After Science, What's Left For Religion?

[gnostic]

I don't see why religion and science can't exist together in any society. It just that shouldn't be considered as the same. Their aims are different, and that is how they should remain.

 

[Sunstone]

I think the more appropriate question is, has science become a religion?

I think that's an especially shallow question best left to bimbo talk show hosts. But that's just my opinion. Others might find some profoundity in it.

Physicists in particular are debating the existence of God and are incorporating many morals into their search for the TRUTH.

I am not clear as to what you meant that morals can be incorporated into a search for truth. Could you enlighten me as to how this is done? Could you give a specific instance of how, where and when it is done?

 

[ALifetimeToWaitFor....]

religion |riˈlijən| noun the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods : ideas about the relationship between science and religion. • details of belief as taught or discussed : when the school first opened they taught only religion, Italian, and mathematics. • a particular system of faith and worship : the world's great religions. • a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance : consumerism is the new religion.

Those bimbos have a good vocabulary!

 

[ALifetimeToWaitFor....]

They continue to make decisions with the light on compassion rather than the abuse of their power. However these rules can be twisted, turned, and are not always followed just as we have seen through the centuries in religion.

Phsyicists mainly by vowing not to use their power to create weapons.

However they do not do this at the expense of science and do not ascribe to social ethics or religious ethics, but have formed their own.

 

[Willamena]

religion |riˈlijən| noun the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods : ideas about the relationship between science and religion. • details of belief as taught or discussed : when the school first opened they taught only religion, Italian, and mathematics. • a particular system of faith and worship : the world's great religions. • a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance : consumerism is the new religion.

Those bimbos have a good vocabulary!

Different contexts, though.

"Music is my religion." etc.

 

[cardero]

After Science, What's Left For Religion?
A pocketful of miracles.

 

[ALifetimeToWaitFor....]

Not different contexts. In Christianity is it not the pursuit of which Christians ascribe supreme importance to living life like Christ? In the same way you may ascribe to music or to food whatever, but it still a pursuit of extreme importance. Even if not relating to God entirely. It is still religion.

 

[OneStraw Revolutionary]

I see where you're going with that. I think I might know an athiest or two who, if forced by knife-point to answer the question, would say science is indeed their religion.

Really, I can't see the two as different, science and religion. True, there are many different parts with no relation to each other whatsoever, like digging up a dinosaur femur has nothing to do with when its right for me to give in to my bloodlust. But to say that religion has only one goal, and science too has one aspiration, seems to be simplifying each too much.

When it comes to such things as the origins of this world, or how exactly the cultures which practiced these religions did so, Science and Religion walk hand in hand. The revivalist tradition which I follow owes much to anthropology and technological advancements to gain a window into this dead culture. In terms of discovering who these people were, how they practiced their religion, what was their religion, my spiritual tradition and a few scientific traditions wanted to find out the same thing.

 

[Booko]

After Science, What's Left For Religion?
A pocketful of miracles.

What miracles?

Let me know when you run across the slew of miracles in my religion, cardero.

I can show you the texts that proclaim miracles useless as proof of anything.

 

[Willamena]

Not different contexts. In Christianity is it not the pursuit of which Christians ascribe supreme importance to living life like Christ? In the same way you may ascribe to music or to food whatever, but it still a pursuit of extreme importance. Even if not relating to God entirely. It is still religion.

Right; the ideology you describe is that last context. But that is different from, for instance, the first context mentioned --the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods --which does not express an ideology.

Has science become a religion? It can be, in the last context, for some individuals who are going to embrace it as one of their ideologies (i.e. they become "the scientist"). For those whom religion is a belief in God, science is not a religion. Different contexts.

 

[roli]

It is very rare for a person to continue to hold a belief when confronted with evidence that shows something contrary. For example, a Creationist will attack and undermine scientific evidence for evolution in order to keep their beliefs. They would not be able to accept the scientific evidence and hold their Creationist beliefs since this would be a variation of Moore's paradox.

