Science Proves the Bible every time; if we pretend it does.
Usually, when we hear a religious fundamentalist make a claim like "Science Proves the Bible every time", they're about to say something really uneducated about cosmology or evolution. .
However, this time, it's a prelude to *reverse engineering* "God" to (poorly) fit with current scientific understandings about healing from psychological trauma.
Claim
1. "The one thing that causes glial cells to release"
--
Problem:
There are several things that can cause new glial cells in the brain.
Another problem:
"Forgiving people" is not something that causes glial cells to be released in the brain.
In the adult brain, glial cells are produced when neural stem cells, located in specific regions like the subventricular zone, divide and differentiate into new glial cells, primarily in response to signals indicating tissue damage, inflammation, or increased neuronal activity.
What, then, is the actual connection between religion and the brain's glial cells?
Fundamentalists religions cause literal brain damage over time, because they cause psychological trauma.
Psychological trauma manifests physically in the brain.
That damage causes the release of glial cells, as the body attempts to mitigate the damage.
---------
Claim:
2. Glial cells are produced when a human forgives another human for a serious wrong; even when the offending actions were severe.
This includes when the offending person refuses to acknowledge, own, feel sorry, apologize, or make amends.
--
Problem:
There is no scientific data to support this claim. Although, there is scientific data to support a positive correlation between forgiving others *vs* healing.
We'll get into this in a moment.
First, we need to understand ...
It's unreasonable and disrespectful towards victims
to teach that they 'should' forgive non-reprentent injurers.
Instead, we should limit our advice to merely advocating for the benefits of "letting it go".
We can do that without saying someone 'should';
especially since it's not always true that someone can.
Nor is it a morally "right" thing to do for those whom have severely wronged us.
We can benefit from letting it go; IF we are able to do so. But it's not a matter of moral virtue.
Not even the "God(s)" of biblical religions think non-repentant offenders should be forgiven.
Although, if God-fans want to update "God" to a new set of ideas, I'm in favor of that; generally speaking.
In any case, it's unreasonable to speak as if it's always a choice.
It's not always a choice.
The part of the mind which can commit to "letting it go"
might still be powerless to direct the injured parts of a mind to do so.
However, this is the part the video gets right:
Whenever "forgive" just means "letting it go",
successfully doing so can go a long way towards healing the brain.
So far as I'm aware, there's nothing in a bible which says any such thing.
However, I wouldn't really be surprised to learn that some ancient goat herders merely noticed that "letting it go" is a pathway to healing.
They wouldn't need science for this.
They wouldn't need divine revelation either.
This is a natural discovery for many humans.
Sometimes someone is able to "let it go"; and then they start to feel better.
Word of this 'gets around'.
Religious figures hear about it.
It becomes part of religious discourse.
Over time, that idea could get incorporated into religious stories, proverbs, poetry, songs, and sermons.
I'm not aware of any such idea in biblical texts.
However, it would be an easy thing to miss, since it's such common knowledge derived from lived experience.
It would be unimpressive to see some passing reference to it.
Today, (unlike Bible writers and bible characters) we can understand that common personal discovery in a scientific context;
because we have access to modern scientific insight.
If psychological trauma is being re-lived less often and with less intensity, we slow the rate of re-damaging the brain. This can give glial cells 'a fighting chance' to make real progress helping our brains heal.
This is where that video's advice has partial and indirect scientific support.
However, we really need to balance our digestive microbiome for this.
But in doing so, we must reject the claim made by the literary figure "Jesus" who taught that it doesn't matter what we eat.
Mark 7:14-37: Jesus said that food doesn't make a person unclean and unfit to worship God. He also said that what comes from the heart is what makes a person unclean.
Mark 7:18-20: Jesus said that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them. He said that what comes out of a person is what defiles them.
1 Corinthians 8:8: Jesus said that food doesn't bring people closer to God.
Granted, a Christian might say "he meant spiritually".
But that's actually my point.
What we eat and drink absolutely does affect the brain-states which spirituality-minded people are distinguishing as "spiritual wellness" and "spiritual unwellness".
We must also reject the passages where believers are given cause to worry constantly about getting on a "God's" good side, staying on his good side, and being 'ever ready' for the end of the world; lest we or our loved ones be violently destroyed and thrown away like trash forever (or worse).
The literary character "Jesus" basically said we should sleep with one eye open; gripping our pillow tight;
and with a pre-packed travel pack near the door.
