There is an essential difference between the literal communication as always found in science, and the figurative communication usually found in religion.
Communication in science is always literal because science is only concerned with things anyone can see, or can see with the help of lab instruments. Because religion usually concerns things difficult or impossible to see, or things no lab instruments can measure — like morality, religion must be in figurative communication.
Why must it?
In order for communication to be literal it must be about experiences common to all the parties to the communication. For example if a person has always been blind and never seen anything, much less colors, it is NOT possible to have a literal communication with that person about the color green. Try it yourself. Write a description of the color green for a blind person. It isn’t very literal, is it? It CANNOT be literal.
If ten different people wrote a description of the color green for a blind person, they might get ten different descriptions. That does not mean that green does not exist. Green obviously does exist because people who are not blind can see it. This could explain why most of the “various” religions are on the political right. People on the political right are not terribly confused by figurative language. Atheists often complain that no god can exist since there are differing descriptions of gods. That only shows that atheists are not capable of reading figurative language.
Have you ever been to “The Garden of Eden” as far as you know, wherever that is? Scriptures mention a “talking snake” was there. Please consider the possibility that it was not literally a talking snake, but the story was in the figurative language it was just established is absolutely required for some topics.
Why are people so literal lately?
One possible explanation is that for over thirty years following the first landing of men on the Moon there were outer space travel science fiction shows on PRIME TIME television. Science is always literal even when it is highly speculative, and even when it attempts art. Religion, as explained above, is an art, not a science. Many people lost the art of religion during that onslaught of science.
Another possible explanation or factor is the growing realization that no one can say for certain if, how, or when the universe began, and no one can say for certain if, how, or when life began in it. Science can indeed answer many important questions, just not those. Especially lately people are not buying the “answers” science has so far. Into that vacuum step people who believe that since science has no literal answer maybe scriptures do. That is despite numerous scriptural indications that scriptures are not literal. In 2 Peter 3:8 it says, “But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.”
Much of what you have been told is religion is actually written by atheists who are not qualified to discuss religion. Much of what you have been told is science is actually written by people who failed science, often also atheists. Social media is the likely problem. Social media and majority voting are great for settling issues in politics. Issues in science should not be settled by majority voting. Some religions are more “democratic” than others, but most usually have some foundation that no majority should attempt to discount.
The mission of this site is to offer information the public might use to conduct their “own” critical analysis of the news.
Some characterizations of “religion,” especially on social media, might not be accurate. This can be especially true considering religion has traditionally been considered an “art” insofar as it is in figurative language, rather than a science that is in literal language.
Some characterizations of “science,” especially on social media, might also not be accurate. This can be especially true since internet hordes decide who does and does not count as a scientist. The internet hordes are often not qualified to make such choices. Some people think that blind faith in science is not possible. It certainly is possible when the wrong choices are made who should count as a scientist.
Leave a Reply