Target Audience

How do you explain to a 6 year old that long term planning and effort has value?

Do you tell them about the three little pigs... or do you tell them about the cricket and the ant. You don't say "aggregate gains are multiplied through prudent financial planning with an emphasis on dividend based returns"

Simple stories that the child can easily digest mentally but which establish symbolic logic within the child's mind. I.e. the storyteller selects a story appropriate to his audience.

***
How does god explain the divine to man? He provides him with a cannon of stories, just like the three little pigs, but which have the depth to be mined for centuries.

Divine truth can be found in the Bible, and the Qur'an and the Upanishads and the Torah etc.

***

The problem arises when people want to limit these truths to a past ages conception of reality. Saying the world was created in 6 days is okay to someone living in the year 204 AD. But to someone in 2004 they revolt and say "that's stupid"

but they've missed the point. Just as the "wolf" hunting the pigs is "stupid" in a literal sense, the genius is that the wolf can be translated into a reality that is just as real today for someone in a metropolis as it was for a farmer a thousand years ago.
***
We are a mature species. We have science, we have psychology we have many things. It's safe and appropriate and expected that you can take the truths found in any of these texts and translate them into a modern context that has relevance and meaning.

For instance "turn the other cheek" wasn't fully understood until 1986 when Rene Girard after man years of study and research finally understood its true depths in his groundbreaking work Scapegoat (Johns Hopkins Univ Pr, 1986). Yet, the logic of that simple phrase still has value for anyone who hasn't read his book.
***
Lastly if you want to understand the 6+1 day universe in today's terms... i'll give you a clue... we haven't made it to Sunday yet...

___________________
Светопресавление
your pearl casting hero

Last edited by Subey on Jan-05-2005 at 00:59

You should've wrote a few more paragraphs you had a good thought going there.

___________________
First thing we learn about emotion, is that it has it's price. A complete paradox. But without control, without restraint, emotion is C H A O S.

This needs development. I don't know what religion exactly is in question here. Pick a religion and try to make sense out of it. I don't see where you're going. If I was to guess I would say you were trying to express the need for a real religion full of truth with no room for error. Again, I didn't get it...

___________________

Your reasoning falls flat on its face because any deity powerful enough to create the world would almost certainly have the foresight to realize that society and culture will vary over time and from place to place and thus, so will interpretations of non-literal statements in any religious text.

Even in the same region at the same time you have pacifists and suicide bombers basing their philosophies on the same Qur'an. Subjective, interpretive literature is far too inherently flawed a method for the communication of something as serious as a divine will.

No all-knowing "God" would be stupid enough to employ such a methodology. The true creators of religion - humans - on the other hand, would definitely be stupid enough (as evidenced by this thread). So there's the genuine explanation for religion and it's the only one you'll ever need: it's the product of human stupidity.

quote:

The problem arises when people want to limit these truths to a past ages conception of reality. Saying the world was created in 6 days is okay to someone living in the year 204 AD. But to someone in 2004 they revolt and say "that's stupid"

No we haven't missed the point it IS stupid its just that we have millions of evangelists who say that it is true and not mataphorical...

Can't be arsed to have my lettuce-coloured fonts in this post I'll try to speak as clearly as possible:

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter Your reasoning falls flat on its face because any deity powerful enough to create the world would almost certainly have the foresight to realize that society and culture will vary over time and from place to place and thus, so will interpretations of non-literal statements in any religious text.

That's because the deities portrayed by these religions should not be taken literally either. God, as shown in the bible, for example, is quite illogical - first people claim He's all love, but then he destroyed those two cities out of anger (I know them as Somoda e Gomorra, but these are the Portuguese names). Simply because he's not a physical or spiritual being.

It makes more sense to see the Christian God as "consequence", for example (I'll stick with Christianity as I've grown in a Catholic environment and I know its philosophy quite well). If you behave, you'll be in heaven, which is quite true. If you're kind to others, you won't face as much hostility as a rude person would. If you don't kill/steal/... people, chances of having someone killing/stealing/... you out of revenge are lower. This is quite similar to most other Middle Eastern religions, that were influenced by similar values in other early religions, such as Buddhism and Hinduism (the Greek society took these values to the Middle East back in the time when they expanded its borders till India). As in "God" created the Earth - well, our consciousness creates the Earth, so even in this sense "God" would means "consequence": They're a reaction from our organs to what is surround us. First the world around us is without form and void, then you slowly create things and, in the end of it all, you rest (Sunday). There are loads and loads of different ways of dealing with it - Subey seems to have another, but this is true to every story with metaphors.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter Even in the same region at the same time you have pacifists and suicide bombers basing their philosophies on the same Qur'an. Subjective, interpretive literature is far too inherently flawed a method for the communication of something as serious as a divine will.