Quote Roli
Science is a sudy to accumulate knowledge, a process, not a God
Not when you have seen the evidence that they say is contrary and when you study the complexities of creation not to mention when the the Holy Spirit lives inside a believer and the things of God are as real to the christian as the writing on this screen,not because they make sense to the mind but because they are revealtion in the spirit which the scientific community,evolutionists give no weight to compared with visual and numerical facts
I see the extensive evidence that out weighs evolution and supports creation,but more so the logic to me that says, anything created has complex design and functions under governing laws that regulate it's existence,it has intent ,purpose,logic,complexity and order in it's existence in this world and must conclude without a shadow of doubt intelligent design behind it.
Does that really not make sense to those intelligent minds who oppose intelligent design or is there a willful ignorance,a playing the fool ,to prove their point and help them to better live their lives with no conscience or moralistic boundaries.

It amazes me that some of the most intelligent minds believe in evolution,I know their reluctance to share the truth of what they truly see in their daily studies of life for many is because of the intimidation from superiors,the security of their scientific research grants and their reputation and image among collegues.
The contridiction of theories with evolutionists is staggering especially if I went to one of those intelligent scientific minds and used their own logic and said here is a hummingbird,it just evolved through a scientific process called evolution random chance . Believe it,that is the wool that is pulled over the eyes of the kids in our schools ,they only believe it because they are told to,and not givenb a chance to use their own logic.

Science is easier to believe than religion for those who have not had religious experiences since its concepts are constantly demonstrated via our senses. For this reason, it may replace religion entirely. It certainly would not be the result of having a monopoly on truth.

By Roli
After science and the exhaustion of man's capabilities,know how,ingenuity,and over active obsession to be proven right,then and only then will God reveal himself to those who call on him from a humble heart.But we want tangible evidence.....
That will never happen fully,man is autonomous unto God and that is a fixed reality
Our excessive pursuit of knowledge has not really solved the most important social issues we are faced with,still we march on to research,design and consruct theories,infrastructures,overlooking our demoralized social state.
God upon revealtion to a person does so through their senses,as it may not be a in the most explainable scientific manner as some require,it is a felt experience.

Science definition
the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding
2 a : a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study b : that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge
3 a : knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method b : such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its

Religion(rules,traditional dogma) may function within these scientific perimeters but the Holy Spirit of God operates outside the scientific arena and that is not logical and therefore disgarded by so called intelligent men.

 

[Æsahættr]

Our excessive pursuit of knowledge has not really solved the most important social issues we are faced with

I think the social progress made in the world over the past hundred years is not to be dismissed so lightly. Medicine, psychology and sociology have all made huge contributions to improving the human condition. If you want perfection then your standards are too high. Progress is undeniable though.

 

[roli]

I think the social progress made in the world over the past hundred years is not to be dismissed so lightly. Medicine, psychology and sociology have all made huge contributions to improving the human condition. If you want perfection then your standards are too high. Progress is undeniable though.

I did not say that we have not made progress, that would be completely ignorant on my part as the technological age we live in is evident.
I like to think I am not as blind as you have stated.
As a matter of fact the book of Daniel indicates that in the end times their will be an increase of knowledge and in the past 100yrs, there has been more technological advancement then in all time before,
I did however say that man in their pursuit and achievement of knowledge and innovation and technological advancement and the empowerment it instills in man for their accomplishments is fleeting and has no real effect on the moral fibre of our society which originates from the family unit and will be the rise or fall of our country ,it is just a matter of time.
The media promotes degenerate and immoral behavior encouraging and brainwashing people to do what feels good and you are a free moral agent to do as you please as it is relative anyways.

 

[eudaimonia]

It's often said that science has progressively replaced religion in our lives. But is this true? Has science really crowded out religion?

Correction, science and philosophy will together crowd out religion.

