[snova]

Is it true "that scientific advances only occurred because knowledge was wrested from the autocratic clutches of religion?"

Keeping A Distance From ReligionPosted: 29-06-2006 | Views: 9Author: Dr. Randy Wysong

A primary reason evolution is believed by many is because what is thought to be the alternative, religion, is feared, dreaded and unthinkable. And it is true that scientific advances only occurred because knowledge was wrested from the autocratic clutches of religion. Our age of wonderful technology came at a cost of great persecution and brought us out of the cave and off the pews into the light (fluorescent).

The memory of clerical obscurantism has been riveted upon the human subconscious. Religion – and by association anything paranormal or spiritual – is rejected out of hand because it is associated with dogma, bias, charlatans and moral confinement, not openness and intellectual advance. Religion and metaphysics are seen as retrogression, capitulation and surrender.

If we look back, the gods and creeds that were used to explain the knowledge voids of the past were jettisoned one after another by the march of science. I know, I know, the time can be pointed to when holy book thumpers and skeptics ranted that man would never fly, that the sun circled the Earth and that electric light was evil - and of course how the dogged march for scientific truth proved them wrong. So it is an easy step from there to conclude that if there is something we don’t know, materialistic science will come to the rescue.

There is a lesson there, agreed, but again, a molehill should not be made into a mountain. The fact that we discovered that disease could be caused by germs and not from skimping on tithes, is no reason to think that there is no barrier to knowledge. Humans are finite, the universe is infinite. We are constrained by definition. The fact that we discovered the wheel is not proof that we will one day be omniscient any more than the ability of a dog to roll over on command proves it will one day do calculus. As quantum mechanics has shown, reality is not even physical. As physical creatures we will always be dogs just doing fancy tricks. Yes, we should forever test the limits with our sciences, but at the same time remain wise enough to see that there are limits.

When it comes to the question of origins, materialists assume that anything that cannot be caged and poked at or surveyed with an instrument and carried out to the twentieth decimal point should be rejected. But in their haste to flee from the spiritual into the arms of evolution, materialists leave behind the rigors of the scientific method – there are no observations, experiments or predictions applied as proof that life arose from nonliving matter and that creatures can transmutate into one another.

Moreover, logic and evidence forsake materialism at the fundamental level of reality and when applied to the question of origins. As I have explained previously, the materialist reaches limits and must resign to unanswered questions about first causes. He has reached no intellectually advantageous position whatsoever by leaving gods and swooning over matter.

Admitting ignorance and incapacity or acknowledging intellect beyond our own need not mean that we must return to the dark ages or begin sacrificing lambs, blowing ourselves up in a Jihad or kissing the boots of church leaders. Nor does evil, suffering and injustice in the world preclude an underlying intelligence. If there are dimensions, powers, intellect and purpose beyond our scope of understanding, that’s okay. It just means either we must swallow a bitter ego pill and accept limits or that exploration may only be possible by means other than microscopes and telescopes.

Evolutionists must be careful that they do not fall victim to the very thing that is repugnant to them and blindly remain devoted to an ideological shrine in spite of the evidence. Unfortunately, in their zeal to escape the perceived irrationality of religion, evolutionists dig irrational holes under their own feet with shovels of faith, bias, bigotry and even fraud.

For further reading, or for more information about, Dr Wysong and the Wysong Corporation please visit www.wysong.net or write to wysong@wysong.net. For resources on healthier foods for people including snacks, and breakfast cereals please visit www.cerealwysong.com.


This article is free for republishing Article Source: http://www.articlealley.com

[cookiemonster]

if i read the article correctly,the author is saying that no one group holds any more answers than another.this i agree with,but tend to find scince answers more questions than religion.however,religion does bring out more questions that cause humans to look for answers.

[JetePlentuara]

It has long been my belief that religion largely answers the questions for us that science can't answer, answers what we can't understand, or provides answers to concepts in life that there simply are no answers to. Humans become afraid when faced with the unknown a lot of the time; religion was invented a long time ago to provide comfort for that. Is there anything else in this world that can answer "everything" based upon nothing more than blind faith?

[antonyandruleit]

i would have to answer no to your question.however i don't hold to the concept of"blind faith"either.

i won't express my opinion of religion here,but i don't agree with the concept of answers or comfort as it's creation.for some people,it does provide the answers they seek,and for others,a path to find the answers they seek.

[broksaksaak]

The ancient Greeks (and other ancient cultures) developed both science and religion. Pythagoras (580 - 500 BCE) divided knowledge in two principal categories: External (exoteric) which included, among other things, science; and Inner (esoteric) which included religion and philosophy mong other things.

Plato (428 - 347 BCE) and Aristotle (384 - 322 BCE) were aware of this division and both cultivated the spirit of external investigation (science) and internal investigation (philosophy/religion).

The Neo-Platonics of Alexandria continued the traditions established by Pythagoras, Plato, and Aristotle during the early years of Christianity. These ancient Pagans saw science and religion/philosohy as complementary to each other.

It would be Emperor Justinian -- who reigned between 527-565 CE -- who would eventually outlawed the Pagan religions and its institution. The Academy of Plato, the Lyceum of Aristotle, the libraries and schools of Alexandria, and many other institutions of learning were oulawed and considered superstitions. The new institution that would determine what was true science and religion would be the Christian Church. It was at this moment that science and religion became mortal enemies (particularly in the West).

Science continued to flourish in the Western world in a hidden way. Scientists would be persecuted by the Church and accused of heresy and sorcery. It would not be until the Protestant reformation that the Church would start easing its hold on scientific knowledge. It would be finally in the 18th Century that science would again obtain popularity and respectability in society.

I am a religious person; I am a minister-priest. I also enjoy science. I am not a scientist. My religious tradition is the search of inner knowledge. The ancient Rishis (Sages) of my tradition -- like Pythagoras, Plato, and Aristotle -- had divided knowledge into external and internal. For thousands of years my religion has had no conflict with science. For example, I have no problems with the scientific theory of evolution. I understand its logic, and I feel that science has explained it clearly. Plus this scientific theory explains something that my religion has been insisting for ages: LIFE IS ONE; ALL LIFE FORMS ARE RELATED. There are many modern scientific conclusion that were already explained not only by the Vedic seers, but also by the ancient Greek philosophers.

I understand that religion is an inner search. It is a process of inner transformation. Science -- ancient or modern -- continues to be the search for understanding of our outer world and the laws that govern it. The doctrines, stories, rituals, and different practices of religion are meant to be symbolical or allegorical representations of inner truths. They are never to be taken as historical or scientific truths... they are instruments that when used with wisdom can trigger an inner transformation that leads to enlightenment that is expressed in Understanding, Love, and Compassion.

If the inner purpose of religion is forgotten, then it becomes pure fantasy and superstition. When Justinian outlawed the ancient Pagan institutions he not only destroyed science, he also corrupted the true purpose of religion.

I stand for both science and religion!

Hermano Luis
Moriviví Hermitage

[qp0yfHOf]

Once again...I resonate strongly with another of your posts. Thank You!