Why people confuse metaphor for somthing real?

[gnostic]

When reading mythological or religious literature, you would often encounter the use of metaphors and motifs.

My problem is people who confused metaphor for the real things?

 

[Quagmire]

When reading mythological or religious literature, you would often encounter the use of metaphors and motifs.

My problem is people who confused metaphor for the real things?

It's easier to worship something than it is to try and understand it.

It's also easier to reject something than it is to understand it.

In the case of a lot of religious material, "believers" read it literally and call it the "word of God".

Skeptics read it literally and call it garbage.

It saves people on both sides a lot of work.

It's sort of like 2 different groups of people pointing at a Christmas present covered with wrapping paper that has pictures of Santa Claus and flying reindeer on it.

One group says "Santa is real! So lets put this box up on the mantel and talk to it!"

The other side says "Santa Claus is a myth! So lets throw this worthless box away!"

Neither side ever gets to play with what's inside.

 

[TheGodHypothesis]

It's easier to worship something than it is to try and understand it.

It's also easier to reject something than it is to understand it.

In the case of a lot of religious material, "believers" read it literally and call it the "word of God".

Skeptics read it literally and call it garbage.

It saves people on both sides a lot of work.

It's sort of like 2 different groups of people pointing at a Christmas present covered with wrapping paper that has pictures of Santa Claus and flying reindeer on it.

One group says "Santa is real! So lets put this box up on the mantel and talk to it!"

The other side says "Santa Claus is a myth! So lets throw this worthless box away!"

Neither side ever gets to play with what's inside.

No. The ones that demand evidence for Santa Claus are the ones that cure disease, fly to the moon, find planets in other galaxies by measuring the gravitational wobble of distant stars, split the atom, build artificial hearts. The ones that talk to the box are the ones that threaten people with burning at the stake because they say the Earth revolves around the sun and not the other way around.

What's inside the box isn't worth it if it requires having an unquestioning, unscientific, completely credulous mind. (and it's likely what's in the box is another pair of socks anyway)

 

[Quagmire]

No. The ones that demand evidence for Santa Claus

Who the hell said anything about demanding evidence of Santa Claus. Anybody who needs to do that is just as deluded as the people talking to the box.

By the time we reach 6 yrs old most of us know that Santa isn't real, that he's part of the wrapping paper, etc. We don't need to waste our time arguing about it with anyone.

If you're actually standing there, pointing at the box saying "Show me that Santa is real", you aren't doing much better than the people talking to it.

are the ones that cure disease, fly to the moon, find planets in other galaxies by measuring the gravitational wobble of distant stars, split the atom, build artificial hearts.

No: those are the people who open boxes to see what's inside.

The ones that talk to the box are the ones that threaten people with burning at the stake because they say the Earth revolves around the sun and not the other way around.

What's inside the box isn't worth it if it requires having an unquestioning, unscientific, completely credulous mind.

Wow, you just don't get it , do you.

(and it's likely what's in the box is another pair of socks anyway)

And what's wrong with socks exactly?

 

[gnostic]

The ones that talk to the box are the ones that threaten people with burning at the stake because they say the Earth revolves around the sun and not the other way around.

The earth does revolve around the sun. I think you made mistake with your phrasing.

Hey, this is my 6000th posts.:woohoo:

 

[Gaura Priya]

The earth does revolve around the sun. I think you made mistake with your phrasing.

Hey, this is my 6000th posts.:woohoo:

Congratulations! ^^

:drool:

 

[gnostic]

Congratulations! ^^

:drool:

Thanks, RFoG.

You're pretty close to your 2000's milestone, yourself. Let us know, when you reach it.

 

[gnostic]

My problem is that some people take the metaphors in certain passages, literally, so that it is real to them.

And I understand the metaphor have meaning, sometimes more than one meaning. But oft they put more meaning into than the original context.

 

[gnostic]

Can you or should you take metaphor or parable literally?

What are the pitfalls if you do?

 

[Thief]

Parables ARE stories..... not of real character and action....
but are intended to express important ideas and social practice.

That makes them important.

The other stories...such as Genesis....tell of action done....
but not well explained for lack of knowing how to do so.

 

[Gaura Priya]

I just think we limit the Scriptural stories if we take them on a literal level... but when we see all Scriptures with spiritual, or metaphorical, allegorical eyes, then we can open ourselves to new and wonderful interpretations...

And this cannot be done if we use literalism in the Scriptures of God. God Himself is described using different metaphors, and God forbid that we literalise them and limit His Essence!

 

[Gaura Priya]

Thanks, RFoG.

You're pretty close to your 2000's milestone, yourself. Let us know, when you reach it.

For sureties! ^__^

:yes:

 

[gnostic]

Parables ARE stories..... not of real character and action....
but are intended to express important ideas and social practice.

