Modern Science is the true religion as the earlier religions defy common sense now & are of no use?

Question

Religions are based upon belief systems of our ancestors who had no scientific understanding of natural phenomenon & thus attributed them to gods. But now , when we know , it is better to stick to science as it is based upon truths found by experimentation. see more below :

http://originofmanandhisreligion.blogspot.com/

I will reproduce from the blog :

(1) MANKIND LIVED NEAR VOLCANOES IN AFRICA

It is known scientifically from genetic research that mankind (homosepians) originated from a very few (about 1000) people in AFRICA .

This means that our ancestors are from Africa. And we all belong to one race/species. Genetically we are all equal.

One of the oldest human fossils ( about 1 million year old) were found in northern Ethiopia near active volcanoes ( the fossil is named as Lucy). This place is called "Danakil depression". Here we have volcanoes in the shape of large lava pools. (See it in google earth).

Just imagine the life of man living near volcanoes. Volcanoes mean fire , earthquakes , thunder , rain , lightening & lava flow all happening simultaneously . The lava of volcanoes probably killed many primitive humans and animals living nearby. The primitive man with primitive thinking might have imagined the natural calamities as the wrath of spirits. It is possible that mankind started worshiping the fire god (actually volcanoes). And, in order to make them calm , he might have thought that the gods/spirits wanted killings of humans & animals. And he started sacrificing animals in fire as a ritual , as a pre-emptive measure, in order to please the fire god as a matter of reverse logic to keep the imaginary gods satisfied and not to create any further trouble.

More below :

Answer 1

Science is a religion if you make it your faith.

Why do people assume that primitives must have attributed everything to spirit activity? Spirits are an abstract concept that could very well have been beyond the mental capacity of the early folk. How would they suddenly spawn this idea of something they cannot see and fear it so much? It seems to me that they would look at the world as it was and accept only that.

It is true that every religion uses fire a lot, but ancient man used fire for everything. It was the highest technology of the age, after all. It would stand to reason that it was included in every aspect of their lives.

Answer 2

Science is NOT a religion. Please do not say that.

Answer 3

science is great! but it has nothing to do with religion. religion is about a relationship with our Creator. its about knowing our purpose in life, providing comfort in times of trouble, etc.. science can do none of these things. i would prefer to have both.

Answer 4

as a believer in the sciences, i can't tell you how disgusted i am at your logic.  

"mankind is 1,000,000 years old?"  hahahahahahahahahahaha........ok just by stating that you lose all credibility.  modern man (cro-magnon and neanderthal) are less than 200,000 years old.

"lucy" was NOT human.  she and her species were merely primates with ability to walk on all 4's over long distances, a precursor to humans.

Answer 5

I don't know what the h*ll all that writing is... but in response to the original statement...

Science will never be a replacement for religion. Religions allow people to feel comfort, hope, and they provide answers that people want to hear.

Science is the study of the universe etc. Neither can replace the other.

Answer 6

Science is not a religion, it is an empirical method of determining reality (in very general terms).  To treat it as religion would be to remove its ability to be objective about its findings.

While mankind may have originated near volcanoes, it is unlikely that that racial memory would have been a causal factor in mankind using fire in recent religions.

Answer 7

I see your argument and it works as far as man choosing to worship things/powers associated with things that are now explained by science.

But, the problem with that argument is two-fold. First: the definition of religion which is: "the feeling of awe we experience in the presence of the sacred or the divine".  Modern Science, in this context, actually does more to remove doubt on what is explainable and what remains a mystery. The fact is, God remains in the realm of sacred and divine. No migration patterns or cultural similarities in rituals enlighten us on to the exact nature of divinity.

Second, your above explanation moves from what/who is being worshipped to what is being used in a sacrificial ritual. The tenuous link is "fire".

However, the information is not without merit.  I believe you made your argument in explaining the common sense lacking in some of the early religions which exclusively paid tribute to natural elements. That was explained well.  

Answer 8

your point might be valid for some religions, but as for Christianity...there is not one credible scholar who will say that the Bible has any discrepancy with science.  Science and Christianity are not in conflict.  So, to suggest that Christianity (specifically) is primitive because it began before modern science is completely absurd.

Answer 9

People invented religions to explain the unexplainable aspects of life... what is our destiny, why are we here, what happens when we die.  Science hasn't answered those, nor is it likely to in the future, so don't bet on it supplanting religion anytime soon.