There can be some truth in myths, but they aren't literally true. They could originate in a true event.
:bugeye: If myths are true, then they wouldn't be myths.
There can be some truth in myths, but they aren't literally true. They could originate in a true event.
:bugeye: If myths are true, then they wouldn't be myths.
Basically one is accepted as being connected to a transcendent personality called god and the other is not.Why do people believe 1 fiction but not others?
How can they mock what they call superstition while believing things which make no sense & have no evidence?
And why would you assume that there is something about the nature of god that makes it impossible for a man to indicate a single truthful phrase ?Religion became a myth the minute man penned God's thoughts.
And why would you assume that there is something about the nature of god that makes it impossible for a man to indicate a single truthful phrase ?
Just wanted to point out that there is a bit of apples and oranges about the terms superstition and myth.
Like if you break a mirror you get bad luck. A custom around relating to things. In a sense magic.
Whereas myth....
IOW superstitions are practices, generally involving things and myths are stories, generally involving gods or other entities with personalities.
I realize that this is not the issue you want to focus on but I felt like the waters were very muddy because of your terms right from the start.
Which generally comes with a narrative 'explanation'. I realize I am pushing myth to the edge here, but I was working it from his rather bald dichotemy.
With philosophers I think I would have an easier time with the line I am taking by using Buddhism, but I'll stick with both for the challenge. If you have a Christian who says that they felt terrible, life sucked and they found themselves calling out to God one night who it seemed responded. They heard a voice and felt a presence. At first they were shocked and somewhat skeptical, but they followed the advice of this voice and felt good in the presence of this, whatever it was, and so continued this calling out to God and realized this was a form of prayer. This experience led them to read a lot of the New Testement, which also gave them a sense of peace. They decided that reading the NT and praying made them feel better - which was reflecting in their relationships and could even be verified objectively - ie. via third person, even non-religious subjective accounts of the changes in the person. They have now become Christian.
If one decides they are irrational without pursuing similar practices under some double blind research study conditions
and simply judges this person as irrational from the outside
isn't one essentially guessing - and if one adds some narrative
such as 'just like all Christians he was afraid of death and is gullible and thus irrationally latched onto something that may give some comfort but is actually just hallucination.'
isn't this myth?
Alcholics Anonymous has a fairly good success rate even compared with psychiatric approaches - another line I could take.
Myths don't happen in reality nor are they witnessed. So myths are lies. The truth on the other hand can be supported by reality.
*************:bugeye: If myths are true, then they wouldn't be myths.
that would be difficultHave you forgotten I'm an atheist?
You saidCan you word that a little differently?
I don't wish to infect this thread with another scripture war, I just offered my two cents, that's all.
This suggests that there is something about the nature of god that is completely unknowable by another person.
Really, one should not listen to any Atheist who does not have a degree in Comparative Religious Studies... and even then, it should be an Ivy League Degree.
Religion can be studied.
The problem with most Atheists is that very darn few of them have Degrees in Comparative Religious Studies.
Really, one should not listen to any Atheist who does not have a degree in Comparative Religious Studies... and even then, it should be an Ivy League Degree.
*************Religion can be studied.
The problem with most Atheists is that very darn few of them have Degrees in Comparative Religious Studies.
While very ancient Religions may have foundations in almost pre-historic mythologies, and while the vagueness of almost pre-historic accounts may lend to the Mythologicalization of events, still, the Doctrines and Theologies of Religions, the Moral Instructions and such are all current and matters of record... well, of the Major Established Religions.
Then, even concerning the Supernatural... while the Dead Religions depend upon ancient memories, the Authentic Religions can point to Supernatural Events well into the Historical Period... even into the Modern Period. If one can refer to Primary Source Historical Documents in the support of certain Events, then they are hardly a matter of Mythology or Superstition any longer.
Typically Atheists point to the shakiness of the Original Ancient Documentations of Religion... convenient for them that all the primary sources had long since rotted away. Or they appeal to ancient Philosophies which were not really very sophisticated. What Atheists stay away from is Modern Documented Supernatural Events and current Metaphysical Philosophies. Atheists like to pick battles that they can win, but it should be seen as something somewhat Intellectually disingenuous to argue against Institutions based on their condition 2000 years ago, while ignoring everything that happened since the Rise of Christian Civilization or even since the invention of the Printing Press.
Really, one should not listen to any Atheist who does not have a degree in Comparative Religious Studies... and even then, it should be an Ivy League Degree. Recently I read a book by this Canadian Professor.... it seemed like he must have gotten his Doctorate from his local Community College.
what the hell do you suppose is going down in china or went down in communist russia?Atheism cannot be forced on anyone. I wish I'd said that!
Religion can be & is forced or coerced on nearly everyone who becomes a theist.
so you think that anything truthful simply confounds expression in the written medium?Nothing like that at all. I was merely suggesting that the end of parol discussion took place at that moment. I believe that the written word is much more intoxicating. That's all but continue seeing whatever it is you wish to see because I'm used to it from you.