Religion
In reply to the discussion: Food for Thought [View all]MarkCharles
(2,261 posts)does not embrace?
Scientists are today's "natural philosophers".
Now on to the major question which religious believers from any scope or gradient cannot seem to agree upon:
Namely, how does one distinguish which religious belief is of value, and how do religious folks act in ways so as to diminish the influence of irrational beliefs.
Catholicism, probably the largest single Christian denomination, has finally agreed to the concept of a heliocentric solar system, but continues to claim gay people shouldn't marry, and that women shouldn't partake of modern methods of birth control.
Unitarianism, (arguably the most "liberal" interpreters of the Holy Bible), although they are fine with gay marriage, still insist that the practice of celebration of Christmas as the birth of Christ is a legitimate activity in December.
Who decides what is a legitimate mythology and who decides which myths to jettison? Do we have a standard other than science? Do we pick and choose to suit our own tastes as if in a Chinese buffet? t
Quite honestly, what is the deciding standard for truth and fact other than science, what used to be called "natural philosophy"?
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations