Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Implication of scientific revolution
The significance of the scientific revolution
Implication of scientific revolution
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Implication of scientific revolution
There are many religions in the world that are outdated and useless. Islam, Buddhism,
Hinduism are just a few of these religions. However, the most outdated religion is Christianity.
All forms of Christianity are completely outdated and should be abandoned.
The greatest factor that makes Christianity outdated is its morals. Christianity has a strict, moral rigid system that no person could ever achieve. The Ten Commandments given in Exodus chapter 20 are just a small example of ridiculous commands that Christians submit themselves to. Many are reasonable but the Christian god demands that “You shall not covet... anything that is your neighbor’s” (ESV, Ex. 20:17). This is ridiculous. In a capitalistic society, people are encouraged to see what
…show more content…
Every religion or belief with deities were created prior to the scientific revolution. Once man discovered science and applied reason to the natural world, gods started to become objects of ridicule. It has been a long time developing, but science has now reached a point where it can explain everything about the world. Many Christians argue against the advancement of science, trying to cling onto the threads of their religion. In the face of science, Christianity stands no chance. The proof found of missing links is so overwhelming that the theory of evolution should soon become a scientific law. Scientists are now even able to explain the universe with ease, removing any proof of a god.
Since Christianity is so flawed and irrational, why should anything it speaks to be followed? Humans have advanced far past the ancient laws of the Ten Commandment. Why should people follow laws at all? Should not humans be allowed to do whatever makes them happy? And has the right to control how a free human being should live? If a person wishes to sleeps with your spouse, why you should be mad at either them? There are no morals,
Christianity took hold on the ancient world because it provided immortality. “...the message that was preached here promised… immortality, a future life which would be liberation from sickness and from disease and from poverty, and individual isolation,” (Document B). “You shall love the Lord, your God with all
It is largely understood that laws are put in place for the good of the communities which they govern. Laws are meant to reflect the wishes of the people and the general consensus is that as a result, these laws should be followed without question. In reality this is not always the case. There are often laws worth questioning whether it be for convenience, personal gain, or deep personal or moral reasons. A historical connection to the latter would be the protection of Jews from the Nazis during WWII and the Holocaust. Hitler created a document outlining a death penalty for any and all persons who were caught aiding Jews in any way, small or large. Despite this law being enforced with dire consequences for infraction, there were still
Christianity, on the other hand, never changed or adapted. The ideas and beliefs have stayed the same since the beginning. The reasons it succeeded in spreading was because it was attractive to everybody. Anyone could be a part of it, not just monks or very strict people. It united all types of people for one cause, to serve God and achieve eternal life. Both these religions spread and attracted many people, and continue to do so even to this day.
The history of opposition between science and religion has been steady for about half of a century. As early as the 1500's, science and religion have been antagonistic forces working against each other. Science was originally founded by Christians to prove that humans lived in a orderly universe (Helweg, 1997). This would help to prove that the universe was created by a orderly God who could be known. Once this was done, science was considered by the church to be useless. When people began to further investigate the realm of science, the church considered them to be heretics; working for the devil. According to Easterbrook (1...
Others have tried to do what Diogenes Allen, Professor of Philosophy at Princeton Theological Seminary, does in his book but none with his breadth or effectiveness. That is, others have attempted to exploit for theism's benefit the hard times now befalling the modern world's emphasis on scientific reasoning and pure rationality, which for quite a while had placed Christianity (and religious belief in general) on the intellectual and cultural defensive. Many of these earlier attempts made use of the Wittgensteinian concepts of "form of life" or "language game" to show that both science and religion depended on unproven assumptions and therefore rested equally on grounds without firm foundations. These kinds of attempts, however, could most always aim no higher than to make the world safe for fideism. And fideism is not to defend the faith. What makes Allen's contribution special and important is his effort to examine in a philosophically rigorous way what we mean when we say Christianity is true. He quotes Colossians 2:2 at the start of his book, but I Peter 3:15 is just as appropriate for what follows: "Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence."
