Should science replace religion?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Why?

LOL

 

[Goldtop]

Human trafficking is the modern form of slavery, both for sex and labor. There are thousands of victims a year here in the US.

The hub of human trafficking in the US is Georgia, coincidentally having an 85% Orthodox Christian population. How now brown cow?

 

[wegs]

Why? Two things happened there: God tested Abraham's obedience - after all, He'd given the man a present and He could ask for it back. Not a nice thing to do, be He had the right. Sarah could always get another handmaid...
Really, the story's meant to illustrate a cultural development - the transition from human to animal sacrifice; possibly marking the departure of a herding tribe from a larger settled agrarian nation.

I don't disagree, and I've read your interpretation by Bible ''scholars" elsewhere, before.

It wasn't meant to be read at all by the general population.

How do you know this?

And, remember, the books were collected from several different sites, times and peoples.
Their inclusion in a single volume was arbitrary; it wasn't necessarily done by well-informed men, and it certainly wasn't intended for a future audience with our vastly expanded and altered world-view.

The fact that it was compiled over time by mainly the Catholic Church, has caused me to wonder if it was corrupted, meaning other valuable stories omitted. Mary of Magdalene was considered one of Jesus' main companions, for example, but she is just given a few sentences in the entire NT.

We can't. But you might consider asking the next questions: Why did people yearn? And how did they get the answers they got?

People yearn for mystery. Yearn to figure out mysteries. I think it could be as basic as reading an ancient text, and feeling that it resonates with you, in some meaningful way. Not everyone turns to the Bible for answers, some turn to the Qur'an, some to the Torah, others to meditation, and some others to Buddhism. On and on it goes. As long as one's beliefs don't harm me or attempt to drip into the government, then who am I to tell someone that they should cease that ''nonsense?''

And if we're honest, some of it is cultural. Most of the Middle East follows Islam. I believe that we not only seek to find the answers to life's mysteries (inherently), but we like to belong to a tribe, who feels the same way. As humans, we like inclusiveness.

 

[Goldtop]

Never had an evangelical do that to me, either. I doubt you have.

All of that and much more (less the sex) are often delivered from Evangelicals. They come to your home to tell you all about Jesus. Tell me what it is that homosexuals are personally affecting your life compared with Evangelicals affecting mine?

Anything?

 

[Goldtop]

As long as one's beliefs don't harm me or attempt to infiltrate into the government

You have hit the proverbial head of the nail. That is the problem we face with religions. So, if religions can't stop doing that, then it's time they ceased to exist.

 

[wegs]

You have hit the proverbial head of the nail. That is the problem we face with religions. So, if religions can't stop doing that, then it's time they ceased to exist.

End of thread.

It's unfortunate, because personally, I don't support those obnoxious efforts. Others do, and so we all get swept into the same bucket.

 

[Jeeves]

[wasn't meant to be read by laymen]
How do you know this?

Well... first, it was forbidden
Most of the population was illiterate. Most of Rome's colonies didn't even speak Latin, let alone read it. Parchment was expensive and scribes were few : very limited reproduction of the text was possible. Over the next twelve hundred years, various monasteries did specialize in illuminated inscription, but each single volume would take years to complete and be precious, locked in its own box, inside the church. The Council of Nicaea could not have planned for the printing press, cheap pulp, or universal literacy - which we have yet to achieve.
Oh, and sometime in the 1960's, I asked a catholic girlfriend why her bible was so much skinnier than mine, she said it was just the NT, because only a priest could understand and interpret the OT.

The fact that it was compiled over time by mainly the Catholic Church, has caused me to wonder if it was corrupted, meaning other valuable stories omitted.

read the article.

People yearn for mystery. Yearn to figure out mysteries.

Which is it?

Not everyone turns to the Bible for answers, some turn to the Qur'an, some to the Torah,

All in the family.

others to meditation,

What's that to do with religion, mystery or worship?

and some others to Buddhism.

Most Buddhist don't turn; it was the cultural matrix in which they grew up. those westerners who do, are turning more away from something that makes them unhappy, hoping to replace it with something better. If they pick the right cherries, it works.

As long as one's beliefs don't harm me or attempt to drip into the government,

That's the big caveat, innit? But how often is such a condition actually met by organized religions?

then who am I to tell someone that they should cease that ''nonsense?''

You are entitled to express an opinion, not to give orders.

And if we're honest, some of it is cultural.