In my dreams, though. I expect religion to exist as long as humanity does.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Æsahættr]

I did however say that man in their pursuit and achievement of knowledge and innovation and technological advancement and the empowerment it instills in man for their accomplishments is fleeting

Perhaps the million who have lived full lives thanks to technology, when otherwise they would have died as children, would disagree with your that it is a fleeting empowerment.

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

Perhaps the million who have lived full lives thanks to technology, when otherwise they would have died as children, would disagree with your that it is a fleeting empowerment.

I, personally survived my 5th month of life, in spite of pneumonia, due, at least in part to an oxygen tent. No amount of praying 200 or 2,000 years ago would have kept my lungs from filling with fluid and killing me, but an oxygen tent and some anti-biotics sure did the trick.

Now whether I, or those around me, are better or worse off, for me having survived, is a question that I suppose remains open to debate.

B.

 

[Spirit Channeller]

Science and Religion are very important to each other.
Eventually the New Age Movement and communication with Life beyond Death will prove Everlasting Life the way Jesus taught us.
When Scientists find a way to prove this to themselves and I believe they could do that by setting up a Research group where each Scientists set out to learn how to communicate with the Afterlife and exchange ideas with each other and offer some proof to the general public who refuse to believe in communication with the After Life and I believe when that happens it will be as important a scientific project as looking for Life on other Planets.
Even Athiests who say they don't believe in God will one day die and when they do they will learn that their intelligence and memories and feelings leave the physical body and go to the Spirit World which is Labeled everlasting Life by Jesus who as we know claimed to be the Channel for God and even then he had a hard time selling his ideas and it was only after those who opposed him killed him that he was martered and became the power that he is today.
But back when he claimed to be a Channell for God he had all sorts of problems and today Psychics who try to talk to the average person about channelling and Life after Death they are called charletons and dillussional and told they need to take medication and all sorts of things and so we haven't come far from when Jesus tried to tell nonbelievers that he was channelling the word of God.
So yes eventually Creation will be proven to most people and so will Evolution because over the years and into the future we will continue to Evolve just as we have since the beginning of time.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Define religion.

 

[Fluffy]

Heya Roli,

Science is a sudy to accumulate knowledge, a process, not a God

What is your definition of knowledge, belief and faith? I personally do not believe that science can attain knowledge since it is based on empirical data but I assume that is because we are using different definitions of knowledge.

Not when you have seen the evidence that they say is contrary and when you study the complexities of creation not to mention when the the Holy Spirit lives inside a believer and the things of God are as real to the christian as the writing on this screen,not because they make sense to the mind but because they are revealtion in the spirit which the scientific community,evolutionists give no weight to compared with visual and numerical facts

Why do you feel that the writing on your screen is real? To me, that is not very real at all. You choose to believe your senses are accurate. Everybody either believes that their senses cohere with an objective reality or that the objective reality is irrelevant since we can only access our sensory data. Science, I believe, takes the latter view and works with empirical data regardless of whether that empirical data coheres with an objective reality. It is an attempt to understand and predict the phenomenon that we percieve. It makes no claim that what we percieve is an objective reality.

I view science and religious belief based on religious experience to be the same thing except that science is more rigorously tested and understood.

I see the extensive evidence that out weighs evolution and supports creation,but more so the logic to me that says, anything created has complex design and functions under governing laws that regulate it's existence,it has intent ,purpose,logic,complexity and order in it's existence in this world and must conclude without a shadow of doubt intelligent design behind it.

If you like, I would be happy to debate the teleological arguments with you on a seperate thread (so as to not derail this one) but I do think that they are very flawed and easily defeated.

Does that really not make sense to those intelligent minds who oppose intelligent design or is there a willful ignorance,a playing the fool ,to prove their point and help them to better live their lives with no conscience or moralistic boundaries.

It does not make sense because the teleological arguments are full of holes, not because scientists are deluded/unintelligent.

It amazes me that some of the most intelligent minds believe in evolution,I know their reluctance to share the truth of what they truly see in their daily studies of life for many is because of the intimidation from superiors,the security of their scientific research grants and their reputation and image among collegues.

