Since when do scientific finding force people to change religions if they can't find a way to reconcile the new finding with the current religion.
What actually happens:
1. Accept the new findings while keeping the old religion. Keep everything separate in your brain and don't try to reconcile anything. Assume it all works out somehow. Compartmentaliza different aspects of your life. There's scientific rational thought and there is religion/spirituality and never the twain shall meet. Most people do this. Or they just don't care enough about religion and/or science to think about it that much and it's not an issue.
2. Just don't think about either religion or science. People who call themselves christian but don't let it affect their lives or think about it that much. Christians that don't read the bible literally and most likely just don't read the bible much at all so whatever is in the bible is not an issue. If you do go to church, it's for reasons of belonging, community, and tradition.
3. Reject the scientific findings that produce cognitive dissonance. You see this in the creationism people. Rejection of any scientific progress having to do with evolution.
4. Alter the religion to make it fit with the scientific findings just enough that you take care of the cognitive dissonance. Pretend it hasn't been altered, that's how it has been all along.
5. A small percentage will turn away from religion, at least deep inside. Some of these people will "come out" as agnostics/atheists, some will not.
No, I do not think that scientific findings/reason will make people convert from one religion to another. It is not reason but emotion that makes people embrace religion. Even if they don't personally feel it, perhaps they want to be accepted in a community.
The rebirth issue would be bigger than the biological one. Purely natural ex nihilo creation has always been the theist argument most compelling to me; otherwise I tend to endorse the view that natural laws were devised so that the universe doesn't need constant micromanaging. Setting aside how I feel about <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=hebrews%209:27&version=NKJV">this statement itself</a>, I find the notion of endless transmigration implausible, if only because of sustainable issues.
A biological origin for souls would be unexpected in the sense of giving a physical analog to something generally understood as spiritual, but Christians obviously believe the spiritual can produce the physical, and a biological origin for souls is just as obviously not an origin for existence. Thus I'd still be left with a choice between ex nihilo creation or a supernatural First Cause of the natural universe; no change there. If you treat transmigration to mean brain death isn't actual death (since the souls life could continue) it's not hard to reconcile with core Christian doctrine (obviously the more beliefs you add to that core the more controversy is likely) so that wouldn't change much in itself either. The end game, if any, is what's relevant. Spirituality aside, the First and Second Law of Thermodynamics don't lend themselves to things like Big Bounces or ex nihilo creation. Even if souls were found to be tangential to or entirely irrelevant to those issues the issues themselves would remain. It might, however, convince some people to change religions if they couldn't see a way to reconcile the new findings with their current religion.
Welcome.
What actually happens:
1. Accept the new findings while keeping the old religion. Keep everything separate in your brain and don't try to reconcile anything. Assume it all works out somehow. Compartmentaliza different aspects of your life. There's scientific rational thought and there is religion/spirituality and never the twain shall meet. Most people do this. Or they just don't care enough about religion and/or science to think about it that much and it's not an issue.
2. Just don't think about either religion or science. People who call themselves christian but don't let it affect their lives or think about it that much. Christians that don't read the bible literally and most likely just don't read the bible much at all so whatever is in the bible is not an issue. If you do go to church, it's for reasons of belonging, community, and tradition.
3. Reject the scientific findings that produce cognitive dissonance. You see this in the creationism people. Rejection of any scientific progress having to do with evolution.
4. Alter the religion to make it fit with the scientific findings just enough that you take care of the cognitive dissonance. Pretend it hasn't been altered, that's how it has been all along.
5. A small percentage will turn away from religion, at least deep inside. Some of these people will "come out" as agnostics/atheists, some will not.
No, I do not think that scientific findings/reason will make people convert from one religion to another. It is not reason but emotion that makes people embrace religion. Even if they don't personally feel it, perhaps they want to be accepted in a community.
I'm writing a story and have been asking people to answer some questions. If you don't mind, it would help me greatly!
In my story, souls have been proven to exist by science. However, souls have a biological origin. Also, science has proven that souls can be and do get reborn.
How would your religious beliefs be changed by this, if at all?
In my story, souls have been proven to exist by science. However, souls have a biological origin. Also, science has proven that souls can be and do get reborn.
How would your religious beliefs be changed by this, if at all?
The rebirth issue would be bigger than the biological one. Purely natural ex nihilo creation has always been the theist argument most compelling to me; otherwise I tend to endorse the view that natural laws were devised so that the universe doesn't need constant micromanaging. Setting aside how I feel about <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=hebrews%209:27&version=NKJV">this statement itself</a>, I find the notion of endless transmigration implausible, if only because of sustainable issues.
