Pim: That of course depends on how you define 'important issues'.
Science surely has affected some very important issues.
Like what?
Mike: Religion deals with the important issues - who are we?
Pim: Actually those issues I consider quite low in importance.
Mike: why are we here? what should we do?
Pim: Once agian such issues might be important to some but
personally they are of low importance to me.
Mike: It is questions such as these rather than questions of
measurement (science) that define our sense of being.
Pim: Does it?
I think so. For example, just think how much we could
learn about human biology if we experimented on
the mentally retarded, criminals, homeless, etc. Why
don't we? Why do we thus constrain the progress
of science? I submit it has something to do with
the questions I raised.
Mike: For example, the Christian religion imparts
value to our lives, as we are in some way created in the image
of God (the means of this creation are disputed by Christians,
but that is not important).
Pim: Of course the value is merely determined by what some
have written down.
If Christianity is true, it does not. But this misses the
point. I was simply opining that some fundamentals
of Christian faith are best left unchanged.
Mike: The Christian religion imparts meaning and direction to our
lives, as we exist for a reason.
Pim: And this perceived meaning and direction is important? I have seen
plenty of people who find direction and meaning outside religion.
I'm not talking about the particular meaning and direction
one accepts, I'm talking about the reality of meaning
and direction that is not dependent on human belief. This
is another thing, that IMO, is best left unchanged.
Mike: The Christian religion imparts validity to our sense of right
and wrong.
Pim: Tell that to those burnt at the stake during the religious wars for
instance. It might be used to grant some respectability to what we are
doing but religion surely has seen some dark sides.
I am not claiming that religion has never been used to do evil
(evil is almost always done in the name of the good). I'm
talking about the reality of evil and good, right and wrong in
ways that go beyond matters of taste and conditioning.
We are hitting a communication impasse in this exchange
also. I am merely responding to the claim that religion
doesn't change by opining that this is a good thing in
some areas. I see no reason to think religion ought to
change because of the "finding of the day" so that
it begins to teach human beings have no intrinsic
value, there is no meaning to life, and there is no such
thing as right and wrong.
Mike