SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Darwin Day is a celebration of Charles Darwin's birthday, the theory of evolution and science in general. This year marks his 210th birthday and 160 years since the publication of The Origin of Species. Those looking to celebrate or learn more about Darwin and evolution will find a wealth of events going on, or if you'd rather not leave the house, try a Darwin Day card with designs generated by simulated evolution.
Recently, an important finding in man's evolution was announced; the so-called Missing Link was confirmed. Australopithecus Sediba fossils were found in 2010 but it took a decade of research and debate for scientists to confirm that this was indeed the missing link that connects man's evolution in an unbroken chain back to primate ancestors.
Not everyone is down with Darwin. The Pew Research Center reports, "In spite of the fact that evolutionary theory is accepted by all but a small number of scientists, it continues to be rejected by many Americans. In fact, about one-in-five U.S. adults reject the basic idea that life on Earth has evolved at all." In Indiana, senator Dennis Kruse introduced a bill that would, among other things, "require the teaching of various theories concerning the origin of life, including creation science."
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by VLM on Monday February 11 2019, @04:01PM (26 children)
A theoretical model with remarkable prediction capabilities that might enhance your interpretation would be leftism as a religion.
Screeching about how we must all be converted to believe in evolution is literally the same mindset as preaching about Jesus to the choir or to the heathens, its about being perceived as a holier better person not about actually converting anyone (although they do see it as a nice side effect). With a side dish of I'm a better person because I upvote that even better person who preaches in public.
Complete with insane fire and brimstone preaching about how the world will end unless we all accept Jesus in our hearts ... oh wait I meant to type "accept global warming" and so forth.
As I've aged my attitudes toward libertarianism have ... evolved (pun intended). It seems we have vast historical documentation that having Jesus in our religion sucks complete with burning witches and heretics at the stake and religious crusades and wars. However, it seems in the contemporary social experiment, that the only thing that sucks pragmatically more than having Jesus in religion, seems to be taking Jesus out of religion while keeping the insane devout virtue signalling and prayers (tweets?) and generally anti-social behavior. In that semi-ironic sense I'm much more tolerant of Christianity than I used to be.
Sure, the inquisition sucked, but unfortunately experimental observation shows political correctness and resurrecting the USSR and Mao's cultural revolution and French revolution re-enactment sucks even worse. So maybe putting Jesus back into religious life might not be such an awful idea, given that yanking him out seems to result in suckage pragmatically and observationally.
It seems the root of a lot of human misery lies in virtue signalling. Don't matter if its Christian preachers, Islamic Imans, American leftists, Soviet political police, all the same thought process and outcomes.
If you know the awful history of Christianity, you might be surprised or shocked to read some biblical quotes where Jesus himself blew the fuck out of public virtue signalling as a magic carpet straight to hell, uh, slightly paraphrasing. The book of Matthew has some based quotes by Jesus on how much virtue signalling hypocrites suck. Essentially biblical proof that a blue checkmark on twitter means a trip straight to hell after death. Jesus... not as bad of a guy as I was led to think...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by meustrus on Monday February 11 2019, @04:29PM (14 children)
Yeah, pretty much the entire gospel is about how contemporary Judaism had been contorted by self-righteous hypocrites (the Pharisees) in order to fit into the Roman system. Those hypocrites were experts at playing everybody for status.
They set themselves up as the most righteous Jews, heirs of the ancient theocratic system and therefore administrators of the temple's wealth (provided by tithes). They set themselves up as the best way for Rome to maintain control over the rest of Israel, entitling them to all kinds of Roman status as long as they kept up their end of the bargain.
Funny how many people, Christian and not, have always failed utterly to see the obvious successors to the Pharisees. I guarantee you that if Jesus Christ came to Earth today, he would be murdered by the Westboro Baptists and other extremist Christians.
As for the leftist virtue-signallers, I doubt they would much notice the second coming. Christianity has become such a farce in their eyes that they barely pay any attention anymore. It's a real shame, because if it weren't for all the televangelists and politicians out there corrupting religious themes for personal profit, not to mention the Catholic church's evils carried out in the name of tradition, the Prius-driving Whole-Foods-shopping capital-L Liberals could learn a lot from the truly radical biblical messages hidden under the stale dogma of most churches today.
If you're interested in an historical take on the gospel, stripping away its traditional religious trappings and incorporating what records we have from Rome about some (but not all) of its characters, I highly recommend Zealot by Reza Aslan [wikipedia.org]. It is not shy about uncovering not just ways that tradition has eclipsed biblical teachings, but ways that the Bible itself was shaped by Paul's evangelism into something that the first few decades of Christians would find unrecognizable, even heretical.
P.S. A story doesn't have to be historically accurate to be true to human nature. Remember that before you criticize biblical stories and those who share them for their supernatural elements.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday February 11 2019, @05:03PM (9 children)
They would have had blue checkmarks on "clay tablet twitter" for sure. People treating "Learn to invent steam engines" at them when they're unemployed would get crucified for sure.
