Fascinating. I still believe that there are preachers who are genuine and who don't lie to themselves or others.
If you believe something to be true, it's not a lie. I'm certain
most preachers fully believe what they're saying, and that Popoff and his ilk are a relative minority.
Some would argue, however, that simply by believing we lie to ourselves. I of course would disagree. Honestly, my belief often conflicts with rationality, but I don't always see it as necessary for rationality to always prevail. There is some value in cultural myth and belief, and possibly even some truth in it.
Nobody disputes the value of cultural myth. We still study Greek mythology today, long after the religious beliefs that spawned it have died out.
There can certainly be
truth in myth. After all, there is
truth to be found in Cinderella; in the story of Bambi; in Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.
But as we all learn in our very first science class,
fact and [/i] truth[/i] are very different things. Truth does not require any degree of accuracy relating to objective reality. Truth is "fuzzy." It's philosophical. Profound truths are found in fiction all the time, yet the fictional works have absolutely no basis in reality.
Fact is the opposite - facts are directly related to objective reality.
You may well find some "truth" in believing in a deity. But that has no bearing whatsoever on whether your deity actually exists. There is a distinct
negative value in conflating truth and fact, believing philosophical and subjective truths to somehow carry the weight of objective fact.
I think we would all agree that anyone who believes today that Thor is the cause of lightning is either ignorant, stupid, or insane.
What
value is there in an irrational belief that something is an objective fact without any supporting evidence? Is there
value in believing that Fairy Godmothers will actually turn pumpkins into carriages, simply because there is "truth" to be found in the story of Cinderella?