Sam Harris: On Interpreting Scripture | Big Think

Summary

In this discussion, Sam Harris challenges the notion that atheists adopt a literal interpretation of religious texts. He argues that many religious followers, particularly fundamentalists, do indeed take scriptures literally, leading to harmful interpretations. Harris critiques religious texts like the Bible and Quran for their antiquated and barbaric teachings, contrasting them with modern scientific knowledge. He emphasizes the inadequacy of religious scriptures in providing guidance for contemporary issues, and how modern secular values have replaced outdated religious concepts in addressing societal problems.

Takeaways

• 😀 Atheists are often accused of misinterpreting religious texts literally, but many religious followers themselves interpret scriptures literally.
• 😀 Some passages in religious texts, like the Quran and Bible, cannot be read figuratively and are used literally by many believers.
• 😀 Religious texts often promote harmful and outdated practices, such as stoning women for adultery, yet many modern followers ignore these aspects.
• 😀 While some religious people attempt to reinterpret or 'cherry-pick' scripture, they face pressure from modern secular values like democracy and human rights.
• 😀 The tension between modernity and traditional religious interpretations reveals the challenges religion faces in the face of scientific and moral progress.
• 😀 The case of a mentally ill student, whose mother sought exorcism instead of psychiatric help, illustrates how medieval religious views conflict with modern mental health approaches.
• 😀 Sam Harris emphasizes that if an omniscient deity authored a book for humanity, it would have timeless relevance and include insights on science, medicine, and technology.
• 😀 Religious texts like the Bible and the Quran are limited by their historical context and do not address modern issues like electricity, DNA, or infectious diseases.
• 😀 Harris argues that modern science has far surpassed the wisdom contained in religious scriptures, rendering them irrelevant for contemporary problems.
• 😀 According to Harris, there is no justification for believing that religious scriptures were directly dictated by a creator, given their lack of practical insight into the modern world.

Q & A

What is Sam Harris' stance on atheists taking a literalist approach to scripture?

Sam Harris addresses a common criticism that atheists are guilty of taking a literalist approach to religious scriptures, like fundamentalists. He argues that while many atheists criticize literalism in religion, they fail to acknowledge that many religious followers do indeed read scriptures literally. Harris emphasizes that some passages in scriptures, such as those in the Koran or the Bible, are meant to be taken literally by many followers, which shapes their behavior and worldview.

How does Sam Harris explain the interpretation of violent passages in religious texts?

Harris points out that while some religious people try to reinterpret violent passages in religious texts as being context-specific and no longer applicable, others still follow these literal teachings. For example, Muslims may reinterpret violent jihad passages as relevant only to historical battles, while some Christians justify death penalties for adultery based on literal readings of the Bible. Harris sees this as a sign that modernity is gradually challenging these interpretations.

What is Harris' critique of the idea that religious scriptures are metaphorical?

Harris argues that if a deity were to write a truly useful guide for humanity, it would not contain outdated and barbaric ideas, such as those in the Bible or the Koran, like animal sacrifices or slavery. He suggests that a truly omniscient God would have written a book containing wisdom relevant to the modern world, including knowledge of science, health, and society, which is absent in these texts.

How does Sam Harris criticize the practical application of religious views in modern life?

Harris critiques religious views by highlighting instances where people’s beliefs conflict with modern knowledge and practices. For example, he mentions the case of a mother whose son was mentally ill, but instead of seeking psychiatric help, she sought an exorcism because of her religious beliefs. Harris suggests that such beliefs, rooted in medieval Christianity, fail to address real-world issues and are out of sync with modern scientific understanding.

What does Harris mean by religion 'losing the argument with modernity'?

By 'losing the argument with modernity,' Harris refers to the way that modern advancements in science, human rights, and secularism have rendered certain religious views untenable. He believes that as these external pressures grow, religion has to adapt and become more sophisticated in order to avoid being seen as out of touch with modern life.

Does Sam Harris believe religious interpretations are entirely arbitrary?

No, Harris does not believe all interpretations are arbitrary. He acknowledges that people can reinterpret religious scriptures and selectively focus on certain passages, but he argues that this selectivity is often influenced by modern societal norms, such as secularism and human rights, rather than divine guidance. He points out that certain violent and primitive passages are still taken literally by some groups, despite broader societal changes.

What is Harris’ opinion on the relationship between religion and modern science?

Harris suggests that religious texts fall short of providing useful or accurate knowledge, especially when compared to modern science. He argues that modern scientific understanding has surpassed the wisdom found in scriptures, pointing to fields like psychology, cosmology, and infectious disease, which provide more relevant knowledge for today's world than ancient religious texts.

How does Harris respond to the idea that religious scriptures were written in metaphors for modern people to interpret?

Harris dismisses the idea that religious scriptures are metaphorical, noting that if the scriptures were truly authored by an omniscient deity, they would contain timeless, universally relevant wisdom, including knowledge that modern science has uncovered, such as the understanding of diseases and the nature of the universe. He suggests that instead, these texts contain outdated ideas that reflect the worldview of their Iron Age authors.

What does Harris mean when he says that 'the universe did not come to us from religion'?

Harris asserts that the modern understanding of the universe and scientific progress have not come from religious teachings, but rather from scientific inquiry and reason. He emphasizes that religion often fails to explain the natural world in ways that are consistent with modern scientific discoveries.

Why does Sam Harris find the idea of a divine creator writing a book problematic?

Harris finds the idea of a divine creator writing a book problematic because, in his view, any book authored by an omniscient God would contain profound and universal wisdom applicable to all of humanity across time. However, religious scriptures like the Bible and the Koran contain outdated, barbaric practices, such as animal sacrifices and the justification of slavery, which he believes are inconsistent with the notion of an all-knowing and benevolent creator.