Some of it??? that's what I've been telling you along. Religion is entirely cultural. That's why, when a tribe or nation is wiped out by its stronger enemy, its religion dies with it. That's why so many religions are extinct - relegated to the sub-category of mythology and dead languages.

 

[billvon]

All of that and much more (less the sex) are often delivered from Evangelicals.

You sound just like all those right wingers saying "I have no problem with homosexuality. But when they shove it down my throat by being out in public and destroying the sanctity of marriage, then they are hurting me and my family."

Easy answer in both cases - ignore that which troubles you.

The hub of human trafficking in the US is Georgia, coincidentally having an 85% Orthodox Christian population. How now brown cow?

Are you a US citizen? And do you oppose trafficking?

 

[exchemist]

About one in three Americans believe humans were created and always existed in their present form, I would say that's rather substantial. As far as scientists are concerned, the list grows smaller all the time, but there's still dissension:

Among the signatories were 21 U.S. National Academy of Science members, nine MacArthur Fellowship awardees, and a Nobel laureate. According to [petition starter R. Joe Brandon's] analysis, of those who signed his petition, there were:

• 3,385 with biology in their title
• 850 with anthropology/archaeology
• 680 with evolutionary & ecology
• 394 from the field of genetics
• 270 from geology and related fields
• 234 from the fields of physics, astronomy, or space sciences
• 111 chemists
• 110 psychologists
• 75 computer scientists
• 50 engineers

Creationism is bigger than the SBC, one in three people, that's around 100 million folks in the US alone.



Thanks, that's a good read.

Yes I've seen these sorts of data before. I think you can ignore stats on what the average Joe believes, in this discussion. The point at issue is how easy is it for someone with a scientific background to follow the precepts of a religion. Your stats give no idea of the proportion of each group of scientific people that the numbers represent. My bet is the proportion is small, considering there are apparently about 7 million science and engineering jobs in the US: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43061.pdf

My point is that while creationism is obviously out of the question for any sensible scientist [pace the numskulls in your stats], it is not part of the doctrine of most of the major Christian denominations. Therefore, creationism is neither here nor there in determining whether one can be both a Christian and a scientist. Witness Miller, who is a Catholic for instance. Or some of my tutors and fellow undergraduates at university, who were Anglicans or Methodists or something.

 

[exchemist]

The hub of human trafficking in the US is Georgia, coincidentally having an 85% Orthodox Christian population. How now brown cow?

Orthodox? Are you muddling it up with Georgia the country? Now that is Orthodox.

 

[Goldtop]

Are you muddling it up with Georgia the country?

Those are the stats I found for the state of Georgia. Perhaps, they were wrong.

 

[Goldtop]

I think you can ignore stats

I try not to ignore them, that would lead to guesswork.

The point at issue is how easy is it for someone with a scientific background to follow the precepts of a religion.

I totally get that, but again, its the process from point a to point z that gets muddled with hypocrisy and dishonesty along the way. That's usually why I want to hear as many explanations as possible, so as to hear one that's actually valid. Still waiting.

My bet is the proportion is small,

It is small, and growing smaller all the time. So it would appear the ease at which one correlates the two becomes more difficult to attest.

Therefore, creationism is neither here nor there in determining whether one can be both a Christian and a scientist.

I totally get that too. Cherry picking is wide, deep and long with Christians. Often, as we have seen in the past, it's usually science that comes along and shows how nature actually works, despite the fact it may be in direct conflict with something in Scriptures. Even though Christians try to fight it, they eventually have to change their beliefs to suit reality. Some do, many don't. And, here we are.

 

[wegs]

I agree, cherry picking through some of these answers, is most beneficial to my initial OP

I have a question, though. Why did this thread's focus become the Bible and Christianity? As if that's the only religion.

We covered that the actual term "religion" for some, means more of an organized style. That's how I tend to perceive the term ''religion.'' But, part of thread broke off into fragments of mere belief in a higher power, being considered ''religion.''

Either way, why are we only talking about Christianity? So would some of you be fine with all other religions existing, but banning Christianity? Because that's what it appears like, from some of the answers within this thread.

I'm more of an objective spectator/participant here, with my original question. I'm not looking to sway your opinion, just discuss. So, I don't care really, if you hate all religions, but I'm just curious how the topic keeps circling back to Christianity. Christianity isn't ''all religions,'' but it's the only religion that's come up in this thread. *head scratch*

 

[Goldtop]

Why did this thread's focus become the Bible and Christianity?

