3 ms·

> While a religion often has an associated cosmology and other myths about the physical world, they have little effect on most believer's lives... I'd go the o

> While a religion often has an associated cosmology and other myths about the physical world, they have little effect on most believer's lives... I'd go the other way and say that religions that have little effect on believers' lives don't mean much. They are just more fluid tribal associations. > ...religions do not generally change fundamentally, let alone fall, if their beliefs about the physical world are found to be unrealistic I think they do. I think Christian Science (not actually a type of Christianity, by the way) has been limited in popularity because of the failure of its beliefs to work in reality (1). So there's probably a lot of survivor bias going on. (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Science#Child_deaths.2C_prosecutions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Science#Child_deaths...

mannykannot 9y ago
The 'they' in the first quote should probably have been 'these', as I was referring specifically to the myths regarding the physical world, not the religion as a whole. Christian Science's biological beliefs may be an exception, but only an exception, and a small one at that. Roman Catholicism, for example, thrives despite its nominal (and once actual) cosmological beliefs being divorced from reality. Few, if any, lifestyle changes follow from abandoning a literal reading of the cosmological aspects of Genesis.
- humanrebar 9y ago
  Ah. Gotcha. You're right that in and of themselves, the cosmology of Genesis don't amount to much. But there's a real concern that if parts of the Bible are not trustworthy, other parts may also be untrustworthy. And a Bible you can pick your favorite parts from is practically dangerous. This is how things like chattel slavery were justified by "Christians". There are also theological implications to editing your own holy book. You end up editing the book down to the God you want (who, strangely, thinks like you and has the same friends and enemies) instead of the God who exists. Of course, you can make those objections to the various canonical versions of the Bible. That's an interesting digression with good answers, but a digression nonetheless. The point is lifestyle change. I'm saying ignoring this part of the Bible may not affect much there, but ignoring certain parts of the Bible certainly does. And how do we resolve the "who watches the watchers" problem? I guess you could say "only cosmological stuff doesn't matter too much" and be pretty much in line with a lot of Christians.
  - mannykannot 9y ago
    > Ah. Gotcha. On the contrary, you end up agreeing with me, but you are attempting to draw a line at cosmology, so lets talk about biology, an area where religion actually is trying to suppress science.
    - humanrebar 9y ago
      In what way are biology and religion contradictory? A lot of the conflict there comes down to misunderstanding (on all sides) which issues are scientific and which issues are metaphysical and theological. Can you describe where you see the conflict between biology and theism?
      - mannykannot 9y ago
        Are you not aware that almost all attempts to suppress the knowledge of evolution are driven by religious beliefs? Of course you are, so now you are just trolling - good-day to you.

mannykannot 9y ago

The 'they' in the first quote should probably have been 'these', as I was referring specifically to the myths regarding the physical world, not the religion as a whole. Christian Science's biological beliefs may be an exception, but only an exception, and a small one at that. Roman Catholicism, for example, thrives despite its nominal (and once actual) cosmological beliefs being divorced from reality. Few, if any, lifestyle changes follow from abandoning a literal reading of the cosmological aspects of Genesis.

humanrebar 9y ago
Ah. Gotcha. You're right that in and of themselves, the cosmology of Genesis don't amount to much. But there's a real concern that if parts of the Bible are not trustworthy, other parts may also be untrustworthy. And a Bible you can pick your favorite parts from is practically dangerous. This is how things like chattel slavery were justified by "Christians". There are also theological implications to editing your own holy book. You end up editing the book down to the God you want (who, strangely, thinks like you and has the same friends and enemies) instead of the God who exists. Of course, you can make those objections to the various canonical versions of the Bible. That's an interesting digression with good answers, but a digression nonetheless. The point is lifestyle change. I'm saying ignoring this part of the Bible may not affect much there, but ignoring certain parts of the Bible certainly does. And how do we resolve the "who watches the watchers" problem? I guess you could say "only cosmological stuff doesn't matter too much" and be pretty much in line with a lot of Christians.
- mannykannot 9y ago
  > Ah. Gotcha. On the contrary, you end up agreeing with me, but you are attempting to draw a line at cosmology, so lets talk about biology, an area where religion actually is trying to suppress science.
  - humanrebar 9y ago
    In what way are biology and religion contradictory? A lot of the conflict there comes down to misunderstanding (on all sides) which issues are scientific and which issues are metaphysical and theological. Can you describe where you see the conflict between biology and theism?
    - mannykannot 9y ago
      Are you not aware that almost all attempts to suppress the knowledge of evolution are driven by religious beliefs? Of course you are, so now you are just trolling - good-day to you.