On the Noble Lie

[Recusant]

What lie would that be?

The Afterlife.

Though given you believe that it is a lie, not really a worry I would hope. In any case, it is a matter of which afterlife we might confront. There is a smorgasbord to choose from after all.   

[MarcusA]

All truths face opposition from liars.

[Asmodean]

They also face opposition from "better" truths. Are Newtonian mechanics based on lies because Einsteinian ones can do certain things they cannot? They are still useful in many an application.

You can measure some things in terms of "just true" or "just a lie." Others, however... Not so much. Even the afterlife can, in the broadest sense, be "true" in that what components make up your body will be recycled into other life forms after you yourself cease to be one. In that sense, we are the afterlife of long-dead stars.

Then of course you can spiral more into the realms of hope, where you are still in some way you after death, which is far more bullshitty. Then, the debate is more about how hard one should look for a kernel of truth in such matters... I'd say "as hard as you care to." If you don't - it doesn't matter.

[MarcusA]

They also face opposition from "better" truths. Are Newtonian mechanics based on lies because Einsteinian ones can do certain things they cannot? They are still useful in many an application.

You can measure some things in terms of "just true" or "just a lie." Others, however... Not so much. Even the afterlife can, in the broadest sense, be "true" in that what components make up your body will be recycled into other life forms after you yourself cease to be one. In that sense, we are the afterlife of long-dead stars.

Then of course you can spiral more into the realms of hope, where you are still in some way you after death, which is far more bullshitty. Then, the debate is more about how hard one should look for a kernel of truth in such matters... I'd say "as hard as you care to." If you don't - it doesn't matter.

Gravity is no lie, even though you can't see it.

[Icarus]

To me, fiction is a lie but not all lies are bad. But taking into consideration that the Bible is a work of fiction, who knows? Fiction might just be bad to imagine.

That is a claim that could start a spirited conversation. Is the Bible an intentional work of fiction or is it the result of a very long history of adjustments for convenience or unintended mistakes.

In the distant past, scribes used feather pens to transcribe what they read from the writings of other scribes. Plenty of opportunity to make an unintentional mistake there. The Massorete scribes of 400 to 600 CE tried to translate writings from the Aramaic languages. The Aramaic used very few vowels. That made the translation a matter of capricious interpretation by the individual scribe.

The Latin Vulgate bibles preceded some of the many that came afterward,the Latin new testament from about 1300, the Gutenburg bible 1455, German translation of the old testament 1560, Greek new Testament from the late tenth century. Luther did some mods to the texts that were current at the time, with his 95 theses. 

The kicker is when king James, about 1611 assigned 54 scholars to create a bible that the commoners could read, that is if they could read. That one was created as a bible by committee and is still the most revered and most widely used version in the U.S.

I do not think of "the Bible" as fiction. I do think of it as a severely fucked up history of the Christian religion.  I am most annoyed by the claims from so many of the devout, that "every word of the bible is true".





 

[MarcusA]

The mediaeval Jewish scribes amended the Old Testament to hell and back, even though it was meant to be against their religion to change one word of it.

[No one]

The almighty is very indecisive for a know it all.

[MarcusA]

The almighty is very indecisive for a know it all.

The Almighty knows nothing and knows it.

[Asmodean]

Gravity is no lie, even though you can't see it.

Is it not though?

Well, is it a force one object exerts on another? Because if it is, it can't really be the geometry of space said objects find themselves in, now can it?

If I were to present Newtonian gravity to you, I'd be discussing gravity as something I know it not to be, thereby lying by the broad definition of the word. Still, Newtonian understanding of gravity is useful in many application, bringing me back to the point; yes, I'd be misingorming you (based on my understanding, naturally, but then, that's how lies work - you have to know something to be untrue, and speak it as if it were true) if I told you that gravity is an attractive force between two massive objects. However, you could use that "inaccurate" model of reality to represent many situations more-than-well-enough for your purposes.

Not every statement should be easily judged in terms of truths and untruths.

[Tank]

The mediaeval Jewish scribes amended the Old Testament to hell and back, even though it was meant to be against their religion to change one word of it.

Please would you point us to the research about this.

[MarcusA]

The mediaeval Jewish scribes amended the Old Testament to hell and back, even though it was meant to be against their religion to change one word of it.

Please would you point us to the research about this.

I'm sorry. I can't help you. I just read it somewhere.

[Tank]

Fair enough.

[MarcusA]

Nietzsche pointed out that the New Testament was written in Provincial Greek. Whatever makes them happy, I say.

[MarcusA]

The Koran is apparently nearly a third gibberish because it is written in Arabic.

[MarcusA]

I have read parts of the Koran and it is nuts.