Originally Posted by Bags
oh, silly Xtians with your fiction book
|
No need to be that disrespectful of somebody's faith, dude.
Growing up in Catholic schools, I've evolved an interesting view on religion. I very much consider myself Catholic and I always will be, however, I do have issues with some of the dogma of the Church. Quick example, I think women should be allowed to be priests, and I also think that the Church will eventually allow women to become priests. The Church just moves at a much slower pace than the rest of society, and I actually firmly believe that it is good to have a counterweight to the fast-food knee jerk society that we have become today.
That means I believe the Church has their heart in the right place, they are just slow to make any changes at all. I mean the were saying mass in Latin up through the 1960s. LATIN. So, they change, just on a different timeline.
Also, I don't really like the title of this thread. I don't like to look at it as "Science vs. Religion", I view it as "Science + Religion". Considering how difficult it is to prove a negative, as much as science seems to want to try, they will likely never be able to prove that God doesn't exist.
I believe there is room to have faith and follow the teachings of Jesus, but still not turn a blind eye to the scientific discoveries made every day. My personal belief is that Jesus had a few main teachings:
1) Love God (
whatever form He may be)
2) Love your neighbor
3) The spirit of the word is more important than the letter of the word.
To point #3, this is where I think many religious people lose their focus. It doesn't take a genius to twist words around to mean something different and totally contradict points #1 and #2.
Bottom line is, I don't judge people based on their faith (in God or lack of god), but I judge them based on how they use that faith to live their lives. I think it would be hilarious to see Pat Robertson and Bill Maher meet up in hell.