Plague Journal, Religion
Religion and politics are hot buttons. That has always been true. A long list of deadly conflicts could be composed without difficulty. Both of these topics are a “third rail.” Advice is widely known that these topics ought to be avoided in polite company. Would you solicit opinion about politics with relatives whom you do not know well, at a Thanksgiving table?
Religion and politics are both about power, the ultimate sources of power both in this life and with a view to the afterlife. Power is life, whether in the form of fire, enough to eat, electrification, entree to good employment, or access to the “meaning of life,” the alleged payoff of religion. There is no fine line dividing the sacred and the secular, they intertwine.
Religion and politics go hand in hand, and never more so than in today’s public discourse. The delicacy of the topics notwithstanding, the quickest way to understand what an individual holds to be most important, — simply initiate a conversation on politics or religion.
At our Socrates Café discussion of this week comment was made about the sizable numbers of our fellow citizens who believe that the earth is six thousand years old and was created in seven days, that Adam and Eve are the original ancestor of us all, and so on. If you were raised in the church of any denomination this story is familiar to you. The “story of Adam and Eve” is the most well known of all of the tales in the Jewish and the Christian scriptures.
All would be well if these details were recognized as only one creation myth in our society which is composed of many cultures and many different creation stories. Sadly this is not how things have played out. If you are a serious member of a Christian community (church) you are likely to believe literally, that Adam and Eve, created on the sixth day were given two jobs by their creator, God. This delegation of responsibility was just as concrete as the “to do” list which you might receive from the hand of your boss on any day of the work week.
Adam and Eve were to 1) obey 2) populate the earth. The obedience part was doubly emphasized by the stipulation of a single fruit tree which they were forbidden to partake. You know how the story goes. They did cross the line which was off limits.
So what is your point, you surely are asking by now… Cut to the chase.
- Taken literally, a big flaw (mistake) in the story is that humans are not creatures constituted for obedience. We thrive when we are able to mutually care for one another, and receive collaborative care. It is possible to learn that life can be lived without fear of failure, and that trial and error is another synonym for “learning.” We learn through failure, and we help one another to learn. By contrast, obedience is equivalent to “just fit in,” machine-like, a cog in the divine plan.
- Expulsion from Eden, is the penalty of record. No wonder that large numbers of our fellow citizens who interpret the story literally, are riled with anger, feeling like a victim. Who may be found to blame? Oh, it’s those immigrants, the non-whites who are here to take our jobs. Never forget about the “liberals.” They want to take rights away from white folk, who discovered this country and made it great. (They will take away my guns!) How absurd to think that everyone, women, Blacks, Hispanics are to benefit from all of the rights that I have earned….
- Mortality, is the consequence of “sin” aka disobedience. But the notion that I have a limited tenure on this earth, the dis-ease of mortality, can be alleviated in a capitalist society in the following manner. I’ll dedicate my time to piling up wealth, billions, billions… My name will be remembered for millennia as was Caesar Augustus and the Pharaohs…. A palpable form of eternal life, wouldn’t you say? After all I deserve no less.
This literal interpretation of the story, or “originalism” as those who fetishize our Constitution would put it, is brought to bear by the Trump administration, by his patronage of the Evangelicals, and by his favoring the Pro-life Catholics in his candidacy for a second term. Folk who are already unhappy with this life, pining for a “better life’ in the great beyond, find in Trump their political Messiah. He feeds into their resentment, their sense of victimization. He is willing to say what he “feels” will bind them to his cult-like cause. His cause is as simple as his unconditional, extended grasp of power.
Evangelicals comprise approximately 25% of the U.S. population. They think the Bible should be read literally and that evolution is false. Evangelicals command significant resources as many mega churches in the affluent environs in the South, the Midwest, and California attest. Evangelicals have connections at the highest rungs of political power.
All that he asks is their obedience, — unto death, if that is what it takes.
2 thoughts on “Plague Journal, Religion”
Jerry,
My issue is with the statement “There is no fine line dividing the sacred and the secular, they intertwine.”
I agree with Stephen J. Gould’s assertion that religion and science exist in a set of NOMA – Non-overlapping Magisteria. Science investigates and documents the factual character of the natural world, and develops testable, quantitative theories to explain it. Religion deals with human purposes, meanings, and values – inherently subjective and non concrete.
The trouble becomes when one tries to delve into the other’s area. When science tries to incorporate religious concepts and principles, it becomes metaphysics or pseudoscience. When religion attempts to bolster its relevance by adopting the process of the scientific method, it distorts and violates the principles of that method. Thus we see the Discovery Institute proposing that the speed of light varies over time to accommodate their believe in a young universe. Their process is factually flawed and their conclusions cannot be quantifiably replicated.
I certainly agree with you. Science is a different “language game” by comparison to religion, which deals with metaphysics through narrative. A priesthood and a church is our way of preserving those stories, and embellishing their persuasion. Science works by observation of the constituents of the natural world as you rightly point out. From a philosophical point of view it is essential to respect the difference between these two distinct discourses, each with it’s own methodology. Having said that, science and religion do intertwine in that it is the same human being, a subject engaged in the narratives, as well as the educated and disciplined observer practicing science.
The Discovery Institute and other institutions, funded “think tanks” are political in nature and use scientific jargon to disguise their avowed purpose. In a 2014 debate with Bill Nye, Answers in Genesis CEO Ken Hamm, founded in 1994 in Petersburg, Kentucky (a young earth creationist juggernaut) said the word “science” 105 times, twice as often as Nye. “I love science” Hamm insisted. Unfortunately those who believe in “Creation Science” would like to subject the rest of us to their irrational discourse, legitimating it as a matter of the law of the land.
Joe I really appreciate your time and effort to comment. Your comments prompted me to further thought.