this post was submitted on 11 May 2024
569 points (97.5% liked)
Science Memes
10885 readers
4759 users here now
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- !reptiles and [email protected]
Physical Sciences
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and [email protected]
- [email protected]
- !self [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
When did the story of Prometheus came? I assumed the Greek myths either came before, or more or less at the same time as the Torah.
500-600BC.
Book of Isaiah: 740BC
Book of Genesis: 1400BC
Interesting. But not to be facetious, if one reads carefully, literally and critically the story of garden of Eden, one could easily asks "Okay, what is actually bad with eating the apple of knowledge? Everyone wants knowledge, right?" I have thought about this when I was a child. But I brushed it off because the church teach that the moral of the story is to follow god etc, or you will be punished. I guess the point of that story worked on me as I let go of that nagging feeling the it doesn't add up. Religion discourages one from thinking critically even at the face of irrational and illogical inconsistencies; resulting in adopting a double think.
The thing is, not liking something doesn't make it less real. A child submitting to their parents is a good thing, so is someone following the law. The only difference is that God will never issue a bad command.
It's not like unquestioning obedience to authority hasn't led to despair, and to both figurative and literal mass suicide before. The Germans only said they were only following orders from their fuhrer; and so were the people in Jonestown following their prophet's order to drink poison.
Plenty of nonsensical rules in the bible, my friend. And Yahweh has issued so many bad commands, particularly in the Old testaments with violent punishments. Like, ordering to kill first born children, who have nothing to do with enslaving Jews as they are too young to be involved nor make any decisions. Not to mention the really weird accounts on Lot's family, starting with the arbitrary command to not look back while Sodom was being smite, resulting in Lot's wife turning to a pillar of salt.
I don't like all of these, and even if they are true accounts, then the whole world just blindly follows a power-tripping deity who punishes innocent children, and turn someone into a pillar of salt for breaking a command that serves no purpose and has no sense in its nature whatsoever. Only an absolute ruler could make such rules and commands with no sense-- like ordering not to eat the fruit of knowledge. What is so bad with eating the fruit of knowledge? Everyone wants knowledge after all, right?
The firstborn children in Egypt likely went to heaven, as is common with children who do not understand sin. As for Sodom and Gomorrah, the destruction of those cities were very much justified.
The consolation after killing childrenfor the sins of their parents is that they go to heaven. Great.
Lot's wife turning into a salt of pillar is not justified though...leading to his daughters raping him and committing incest to "repopulate the earth". That would not have happened had the wife not turn into a salt of pillar, simply for arbitrary command given by Yahweh that doesn't make sense. What a wholesome story.
Lot's children raping him wasn't justified or requested at all. They were affected by Sodom's immoral culture.
Lot's wife was told not to look back and she did. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
And yet Lot's children were spared by Yahweh and let a man be raped.
Lot's wife played games with stupid rules that is.
So you're upset when God seemingly allows disobedience but also upset when He prevents it. Interesting.
So you tolerate rules that are not only nonsensical, but also makes everyone's lives harder? And that everyone should put up with it simply because they're rules no matter how arbitrary? Segregation between black and white people was also a rule, you know?
Moreover, nowhere did you and I mention Yahweh prevented any disobedience. In any case, your comment acknowledges that Yahweh allows disobedience but has the power to prevent it. So, either he is omniscient and could prevent future actions but does nothing, or he isn't omniscient at all.
God doesn't do nothing, as He judges everyone. We have free will. Also, don't see what segregation has to do with it. God never instituted that.
God could have punished Lot's daughters though.
So let me get this straight, he punishes those who commit sins according to his own judgement, but some who commit sins are not punished? Does Yahweh have concrete rule he follows or not? Why do some get punished while others don't? And why are some commandments just there-- like not allowing to eat the fruit of knowledge. Everyone like knowledge, right? What is so bad about knowledge that Yahweh does not want Adam and Eve to eat the fruit containing the knowledge? Which goes back to the point whether Yahweh is omniscient and yet does nothing, or he's not omniscient at all. Or rather, he's omniscient but tempts people into commiting so-called "sins" knowing the person will disobey, and then judge later on despite knowing what the person will do prior to doing it. Interesting. Sounds like this god is a mad scientist experimenting on people.
Edit: I forgot to address.
No. But from the beginning you essentially posits to follow the rules no matter what-- that obeying god is akin to obeying a parent. And doing means one is good at obeying the law too. If god wants segregating other human beings according to race, would you follow it?
The difference is that the law comes from an infallible authority - the government, while God who created all things including morality is infallible.
