Does religion lose its credibility when it conflicts with generally accepted science?

Question

I was reading an article that basically said that religion loses its credibility when it says things that are different than what science teaches. In the article, the idea was being thrown out that it was time for religions to quit speaking against homosexuality.

The author of the article was saying that homosexuality has been proven to be something that is determined by birth. The thinking is that if it isn't a choice, then homosexuality can't be against the will of God.



http://www.xanga.com/TheTheologiansCafe/549129591/item.html

Answer 1

Homosexuality is determined at birth? I completely disagree with this assumption. I am sorry, sinning is a choice, whatever the form.

Answer 2

First things first. The argument that when science contradicts religion religion is discredited seems spurious to me. Many religious people do not believe their sacred histories must be (or can be) read so literally that they can be proved or disproved by scientific findings. Read Gould's Rocks of Ages, which is an excellent (and fairly short) overview of the interaction between science and religion.

Second, the homosexuality argument doesn't make any sense to me. First, it has not been "proven" that homosexuality is "determined" by birth. Research indicates things are more complex than the overly simplistic dichotomies of 100% nature v. 100% nurture. There are lengthy Wikipedia articles with more references than I can give you here. Second, the argument some Christians make is that even if you cannot chose to be straight, you can chose not to commit adultery, sodomy, etc. So they believe there is still a choice involved, and it is that choice that is right or sinful. They analogize it to a predisposition to alcoholism--some people are born so that if they drink they will be out of control and alcoholic. They can't help this, but they can help drinking. (note: I'm not personally endorsing this argument, but I've heard it a lot)

Answer 3

Of course it does, as is the sexual attraction to children, animals, the dead, both sexes, and neither sex, all of which has been established as a sexual orientations in the very same manner as homosexuality was in the 70s. The one for children took place at the APA conference in San Diego in 2000.

All that you are saying is that it is a genetic anomaly, like any genetic anomaly, that will need to be cured at the time of Armageddon.

There is no argument that homosexual feelings are natural to the person in that position, as is the pedophile feelings are natural for the person in that position. The difference is one believes the other should have no rights to express those feelings. One believes the other should be jailed for those feelings. One believes the other should suppress those feelings around normal people. So, which one has the right to live the life they were born to?

My daughter is bisexual and I've known thousands of gay people over the decades, and yes, heterosexual carries all the rights, but if you are going to fight for the rights of a non-heterosexual orientation, than should it not be for all of them?

Life is never going to be what we all want it to be. without it being that way for everyone.

Answer 4

Good grief, the closed minded have appeared for this question.

Yes, the church has lost credibility simply because it refuses to change when new information becomes available. Homosexuality is generally not a choice, it is as natural as heterosexuality.

To the oerson who asked about the colour of the skin of cro magnon, I don't KNOW but I would theorise that it was light brown. Do you know what colour Jesus was or god? You lot can't even agree on that!!!

Answer 5

Religion loses its credibility by having a condemning spirit. The author is correct but misguided. We were all infected with sin at birth. Homosexuality is just one form. Nevertheless, sin is punishable by death in God's view. People who don't understand the Gospel will always try to discredit religion. Believers who aren't guided by the spirit will often condemn those they are supposed to love.

Answer 6

I can tell you, with a bad religious formation, the people could think so, so wrong! when you have an integral religious formation, you can add more knowledge to your life, even if some concepts are against the basics in your religion but, with a good criteria you may agree some concepts and understand with open mind. The good practice of religion does not lose credibility, GAINS and add knowledge. :-)

Answer 7

I didn't read the link you offered.

This is merely my opinion. Science over the decades has proven itself wrong. Time goes by and the science discovers more and more to disprove and or re-prove but in a more sophisticated way....what other scientists have already proven.

What is fact one day....is nullified 50 years later....what's the connection between science and religion? They don't mix in my opinion.

As for homosexuality....why does anyone have concern or reason to prove or disprove the reason for it?

Live and let live!

Answer 8

Of course but the religions are good at sweeping discoveries under the carpet. The recent find of the 3.3 million year old Human-Hobbit skull in Ethiopia, did you notice how quickly they got out their brooms and swept? Just wait until we make contact with intelligent life on other planets. They're going to need a lot of brooms.

Answer 9

ALL homosexuality has NOT yet been determined by birth. Some people do it just to do it, for the fun or kicks or sexual release.

And by the way IS or IS NOT PLUTO A PLANET! I was taught it was!

And what was the skin color of Cro Magnon and Homo Erectus?

Come one science, Blacks, Whites, Reds, Yellows, Browns ALL want to know defintively. WHAT was the COLOR of Cro Magnons Skin!

Answer 10

i imagine that each and every thing you assert would make experience if purely the very first element you probably did wasn't to easily assume that the bible is information of god. progression an finished argument in this assumption ability you eventually end up incorrect. you assert that there is clearly information for god and the bible, yet I fail to work out that information. the purely "information" i have ever heard from theists is that we do not comprehend some issues. They take this no longer understanding as information of god, even as all it really is is the absence of information of something else. and that i have not heard a theist then connect those bits of lack of understanding about the universe to the will that their god is the right one. base line is the medical technique inevitably tells us that faith and technology are incompatible on a needed element. the 2d step of the medical technique is posing a hypothesis in accordance with a question you've. the subsequent steps contain finding out that hypothesis. The hypothesis isn't properly-referred to as actuality till that's been examined and the attempt replicated. No such medical rigor has been utilized to faith. non secular human beings purely arise with a hypothesis (surely, non secular human beings thousands of years in the past got here up with it making use of their truly constrained information of the international), settle for it as authentic, and then bypass and attempt to locate techniques they could educate that it really is authentic. perfect-down reasoning. won't be able to abide by that.