More seriously:
Yeah for sure, an interesting example would be a shared cultural experience of Aesops fable of "the goose who laid the golden egg" is useful regardless if geese lay gold eggs or not.
Another classical argument is Herodotus is worth reading regardless of all the weird nonsense in his book about giant ants and gold badgers and stuff I've forgotten.
In that "glass half full glass half empty" over the years I've always thought the Bible was a somewhat inferior astrophysics or geology or biology textbook, yet it seems to be a more valuable civilization foundational document every year I get older. Which I suppose is part of the trolling, "yer foundational document sux" will often get a rote learned response from trollier people similar to "LOL no, its also my favorite geology textbook so KMA".
I mean, if your cultural opponent freaks out, it was the correct response, wasn't it? Fighting your opponent the best way possible is almost ... evolutionary... in action (not sure if insightful or bad pun or both?)
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Monday February 11 2019, @06:57PM (8 children)
I see it didn't take any time at all for this thread to swerve into religion. Evolution, and science, is not about belief, hasn't anything to do with belief and faith.
The core tenets of Christianity are Christian charity, turn the other cheek, love your neighbor as yourself. It's love, peace, charity, and forgiveness. It's rules to live by. It's a moral code, and wisdom. Nowhere in the Christian morals is there anything about Creationism, Geocentrism, or any of the other pseudoscientific trash that fake Christians push with such zeal.
We have a pretty good idea why Creationist zealots continue to defy all reason, evidence, and logic. Their faith is weak, and to bolster it, they hang it all on the testable things in the Bible. They even invent testable stuff. But they want test results to confirm what they already think, what they want to believe, and refuse to be honest about it. They rig tests, and they deny it when an honest test goes against them. They resort to censorship and propaganda, and have a hard time understanding why that's lying, why that's wrong. It's no good trying to bury them under evidence, data, and test results, that's not addressing their real problem.
Just why the idea of humans evolving from apes, and being closely related to monkeys is so awful is a question. I rather think pride has a lot to do with it. Well, we're in for a lot more humbling. We've discovered that the Earth is not the center of the Universe after all, and is in fact a very, very, very tiny and insignificant speck of matter in a Universe that is far vaster and older than most people ever imagined. And it's no big deal. Most of the zealots eventually got over it.
The creation story in Genesis is obviously made up by people who had no clue how the Earth really came to be. They may have thought no one would ever really know. For whatever reason, they felt free to make up something they thought would appeal to the masses, and help cement their position as authorities. The Bible serves various other needs, like recording history and keeping the peace within the tribe as well as ginning up war fever against rival tribes. The Old Testament, while generally agreed as harsh by today's standards, with a wrathful God frequently meting out punishments for sins, proved to be a successful formula for Iron Age life. It certainly was an improvement over the even wackier Bronze Age religions such as Egyptian mythology.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday February 11 2019, @11:31PM (4 children)
Um...there is a *lot* about the first couple and the origin of sin (though Original Sin as we have it appears to be an Augustinian invention, like so much else wrong with Christianity). The Creation and Flood narratives are cribbed wholesale from Sumerian/Akkadian sources, with Ut-Napishtim (or Atrahasis if you prefer) being the, pardon me, antediluvian Noah.
Evolution destroys Christianity at the root, which is the reason the Catholics' supposed acceptance of the theory comes with a big frickin' asterisk that carves out a "special creation" exemption for Adam and Eve and *completely* ignores the actual molecular-genetic nuts and bolts of how evolution actually works.
There was no Fall of the single ancestral couple of humanity. Therefore, there was no need for a savior--and when the guy doing the saving is the guy whose eternal flaming temper tantrum you're being saved from, what we have here is not redemption but blackmail. Not, of course, that you need to point to anything outside the narrative to show how absurd it is for God to sacrifice (an aspect of) himself *to* himself to get himself to make an exception to the rules he arbitrarily made up (but never mentioned to anyone when it would have been relevant) for a couple who did something they literally could not have understood it was wrong to do, since they by definition had no knowledge of good and evil before they did it.
None of this matters to the zealots. They will act like you didn't say any of it if you say it to them. There is something diseased about this mindset, and unfortunately for us, it appears to be a majority.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday February 12 2019, @01:45PM (2 children)
I would interpret that as you both are talking about different yet related things.
Clearly OP is talking about the new testament deal and you're talking about the "legacy" old testament deal. May as well be separate holy books. Of course the fans of the new testament REALLY like how the old testament prophesied events in the new testament so they're often fans of the old as well.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 12 2019, @07:51PM
Riiiight, because the WORD OF GOD can be easily tossed aside for the more palatable NEW WORD OF GOD??
