It is my Religion and I am a Heretic!

mangetom

27th March 2005 - 03:53 AM

Brothers in Science!

Please leave your mind free from whatever they teach you in school. And…

The new theory will come and you will recognize it when this new invented or discovered theory will produce real miracles.

So, do not bother with any new theory as much as it cannot produce any miracle.

Looking deeply into science and scientific community, it is not much different from religion.

For me it is just a religion. Unfortunately it is my religion too.

But, I am not a priest I'm a heretic.

Analyze the history of the Big Bang Theory, it is just an example.

And, this is happening because of our biggest weakness - WE BELEAVE!

Magnero

haste

27th March 2005 - 11:39 AM

science is a religion? what kind of crap is that, in religion, God has always been god, Jesus will always save mankind, yatta yatta, the usual fun stuff

in SCIENCE, we are constantly learning new things, and integrating that to CHANGE our understanding of the old

Rayzor

27th March 2005 - 01:58 PM

Where there are laws, Gravity etc there has to be a lawmaker

Guest

27th March 2005 - 04:28 PM

"Replying to It is my Religion" ... and I am a Heretic!

I digress...

Quote: Originally posted by haste
in SCIENCE, we are constantly learning new things, and integrating that to CHANGE our understanding of the old

Then wouldn't the religion be that of how we learn new things, instead of simply using what we know? Many would say that "religion" is simply a code of conduct and a system of beliefs...

Guest

27th March 2005 - 04:54 PM

QUOTE (Rayzor+Mar 27 2005, 01:58 PM)

Where there are laws, Gravity etc there has to be a lawmaker

Assuming there is a lawmaker only leads to the question: who made the lawmaker? and then of course: who made the lawmaker's maker, and so on.

mangetom

27th March 2005 - 05:34 PM

Hei Guys!

What is going to happen to a Researcher or Teacher (from Scientific Community) if he suddenly will say he doesn’t believes in Quantum or in Relativity?

Magnero

mangetom

27th March 2005 - 05:48 PM

Sorry guys!

You seams do not understand what I am saying.
Ok, in the short form to translate my Metaphor: The outgoing of the Science toward Religion behavior slow down the Science advance.
It is a human nature, protecting their believes.

Sorry : “BELEAVE” Pls read: BELIEVE

Magnero

dstrong86

27th March 2005 - 09:15 PM

Since someone named this thread "Religion" and another mentions Jesus, considering today is Easter ...

and everyone of you gladly take off from work on "Christmas vacation" here's some info for you. Do with it what you will, this is just for those who might be interested.

"Good Luck"

- Dave

and if you want to seriously examine the evidence "scientifically" then I suggest you contact the scientists who frequent:

http://www.godandscience.org
http://www.reasons.org
http://www.discovery.com

=== FYI (below) ===

WHY CHRISTMAS AND EASTER???

THE ONLY WAY ??? ONLY JESUS CAN GIVE YOU A NEW HEART - YOU MUST BE BORN AGAIN TO SEE HEAVEN
"FOR I know the plans that I have for you," declares the LORD, "plans for a future and a hope
... You will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart". (Jeremiah 29:11-13)

(read) Isaiah 42:16, 2nd John:20, Romans 5:8, John 14:6, Ezekial 36:26-27, John 3:3,
Revelation 3:20, John 1:12

www.family.org www.intouch.org www.billygraham.org www.decisionmag.org www.ttb.org (radio) www.jewsforjesus.org www.billygraham.org/believe/stepsToPeace.asp

