A Question for Christians

[carlo]

[ QUOTE ]
Science and religion belong to two different domains. I don't really care much about what quaint religious beliefs peope have, as long as they don't force them on me or limit my behaviour based on those.

The really rankling and galling thing is to try to infer that somehow religion is of the same domain as science, and then trying to undo centuries of development and refinement of the scientific thought/process/method which has been extremely useful (more so than religion imo), by appropriating the rightly developped rational related prestige of science to support some travesty of it by bringing in the metaphysical concept of supernatural. Science and rationality have nothing to do with the SUPERnatural. It is of no concern to the scientific and to the rational mind. Rudolph (how seasonal ) Steiner is neither a scientist, nor a rationalist or rational thinker. He, like many religionists, is trying to appropriate the inherent value of reason, and therefore pervert it, to sustain or add credibility to their own irrational fabrications. It is a very dangerous trait. It is an attempt at subversion of the rational by the irrational. It would have great and tragique consequences for culture and human development and it is a very insinuous and pernicious manner of attempting this subversion.


[/ QUOTE ]

You're fighting your own windmills. The title of this post is "A Question for Christians" and a picture of the soul was brought forward. Yopu then mocked me(with a smile) when speaking of a soul which to Christians,in main, is not material.

There are Christian scientists and scientific Christians and it is really hard to place them in opposition in the abstractions of religion and science. This is about INDIVIDUAL MAN and his work in his mileu.

I believe I did invite this contumely when I made it seem that scientists are somewhat less than human(superstition,speculation,etc.) and for this I apologize.

Rationality and logical thought cannot be destroyed by what you've read in these posts but to bring this knowledge(soul knowledge if you will) the thought forms and logic expected and understood by people of our day are absolutely necessary in the presenting of this work. I believe that luckyme said it clearly when he dared someone to have a discussion of faith or religion without the use of rationality . It would be interesting.

The opposing camps(yours not mine) are made up of INDIVIDUAL MAN and to believe that science or religion is greater than the work of these individuals is presenting things "fass backwards". This is the realm of compulsion, that of religion and science in a compulsive sphere.

Why is it so hard to believe that INDIVIDUAL MAN can reconcile?

I shudder to think of what would happen if I were not allowed rationality and logic to guide me in this life.

carlo