That I can understand. I can also understand that parable is a vehicle used to teach people about morality or other issues, including about religion. That's the nature of a parable. So I understand why Jesus would use it to teach his followers.

The other stories...such as Genesis....tell of action done....
but not well explained for lack of knowing how to do so.

I would see the Genesis as a mythological narrative, which is more complicated than the parable.

 

[Thief]

That I can understand. I can also understand that parable is a vehicle used to teach people about morality or other issues, including about religion. That's the nature of a parable. So I understand why Jesus would use it to teach his followers.



I would see the Genesis as a mythological narrative, which is more complicated than the parable.

As per previous engagements....you have no doubt seen my rendition on Genesis.

Chapter Two looks altogether to be an experiment....a manipulation.

I find it remarkable because the narrative took hold at a time when such things were beyond believing....and yet people believed.

Like taking a rib from a man as he lay sleeping.

We know in this day...it could be done.

In the time the story took hold.....no.
Take a rib from a man.....he dies.....no matter what.
And yet...they believed.

So I suspect...strongly suspect....there's more to it than myth.

 

[Draka]

What the problem seems to be, at least for me, is that people only surface read anything which is designed to make one actually think. One group reads something and takes it face value and it has to be true just because. Another group reads the same thing and says it can't be literally true so it is lies and false and garbage. Unfortunately neither of these groups seems to have the capacity to read deeper into something to really find out that the allegory, the metaphor, IS the important part. Not whether something really happened or not. All mythology conveys messages. A greater understanding of the internal human condition and its part in this world and its understanding of this world. One may not agree with these certain messages but so be it, there are many to choose and learn from. However, one will learn absolutely nothing if one takes what is written as literal truth or flat out garbage.

 

[nevaya]

What I find quite amusing is that most Christians asume their going to heaven simply because they believe in Jesus and have asked for forgiveness, but the bible clearly states that Jesus said," Not everyone who says to me Lord, Lord will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my father will enter the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 7:21

The will of the father is to be better than that of the Pharisees the teachers of the law.

"For I tell you that unless your rightiousness surpasses that of the pharisees and the teachers of the law,You will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 5:20

I can hardly imagine that even the slightest fraction of christians meet this criteria.

 

[gnostic]

Like taking a rib from a man as he lay sleeping.

We know in this day...it could be done.

In the time the story took hold.....no.
Take a rib from a man.....he dies.....no matter what.
And yet...they believed.

So I suspect...strongly suspect....there's more to it than myth.

If you talking about cloning, then sure, it could be done.

Except for few important minor details.

For one, you would have simply create another Adam with cloning, meaning another man, not woman.

For another, you wouldn't create a fully grown adult with cloning. So it would have been long process for allowing to grow; years before she become the adult Eve.

So I would say no. So I am not convince with your argument.

What you are suggesting about the possibly of woman-created-out-of-rib is still mythological, a fairytale.

 

[Quagmire]

What the problem seems to be, at least for me, is that people only surface read anything which is designed to make one actually think. One group reads something and takes it face value and it has to be true just because. Another group reads the same thing and says it can't be literally true so it is lies and false and garbage. Unfortunately neither of these groups seems to have the capacity to read deeper into something to really find out that the allegory, the metaphor, IS the important part. Not whether something really happened or not. All mythology conveys messages. A greater understanding of the internal human condition and its part in this world and its understanding of this world. One may not agree with these certain messages but so be it, there are many to choose and learn from. However, one will learn absolutely nothing if one takes what is written as literal truth or flat out garbage.

:yes: you'll get sick if you try to eat a cookbook. Then again, if you look at the fact that you can't eat a cook book as proof that there's no such thing as food....

 

[Thief]

If you talking about cloning, then sure, it could be done.

At that particular point...'surgery'....
Removing a rib would kill a man.
Yet people in the 'days of Genesis'...believed.

Except for few important minor details.

For one, you would have simply create another Adam with cloning, meaning another man, not woman.

And genetic engineering?.....performed during the same scene....

For another, you wouldn't create a fully grown adult with cloning. So it would have been long process for allowing to grow; years before she become the adult Eve.

And Adam lived a long time.

So I would say no. So I am not convince with your argument.

What you are suggesting about the possibly of woman-created-out-of-rib is still mythological, a fairytale.

And these days we know such things are pending...soon to be our reality...
by our own hands.

The Genesis narrative is remarkable because people believed....
centuries before the ability to answer .....how can this be?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Using abstract concepts like metaphor and allegory for something as ubiquitous as religious teachings ignores the fact that most people aren't that skilled at abstract thought. Just seems like bad planning on the part of the authors.

It's like handing a bunch of monkeys some bananas and blaming them when they eat them instead of ruminating on the lifecycle of fruit.