======== MOST IMPORTANT BOOKS IMMEDIATELY BELOW ========
*** (Bible) Book of Isaiah chapter 53, Psalm 22, Book of John chapter 18-19
*** (Bible) New Testament books of John, Luke, Mark, Matthew
Signature of God (book/VIDEO) - Grant Jeffrey ISBN: 0921714289 / ISBN: 0921714270
Case for Christ: A Journalist's Investigation - Lee Strobel ISBN: 0310209307
Jesus of Nazareth (6 hour VIDEO 1977) ISBN: 0784001154 www.amazon.com (buy books + video)
Evidence that Demands a Verdict (volume 1) - Josh McDowell ISBN: 0840743785
Jesus: The Great Debate (VIDEO incl Shroud of Turin) ISBN: 0921714394 and 0921714564
Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific Evidence - Mark Antonacci ISBN: 0871319632
Startling Proofs: Does God Really Exist? (VIDEO-Creation/Evolution) ISBN: 8901731479
Genesis Question Scientific Accuracy of Genesis - Hugh Ross ISBN: 1576832309
Unlocking The Mystery Of Life (Intelligent Design of God) by Lad Allen, VIDEO
End of History Messiah Conspiracy - Philip Moore ISBN: 1579159931 and 0964862301
Charlton Heston Presents the Bible (four VIDEOS - Genesis, Moses, Jesus)
How to Be Born Again - Billy Graham ISBN: 0849931606

*** FUTURE EVENTS *** Omega Code (1999 VIDEO with Casper Van Dien)
Planet Earth Final Chapter - Hal Lindsey ISBN: 1888848251 (also VIDEO)
Armageddon: Earth's Last Days or Armageddon ISBN: 0921714408 - Grant Jeffrey
Approach to Armageddon - Top 10 Signs (VIDEO) - Grant Jeffrey
Alien Enounters Secret Behind UFO Phenomenon - Chuck Missler ISBN: 1578212057
Left Behind Series (fictional account of future events) - Jerry Jenkins, Tim Lahaye

www.godandscience.org www.reasons.org www.100prophecies.org www.coralridgehour.org www.coralridge.org/BroadcastArchives.asp www.grantjeffrey.com www.ankerberg.com/index.html www.intouch.org www.greatcom.org/index.htm www.crosswalk.com www.christianitytoday.com http://cf.web-light.net/ttb/listing.cfm www.ttb.org/foreign.htm www.messianic.com www.jfjonline.org/pub www.levitt.com www.messianictimes.com www.bible-history.com www.gty.org www.coralridge.org/CRMresources.asp www.family.org (James Dobson) www.insight.org (Insight archive title) www.gospelcom.net/rbc/odb/odb.shtml www.gospelcom.net/rbc/ds/topics.html www.scp-inc.org www.alienencounters.com www.equip.org www.christianbook.com www.ankerberg.com/ankerberg-articles/christian.html

==== For the real meaning of Christmas, Life and YOUR OWN FUTURE ====
>>> Please listen to/buy these sermons below in the order listed <<<
www.intouch.org/myintouch/broadcasts/archives_77395.html
1) The Way to God 7) The Cross: A Debt Paid In Full
2) Tragedy In The Church House 8) What Does It Mean To Be Born Again?
3) Good but Not Good Enough 9) The Great Tribulation
4) Virgin Born: Does It Matter? 10) The Second Coming of Christ
5) The Big Picture of Christmas 11) God is Able
6) The Blood of Christ

============== PERSONAL STORIES ==============
(The Book of Acts of the Apostles) A.D. (VIDEO) ISBN: 1555681700 or 1555682219
(Jewish) Stan Telchin - Betrayed ISBN: 0800790685
(Arab/Palestinian) Anis Shorrosh - The Liberated Palestinian (and) Islam Revealed ISBN: 0840730152
(Nuclear Engineer and Chemist) Robert Faid - A Scientific Approach to Christianity / Biblical Mysteries
(Satanism) Lauren Stratford - Satan's Underground ISBN 0890816301
(Hinduism/Eastern/New Age) www.scp-inc.org Tal Brooke - Lord of the Air ISBN 0890818347
(Occult/Shamanism/Magic) Johanna Michaelsen - Beautiful Side of Evil ISBN 0890813221
(Freemasonry - Masons, Shriners) Jim Shaw - The Deadly Deception ISBN 0910311528
(Cults/False Christianity) Kingdom of the Cults - Walter Martin ISBN: 0764227440
(Masons, Shriners) The Secret Teachings of the Masonic Lodge by John Ankerberg ISBN 0802476953
(New Age) Occult Invasion ISBN: 1565072693 and America Sorcerer's New Apprentice - Dave Hunt
(Occult) Coming Darkness - Ankerberg and Weldon ISBN: 1565070232
(False Teachings) Christianity in Crisis by Hank Hannegraf ISBN: 1565076966
================ OTHER BOOKS ================
Alfred Ederscheim: Old Testament Bible History (Jewish background) ISBN: 156563165X
Alfred Ederscheim: Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah ISBN: 0943575834 The Temple ISBN: 1565631366
Mitch and Zhava Glaser: The Fall Feasts of Israel (Jesus) ISBN: 0802425399
Hal Lindsey: There's a New World Coming (book of Revelation) ISBN: 0890814406
David Hunt: Jerusalem Cup of Trembling, America, Islam and Israel ISBN: 1929125321
Werner Keller: The Bible as History ISBN: 0553279432
Randall Price: The Stones Cry Out ISBN: 1565076400 VIDEO - www.worldofthebible.com
"The Student Bible" New International Version (LARGER size paperback) ISBN 0310926645
Bread Of Life Gospel Of John ISBN: 0840700156 www.nelsonministryservices.com
Gerald Schroeder: The Science Of God ISBN: 076790303X / Genesis / The Big Bang
Lee Strobel: The Case for Faith ISBN: 0310234697

