Never Mind I understand now!

This post has been edited by Mafamba Team: May 23 2007, 06:34 PM

People use the same BS arguement to say that science keeps changing its mind about things and therefore it is meaningless.

The truth is that both religion and science change their mind about almost nothing and this argument is a silly product of rhetoric which can only convince fools. The fact that both science and religion adapt only means that they are alive and well and nothing more.

Commercialization is a pervasive fact of modern society which affects only "public" perception of everything but really affect nothing for those who are actually involved and take it seriously. Science is an excellent example of this as well.

This post has been edited by mitchellmckain: Nov 3 2006, 05:44 PM

mitchell hit it on the head from my point of view, I automatically thought of how it was scientifically "proven" that the world was flat and the universe revolved around the earth. I won't deny that most/all religions have contradictions within them but the only reason they are contradictions and not "updated facts" is because of religions basis on faith and not "scientific fact" which, as pointed out, isn't necessarily fact but simply what is perceived as fact.

I'm a Christian and also one of the first people to usually point out your side of the argument. Christianity IS full of contradicitons (I wouldn't comment on the others since I don't know enough about them to be fair) but at the same time that just means (in my opionion) you must study as you see fit and come to your own conclusions. Christianity is based off human interpretation of Gods will for us, so obviously there is room for error especially after the Bible has been re-translated so many times. Frankly, religion and science are both basically "use the best information we have".

Well, I'm not quite sure what Mafamba is trying to say when he/she pointed out the contradictions in religion. But to me, that is a very good point. Let's face it, people treat religion differently than science. Scientific facts can changed anytime but a religious edict is divine and therefore, it cannot be wrong. What mitchellmckain and Jeigh have said about religion adapting and using the best information available is unfortunately, not shared by lots of other religious people.

But I said just the opposite. I said that neither science nor religion really change very much at all except in the very beginning when they are still trying to figure things out. Sure Relativity and Quantum mechanics was a big change, but so was the Protestant reformation (and counter-reformation), but on the other the other hand these changes left the core of both science and religion unchanged. We still teach Newtonian physics in high school and in a college introductory physics course, just as Christians still hold to the same cannon of the Bible and the Nicean creed.

I was simply making the point that the changes which do occur do not invalidate them but just the opposite that they indicate their continued strength and usefulness. In fact, just as you say, the greater willingness of science to change is an advantage in science rather than a weakness.

Hii, I will like to make a point out here to Mafamba Team .I dont know how did you get the facts about Hinduism.Did you read any of the holy texts like the Upanishads or the Vedas or the Puranas or the Gita or did you get the information indirectly from other sources.

Lets make the facts clear if you would have read the Holy Books then you will find that the Gods which you have defined are the way to the Supreme being..There is only the absolute the AUM and nothing is outside it or beyond it.Even when one chants any of the thousand of mantra it begines with Aum because it is everything..By praying to so called many Gods and Goddeses they are actually praying to Aum.Five elements which you are talking about are by which the whole universe is made of...

Also To me Hinduism is a very scientific.You can ask any question regarding Hinduism...

I donno much about Scientology except the fact that many influential ppl are following this religion including Tom Cruise.It is a blend of eastern mystic and western belief.As far as the issue of conversion is concerned it is following the footsteps of Christianity,Islam (as these religion seeked converts during their yonger days and even now....)

I think religion is a way of life. Some people took it so seriously that they started their will on others on the name of religion. Some even went farther and started killing and raping on the name of religion. All it is that depends on interpretation of every religion. Christianity and Islam are more conservative because they go by one book. While Buddhism, Sikhism and Hinduism seem to be freer in nature and more adaptive to change , they do not deliberately convert people.

Science is not a religion. Science does not tell about ethics. Religion is supposed to shape one's personal life as well as social life.
The Religions should not have any say whether the earth is flat or round it’s none of their business nor are they qualified to do so. Their interference in scientific studies only exposes them.
The same way science should not interfere in ethics, love and similar things.
For an example Love is a mere sexual attraction according to science but religion has a different way to look at it, which also considers feelings of human beings and the social impact of such union.
Thats why Scientology can not be a religion
So in my opinion Science and Religion are two tracks of train, they never should meet but help the train along its path of life.

You know I have seen a lot of marketing schemes and mail order companies that operate a lot like a religion in the way the promote their product (Usana for example). It is that blurring of the lines which makes it particularly hard to classify scientology. Is this simply a new type of non-traditional medicine? Is it a new pyramid scheme? Or is it a religion in the tradition of the far east like Buddhism which does not claim divine revelation. It certainly partakes of many of the aspects of a self-help organization as well.

Scientology certainly has been targeted by more than the usual number and severity of allegations leveled at a new religion. This could be because it does not include any kind of moral standard or objective. The practice of paying members commissions on new recruits they bring in, is one of the more decisive indications that this is more of a pyramid like business than a church.