If Atheism Is A Religion, What About Science Itself?

[Delta4Embassy]

Because we have over 25,000 discrete religious systems, one could argue we have so many because they're all lies and variations on a theme. Further, one might argue a "true religion" would be discernable amongst the clutter by having universally acceptance and adoption. But no religion comes close. But science does.

Could science be considered a religion? A universal and true religion at that?

 

[deltex1]

Whose work is science trying to come to grips with? That science can explain why an apple falls from a tree is significant but who decided that the apple would fall in the first place? I am content to believe a higher power designed it. It is depressing to think that the mud of humanity is all we've got.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Whose work is science trying to come to grips with? That science can explain why an apple falls from a tree is significant but who decided that the apple would fall in the first place? I am content to believe a higher power designed it. It is depressing to think that the mud of humanity is all we've got.

It is depressing. And if religion were content to be a child's bedtime story I'd say more power to them. But so long as we kill people in the name of religions, and implement laws based off them, we need to accept the more likely fact that gods don't exist.

 

[deltex1]

We sort through science and select what we "know" to be the true solution. We accept that solution because it works...the others don't. If we had someone with enough focus to sort through all the religions we could find a lot of one true solutions...keep those...throw away the others that don't work/create chaos. I suppose religion is much squishier than the "simplicity" of the apple falling from the tree. Too many apples with worms falling from too many trees, for too many reasons...that's religion trying to explain humanity.

My head aches now...and the game is on....

 

[Delta4Embassy]

We sort through science and select what we "know" to be the true solution. We accept that solution because it works...the others don't. If we had someone with enough focus to sort through all the religions we could find a lot of one true solutions...keep those...throw away the others that don't work/create chaos. I suppose religion is much squishier than the "simplicity" of the apple falling from the tree. Too many apples with worms falling from too many trees, for too many reasons...that's religion trying to explain humanity.

My head aches now...and the game is on....

Fortunately, nothing Man creates seems to last forever. Religions, like nations, come and go. Of the 25,000 unique religious systems we've invented only a couple thousand or so remain extant. Corrosive and counter to human nature as some religions are (meaningful look at others) they wont endure precisely because of the mayhem they create.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Christianity didn't even last 1500 years before Catholicism fractured and Protestantism came along. Islam came along just 600 or so years after Christianity was founded. And the process continues as with Mormonism.

 

[emilynghiem]

Because we have over 25,000 discrete religious systems, one could argue we have so many because they're all lies and variations on a theme. Further, one might argue a "true religion" would be discernable amongst the clutter by having universally acceptance and adoption. But no religion comes close. But science does.

Could science be considered a religion? A universal and true religion at that?

Hi Delta4Embassy: Thanks for this post, which I believe can lead to a consensus on science and religion by agreeing to treat them as languages for laws. Then we can distinguish which parts become "religious" (creation, evolution, global warming, origin of life, whether natural laws are universal, what depends on government and what exists naturally, etc.) and what parts can be AGREED upon by all people where it is not considered religious.

So yes and no.

Right now, there ARE parts of science that get "religious" as mentioned above.
And there ARE parts taught in religion which can be PROVEN by science,
agreed upon by all people as naturally existing processes in the world,
and do not need to be treated as religious.

Ideally, if we distinguish the Concepts and Principles/Process behind the terms in religion
then we can treat both Science and Religious terms "Objectively" as LANGUAGES,
similar to French and English, or Math Symbols, that are NEUTRAL and do not impose beliefs.

We can demystify the concepts behind them by proving them scientifically.

For example, I hve brought up the topic of studying energy
so that prayer, spiritual healing and even occult manipulations
can be explained using energy and what is the process going on
as proven medically and scientifically.

So this would demystify religion and allow people to communicate
freely similar to how science explains things.

The same spiritual processes would still be found to occur, as science can
be used to quanitify, measure and prove,
so this would NOT "dismiss" what is taught in religions
but would confirm what is universally true.

The facts and understanding/agreement in both science
and religion would still be "faith based" in the sense that
all our knowledge is based on faith on some level, and
could always be wrong or change; but the AGREEMENT
on what is true would get the religious bickering out of the picture.

Thanks Delta
I believe this approach will work
and will bring together minds from both
the science and religious communities
to establish agreed understanding on common truths
that can be shown to be universal to people of all views and backgrounds.

It would validate and include all religions instead of leaving any out.
So all this unnecessary conflict would be resolved in the process
of proving what is universal, and quit rejecting people over what
language they use to describe laws, concepts, principles and processes in life.

Kudos to you for pushing for answers.
May what you receive in return exceed
your expectations and bring benefits
and blessings to many more people
that we influence directly and indirectly in our circles.

Good points!
Now let's follow up!

 

[emilynghiem]

Christianity didn't even last 1500 years before Catholicism fractured and Protestantism came along. Islam came along just 600 or so years after Christianity was founded. And the process continues as with Mormonism.

Dear Delta4Embassy: The Jewish, Christian and Muslims are still all under the same divine laws: all sent by God, all laws and prophets.

The fracturing is part of the organization process of identifying and grouping by tribes and language/culture.

Look also at what is happening with the Natural Law branch or fold of the flock:
Buddhism gave the natural laws 600 years before Christ, parallel to Moses giving the sacred laws.
Constitutional laws were not written down and established officially until the founding of America,
but these also make statutory the Natural Laws studied and passed down centuries before.

The Universalists, Bahai and Muslims who believe in including ALL sent by God
are also part of the puzzle of bringing this all together.

Personally I believe the Muslim Leadersihp in America, especially Black leadership,
can lead the resolution and agreement between Left and Right on Democratic
Principles and Process that was supposed to be established under theConstitution.

These parties are split over pro and anti Christian,
so it may take the Muslims who are embraced by the Left
to reconcile with Christianity and the Constitution as Muslims
are called to receive and respect ALL sent by God.

So by proving that Natural Laws given by the Constitution
are Sent by God, then all this can be reconciled while
recognizing and preserving Diversity. Under the Constitution
we can agree on central laws, and still have our own diverse religious freedom
and speech, we don't have to impose one way or one belief for all people.

So that is why the Constitutional concepts, principles and process
are key to resolving all the other issues otherwise dividing people religiously and politically.

The process isn't done yet.

Some parts have only just begun .....