dstrong86

27th March 2005 - 09:34 PM

My typo should read --- http://www.discovery.org

... includes scientists/mathematicians: Stephen Meyer, Michael Behe, Jonathan Wells, Scott Minnich, Paul Nelson, and William Dembski

LouManyeti

27th March 2005 - 11:34 PM

religion
Is about faith
faith is belief
without verifiable proof

it is true there are persons calling themselves scientists
(Scientia, from the latin, Knowlege)
that are arguing for or furthing the causes of religion.

that makes them Belivers , not Knowers.

I like reality, and science reveals reality, self correcting as it goes on.
religion
tells a story
unprovable
unreserachable
but emotionaly satisfying.

the revealable universe is big enough to
awe
and empower us

the religious universe is
finite
limmited
and generally holds one set of persons
above all others.

they all have two common threads

you will never die ( unless you are a bad unbeleiver)
and humans are the center of and reason for existance.

Dear religious people
you, the belivers in such untangible, unprovable ideas
you are in the majority
you rule the earth

Is it so much to ask
that you leave us,
the minority of the reality based community alone?

time will tell as always
who is correct.

Just Passing Through

28th March 2005 - 01:22 AM

XTC - Dear God : "... did you make mankind, after we made you?"

jcamjr

31st March 2005 - 06:34 PM

Easter has been cancelled....They found the body

WaterBreath

31st March 2005 - 07:07 PM

QUOTE

Assuming there is a lawmaker only leads to the question: who made the lawmaker?

QUOTE (->

QUOTE

Assuming there is a lawmaker only leads to the question: who made the lawmaker?

Assuming there is a universe only leads to the question: who made the universe?

Such "clever" little quips are circular, and don't really resolve anything among people who are able to think beyond catchy sayings.

What is going to happen to a Researcher or Teacher (from Scientific Community) if he suddenly will say he doesn’t believes in Quantum or in Relativity?

Depends what you mean by "don't believe in". Pretty much everyone can agree that they're not perfect or complete. They make predictions rather well within their respective scales, but they just don't mesh well. We're obviously missing something. Something BIG. Most physicists worth their salt agree on that.

However, if you are saying you don't believe the experimental results that confirm what the theories do have correct... Well, then I think you might be headed for "a long walk off a short pier", reputation-wise.

...

Additionally, in response to dstrong86's post: I'm a Christian, but I don't advocate searching out God by reading the results of other people's searches. Search for yourself. While I believe the Bible to be the God's Word, I prefer not to read other people's commentary on it. I'll search it out myself, thanks.

Byson

2nd April 2005 - 10:36 PM

If we remove the entire concept of creation from the picture by assuming that our universe is but one aspect of a greater multiverse then there is no need for a point of creation reality has simply always existed in one form or another. No creation removes the need for a creator god is no longer required

Good Elf

3rd April 2005 - 02:04 AM

Hi mangetom,

mangetom Posted: Mar 27 2005, 03:53 AM

QUOTE

But, I am not a priest I'm a heretic. Analyze the history of the Big Bang Theory, it is just an example. And, this is happening because of our biggest weakness - WE BELEAVE!

Nonsense... you can't be a Heretic unless you believe in Heresies.

