Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="audioholic" data-source="post: 5838663" data-attributes="member: 549629">For the billionth time in this thread, the major difference beyween religion and science is religion says &#039;believe&#039; while science says &#039;go and out and learn via testing&#039;. We can speculate that science, even at its most fundamentals, is wrong. But that&#039;s the beauty of science... the practice of science itself would reveal this flaw in the fundamental theories, and a newer and more accurate theory would emerge. This has happened many times before. Science has room to be wrong, encourages finding out if it is. Religion encourages closing your mind and simply ccepting what you are told. To try and call science a &#039;religion&#039; is to not understand or state the fundamental differences between the two, in an attempt to place &#039;faith&#039; on the same level as scientific testing.The fact that religion is aspiring to emulate science just shows that religion is in its declining years. Evolution of the human mind will put it past the need for such a crutch eventually.We know what God is... God is merely everything humans do not understand. The absolute origin of the universe... must be God right? No other logical explanation than a divine creator? And people use to think there was no other logical explanation for rain than God himself. God made babies, weather, astrological phenomenon, etc. All things modern science now easily explains as naturally occuring phenomenons, were once considered obviously the hand of God... simply because we didnt comprehend it at the time. Are we so vain as to assume we now have all possible answers humans can attain, and everything we dont understand (like origins and infinity), we never will because they are the face of God? Pretty short sighted attitude.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="audioholic, post: 5838663, member: 549629"] For the billionth time in this thread, the major difference beyween religion and science is religion says 'believe' while science says 'go and out and learn via testing'. We can speculate that science, even at its most fundamentals, is wrong. But that's the beauty of science... the practice of science itself would reveal this flaw in the fundamental theories, and a newer and more accurate theory would emerge. This has happened many times before. Science has room to be wrong, encourages finding out if it is. Religion encourages closing your mind and simply ccepting what you are told. To try and call science a 'religion' is to not understand or state the fundamental differences between the two, in an attempt to place 'faith' on the same level as scientific testing. The fact that religion is aspiring to emulate science just shows that religion is in its declining years. Evolution of the human mind will put it past the need for such a crutch eventually. We know what God is... God is merely everything humans do not understand. The absolute origin of the universe... must be God right? No other logical explanation than a divine creator? And people use to think there was no other logical explanation for rain than God himself. God made babies, weather, astrological phenomenon, etc. All things modern science now easily explains as naturally occuring phenomenons, were once considered obviously the hand of God... simply because we didnt comprehend it at the time. Are we so vain as to assume we now have all possible answers humans can attain, and everything we dont understand (like origins and infinity), we never will because they are the face of God? Pretty short sighted attitude. [/QUOTE]

Verification