For Christians, would the news possibly make you change your beliefs? Lose faith? Or would it be met with continued faith and belief that it's all part of God's plan? Or outright disbelief? Something else?
A biological origin for souls would be unexpected in the sense of giving a physical analog to something generally understood as spiritual, but Christians obviously believe the spiritual can produce the physical, and a biological origin for souls is just as obviously not an origin for existence. Thus I'd still be left with a choice between ex nihilo creation or a supernatural First Cause of the natural universe; no change there. If you treat transmigration to mean brain death isn't actual death (since the souls life could continue) it's not hard to reconcile with core Christian doctrine (obviously the more beliefs you add to that core the more controversy is likely) so that wouldn't change much in itself either. The end game, if any, is what's relevant. Spirituality aside, the First and Second Law of Thermodynamics don't lend themselves to things like Big Bounces or ex nihilo creation. Even if souls were found to be tangential to or entirely irrelevant to those issues the issues themselves would remain. It might, however, convince some people to change religions if they couldn't see a way to reconcile the new findings with their current religion.
Responses from all religions (or lack there of) are welcome.
Thanks!
Thanks!
Welcome.
This message last edited by Vivien on 12/04/2011 at 08:28:32 PM
Questions about souls...
- 12/04/2011 03:06:54 AM
2020 Views
You assume we all know, and agree on, what "soul" means.
- 12/04/2011 08:42:47 AM
943 Views
It is what hope, which is a thing with feathers, perches on.
- 12/04/2011 07:32:07 PM
990 Views
But seriously, what does it do?
- 12/04/2011 11:01:58 PM
992 Views
it wouldn't change much for me, but I'm pretty flexible in my spiritual beliefs
- 12/04/2011 04:23:34 PM
1029 Views
Re: Questions about souls...
- 12/04/2011 05:44:53 PM
1074 Views
What a fantasy.
- 12/04/2011 07:57:38 PM
943 Views
Your comments, or mine? 
- 13/04/2011 01:24:53 AM
1416 Views
- 13/04/2011 01:24:53 AM
1416 Views
I'm a Christian who is partial to reincarnation, so I do not think much would change.
- 12/04/2011 06:21:36 PM
986 Views
*is disappointed* *NM*
- 12/04/2011 08:01:05 PM
506 Views
You'd be surprised how frequently I get that from both sides. 
- 12/04/2011 08:22:24 PM
968 Views
- 12/04/2011 08:22:24 PM
968 Views
I bet you do!
- 12/04/2011 08:47:59 PM
933 Views
I think we are similar in some respects philosophically.
- 13/04/2011 05:59:38 AM
918 Views
That's pretty much how I feel. Being a universalist helps in that respect. *NM*
- 13/04/2011 06:25:34 AM
574 Views
So then my question is....
- 13/04/2011 07:08:42 PM
886 Views
Because I believe that Jesus was an incarnation of the λόγος.
- 14/04/2011 12:36:36 AM
919 Views
*heh*
- 14/04/2011 04:12:32 PM
1026 Views
I think I answered it pretty clearly in my post title. *NM*
- 14/04/2011 06:59:47 PM
581 Views
I think that, like a lot of other people responding, I would want and need more information.
- 12/04/2011 07:13:14 PM
912 Views
Speaking of the agnostic/atheist thing
- 12/04/2011 07:40:04 PM
954 Views
99% that there is no God...
- 12/04/2011 08:08:42 PM
1021 Views
Technically, no, atheists simply lack belief in a God.
- 12/04/2011 08:19:15 PM
941 Views
- 12/04/2011 08:19:15 PM
941 Views
Whoah there,
- 12/04/2011 08:26:43 PM
932 Views
Okay, I have to admit I wasn't expecting to get called out on that.
- 13/04/2011 04:03:08 AM
1020 Views
And that's why I don't quibble with %'s, I just say I'm an atheist 
*NM*
- 12/04/2011 09:45:31 PM
617 Views
*NM*
- 12/04/2011 09:45:31 PM
617 Views
It certainly doesn't mean you can't make conclusions.
- 12/04/2011 08:09:41 PM
1027 Views
Re: Campbell:
- 12/04/2011 08:42:09 PM
1026 Views
Self-identification is an interesting point here.
