Why is science knowledge not considered more important than religious belief?

[Shadow Wolf]

"science without religion is blind

Better tell those blind scientists (Including Einstein) making world-and-lifestyle changing discoveries.

 

[bobhikes]

Who do you think is more happy, a living human or a dead human?

It is only a living human that can be happy or sad. A dead human can be neither. My question to you is it better to live a fulfilled, happy life for 30 years or to live a struggling, pain filled life for 80 years. For me happy fulfilled and short life is fine, ideally I would like to live a more fulfilled and happy life for a longer time but not at the expense of other humans.

 

[stvdv]

I point out, for example, that the Old Testament mandates the killing of a daughter who goes a little too far with her boyfriend before getting married

Nothing in the whole Bible actually countermands that.

Clearly most of the Bible is written by men.

Jesus may have forgiven the prostitute, but he never did the same for any girl just getting it on with the cute boy next door, not that I can find

IF He forgave the prostitute and said not to judge THEN I guess He forgave also "any girl". It's mostly humans doing the judging IME.

And since Jesus also claims that absolutely "not a tittle or a jot" of the law will be revoked, then we can say the Bible still mandates killing her.

Again, Bible is written by men. In the year 0000, I think men were worse than in Middle Ages (which was pretty bad; according to my history books)
We should always be careful with the quotes of a Master, because it's easy to misinterpret, and often there are many levels to interpret. Sometimes literal, at other times figuratively or even both

In this case (hypothetical these were Jesus's actual words) I could easily interpret it differently as "not a tittle of a jot" of the LAW (meaning God's Law) will be revoked. Would be something if God's Law like for example gravitation Law would change a "dot" (9.81 to 98.1). And don't forget behind the Bible is a billion dollar industry. Having lots of money is not always known to make people honest and just.

So, for me it's simple. Everything that really feels off from any Scripture, I just don't accept. Period. I accept only the good parts.

 

[stvdv]

My capacity for making value judgments does not ccme from religion, it comes from my appreciation of my own human nature, and yours, and everybody else's -- and valuing it. But I don't claim that I have any more "proof" (in a scientific sense) for my value judgments. I can argue strongly for them, but never prove them in such a way as to convince everybody else.

I would never urge you to change that.
I follow my conscience. My conscience does get better, as do my value judgments. I do read Scriptures now and then, and get inspiration, sometimes on "how to do it (I like the advice and follow it)" and sometimes on "how not to do it (I don't like the advice and follow it not)". (like as in conscience)

 

[firedragon]

Here is something to consider: in the last 100 years, humans have become the masters of absolutely incredible technologies -- technologies that will eventually, in all likelihood, give us the power to create and/or destroy whole worlds, or to increase the human life-span, or to repair catastrophic injuries, or to leave our own earth and seek some otherwhere to carry our species (or whatever we become).

Your statement is true to you from your perspective because you live in this century, if you lived a thousand years ago, maybe that century's discoveries would have been the same value to you.

But far, far too few of us know much of anything at all about science, and far too many of us reject science altogether when it conflicts with our religious beliefs and prejudices, or just conflicts with out understanding of our own human nature.

Can you give an example of a situation where "far too many of us rejected science altogether when it conflicts our religious beliefs and prejudices"?

 

[stvdv]

Better tell those blind scientists (Including Einstein) making world-and-lifestyle changing discoveries.

I have to disagree with you. Scientists are generally not blind. My quote said "Science" not "Scientists". @Evangelicalhumanist explained also

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Here is something to consider: in the last 100 years, humans have become the masters of absolutely incredible technologies -- technologies that will eventually, in all likelihood, give us the power to create and/or destroy whole worlds, or to increase the human life-span, or to repair catastrophic injuries, or to leave our own earth and seek some otherwhere to carry our species (or whatever we become).

But far, far too few of us know much of anything at all about science, and far too many of us reject science altogether when it conflicts with our religious beliefs and prejudices, or just conflicts with out understanding of our own human nature.

But that means, and I think this is an incredibly important consideration, that although there must be somebody controlling the direction that science is taking us and will take us -- it will not be the vast majority of us. Because we refuse to know enough about it.

Who do you want mapping your future, and the future of your world? For myself, I would really like to be part of the decision-making process, even though my own science knowledge is limited. For that reason, as limited as it is, I at least make an effort to keep up, and to understand some of the basics.

