, Polar, grizzly, is down to an evolutionary process ov divergency (sub -species) over tend of thousands of years.

The last Creationist attempt to deal with the problem of logistics was to have two basic bears (1) on the Ark and a super - evolution packed into a thousand years or less, if it is dated thater than the pyramids which some have argued.

Not only is there no time for such divergence but genetically it doesn't work and the DNA shows no sign of origin from 1 pair.

(1) the 'baryma' idea of a pair of cat -kind, cow kind, horse kind from which all the species would evolve - in a thousand years or so. Hamm's Ark even has a 'Pakicetus' on show as a 'baryma' for the cetans (whales), which is pretty crafty of hi, ;) but seems to show that he realised the evidence for the centan evolution is pretty solid. So he crams the whole thing into the time from the Flood ending to records of civilisation.

And why not have non -stamp collector's animated take on the whole problem?



the 'Baryma' or basic Kinds (not really found in the fossil recors, even if Tiktaalik is O:) idea was to finally get around the millions of species which wasn't really helped by suggesting Juveniles or eggs, and which was doubled in problems when it was realised that dinosaurs had to be on the Ark too, because their footprint were in the supposed flood levels.

Unlike Fellowship of the Ring, I won't heep you waiting for part 2.


User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11598
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 337 times
Been thanked: 379 times

Re: Do we need Religion (Mythologies)?

Post #118

Post by 1213 »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Sat Jul 29, 2023 3:29 pm ...but in a few generayions the problems of inbreeding would start....
Why do you believe so?
TRANSPONDER wrote: Sat Jul 29, 2023 3:29 pmNot only is there no time for such divergence but genetically it doesn't work and the DNA shows no sign of origin from 1 pair.
Does DNA show origin from 2, 3...or 200000 pairs?

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11598
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 337 times
Been thanked: 379 times

Re: Do we need Religion (Mythologies)?

Post #119

Post by 1213 »

brunumb wrote: Fri Jul 28, 2023 8:08 pm ...Was the platypus unique and on the ark?
Maybe Aboriginals are right and platypus is a hybrid of a duck and a water rat. :D

I think it is possible that platypus, that I think is one of the greatest evidences against evolution theory, could have survived in cavities below earth and flood water during the great flood. But, I think it is also possible that it was in the ark and after the flood traveled slowly to Australia. And maybe it didn't survive in other areas, because other animals ate them.
brunumb wrote: Fri Jul 28, 2023 8:08 pmHow many different species of birds were there on the ark. Did the thousands of vastly different species all come from a few pairs that were on the ark?
My estimation is, there was about 160 mammal families, 200 bird families and 100 reptilian families (total number of animals in the ark ~3500). All modern species of those families are then offspring of that group.
brunumb wrote: Fri Jul 28, 2023 8:08 pmThe problems with the ark story just mount up and up until anyone with an open mind should see the impossibility of it all.
I think that is funny, if you believe all species evolved from a simple organism to this current diversity, by happenstance and lucky coincidences. :D

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11598
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 337 times
Been thanked: 379 times

Re: Do we need Religion (Mythologies)?

Post #120

Post by 1213 »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Fri Jul 28, 2023 8:17 am This is clear. Daylight, alternating with darkness of night, was made before the sun and moon. The excuse that it was some cosmic brilliance NOT to do with day and night is ignorance of the Bible or denial. Which is it?
Yes, it is clear what the Bible tells. I think it is possible to have other sources of light than sun and moon. Why do you think it is impossible?
TRANSPONDER wrote: Fri Jul 28, 2023 8:17 amNow, can you still deny that the sun was made before the earth?
I believe things were created as told in the Bible. To me Bible is more credible than you, or "scientists" who claim they know better.
TRANSPONDER wrote: Fri Jul 28, 2023 8:17 am...Genesis is a myth, that fits with the Babylonian snowdome cosmos, and reflects the ideas of men, not the knowledge of gods. ·
Sorry, I disagree with that. Babylonian idea seems to be misunderstanding of what is told in the Bible.

Post Reply