That is certainly a possibility but, so far, a completely unsupported one. I have to admit that I am slightly more sceptical of conspiracy theories but I'm willing to keep an open mind if you wish to produce some evidence. However, I think that this again would best be saved for another thread. If you want to start one, I'll be happy to participate.

The contridiction of theories with evolutionists is staggering especially if I went to one of those intelligent scientific minds and used their own logic and said here is a hummingbird,it just evolved through a scientific process called evolution random chance . Believe it,that is the wool that is pulled over the eyes of the kids in our schools ,they only believe it because they are told to,and not givenb a chance to use their own logic.

I was never really taught the theory of evolution at school. I found the explanation given to be of a very poor standard and I came away with a whole draft of misconceptions until I did my own research into online. One such misconception I had was that it was based on "random chance". However, this is fairly understandable since at GCSE level, teachers are under a huge amount of pressure to fit in all the topics and often have to concentrate on helping students to understand the overall idea rather than the mechanics so that they could continue a more indepth study at a higher level if they so chose.

After science and the exhaustion of man's capabilities,know how,ingenuity,and over active obsession to be proven right,then and only then will God reveal himself to those who call on him from a humble heart.But we want tangible evidence.....

Whilst I am critical of science's so called "knowledge", I am equally critical of any attempt to ignore the request for evidence. Going back to the whole perception dealio, there is no way of knowing whether what you have percieved is God or an evil daemon. Suggesting that faith is in some way superior to evidence is going to require better justification that what you have provided so far.

God upon revealtion to a person does so through their senses,as it may not be a in the most explainable scientific manner as some require,it is a felt experience.

It is evident that in order to percieve God, it would have to happen through those things we use to percieve. However, as I have said above, all we can affirm is the internal consistence of our perceptions not whether they are true.

Science definition
the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding
2 a : a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study b : that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge
3 a : knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method b : such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its

If you like. That simply redefines the word knowledge to be synonymous with belief, however.

Religion(rules,traditional dogma) may function within these scientific perimeters but the Holy Spirit of God operates outside the scientific arena and that is not logical and therefore disgarded by so called intelligent men.

Philosophy also operates outside the scope of science yet it is entirely based on logic. The same goes for Mathematics. The only reason religion is discarded is when it tries to make philosophical, mathematical or scientific claims (ie claims that are logical in nature) when it is not a logical nor illogical system.

 

[Spirit Channeller]

After reading all these very exciting theories that are being discussed here I say if I could only convince the world of the things I believe I know.
Proving what I personally believe is very difficult yet I know these things to be true to myself.
I believe that science and religon go hand in hand and in the future this will be common knowledge but for now I have no way to prove the things I know and the things that many people know who communicate with those beyond the Veil of Death which is known as Everlasting Life.
But since we who know these things can't prove them many people reject the truths that I know.
After 20 years of communicating with those in the After Life where we all go on death and where I am certain that the Spirit which leaves this earthly body and goes to the Great Beyond takes with it all its memories and intelligence yet I don't know how to prove what I know to others at this time.
For Example I am in communciation with a Source in the Spirit World which can show me Movie Like technicolor pictures which can take me back in time and recreat entire crime scenes of national importance yet when I relay these stories to others few believe them.
I also know this source can look into the future and predict accidents and death and sometimes death can be prevented if its to be from Murder, Accidents and or a health issue if others would only believe and take precations to prevent such disasters.
I personally believe proving these things would not only prove a Higher Power in the Universe but it could also be beneficial to furthering scientific research into life beyond Earth and eventually even encourage others to continue with their quest to find life on other galaxies.
Many people around me like my relatives and others who don't have the gift to communicate with those in the Universe reject the things I know as fantacies and or Dillussions but I believe in the years to come as more and more people get into developing these kinds of communication Skills that this will become very routine and will possibly one day even make it possible for those beyond planet Earth to communicate with us through our Computers and Satallite technology.
I believe its only a matter of time before more people know this to be true.