You have choices... Tell us your heresies and be burned at the stake

(or worse - ridiculed by the "flame" of scientifically based satire

) OR you are an "Agnostic" and are so confused that you don't know what you believe OR you are an Atheist (and are a closet commie automatically - part of US Constitution

the 5th Amendment ) OR you are a Scientist and believe only what is provable (but always have the commonsense never to be backed into a corner publically... sometimes called a hypocrite) OR you really are some new fangled born again true believer that is just josh'in with us

(worst of them all).

I think you could be the last one since you strongly defend that you base your life on "beliefs" and believe "everyone" shares his mentally deficient notions (Yup... a believer if I have ever seen one

) Logically speaking though... lets work through this issue...So you are one-of an Atheist, Born-again "believer" or Heretic (all believers). The others are quasi or "pseudo-beliefless". As Scientists no understanding of natural "Laws" are complete and must be continually revised so they always are "delicient" in being totally beliefless.

The Heretic label is improbable since you seem to have no avowed beliefs that you are willing to stand up for

. Real Heretics are rabid "loonies" and express personal beliefs without proofs at every opportunity

. You are definitely not crazy enough. I also rule out Atheists as well (since they are born again believers - just the opposite sort of the ones in Churches).

I will agree "closet" Scientists often say they are "Agnostic" but we all know there is just not enough proof in the Universe to prove that kind of God everyone else claims exist does really exist. That requires "beliefs". Scientists are just protecting their butt in case they get in a corner with scientific argument and they don't want to be caught "out" with all their "buddies" watching. You will see them using the word "God" on TV Shows and such but deep inside it has a different meaning to what the Idol worshipers and Communion going Elites want it to mean. They really need to be brought in for questioning.

You may like to know what I am - The Witchfinder General and a Scientist (Hypocryte).... I provide the matches for all "loonies" who are having trouble determining their "manliness" publically. Once we get you "labelled" we have a "cookout".

Just a "friendly" reminder - none of you Scientist "types" get out of hand now... or you will stand before the Scientific Inquisition to "out" you. If found guilty - you will lose your funding and be forced to "recant" or be burned (for your own good of course

). When you do "recant" and if you have any "residual" beliefs that are in conflict with the Christians and Pagans, the Christians will have you and (depending on local Laws) could burn you at the stake (for your own good of course

).

Failing that you may be classified by the State as one of those homeless crazies and be institutionalized

and be given free electroconvulsive therapy for the rest of your short but miserable lives (for your own good of course

).

Never become involved in this "Social" process for it will demonstrate dramatically to you why you need beliefs.... or work within an "accepted" framework (Science!).

So you can run Heretic but you can't hide... we will find you and we have ways and means of "finding out"

...... watch your television screens for clues.

Under "torture"

we have found even Agnostics will recant (though they can't say exactly what for).

Good thing we have Meiers-Briggs tests.

Oops... I have just posted a message that has too many emoticons than the board allows. This is a serious belief problem and I think I am going to be brought in now..... There.. I removed two emoticons and I think it can now publish... beat the system! (and the rap)

Cheers

thezman

3rd April 2005 - 08:35 PM

Hi,

In order for your true self-beingness to evolve and progress you have to be a heretic everyday. You have to question your beliefs and the basis of your knowledge, whether it be science or religion or whatever. Anything else will just lead to stagnation of the status quo.

Eventually, this will lead you to an intuitive understanding of self-evident truths, a state which is really beyond belief and knowledge.

z

mangetom

9th April 2005 - 05:00 AM

Thank you, for your time to write and to think about what I was saying.
Right now I am hurt by my own social mistakes of not believing.

You are a very critical thinker, and I appreciate your comments.

Thank you,

Regards

Magnero

disguise

13th April 2005 - 02:20 PM

Heretic is simply a latin-derived word meaning 'wrong-thinker', used by the early 'orthodox' church to disempower theologians whose theologies were inconsistent with 'orthodox' (or correct doctrine) thinking.

Therefore by calling yourself a heretic, you are simply saying that you are wrong.

Smart.

WaterBreath

13th April 2005 - 02:39 PM

QUOTE

Therefore by calling yourself a heretic, you are simply saying that you are wrong.

Smart.

