• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Religion is like Science

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
To clarify your intended meaning here, you mean to say that there is an illusion of progress or advancement? Is progress/advancement necessarily important? If so, when?
First when you have not made an effort to learn, then the illusion that you have mastery is neither good religion nor good Science. When you don't appreciate mastery and don't understand what it takes and that there is reward, then you can have the illusion of progress without effort. That is one end of the bad spectrum, and you can become a clueless teacher. When your Psalms teacher makes every Psalm in the Bible sound the same you do not have a teacher at all but a deluded layperson who will prevent you from learning. They don't know anything, but they believe they know the limits of what can be learned. Thus you, the student, are stuck in an Escher painting. I think there is a parallel in research where there are groups of peers who believe in Economic theories and won't acknowledge the validity of other models. It happens in the Humanities, too. So if you as a student learn one point of view and get the impression that you have mastery then what you have is someone's model and not mastery. If one model is your idea of mastery then you become a clueless teacher who can only learn and only teach one thing.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
"It begins with a traditional, revealed, a priori set of mythology-based axioms. It actively discourages criticism. It encourages faith over critical analysis. It sometimes views science as inimical, and seeks to bolster it's mythology by undermining it, relying on a false dichotomy: if science is wrong, we're right -- by default."

I believe it is not mythology but God's word.

I believe that depends on how dogmatic a religion is. You can ask God anything but don't expect Him to lie to you just so you can feel good about your own opinions.

I believe critical analysis does not serve the truth well. I am reminded of the scene in the Princess Bride where there is a contest to see who will drink the poison. Critical analysis absolutely failed in that one.

I believe it is simply a matter of viewing science as flawed because it doesn't have all the answers.


I believe this is patently false.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
An equal amount of time, work, and energy can result in massive differences in the amount of useful work done or how much of a useful skill is developed. One can spend decades reading all of Tolkien's works, learning all the languages and lore, and pulling apart every reference, character, and tale - but, at the end of the day, you've spent a lot of time learning about a fictional world. This seems to be similar to what dedicated study of religion results in. This is how it is different than science.

I believe your above statement is the true fiction.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
They aren't comparable at all. They are totally opposite things.
Science is logical and can be proved, religion on the other hand is just plain faith.

I believe that is only partially true.

I believe religion makes good sense. Experimentation is encouraged:
Ps 34:8 Oh taste and see that Jehovah is good: Blessed is the man that taketh refuge in him.
 
Top