- 12/04/2011 09:00:46 PM
925 Views
Re: Agree
- 12/04/2011 09:22:22 PM
959 Views
Sadly enough, one of my favorite explanations of religion came from someone discussing a video game.
- 13/04/2011 04:12:23 AM
968 Views
Re: I'm basically a Magi. I'm going to travel to Brazil and then take over the world. *NM*
- 13/04/2011 04:18:25 AM
581 Views
Either you meant "Magus" or you are a schizophrenic wizard. Both are acceptably awesome.
- 13/04/2011 05:37:34 AM
969 Views
Re: I think it was Jarod Diamond...
- 14/04/2011 03:39:32 AM
956 Views
Answers.
- 12/04/2011 09:05:38 PM
924 Views
That's not a compelling counter-argument for me.
- 12/04/2011 11:22:21 PM
1095 Views
Never mind.
- 12/04/2011 11:34:46 PM
894 Views
Have you had any vivid dreams that came true?
- 13/04/2011 01:16:59 AM
857 Views
My mom used to have dreams like that, usually about relatives.
- 13/04/2011 02:25:45 AM
995 Views
I can easily believe that.
- 13/04/2011 06:14:51 AM
867 Views
Taking things at face value is usually unwise, but the face value can still be correct.
- 24/04/2011 12:11:51 AM
811 Views
Minivans can fit lots of useful stuffs, like furniture. *NM*
- 13/04/2011 03:47:04 PM
579 Views
So can gas-guzzling SUVs, and full trucks. *NM*
- 13/04/2011 05:13:20 PM
532 Views
for that matter, you can fit a surprising amount even in a baby truck! *NM*
- 13/04/2011 06:36:58 PM
515 Views
Well, as I said in my census form on Sunday
- 12/04/2011 08:36:05 PM
1062 Views
It would upset my belief in science
- 12/04/2011 09:39:39 PM
1057 Views
There's so much wrong with that statement.
- 12/04/2011 09:55:45 PM
1033 Views
If science proved there really was an Easter Bunny would it affect your believe in science? *NM*
- 12/04/2011 10:30:09 PM
618 Views
*is both bored and annoyed*
- 12/04/2011 11:03:10 PM
925 Views
and what if science proved that science was false?
- 12/04/2011 11:48:32 PM
997 Views
I think that's kind of the point; it can't.
- 13/04/2011 01:33:44 AM
880 Views
Did you read my original post?
- 13/04/2011 03:13:34 AM
836 Views
I did, yes.
- 13/04/2011 03:32:18 AM
884 Views
Yes it would upset my belief in science, why is that so hard to accept
- 13/04/2011 01:56:59 PM
986 Views
Well, if that's all it is, we know that a lot of that broad base is wrong.
- 24/04/2011 01:18:05 AM
1126 Views
What's a soul?
- 12/04/2011 10:51:39 PM
903 Views
I can only give you my personal take.
- 13/04/2011 01:47:39 AM
1038 Views
Actually the reason you don't revive people denied oxygen half an hour is due to chemical processes.
- 13/04/2011 04:08:37 AM
969 Views
True, but even well preserved brains require more than a jump start to resume life.
- 23/04/2011 09:20:42 PM
828 Views
so did this guy took a railroad spike through the head
- 13/04/2011 01:58:52 PM
1056 Views
Nah, he just got someone else's added to him. But now Ruin can influence him. 
*NM*
- 13/04/2011 06:38:31 PM
581 Views
*NM*
- 13/04/2011 06:38:31 PM
581 Views
Thanks a lot
- 13/04/2011 07:02:29 PM
927 Views
I'm really happy you've read them and got the reference. Phineas Gage, Steel Inquisitor. *NM*
- 14/04/2011 12:29:01 AM
507 Views
*NM*
- 14/04/2011 12:29:01 AM
507 Views
No.
- 23/04/2011 09:15:16 PM
936 Views
but we know personality can be draticaly altered by physical means
- 24/04/2011 03:28:36 AM
1251 Views
I assume you're implying time travel between past-life or future-life experiences.
- 12/04/2011 11:26:19 PM
954 Views
I would becoming interested in tracing people's souls across time/space
- 13/04/2011 04:00:51 PM
920 Views
Re: I would becoming interested in tracing people's souls across time/space
- 14/04/2011 03:29:55 AM
926 Views
Interesting concept....
- 13/04/2011 07:28:42 PM
899 Views
Heh. Loose faith.
- 14/04/2011 02:32:27 AM
925 Views