No, what's really "smart" is ignoring the spirit of a thoughtful discussion to make petty attacks on word usage. The literal latin translation of a word means very little in mondern English usage. How people use it matters. The original use by the Catholic church has become an anachronism.

Today, the word "heretic" has acquired the connotative meaning of "one who holds controversial opinions". And that's what the discussion is about. One who posits that an accepted theory is wrong, or proposes a vastly "different" new theory, can be considered a scientific "heretic". Though if they turn out to be right, they will eventually be called a "visionary", e.g. Albert Einstein.

fatcabral

13th April 2005 - 05:05 PM

actually "heretic" has a Greek origin meaning "one who has a choice" ultimately from the verb "to choose".

i think the main problem with the semantic input was that it was used to close down the discussion, rather than open it. the idea of a person "choosing" among the ideas presented to them, is very important, even profound.

one of the worst aspects of religion is that it forces acceptance of ideas that have never been demonstrated to be true. they call it faith.

that an individual is responsible for his beliefs, that he has made the "choices", is absolutely essential to enlightened human existence. what kind of person is it that says he is bound by his religion to do anything that is wrong or stupid?

there is always room for semantics in the discussion of ideas since the words and ideas are inseperable.

WaterBreath

13th April 2005 - 05:56 PM

QUOTE

what kind of person is it that says he is bound by his religion to do anything that is wrong or stupid

One that doesn't understand that he has chosen to believe his religion. A more intelligent statement would be to say that one is bound by his beliefs, or morals, or values, or choice.

I, for one, don't think it's worth much to "believe" something if you truly feel "bound" by it. If it's a burden, then where does the heart truly lie?

QUOTE (->

QUOTE

what kind of person is it that says he is bound by his religion to do anything that is wrong or stupid

I completely agree. But I think the modern associations of "heretic" with that concept has less to do with the literal translation of the word than it does with the history and transformation of connotations. During the period of the Catholic church's strongest influence, they subverted the word. It no longer meant choice, but rather something akin to "sinner" or "unbeliever", or even "infidel". But the church's misguided persecution of people like Galileo and Joan of Arc eventually counteracted the previous subversion.

Current connotation is more important than past definition because over time it becomes the new accepted definition.

I would like to note though, that I do think it can be very enlightening to look at word origins, and especially how we have departed from original definitions through language evolution. I am an amateur fan of linguistic anthropology, myself. I just don't think it's an effective or appropriate rebuttal to claim someone using current connotation is incorrect because it doesn't fit ancient definition. Language is fluid. The current popular usage defines the "proper" usage.

QUOTE

there is always room for semantics in the discussion of ideas since the words and ideas are inseperable.

Semantics, yes. Word origins, maybe not so much. What is important is not what it meant 400 years ago, or before that, but now. Now, it means choice again, but it is still associated with unpopular choice. And it means this because of history, not literal translation.

But to return to topic... As you and others have noted, the continuous conscious choice of what to believe, what to pursue, is of utmost importance. Even a proper Christian must agree with that. Wasn't it Paul the Apostle who made famous the phrase "I die daily"?

fatcabral

13th April 2005 - 06:37 PM

it seems that you wish to fight a semantic battle about word origins. don't forget the cognitive value of words. that is what i am stressing.

in this case, it was not important to look back 2500 years to create a hierarchy of obsolete definitions. what is important is to show that each word has a variety of possible meanings which can be useful in extricating oneself from a cognitive quandry. think of it as archaeology. there is a tool box of ideas associated with past uses of a word.

the word "heretic" was a pejorative that the first writer (mangetom?) was belaboring himself with. it is very useful to be able to turn that into an asset with respect to his doubts about religion.

religion is a human activity. there is nothing sacred about it, except for what the believer chooses (conciously or unconciously) to believe. doubt is a problem only for a 'true' believer. having faith, as mark twain said, means believing in something you know is wrong.

for the scientist, doubt, or its big brother, scepticism is essential. for the human being, the understanding that everything one knows could be wrong is mandatory because of the lack of omniscience in all mortals. anyone who says he is certain about anything in this world or the next is certainly (pun intended) dangerous.

so, the special concern about those who claim god made them do it.