I believe that we can be morally justified in disobeying laws, which we consider to be immoral and there are several reasons for this. I believe that it is only possible to happily live in accordance with our own moral code, it may also be possible to live without too much dissatisfaction within the bounds of laws, which dictate a stricter moral code than our own. However I do not believe that it is possible to happily exist under a system of law whereby we are obliged at times to break our own code of morality. In this situation we are likely to find ourselves in a constant struggle ...
Christianity has quickly begun to lose its true meaning throughout the years. It’s when people use words like love and morals and common sense—they just don’t have the same meaning as they once did all those years ago. Christianity though, unlike the previously stated words, has been modernized in such ways that we have deceivingly altered things such as “The Ten Commandments” to foolishly fit our desired lifestyles. We have begun a modernization of Christianity I like to refer to as, Twenty-First Century Christianity.
Today, the non-Western world boasts the majority – more than 60 percent – of the globe's Christian population. Whilst some have heralded this as the beginning of Christianity’s transformation from a primarily European religion to a truly global religion, others have noted that it is actually a reflection of the earlier demographic situation: Christians of the Global South were in the majority for the first 900 years of Christian history. “Christianity was born in Africa and Asia, and in our lifetimes, it is going home.”
We all wonder why things have to be like that and what would happen if we break the law? I believe that if a law is hurting your family or someone close to you, you should break it and not follow anything regarding what you have been told. Some laws are meant to be broken so might as well break them before they end up breaking
The rise of Christianity in western civilization is arguably among the most important memories in history. There is no denying what the spread of Christianity has done for the world, for better or worse. Its impact on western civilizations is unrivaled and unprecedented. Christianity slowly became something for many individuals to turn to; in times of hurt its provided comfort, in times of pleasure it has given thanks. The will and belief for salvation has driven individuals to be better, and to have a reference while in need. The rise of Christianity more than 2000 years ago provided necessary building blocks for the future. Without Christianity there would be no cathedrals, no monasteries, no music from one Johann Sebastian Bach, no paintings from Michelangelo, nor no philosophy from Saint Augustine (Backman 205). There are countless times in history, whether good or bad, that can be credited to
...eveloped, and especially during the Enlightenment, God and religion were relegated to a lesser role because it was thought that science could explain everything. Now, though, the farther we plunge into science, the more questions we find that can only be answered by religion. When science and Christianity are both studied and well understood, especially in the context of their limitations, it is possible to integrate them, or at least for them to complement each other, in my view of the world.
Christianity and science are seen to conflict with each other because people approach both views the same way; instead, they should be taken differently. There are certain things that can be explained with science and other things with Christianity. There are incidents that science cannot explain and people believe that those things are still true without evidence. Christianity is not opposed to science unless it contradicts the word of God written in the Bible. Scientific method is not the only way to find the absolute truth. The scientific and Christian view of the world will always have some conflict and misunderstanding because they attempt to explain in essence two different things.
We are a nation of laws because we have to build a foundation to strengthen the government and be well run country. everyone is governed the same way. To protect people from each other. It’s to prevent crime before it happens to assure every American are safe and in order to
The relationship between science and religion has been debated for many years. With strong personal opinions and beliefs, it is not surprising that no progress has been made in this argument. In my opinion, I feel as though religion and science have to be related in some way. There is no possible way people can separate two things that attempt to prove the same facts. My belief is that a metaphorical bridge has to be formed to connect the two. Personally, I feel as though science can be a compliment to religion, and that the scientific discoveries can and should be used to prove that God exists, not disprove it. If science did this, then the relationship between science and religion could be a friendly one. If that happened, people could stop debating and fighting over the two, allowing priests and scientists to talk and work together peacefully.
Both law and morality serve to regulate behaviour in society. Morality is defined as a set of key values, attitudes and beliefs giving a standard in which we ‘should’ behave. Law, however, is defined as regulating behaviour which is enforced among society for everyone to abide by. It is said that both, however, are normative which means they both indicate how we should behave and therefore can both be classed as a guideline in which society acts, meaning neither is more effective or important than the other. Law and morals have clear differences in how and why they are made. Law, for example, comes from Parliament and Judges and will be made in a formal, legal institution which result in formal consequences when broken. Whereas morals are formed under the influence of family, friends, media or religion and they become personal matters of individual consciences. They result in no formal consequence but may result in a social disapproval which is shown also to occur when breaking the law.