That's because, like I said, those "divine" figures are most likely metaphors. Take the Nihilist maxim, for example, that the world and human existence is without meaning, purpose, comprehensible truth, or essential value. This goes completely against the human need of creation and imagination - living in such meaningless world would get most people depressed during harsh times, and would soon lead to our very own apocalypse, as most people wouldn't find much reason on living. These stories are as important as science, because they're complementary. That's how human nature operates, and why there's art (which can be compared to religion). Every culture has a different "creation of the world", different "Gods" and different values. Secular people have their values, Gods and even creation of the world (backed up by science, which plays a divine status in this culture).

Why? Simply because there needs to be some organisation. Religion, such as other forms of art, can provide this. Not all people can be bothered to read a code of laws, but they'd instantly read the story about noble men doing the right thing by saving the world from demons. That's the problem with extremism both from religious and non-religious people - they all take things too literally. It's entertaining though, I remember I love to hear my adventist friend claim that the world is going to end every couple of months (which seems to be a way of dealing with death).

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter No all-knowing "God" would be stupid enough to employ such a methodology. The true creators of religion - humans - on the other hand, would definitely be stupid enough (as evidenced by this thread). So there's the genuine explanation for religion and it's the only one you'll ever need: it's the product of human stupidity.

On the contrary, it's the product of talent. If the stories were mediocre, for instance, do you really think they'd have lasted all these centuries? They're written in such passionate manner, they sound so magical... have you ever heard (seriously) good gospel music? It's touching. They sing as if they were saving their lives by doing it. Human despair and hope combined. These individuals were touched by these stories, and it's had a major impact in their existence.

Pretty much like everything else, there are downsides. Nothing is neutral, so it was bound to happen. The same way forks and knives can be used to kill, it can be used to help people eat (no, chopsticks don't replace them - knives are still necessary for chopping meat, for example). Here are comments on Christianity (I won't dare talking about religions other than Chrsitianity, Taoism and Buddhism simply because these are the religions I have a better understanding):

• The Christian Trinity: The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. Like any all other metaphors, it can be understood differently be each one of us, so I'll give just one example, out of the many things that could be said about the trinity
  
  Father would be God as we know him, which I've already compared to the concept of "consequence" - we make our own world by our actions, so God would be the consequence, the "creator of the world". The Son, Jesus, would be the moral standards - the essential code of laws brought within Christianity, and which may lead us to a better "consequence". It even comes with a person that incorporates it all, which makes understanding easier (we all like heroes). As for the Holy Ghost, the ability of knowing the truth and becoming a Christian would be the will of following these rules. God's been humanised because of human fear, and there's nothing wrong with that.
  
  It reminds me of the 3 Hinduist Gods that create, destroy and organise.
  
  
• Sins: This, Arbiter, would be a personal favourite of yours, I suppose. In its original meaning, a "sin" would be any wrong doing, which would be punished by its consequences. Then you might argue that we need a system with a loose code of laws, which could be extended by individuals without any segregation just because people have different opinions. That's why sins can be forgiven - if a person's done something wrong, (s)he can be forgiven. The harsher attitude from religious people are actually a sign of weakness (as they need to strongly punish transgressors to keep them far from doing it), pride (as they are "the correct ones", and need someone to look down) and ignorance (as the bible itself talks about forgiveness).
  
  
• Apocalypse and Genesis: This is culturally necessary. It's a nice story. The amount of metaphors in the apocalypse is artistically amazing - thousands of different interpretations may come out of it. Besides, it's fun to read.
  
  
• Heaven and hell: If you're nice to others, you'll feel good (i.e. in heaven). If you're mean, probably people won't be as friendly with you as you'd want them to be, so that would be a living hell. No actual need of having flames and angels playing harps.
  
  
• Noah's Arch and other stories of the bible: They might stress some rules in the code of laws or they can be just stories. No need to be picky about it (or take things literally, for that matter).
  
  
• Baptism, marriage and other rituals: Every culture has rituals as well. Baptism would mean the gateway to becoming part of the group, and strengthens the concept of community. Marriage is formalisation of family - the breeding couple would now dedicate their lives to the goal of contributing to society. In this sense, gay marriage wouldn't bring much trouble - there are loads of orphans in this world, they could take care of them and contribute to society. It would be weird to have two fathers or two mothers but I reckon it would be better than having nothing at all.
  
  
• Abortion (Religious pro-life instance): This is a tricky one. Morally and individually, this is wrong, although it would be necessary (hence right) for the community. Wrong individually because a child's life doesn't belong to the mother (I can't speak on behalf of the lot of you, but I'm not part of my mother) and killing is an invasion (your liberty affects someone else's ability to live). However, due to the weakness, pride and ignorance forementioned, society is not prepared to openly accept the child of a mistress, for instance, not to mention the economic trouble a pregnant teen brings.
  