WaterBreath

13th April 2005 - 07:20 PM

Regarding the semantic battles, I think we're going in circles. It seems we're touching on the same points, but responding to incidental remarks. I think we agree, at some level, and I'd rather let it rest at that rather than trade blows on the semantics of our arguments about semantics.

QUOTE

the word "heretic" was a pejorative that the first writer (mangetom?) was belaboring himself with. it is very useful to be able to turn that into an asset with respect to his doubts about religion.

I don't think he was belaboring himself with it. Getting off into religion is only a distraction, because he wasn't talking about religion. He was comparing the scientific "establishment" to religion. And in that sense, his use of the word "heretic" referring to his own relationship with scientific establishment alludes to the relationship between the Catholic church's thought-policing and the refusal to submit/recant by people like Galileo (at least initially). It seems to me this is just exactly what he intended in using that particular term.

The message I got is that magnetom feels that the establishment continues to dominate by way of its entrenched devotees, rather than by way of creative, original, boat-rockers. He feels that the etablishment has forgotten its own origins, and the true impetus for scientific progress. The establishment makes use of anti-heretical tactics and language to protect itself, rather than risk losing its current identity in the face of future change.

I appreciate thezman's remark that the best way to fix it is to hold true to the spirit of creative investigation on an individual basis: i.e. to be steadfast heretics in the face of the scientific establishment. Time makes all things transient, and the establishment itself will change as its consituents are replaced in the natural order of things. This is an appropraite point to bring in religion, because the Catholic church is a prime example of how time changes even the most entrenched establishment in the face of steadfast heretics. The church of today is nigh unrecognizable compared to the church of Galileo's age.

Guest

13th April 2005 - 08:13 PM

i agree to avoid trivia. another saying is that anyone who comes in late is always wrong. that is what i did.

when it comes to "scientific establishment", semantically that is an oxymoron. we understand principles under which natural processes can be analyzed and understood. predictions can be made and tested. findings can be verified.

but any ideas that are considered established, and therefore immune from further examination, experiment, or skepticism, cannot possibly be scientific. they become matters of faith and drop out of scientific effort.

so the analogy between "scientific establishment" and religion is exact as far as i am concerned. and my analysis of the term "heretic" still applies.

the only thing i would add at this point is that the "scientific establishment" is comprised of people as well as ideas. and a nontrivial consideration is the rice bowls of those people. the preservation of structural integrity of those bowls becomes more an exercise in politics than religion.

coming into conflict with that preservation effort will be more likely to get the heretic burned at the stake than the ideas he nurtures.

mangetom

14th August 2005 - 07:45 AM

Hi WaterBreath,

You got it!

Thanks,

Regards,

lengould

14th August 2005 - 05:49 PM

QUOTE

Dear religious people
you, the belivers in such untangible, unprovable ideas
you are in the majority
you rule the earth

Is it so much to ask
that you leave us,
the minority of the reality based community alone?

A couple of observations, likely worthless but..

i) Question: Can a person capable of unquestioning faith in one area of importance (eg ethics/religion) also be capable of the level of openness required to do truely creative science?

ii) Question: If reduction in the "mindset of faith" is one significant reason for the dramatically increased pace of scientific progress through most of the 20th century, is my perception of an upsurge in importance of religion generally a genuine forcaster of a future trend? (esp. ref. US)

iii) Question: If a clear non-faith-based mindset among the general population is a significant advantage to development of a scientific community, will all the effort over fifty years in China to eradicate religion result in a far more competetive population in future?

MDT

14th August 2005 - 07:01 PM

Being a heretic essentially amounts to questioning the perceived socially accepted truth. The socially accept truth integrates culture in a point of time, while not neccesaarily reflecting absolute truth. Capernicus was an heretic in his day because it proved that the earth wasn't the center of the universe. The sun is either so he wasn't 100% true. Irregardless, he wasn't allowed to publish and accept credit for his science until he was on his deathbed. In other words, he stopped becoming a heretic fairly early, at in the minds of the leadship because they saw the truth, by the leadership kept the perception alive that he was still a heretic, until they felt he could do them no harm.