Why?
Because "the end" will "come as a thief in the night".
And when it does, his people must RUN! Flea for your lives! -For the very wrath of "God" is about to be poured out violently upon all who are not prepared.
[Although, it would be hilarious watching Christians running around in circles.
"Fox News just reported a giant JESUS stomping around the world!"
"So much squishing!"
"So much crunching!
Which direction should we run?"
"I don't know. He forgot to say!"]
Granted, various Christian sects have varried interpretions for his return, subsequent destruction, who will be spared, and how they can 'get to safety'.
However, they all share in common the idea that it will be sudden, it will be global, it will be violent, and you better always be ready.
Bible stories clearly explain it as a literal physical event, where believers will be required to run to safety nearby.
However, that's because Jesus (per those legends) was only talking to (and about) Jews, in Judaic religion, in those local territories.
Nobody else in the world was being warned, because it wasn't ABOUT anyone else.
So at the time, it was literal and local.
That's why the writers felt like they were specific enough about where his followers would need to go once the world began to literally end (in their lifetime).
However, modern Jesus-themed religions need to re-interpret all of that, so that it's about everyone in a DIFFERNT "true religion", and all of their members around the world.
Perhaps literal "rapture"-theory is the most convenient. Because then you can sleep right through it. You'd just get beamed up to Heaven like in Star Trek.
However,
that's still a constant source of severe anxiety for every adult and child in those religions who constantly worry that they might not have clarified and correct enough doctrines, or might not have enough certainty about "God", or might not have adequate compliance of thoughts, feelings, actions, priorities, etc..
It can be equally distressing for every believer who worries that a loved one isn't going to be spared.
Where did Jesus say anything about it in bible stories?
Examples:
1 Thessalonians 5:2
- "For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night"
- "For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape"
Matthew 24:43
- "Be on guard, keep awake. For you do not know when the time will come"
That's a very serious problem.
And we can realize just how serious that really is,
once we become scientifically literate about how perpetual "fight, flight, or fawn" mode causes and worsens mental illness.
Being stuck in 'fight, flight, or fawn' mode also impedes humans' ability to think rationally.
It's also very harmful for fetuses, because of how that sets epigenetic switches to perpetual 'flight, flight, or fawn' mode.
That, in turn, pre-sabotages the mental health (and other facts of mental development) of children.
That, in turn, often causes a lifetime of potentially catastrophic consequences;
consequences which few adults ever realize, and fewer still find a way to overcome.
It is also a *part of* a larger set of causal mechanisms for the development of Major Personality Disorders, substance abuse, and domestic violence.
[There are other ways which Abrahamic religious faith-systems cause those problems.
#AskMeHow]
We must also disagree with the passage which claims exercise is only good for a very small amount of benefit.
◄ 1 Timothy 4:8 ►
We must also disagree with the idea that money is trivial for our journey and outcomes.
It may be tricky to avoid becoming slaves to the pursuit of financial health. But the reality of our world is that every facet of human health depends upon healthy finances.
We must also disagree with the writers who all pushed hard for everyone to embrace religious fundamentalism. Because, again, those systems of faith and worship are very damaging to our cognitive, emotional, social, and societal health.
As world-renowned neurologist and cognitive behavioral scientist Dr Robert Sapolsky has said “the same exact traits which in a secular context are life-destroying” and “separate you from the community” are, “at the core of what is protected, what is sanctioned, what is rewarded, what is valued in religious settings.”
This is a big part of the reason why secular societies fare better than religious societies.
It's for the same reasons why America's "Bible Belt" has much worse health and education statistics than their less religious States.
It's important to understand that humans do *not* have a different set of neurophysics (such as: brain morphology, tissues, electrical activities, chemical actions/reactions, and triggers for those events) for relating to other "persons" (real or imagined; humans or gods) in religious *vs* non-religious settings.
The physics of the mind work the same way in one setting ... as they also works in another setting.
This means that whatever is unhealthy in a not-religious context ... remains unhealthy in a religious context. With that in mind, we should be able to understand religious advice in its proper context. For a Christian church (of the moral-authoritarian varieties) to offer actually-good advice about health ... is tantamount to a dealer in an opium den advising the use fresh needles; or for them to point out that it's important to go for walks in the clean air and sunshine. They aren't wrong. But they are overlooking the irony.
Comments
Post a Comment