Perhaps, we can just say the religions of the Abrahamic God? That covers several billion folks on the planet and is relevant to the discussion.

 

[spidergoat]

The rub comes in, where objective evidence would be considered science, then. Believers aren't under the impression that they're being duped, but rather they choose to make the leap of faith to believing in something that can't be proven, under standard measurements.

In the case of willful ignorance, they have to ignore some evidence that can be demonstrated. In other cases, how does it make sense to believe things that cannot be demonstrated? What is the virtue in a leap of faith?

 

[wegs]

Perhaps, we can just say the religions of the Abrahamic God? That covers several billion folks on the planet and is relevant to the discussion.

Okay, fair enough. Good call.

In the case of willful ignorance, they have to ignore some evidence that can be demonstrated. In other cases, how does it make sense to believe things that cannot be demonstrated? What is the virtue in a leap of faith?

Because if in the end, your faith was the right path...then your leap of faith wasn't in vain. (Pascal's Wager?) Maybe a little.

Is there virtue in science?

 

[Goldtop]

Is there virtue in science?

Perhaps, if you thought about everything you have or use in modern day society is probably the result of science.

I wonder what the Abrahamic religions have brought us? Even the Golden Age of Islam was little more than pirates stealing booty and then calling it their own.

 

[wegs]

Perhaps, if you thought about everything you have or use in modern day society is probably the result of science.

I wonder what the Abrahamic religions have brought us? Even the Golden Age of Islam was little more than pirates stealing booty and then calling it their own.

True, but religious people sometimes answer that question as science was a gift from God. I think we went over this a few pages back.

I haven't always believed in a higher power. In fact, I was indifferent for a few years. So, when I read your posts, or some others, I get it. It's not that I don't get it. But, maybe just try to see why someone else might find faith to be of help in their lives. If you* believe that God is real, even though you can't see or hear him, it can shape your life in a meaningful way. Maybe I'm a fool, and in the end, you will have been right. I'm willing to take that chance, I guess.

*Note - “you” as in a general “you”

 

[Goldtop]

religious people sometimes answer that question as science was a gift from God.

Yet, we know only too well that's not even remotely true considering there is no mention whatsoever of anything to do with science in the Bible. In fact, there was no concept of science for many centuries after the Bible.

They might as well say science was a gift from Mother Goose, it's just as valid a claim.

If you believe that God is real, even though you can't see or hear him, it can shape your life in a meaningful way.

Sorry, but I can't even imagine how it's possible that a belief in something that's never been shown to exist could shape anyone's life. Makes no sense unless that is what the person wants to believe, which makes more sense.

Religious beliefs are like personal accessories, people make them up, wear them and discard them when it suits their purpose.

 

[Jeeves]

I have a question, though. Why did this thread's focus become the Bible and Christianity? As if that's the only religion.

More than one person already answered that: because that's the one most familiar and that affects most of us directly.
I'm not qualified to discuss Hinduism or Shinto in any detail; the ancient myths of Greece, Rome, Scandinavia and Egypt have been subsumed in our cultural matrix as horribly debased fictional themes; the pagan beliefs of early Europe, Africa and the Americas are unfamiliar to most of us; Judaism and Islam have been touched-upon, but their roots are illustrated in that same book.

And because you keep returning to it.

But, part of thread broke off into fragments of mere belief in a higher power, being considered ''religion.''

It doesn't meet the criteria: too vague.

So would some of you be fine with all other religions existing, but banning Christianity?

Which ones? And why do you persist in the word "banning" when nobody suggested using force to get rid of the negative effects of religion? I'm certainly happy to see them wither away.

I have the exact same objection to the whole Judeo-Christian-Muslim complex of religions: they're coercive, repressive and intolerant.
I have no basis on which to object to Hinduism and Buddhism - they seem to me more like cultures than religions, and I don't think removing the temples and religious orders would change very much in the people's way of life - except the pretty architecture and gardens would be missed. The pagan religions aren't coming back, except as play-acting for the bored western middle-class.
As religious attendance declines, there has been some puzzlement over what what to do with all those great piles of stone, brick and cement with crosses on top that clutter up so many street-corners in the cities and towns of the Christian world. They're underused and untaxed. Fortunately, people are coming up with ideas
https://www.economist.com/britain/2013/01/26/fit-for-new-purposes

Now, I have some new uses for old banks.