  Following religion then, at the same time abortion is wrong (as it involves death), it's happened either because of someone's irrational behaviour (of not thinking about the consequences) or abuse, and forgiveness could play a role in accepting that (both whether abortion is chosen or not).
  

___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter Your reasoning falls flat on its face because any deity powerful enough to create the world would almost certainly have the foresight to realize that society and culture will vary over time and from place to place and thus, so will interpretations of non-literal statements in any religious text. Even in the same region at the same time you have pacifists and suicide bombers basing their philosophies on the same Qur'an. Subjective, interpretive literature is far too inherently flawed a method for the communication of something as serious as a divine will. No all-knowing "God" would be stupid enough to employ such a methodology. The true creators of religion - humans - on the other hand, would definitely be stupid enough (as evidenced by this thread). So there's the genuine explanation for religion and it's the only one you'll ever need: it's the product of human stupidity.

I think you kinda missed the point a bit. It is not god himself who created these stories and metaphores, it was the ruling class of priests and clergy who created these stories to explain moral values and the way world works to stupid and uneducated people. Unfortunately, those people often cling too hard to those stories which causes them to effectively miss their point, as well as it causes them to fail to notice that some of those stories are no longer applicable to the modern world.

___________________
1+1=10

quote:

Originally posted by Sevas Stra You should've wrote a few more paragraphs you had a good thought going there.

Perhaps you could write them for me

___________________
Светопресавление
your pearl casting hero

quote:

Originally posted by ierxium This needs development. I don't know what religion exactly is in question here. Pick a religion and try to make sense out of it. I don't see where you're going. If I was to guess I would say you were trying to express the need for a real religion full of truth with no room for error. Again, I didn't get it...

I will try to clarify some of your confusion.

I am trying to move the discussion of religion forward. There are people on the religious side who say "The text is literal yesterday, today and forever", and there are those who respond to that and say "But that's moronic because of x, y, z"

People have been arguing that conversation for a long time. My point is that its a moronic debate to still be engaged in. If you spend a minute of your life arguing for either side, then you are wasting time.

The problem that was then observed by Lira and Arbiter, is that a NON Literal divine text is open to multiple interpretations. Lira sees this as an opportunity for man to exercise his own intelligence, imagination and spirit in working out what these interpretations might be. While

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter Subjective, interpretive literature is far too inherently flawed a method for the communication of something as serious as a divine will.

doesn't understand that it isn't flawed because it forces us to expand our intelligence, imagination, and spirit.

And what Arbiter really doesn't understand, is that studying Atheism serves the exact same purpose, and that a person who studies it is as important to human development as someone who studies The Bible.

___________________
Светопресавление
your pearl casting hero

im staying out of all religion threads.

1. Everybody thinks, no, "knows" they're right, and niether side is ever going to believe the other.

2. Becomes very long and drawn out, christmas breaks over, i no longer have 2 hours to type and research for one post.

3. Nobody can prove or disprove anything. its all based on theory and beliefs on both sides.

**im throwing this in

scientific laws are not always right 100% of the time. if any of u know anything about quantum physics, and other fields, laws can be broken, and broken repeatedly. and string theory, which is a sub-catagory of quantum physics, read up on it in the other thread.

therefore, events such as miracles cannot be said to be against scientific laws, because just as in civil/government law, the rules can be broken.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by ::TranceVanDyk:: im staying out of all religion threads. 1. Everybody thinks, no, "knows" they're right, and niether side is ever going to believe the other. 2. Becomes very long and drawn out, christmas breaks over, i no longer have 2 hours to type and research for one post. 3. Nobody can prove or disprove anything. its all based on theory and beliefs on both sides. **im throwing this in scientific laws are not always right 100% of the time. if any of u know anything about quantum physics, and other fields, laws can be broken, and broken repeatedly. and string theory, which is a sub-catagory of quantum physics, read up on it in the other thread. therefore, events such as miracles cannot be said to be against scientific laws, because just as in civil/government law, the rules can be broken.

Yes scientific laws are not allways correct as you have pointed out,there will allways be situations where these scientific laws and theorys etc will be proven wrong but that is the nature of science.
Science by its very name is involved with the physical universe and the physical universe as we all know has many flaws.

if something is thought to be supernatural this is beyond something that is considered to be normal.
It is thought to be beyond the laws of human nature or understanding,and miracles as we understand them would come into this catergory as well.

But that does not rule out that sometime in the future what we consider to supernatural now,will be just considered ordinary science in say fifty or one hundred years time.

I got one simple question or whatever you want to call it.
Let's go back in time to the ancienct Hebrews. Now it was their belief there was only one God and not dozens like Egyptians for example. Now how exectly did it involve into organized religion while others didn't? I mean the Hebrews had no more proof of their God than anyone else y'know?

___________________
First thing we learn about emotion, is that it has it's price. A complete paradox. But without control, without restraint, emotion is C H A O S.