science-and-religion

Hard as it may sound, no god has saved anything or anyone in human history. It is the humans who have done so.

Any thought sequence that minimizes anxiety would get reinforced over time. The sequence would be maintained during the person__ development and would be provoked in contexts where refutation of the belief might occur. So, any kind of refutation of a person__ religious beliefs makes the beliefs only stronger.

When it is time for religion to vanish from the face of earth upon having finished its service of psychological reinforcement to humanity, Mother Nature will make that happen one way or another.

This most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.

Even though the world hails Joan of Arc as some sort of hero, which she undoubtedly was, what pains me the most is that her pathological condition ultimately led to her demise at the age of only nineteen.

Pathology can indeed cause experiences of the Kingdom of God, but not all God experiences are caused by pathology.

Science and religion both make claims about the fundamental workings of the universe. Although these claims are not a priori incompatible (we could imagine being brought to religious belief through scientific investigation), I will argue that in practice they diverge. If we believe that the methods of science can be used to discriminate between fundamental pictures of reality, we are led to a strictly materialist conception of the universe. While the details of modern cosmology are not a necessary part of this argument, they provide interesting clues as to how an ultimate picture may be constructed.

Angels, fairies, gods, hell-heaven, "mediating" messiahs, demons, spirits etc. - are but your cultural-isms. Free be of these prisons.

The integrity of one's own mind is of infinitely more value than adherence to any creed or system. We must choose between a dead faith belonging to the past and a living, growing ever-advancing science belonging to the future.

It is pretty simple - mind is a part of life - consciousness is a part of mind - God is a part of consciousness.

It is the natural tendency of the ignorant to believe what is not true. In order to overcome that tendency it is not sufficient to exhibit the true; it is also necessary to expose and denounce the false. To admit that the false has any standing in court, that it ought to be handled gently because millions of morons cherish it and thousands of quacks make their livings propagating it__o admit this, as the more fatuous of the reconcilers of science and religion inevitably do, is to abandon a just cause to its enemies, cravenly and without excuse.

Humans are not simply higher than Gods, Gods are mere mystical representations of the humans themselves.

Through Neurotheology, I and my fellow scientists of twenty-first century have already taken the first step from the side of Science, to diminish the gap between Science and Religion. Now it is time for Religion to do the same.

In the hands of thinking humanity, the purpose of the tool of Divinity or Religion is not the service of bookish doctrines, but the realization of the self.

Primitive humans could not comprehend the vastness of infinity and eternity, so as a trick of self-preservation they came up with the perception of survival of the soul after death and its recurring incarnations.

The religion I am talking about here is plain everyday humanism. That__ exactly what the person named Jesus attempted to spread, but due to innate psychological reasons, his pupils ended up constructing yet another orthodox circle with its own distinct beliefs, ideals and fantasies.

The assumption of no God cannot be proven by science.

No,matter how sinful we are there is a way to repent.