Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You need to come up with a bit more. Religion might have come up with what is arguably a better answer, but what they haven't done is validated it, which as you know in regard to even plausible faith -claims, are only validated as answers when validated by science.
So the better answer about the nativities or the resurrection than what might be regarded as a the 'science' answer of "Miracles don't happen", is that science (the broadly scientific method of historical and textual critical analysis) supplies a better one: miracles could happen, but those aren't a record of miracles, but fairy tales, designed to persuade the gullible.
You are misdefining science per the dictionary link I previously gave. You are defining science as perfectly following proper protocols and with proper moral framework. Science is merely the process of seeking to understand, which can be corrupted, tainted, or immoral.
You might "Feel" that science should be defined differently, but that is no different than those that misdefine religion to always put it in the best light.
Science has made false claims that has promoted racism. Religion has at times promoted equality, such as the foundation of the Society of Friends.
However you want to define science the question still stands. What claims has science made where religion came up with a better answer?
However you want to define science the question still stands. What claims has science made where religion came up with a better answer?
I would beg to question on the matter religion coming up with any answers. All it can provide are snippets of dogma conjured up thousands of years ago, and nothing more. Believers, likewise. Coming up with answers based on the analysis of evidence is the virtual opposite of religion, which scarcely looks at evidence, and when it does, manages to contort some non-evident interpretation of same that fits dogma.
I asked to what questions? How the hell can that be off-topic?????
Perhaps it's 'what answers?'. Religion may come up with more pleasing answers than science. But are they true? I think the truth is, after all, better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
Answers about what then???? "Has religion ever come up with a better answer than science?" Science only provides answers about Reality.
Hardly worth the effort, is it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You need to come up with a bit more. Religion might have come up with what is arguably a better answer, but what they haven't done is validated it, which as you know in regard to even plausible faith -claims, are only validated as answers when validated by science.
Has religion ever come up with a better answer than science?