Because science is primarily material and that will only get you so far. For the rest you need the mental and for some, that is spiritual.

 

[Piculet]

Who do you want mapping your future, and the future of your world?

By mapping, do you mean

map

verb
mapped; mapping
Definition of map (Entry 2 of 4)

transitive verb

1a : to make a map of map the surface of the moon
b : to delineate as if on a map sorrow was mapped on her face
c : to make a survey of for or as if for the purpose of making a map
d : to assign (something, such as a set or an element) in a mathematical or exact correspondence map picture elements to video memory
2 : to plan in detail —often used with outmap out a program
3 : to locate (a gene) on a chromosome
intransitive verb

1 of a gene : to be located
2 : to be assigned in a relation or connection
Definition of MAP

If you do, my answer is "God", if you mean something else, please specify. I don't consider this "my world".

humans have become the masters of

They're not masters of anything. .....except, I wonder — maybe of stupidity.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I have to disagree with you. Scientists are generally not blind. My quote said "Science" not "Scientists". @Evangelicalhumanist explained also

Who do you think does the science that drives our scientific discoveries that drive the world? Most scientists, especiallytoday, are not religious.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

They're not masters of anything. .....except, I wonder — maybe of stupidity.

Its a mastery of physics and electricity that allows you to say that over an electronic forum.

 

[icehorse]

The future to me is embracing Science in the guidance given in Religion.

It is God that gives us our capacity.

Regards Tony

I'm probably a tad infamous for trying to get people to make a distinction between religion and spirituality.

I would say that science and spirituality should be comfortable in the world together.

 

[truthseeker7]

Here is something to consider: in the last 100 years, humans have become the masters of absolutely incredible technologies -- technologies that will eventually, in all likelihood, give us the power to create and/or destroy whole worlds, or to increase the human life-span, or to repair catastrophic injuries, or to leave our own earth and seek some otherwhere to carry our species (or whatever we become).

But far, far too few of us know much of anything at all about science, and far too many of us reject science altogether when it conflicts with our religious beliefs and prejudices, or just conflicts with out understanding of our own human nature.

But that means, and I think this is an incredibly important consideration, that although there must be somebody controlling the direction that science is taking us and will take us -- it will not be the vast majority of us. Because we refuse to know enough about it.

Who do you want mapping your future, and the future of your world? For myself, I would really like to be part of the decision-making process, even though my own science knowledge is limited. For that reason, as limited as it is, I at least make an effort to keep up, and to understand some of the basics.

science is less comforting than religion

religion is not science-religion is there to ENLIGHTEN, science is not

 

[Piculet]

You know there's fish that use electricity? They don't need any of your technologies for that. Nor were they taught by humans. Nor are they arrogant.

Its a mastery of physics and electricity that allows you to say that over an electronic forum.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You know there's fish that use electricity? They don't need any of your technologies for that. Nor were they taught by humans. Nor are they arrogant.

Yeah? What of? Electric eels can zap with it, sharks can detect prey by sensing their electrical impulses. They were born with that innate ability and can't manipulate it beyond that. We weren't born with lightbulbs, but we turned electricity into light, we power out phones with it, operate our cars, and even pump hearts with it.

 

[Piculet]

scientific discoveries that drive the world?

Could you describe how they supposedly "drive" the world? Please note that I see it as insufficient for you to simply mention something useful that has come up, but instead I would like you to explain — and preferably prove — how scientific discoveries "drive" the world.

 

[Piculet]

They were born with that innate ability and can't manipulate it beyond that. We weren't born with lightbulbs, but we turned electricity into light, we power out phones with it, operate our cars, and even pump hearts with it.

If I told you I was born with the ability to give electric shocks with just my human body, would you believe me?

 

[Piculet]

My conscience does get better, as do my value judgments.

The question is, what is "better"?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If I told you I was born with the ability to give electric shocks with just my human body, would you believe me?

No. It's called a static electrocy and something everyone can do if their body is allowed to build up a static charge, and it will happen once the electricity is able to find a ground or greater charge of the opposite polarity, transferring the electricity from you to the receiving object or person.

 

[stvdv]

Who do you think does the science that drives our scientific discoveries that drive the world? Most scientists, especiallytoday, are not religious.

To me being religious or spiritual, does not mean you need to believe in God. All that matters is to be a good human. Love is the key.

 

[stvdv]

The question is, what is "better"?

More loving, less hurting. More Peace.