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday February 13 2019, @02:52AM
It's hilarious whenever a Christian tells me that Jesus abolished the Mosaic Law. That was another Pauline invention, not something Yeshua bar Yousef ever said. This is the main reason I refer to Paul as the original heretic, the one who made a spirited and arguably successful attempt to strangle the new religion in its bassinet.
Matthew 5:17-20 King James Version (KJV)
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 13 2019, @02:20AM
but the take away is women corrupted men! who doesn't love a good scapegoat story?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 12 2019, @03:43PM (1 child)
This is where I am with regards to religion.
I feel that I don't need proof that my house was built by carpenters. The house itself is proof, but the best way I have to learn about those carpenters is to inspect the house.
I also feel that this Jesus guy had some good ideas as to how to treat each other, regardless of his parentage.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 13 2019, @02:34AM
Most people agree with you, but the bible has a LOT of other stuff that is not-so-nice.
(Score: 2) by turgid on Wednesday February 13 2019, @06:40PM
Could someone please let the members of the Conservative and Unionist Party please know, in particular Theresa May? And then you could educate the DUP./p?
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday February 11 2019, @05:09PM
Hmm I'll put that on my list. First impression: longer format newer more serious "Jefferson's bible".
I can't keep up with the SN book discussion group, but if I could, maybe that would be an interesting book.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 12 2019, @01:21AM (2 children)
Ummmm, yeah. About Aslan [wikipedia.org], this wiki page says he is a professor of creative writing at UC Riverside. Sure, he's got opinions, but I'm not sure they are much better informed than those of us in the peanut gallery. I would be more interested to hear from an actual historian about the ways that "tradition has eclipsed biblical teachings". Just sayin'.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Tuesday February 12 2019, @01:46PM
Given higher ed political problems, I'm not sure you can find "actual" by using academia as an appeal to authority.
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Tuesday February 12 2019, @03:51PM
It references its sources like any proper academic work. Judge it on its own merits. Credentials do not equal truth.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 4, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Monday February 11 2019, @04:56PM (8 children)
...is literally the same mindset as preaching about Jesus to the choir or to the heathens...
Not really, we have evidence for our theory.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday February 11 2019, @05:16PM (7 children)
Unfortunately, the preachers think the same thing. Thats kinda my point.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 11 2019, @05:29PM (6 children)
That's a false equivalency, there's literally no evidence to hold any of that up. Which is a large part of why religion is on a decline more or less globally. People are just increasingly tired of something that contributes so little to society in the current time and causes so many problems.
Anybody who cares to learn about evolution has ample resources to do so and there's plenty of experts willing to explain what's going on and how we know what we know to anybody that will listen with an open mind.
This whole business about just because a bunch of delusional preachers and followers believe something that the belief is equally founded is ridiculous. They don't do any experiments, they cite a book that has changed over the years as scribes misrecord things and the actual version that we use now is only from the 16th century, or thereabouts, more than a thousand years after the most recent events in the book. The inclusion and exclusion of various books was arbitrary at the time, why include Revelations, but not the Gnostic books?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 11 2019, @07:20PM (1 child)
No, you're rejecting both their evidence and their definition of evidence. And with good reason, but claiming "there is no evidence" repeatedly when both sides clearly have a different definition of that word is not going to solve anything.
(Score: 4, Informative) by PartTimeZombie on Monday February 11 2019, @09:24PM
One side provides evidence which is testable, and the other side doesn't. That's the real difference.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 12 2019, @01:36AM (3 children)
I'll just leave this [wikipedia.org] here for anyone wanting some background info. I would have thought that by now any semi-literate person would have at least heard of the Dead Sea scrolls. And I can't find the reference but I seem to recall that there are some who think that one of the earliest papyri scrolls of the Gospel of John could date from as early as around 90-something AD! Rather a far stretch from the 16th century, wouldn't you say?
Well, that's a whole 'nother discussion I suppose.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday February 12 2019, @02:21AM (2 children)
Are the dead sea scrolls included in the New Testament? (King James is the most common I think?)
There's plenty of older manuscripts to reference, but in general what we can translate doesn't really agree with the modern manuscripts at the center of modern Christian religions, at points diverging into what modern clergy are likely to consider downright heretical.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 12 2019, @02:36AM (1 child)
Maybe you should actually read the link I posted? It will almost certainly help.
Older than the Dead Sea scrolls? I think not! Seriously, you should read the wiki page!
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday February 12 2019, @04:21PM
Sorry, I can see how you'd think that: I meant older than the bible sitting on a believer's nightstand.
The rest of my comment stands
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 11 2019, @05:23PM (1 child)
I think it is more that a certain type of person is always going to turn to some father figure and if it isn't a religious organization it will be the state.
It is better to have the religious organizations competing with the State for telling them what to do then to let these merge into one (basically ceasaropapism). When there is competition the insanity is kept in check somewhat.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 12 2019, @02:39AM
Yeah! It's definitely working spectacularly in the USA these days!</sarcasm>