Sometimes being a heretic for truth isn't the most harmonious path to take, especially the better one's life situation is. In any marrage saying that the wife is putting on the pounds, even if true, can lead to a disturbance in domestic tranquility. It is probally better to bury one's head in the sand of pleasant illusions and restrict the heresay to little battles. This is the compromise of truth that keeps your comfort level maximized and keep things moving in a coorperative way.

On the other hand, within a loveless, respectless marriage, what is the worse that the truth can do? How can things get any worse? At that point, one is not obligated to any social illusions because this is no comfort to maintain. Sometimes a shot of strong truth is the only medicine that can turn things around.

Steveo

15th August 2005 - 03:44 PM

Maybe I will be laughed out of here, but lets consider the reason behind, and the undertones of all religions in the world. Isn't all religion's main function to provide a structure of morals and values to live your life by? And in science isn't our moral code based on the scientific method? In that respect science can be comparable to religion, but not neccessarily in the respect of believing in a creator, or higher being.
Many great scientists (and I am sure many not so great ones) have been very religious. I think it was Faraday, who came up with the idea of fields was greatly influenced by religious beliefs, and the whole idea for having smooth curves as fields was because of his religion. (might not have been faraday, but I think thats who it was!) A professor at my university, who is an exceptionally bright man, and has some influential friends *cough* Stephen Hawking *cough* claims to be an evangelico christian, yet he still publishes credible physics papers all the time.

Religion has held science back, but it doesn't has to.

Drude

15th August 2005 - 08:07 PM

Relgion is the result of an innate human tendency to accept its inferiority. It is in our nature, to seek our potentials only and only when we feel inferior to an entity , be it god, or gods, or our country or our ideals. Men also possess a very creative imagination.

Now imagine, what might happen when you put the element of inferiority and imagination together. The result is almost fantastic creations of psedu-logic. The result is a religion. The result is a primitive religion. First it was God for Greeks but then as technology progressed and general opinion became more logistic, the concept of many Gods was abandoned in the hope of a better unified concept. Then came the concept of Christ, built upon an earlier concept created by the early jews to give order to disorderly men of Babylon. Then came Mohammad, who having read the books of judaism and Christianity created his own version, added his own touch of racial , religional creativity.

These religions were unbelievably effective. They kept men in CHECKS. They gave the clerics, the priest, and the imams, and the rabbis , the opportunity to suck the blood of the common man and to earn money and make an easy living by pretending to be the messengers of this so called God.

Why religions persist even to this day?

Simply because of two obvious reasons: one being the fact that children are conditioned from an early age to wear a yamika, to go to church, to pray, or even to praise Buddha or worship a small handmade piece of stone, and second being the fact that the people who first created religion (in the universal context of christianity , judaism and islam) knew well enough that they can not bring any proof to truthfullness of their religions, so instead they created a god who is so far up in the sky and so out of reach that only those who truely believe in him can reach him. They created rules and attributed them to their own version of god. And so as each generation passed, the ideas got changed, modified, infiltrated by the greed of men who wrote them and by politics to turn into what we percieve today in Israel as Islam and Judaism and what we see in Europe and US as Christianity.

However, does it mean that because religions are fake, that there is no god?

Frankly, I dont konw. I like to believe that he exists because he gives me the ability to feel alive and motivated. this god could be the evolutionary force, could be an alien who is observing our life, could be dressed as a man, or could in fact not exist. But it does help one through his life to believe in him, than not.

enigma

15th August 2005 - 08:43 PM

QUOTE (Drude+Aug 15 2005, 01:07 PM)

Then came the concept of Christ, built upon an earlier concept created by the early jews to give order to disorderly men of Babylon.

Jesus was an actual person, are you saying that what he stood for was a concept? I don't understand how it would be the Jews who created this concept of Christ, when they don't believe him to be what he says he stood for. Judaism does not acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah, it considers him to be merely a prophet.

QUOTE

They gave the clerics, the priest, and the imams, and the rabbis , the opportunity to suck the blood of the common man and to earn money and make an easy living by pretending to be the messengers of this so called God.

