Do you think there will ever be a religion based on science ?

Answer 1

There is but most people will not open there eyes to see it.... Jim

Answer 2

"Based on"? Sure, why not?

But it'd have to be very loosely based on science, since science is essentially the opposite of religion.

Babydoll wrote: "There are already people who believe everything scientists purport to be absolute truth".

I very much doubt that. Believers like to say it, but I'll bet you can't find a single person who fits that description. You just made it up, largely out of frustration at the fact that science has revealed so much of religion to be false.
=====================
Sorry, babydoll - claiming it a second time isn't the same as finding such a person. Taint't true, and you know it. You should have stayed away from the hyperbole and made a valid point instead, and when called on it, you should have just admitted that you'd exaggerated for the purposes of defending something that couldn't otherwise be defended.

You most certainly do know people who regularly trust scientists without checking up on those scientists' claims. But of course that's FAR short of "people who believe everything scientists purport to be absolute truth", a kind of person you invented because you wanted to be able to claim that science isn't any better than religion. That's an indefensible position, which is why you had to invent "facts" to defend it.

Answer 3

Yes, it is called Evolution. Science has its own set of beliefs and faiths. Evolution, which is merely a theory accepted as fact, is just an agenda to keep God out of the public arena. If those who wish to cast out any form of religion out of the schools, they must also do the same with evolution--it is a faith with just as many zealots.

Suppose a secular scientist were sent to investigate a meteor that impacted the earth. Upon scraping the crust away, the scientist is amazed to find a perfect, sphere of polished metal. Back at the lab, he sees that he can unscrew the hemispheres apart. Inside he finds a very elaborate system of gyros, propulsion and visual cameras. If damaged, the internal systems can repair itself. Would the scientist marvel at how long it took to have such a mechanism accidentally evolve in space? Or would he choose to believe it was created by an advanced designer somewhere outside of terrestrial domain? Because he is a secular scientist, he has no problem with thinking the latter. Yet if we say we believe in a Creator, we are branded as unscientific or mindless zealots.

In order for the math of evolution to be even remotely possible, you would need millions of years of mutation and adaptation. . John A. Eddy (Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics) and Aram A. Boomazian (mathematician with S. Ross Co.) have determined that the sun has been contracting about 0.1% per century. The data examined spanned a 400-year period of solar observation, so that this shrinkage of the sun, though small, is apparently continual. If the sun was larger in the past than it is now by 0.1% per century, a creationist, who may believe that the world was created approximately six thousand years ago, has very little to worry about, for the sun would have been only 6% larger at point of origin to now. However, 100 thousand years ago, the sun would have been twice the size it is now, and it is hard to imagine that any life could exist under such altered conditions. Yet 100 thousand years is a minuscule amount of time when dealing with traditional evolutionary time scales.

Answer 4

There are already people who believe everything scientists purport to be absolute truth and spout it the way Christians quote the Bible.

As far as Scientology is concerned, that is science fiction not science.

Ah but I can Paul! I personally speak to hundreds of people each year about their beliefs. At least one person who comes to mind at the moment has admitted that this is so for her. How many average people do you know have the time or will to repeat scientific studies and confirm observations? Or even read all of the studies that prove or disprove certain conclusions?

Answer 5

Pure Religion: James 1:27
Notably paid a "visit", not a ransom.
Arrived "undefiled"! Remained "unspotted"!
In a come and go "visitation": to those "afflicted";
Afflicted with a bad case of life + death = dead end.

Pst - "the law is not of faith": Galatians 3:12.
Whatsoever is "not of faith" is sin: Romans 14:23
Ye are not under law, but under grace: Rom & Gal.

"Now Faith": the EVIDENCE of things not seen.
The "EVIDENCE" does not lie, nor take sides.
It simply makes something "EVIDENT" unto all:
"these ALL DIED" and "received NOT the promise".
Hebrews 11: is perhaps a hALL of shame, not fame.
Hebrews 10: do will of God precedes receive promise.
http://www.godshew.org/GodShew4.htm

So then what's "EVIDENT" from all the "EVIDENCE"?
Galatians 3:11 No man is justified by law in God's sight.

Hear what the Spirit saith: "unto the churches" is x 7.
Galatians: the only book written "unto the churches".
http://www.godshew.org/Revelations7.htm#23

The GRACE of our Lord Jesus Christ with you all. Amen.

Answer 6

science is observation. For a religion you need to have some aspect of belief. Everything in science is proved....and will stand until the theory id disproved!!

Answer 7

Christian science. They're kinda whacked, they think god is a cure-all and will not see doctors or take medicine.

Islam doesn't contradict science? Faith contradicts science. The simple belief in god or even a god is cause to ruin your opinion. Are you trying to draft believers or something?

Answer 8

No. Religions require believers, people who believe things even if there is no proof.

Science, in order to work, requires an open mind. If the experiments and the facts prove that a theory is wrong, the theory must be discarded and a new theory takes its place. As new facts are learned, a scientist has to be willing to change his mind about what he knows. There is no place for "faith" in science.

Answer 9

Well some people do blindly put their faith in science just as some blindly put their faith in the idea of a god.

I would have to say that to some, science IS a religion.

Answer 10

Religio means bonding together

There are scientific principles concerned with th ebonding of your soul with God, but if you don't go beyond science and human intellect into surrender, you can't do it.