How do you know God didn't punish Lot's daughters? The argument from silence won't cut it here. When you die, God judges you, and He judges you perfectly. The ones who don't get punished aren't simply waived away. It's because their punishment has already been paid for by them through Jesus Christ's suffering on the cross, Whom they repented to and embraced. And that offer is open to everyone, including you.
So to you, god being infallible and orders segregation, you'd do it?
Don't throw stones into glasshouses. You are the one who clearly avoid questions. Will you approve of segregation if your god states it? And what is so bad with the fruit of knowledge? You still haven't answered that rhetorical question because you probably know already the answer. Silence won't cut here.
So those who weren't punished are punished later. Sounds like selective justice.
This is something that Christians could never explain. How does sacrificing your own flesh and blood (even early Christians argued whether or not Jesus is Yahweh's own physical manifestation, or his own offspring, or both) cleanse the sins of the world? Even after Jesus died, people still carried on with their lives. And someone already explained, the accounts of Jesus were written 30 to 600 years of his claimed death. And in that time, dozens of books about Jesus and Christianity were written but the rest were discarded and cherry picked four or five books. If these books are all true then there is no reason for them not to be compiled at all together.
If your god is omnipotent and omniscient, why sacrifice a human being to cleanse the world of sins? An all-powerful god would just snap his finger and make all sins forgiven. But instead a human had to be sacrificed-- and his own flesh and blood at that. Why worship such a sadistic god? That being said, many scholars believe that Yahweh is a god of war from the pantheon of Levantine gods. Which explains the violent accounts. And that implies the true nature of monotheist dogma of Abrahamic religions. Reckon this is what the Bible means from withholding the fruit of knowledge?
If God ordered segregation, then in that case it wouldn't be morally wrong. So yes, I'd do it.
The problem with the fruit of knowledge is that it gives us the ability to sin as we have the knowledge of what's right and wrong. It's not something that needs to be taught to us.
It's not selective justice, everyone gets punished. For a deity not bound by time, our concept of time doesn't matter.
The accounts of Jesus are within the 30 years, nowhere near 600. Which is very early compared to figures like Alexander the Great who has an 800 year gap for his accounts which are seen as historical fact.
The discarded books came around 100 years later and are all gnostic heresy, are very inconsistent, even a few of them promote other books made by the same forger. They are very clearly forged. Here's a video for more detail
If an all powerful being would snap his fingers and forgive every sin, then there's literally no justice.
As for Yahweh being a god of war or in a pantheon, there are simply no ancient texts that ascribe to such. It's just an alternative theory on what could have happened if you first discard the Biblical narrative and carries absolutely zero backing whatsoever.
It's inconsistent to reason that you'd discard the evidence for Jesus which are carried in ancient texts, yet immediately jump onto a theory which has zero evidence to actually back it up.
If one knows what is right and wrong then one would know what is sin. Ergo, one would avoid committing sin since the person knows the difference, yes? Then why does Yahweh denied such knowledge to people, but instead letting them constantly making sins micromanaging them? The last paragraph is key here because a benevolent god would not create and his/her subjects constantly committing egregious errors. Christians constantly states Yahweh gave human free will and thus. For there truly be free will, then Yahweh should grant humans knowledge to make choices, because one cannot have free will without being informed and thinking for themselves. Denying humans the ability to know does not make them possess "free will", it makes them controlled.
Therefore, this reinforces the original position that religion is the surrender of agency and freethinking, leading to unquestionable obedience and submission to authority. Akin to supporting segregation, yes? Just because it's the rules, would you agree? Those Germans who committed to murdering Jews were only following orders, yes?
Yahweh is a war/storm god out of the pantheon of other polytheistic Canaanite religions.1 2.
All these ara adaptation from (in part even literal) from old Mesopotamian, Babylonic (Gilgamesh) and Egypth (Book of Death) Myth. The Bible (old Testament) isn't an excepcion, the new testament are fractions of over 80 documents of which 4 were chosen at convenience, very shortened to conform to the dogma and which were published between the years 60 and the year 300 after Christ. None of these were written by the alleged authors, but by monks in those years. All the rest was either destroyed or archived as apocryphos. In other words, the Bible is no more truthful than a Harry Potter novel. Although some events in ancient myths are based on real events (eg the Great Flood), they were related by ignorant and superstitious people who sacrificed goats to have a better harvest, stories that were embellished for centuries, until the raft where a peasant saved his life. family, his chickens and goats, became an aircraft carrier with all the animals on earth.