Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Science v. Religion

108AAAA9-F41D-401B-BCC2-7F22B2F57BC7 4.000000 Letter Letter\envelopes.imf Business Stationery Envelopes SU1CTDEsNDYsgUmBSYWBwSQkJCTFTTiJhShNiYGFME0wNDSRTZ04kZEwkTiNnTA0nUmBSYFJgSxJTUJMMiwwLCxJTUJMMywwLCw= repeat #ffffff X-ASN,X-ASH,X-AN,X-AP,X-AD ;
   Science is acquired knowledge whilst faith, as Sydney Hook notes, begs the question  of being knowledge.
Supernaturalists claim that science and religion rely on faith as trust, but the vital difference is that science depends on facts while religions depend on never verified scriptures, and in the case of the Abrahamic ones no good morality and no real history. Yes, supernaturalism can adapt to science. Hinduism itself posits billions of years for the Metaverse, so it could easily note that age whilst its notion of reincarnation flaunts science. The Abrahamic ones faced evolution, and some of their sects find that it is God's method of creation of new life forms whilst other sects feel that evolution means that we are just animals who would lack morals.
  Religions can see metaphors in their scriptures for otherwise literal matters. Yet, those metaphors are just that: empty of substance. One  believer told me that the Deluge is a metaphor for new beginnings. For an  errantist- non-fundamentalist- that  rationalization ranks with those of the inerrantists like Gleason L. Archer. Whether read literally or metaphorically, the Tanakh , the Christian Testament and the Qur'an make no sense!
 The Christian sense of salvation requiring the blood-letting of the Atonement defies reason: we each atone for our own wrong-doing rather than have someone else do so. Whether  they are metaphorical cannabilism and vampirism in Protestantism or actual such in Caholocism , the  Lord's Supper and the Eucharist respectively mock morality.
    As Victor Stenger notes, were the actions of the Metaverse different, then maybe a God could be a viable means of controlling the Metaverse, but I ad as He has no referents and has contradictory,incoherent attributes, still He could not exist!
   Science and religion conflict rather than complement each other as venues of knowledge. Science find no human to be virgin-borned, resurrected, having done miracles and so forth.It finds no intent as Lamberth's atelic or teleonomic argument notes that the weight of evidence reveals no divine intent, and thus no intent for miracles, patterns as designs, Primary Cause for the Big Bang or other natural phenomena, and thus without those referents, yes, He cannot exist!   
    And as He has contradictor, incoherent attributes, He cannot exist!
    A triple whammy!

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please refrain from cursing. Please be respectful whilst contemnng arguments. Please be thoughtful. And please don't be pedantic1