QUOTE (->

QUOTE

If you read carefully what many religions are saying, it is that one should live their life humbly. Material goods are not going to help you look more favorably in God's eyes. The corrupt people who greedily earned money through their religion, are not the true role models for any religion. But, like in everything, there are "good" and "bad" people.

second being the fact that the people who first created religion (in the universal context of christianity , judaism and islam) knew well enough that they can not bring any proof to truthfullness of their religions

But even in science you cannot bring any proof of "truthfulness," that's why anything that looks like it could be true is only called a theory. We cannot, as of now, prove something to be true beyond any doubt.

QUOTE

And so as each generation passed, the ideas got changed, modified, infiltrated by the greed of men who wrote them

Again, greed is frowned upon, and men who turn towards that and claim to be following a religion should not be listened to.

Obviously some of this is my opinion and my understanding of these religions. It's interesting that you seem to disagree with yourself in terms of believing in God or are you merely against organized religion?

Steveo

15th August 2005 - 09:14 PM

QUOTE

Your right that science can not prove anything to be true, but what science does over religion, is that it elimintes things that are untrue by experiments.

And as someone in another thread has said, that if Jesus were alive today he would be a scientist. I don't think he would (he would probably be to busy helping people) but I think he would support the scientific endeavor.

One thing that I have noticed in my life is that humans seem to need to have belief in something, whether it be religion, spirituality, or something else, maybe love, or whatever. But everyone seems to have complete faith in something or another. (for us scientists, maybe its the scientific method?)

I think staying away from organized religion might be a good idea. For all of the christians, Jesus himself said to be wary of the organized religions. Religion is way to personal a thing to be done in a group in my opinion. When you pray (if) it is just you talking to god, so why should some priest tell you how to feel, and think, and pray, and whatever else.
However, even with my hatred for organized religion, some churches (I mean individual churches) are good, and some people also need organized religion, at least at the beginning, so it isn't always a bad thing, just mostly! haha

enigma

15th August 2005 - 09:19 PM

lol... I think your right. The frustrating thing about religion is that it relies on faith versus fact (though to those who believe, they find that to be good enough)

as for organized religion... you do have to be wary, especially if you are susceptible to peer pressure and can't stand up for yourself...

not saying this is the case with you... haha...

can't you have faith in both science and religion?

Steveo

15th August 2005 - 09:35 PM

Well, since I am not religious even a little bit, this is not the case with me, so no worries there.
And I think it is possible to have faith in both science and religion. According to the scientific method you are supposed to approach every theory with skepticism, and this you don't have to believe any of it, but you do have to be 'smart' enough to approach it without bias either.
But also, for example, if you are christian, if you interpret the bible as a group of stories that teach you your morals rather than a history book there is no conflict at all. Science is at no level to disprove religion (and it probably will never get to that level).
The church was very quick to accept the big bang theory, because the big bang theory, in essence can be viewed as a creationist theory (just not one where the earth is 6000 years old and was created in a week).

Saint-Ex

15th September 2005 - 07:26 PM

QUOTE (Drude+Aug 15 2005, 08:07 PM)

But it does help one through his life to believe in him, than not.

I agree. I have no religious beliefs whatsoever, but I am not one of those people who are militantly anti-religious. This is because of the quote stated above. My parents are Christians, and that makes them happy. My brother-in-law is in jail and his belief in God comforts him, no matter how silly I think it may be.

Steveo

15th September 2005 - 09:07 PM

Very good point Ex-Saint.

Just because you don't understand how someone can feel a certain way doesn't make it wrong. Hell, I don't know about the rest of you, but half the times I don't know why I feel a certain way LOL

Bummerstinky

13th July 2009 - 01:46 AM

Interesting point, is science a religion? Perhaps it can be viewed as a modern religion based on an improved understanding. of how the universe interacts with its-self After all a unified theory of everything does sound like a religious aim. Science can be viewed as a set of principles and a way of viewing both the world and truth. In this way it is similar to religion. The aim is very similar, to understand the universe and our part in it. But science also has an undeniable practical application. Where is the religious context in developing a new polymer to improve filtration? But in this modern age we tend to forget the practical side of religion like blood sacrifice to improve a harvest. The point is this both are human constructs and both seek to achieve the same goals i.e. improved lives and understanding. The methodologies however can be quite different. You can be a scientist and be religious so can science prove the existance of God? Lol rather than answer your question I ask my own. OK to answer your question I am gonna say....... maybe.

PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.

To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.