Could any amount of scientific evidence render religion obsolete?
Any divide between revelation and rationality, religion and logic has to be irrational. If religion and rationality cannot proceed hand in hand, there has to be something deeply wrong with either of the two.
Religion is like statism. It will take a lot of education to get people to think for themselves.
As for the rationality - or not - of religious beliefs (e.g. survival of the spirit), it's an unfalsifiable assertion (i.e. not capable of being proven false).
This said, the scientific evidence currently available is also VERY far from conclusive - regardless of what you might read.
Once science reverts to its own principles (which include objectivity and lack of bias), as opposed to so much dogma, things might change. As it stands, it's an intellectual stalemate.
Probably not. Religion is a matter of faith, and faith exists regardless of scientific evidence.
What I find interesting, is that the bible actually has some scientific information in it.
The bible and hygiene. Leviticus 15:13 we are given specific instructions to wash our hands and keep ourselves clean, wash our clothes, and bathe our flesh in running water. Before doctors were aware of germs they would go from patient to patient without washing their hands. In those cases, most of the patients in hospitals usually died. It wasn't until germs were discovered by microscopes and doctors in hospitals began to wash their hands, that patients recovery rates increased dramatically.
That is only one scripture in the bible, there are more.
Probably not since they are two different things. If it is impossible to prove religion it is probably impossible to disprove it.
However, since you said "obsolete" it is possible that investigation can show the role of any deity increasingly limited to the point they are irrelevant to daily life.
Not as long as there is faith and hope - faith defined as the assurance of things hoped for.
I would say the only scientific evidence that could render religion obsolete is medicine. If it can reduce diseases and vastly increase life spans (that are high quality, and not living to 110 suffering), religion will be less and less appealing because the fear of death will be drastically reduced.
I'm not saying belief in a general God per se is a result of being afraid of death and the unknown, but specific religions usually are.
Religion? Maybe. However, God, the Creator, always was and always will be. He is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Scientific facts have changed as more or different information comes to light. God's Word remains the same, translated in many different languages and versions.
I doubt it. Science and religion exist on two different planes. The ultimately "religious" or spiritual are faithful without proof. As I have interpretted it in a number of contexts (one which might surprise!), the search for or yearning for proof is a lack of faith and puts distance between you and God.
As I am incurably analytical, I question almost everything. Even if science were to find "proof" that Jesus never did rise again and somehow, fossilized or other biological evidence proves something about Jesus the human that contradicts scripture, the desperate would deny deny deny, and the faithful would ignore this science-based want and search for proof.
All of the above can, of course, apply to non-Christian contexts. Ultimately, we cannot literally *see* God or Heaven until we have shuffled off this mortal coil, at which point we are no longer of flesh or it's scientific interests, and either we are rendered nature's recyclables to see or not see life again, or we are of Heaven (for me, Hell contradicts spiritual teaching AND natural "law"), and the fleshly world is as inaccessible to us then as blissful (?) eternity is to us now.
The scientific method can never prove nor disprove that which is not of the "real" is it defines it and thus not of science. It can ponder existence in the past, present and hypothetical future, but it will never prove nor disprove that which isn't "testable" or replicable.
I know the faith aspect of believing in a creator or God is significant without science but what about truth on the traditions and superstitions that accompanies all faiths. Faith allows me to hope and/or pray for a new job. Science tells me the probability of waiting for employment oppose to getting out and actually getting a job. Religion is the word of importance. Do we need it to have a connection with God?
by aka-dj23 months ago
A worldwide flood (like described by Noah's flood) is said to be part of many cultures folklore.Creationist proponents belive geological evidence "supports " such an event. Atheists (and others) do not. What...
by Sean Thomas Gartland5 years ago
If you have any evidence please present it.
by Rhonda D Johnson20 months ago
A Colorado school district is being sued for discrimination. The parents of six year old Coy Matthis, who they say has identified himself as a girl since he was a toddler, are incensed that the school will not...
by The Reluctant Revivalist18 months ago
Is there scientific evidence that God exists?
by Joseph O Polanco15 months ago
As an Atheist, would you say you accept all evidence or just scientific evidence?
by sibtain bukhari4 years ago
"The genetic code is a set of instructions and information""The set of instructions and information is intelligence""therefore genetic code is intelligence""All living things are...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.