obvious Child

If your religious interpretation conflicts with facts, which do you change or stop believing?

For example, if you believe in a 6,000 year old Earth, do you stop using water out of the tap since municipalities across the US including the US army corp of engineers manages the water sources using hydrogeology which operates on an extremely long time span (millions of years)? Or do you change your interpretation of how old the Earth is?

Lachean

Some engage in denial of the science (see: the evolution vs intelligent design debate) some then take a less biblical literalist interpretation in favor of a more allegorical type (see: those who believe that their god guided evolution, and set up the physical constants in the big bang) and some (very few I imagine) abandon their sense of mysticism entirely in favor of a more rational evidence based understanding of the natural world.

It all depends on the individual's skepticism and rationality when it comes to matters of fact and fiction. However, matters of probability tend to occur to people much sooner than scientific facts; like the improbability of truth regarding one's arbitrary religion of birth given the various other contradicting religions that all cannot also be true.

__________________
"Truth, in the matters of religion, is simply the opinion that has survived." - Oscar Wilde

ladyt28

Speaking for myself, my faith has to do with my relationship with God and how I act while here on Earth. I refuse to get caught up in non-issues such as how old the Earth is or evolution/creationism when it comes to my faith. Yes, I believe in science.

__________________
"Truth between candid minds can never do harm." - Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1791

Cephus

Unfortunately, you get a lot of theists who, when reality conflicts with their beliefs, they demand that reality is wrong. There isn't a religion out there that doesn't do that to some degree.

__________________
I'm not anti-religion, I'm anti-hypocrisy.

Blog me! http://BitchSpot.JadeDragonOnline.com

Lachean

You know after I saw this post, I watched a video from The Onion whos ticker read "BREAKING: Creationists and Evolutionists combined are now outnumbered by dontgivea****ists."

SouthernDemocrat

I think Buddhism generally always accepts science, even when it might conflict with a prior Buddhist teaching.

__________________
Charles Krauthammer describing Obama:

"He's got both a first-class intellect and a first-class temperament."

mikhail

Literalists will just deny the facts or try to find fault with the theoreys or evidence even if they are kicking water uphill.

Moderates who do i feel tend to be somewhat intellectually dishonest they tend to cherry pick what they believe without explaining what authority they have to decide.

__________________
The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking.

obvious Child

And justone just authenticated your argument with more then enough bat crazy denial to place him on the ignore list.

UtahBill

Everybody cherry picks their beliefs....without available facts to get in the way, that is their only choice.

__________________
The Age of Reason doesn't have to be a thing of the past.
Being judgemental is the prime directive of some evangelicals.
No success can compensate for failure in the home.

Cephus

And rationalists realize that religion is all crap and reject it all as unsupported dogmatic nonsense.

Count me with the rationalists.