Does Modern Science Owe Its Existence to Religion?

[Statler Waldorf]

Stat, firstly, I am not quoting your post because you need to fix your quote. Please do so.

Your post, which my agreement with or lack thereof is irrelevant at this point, mentions a "relationship with religion" and origins in faith, but makes no mention of origins in religion or religious faith. Neither a relationship with religion or seeking knowledge out of faith that it is there demonstrate that science owes its very existence to religion. You will have to do better than that, Waldorf.

Seriously? I feel like you are just playing games now, if science's existenece did not depend on Religion then why did one of the quotes say, "As strange as it may sound, science will forever be in the debt of millenarians and biblical literalists"? Why be in debt to someone you didn't depend on? Like I said, it's Whitehead's hypothesis, it's a widely accepted fact that even Richard Dawkins concedes, if you are more biased on this matter than even he is then there is not much I can do to convince you.

More evidence I am sure you will just ignore…

Historian Robert G. Frank - "The predominant forms of scientific activity can be shown to be a direct outgrowth of a Puritan ideology."

Francis Bacon, the father of the scientific method- "There are two books laid before us to study; to prevent us falling into error; first, the volume of the Scriptures which reveal the will of God; then the volume of the Creatures, which express His power."

Science Historian R. Hooykaas: A New Responsibility in a Scientific Age - “Modern science arose when the consequences of the biblical conception
of reality were fully accepted. In the 16th and 17th centuries science was
led out of the blind alley into which it had got through the philosophy of
Antiquity and the Middle Ages. New horizons were opened. The picture
of the world as an organism was replaced by that of the world as a mechanism. It is not generated but made; it is not self-supporting, but it
needs maintenance.”

Dr. Jack L. Arnold-
“In the realm of science, it is generally granted by modern historians that there never would have been modern science were it not for the Reformation. All scientific investigation and endeavor prior to that had been controlled by the church. Only through sheer ignorance of history do many modern scientists believe that Protestantism, the true evangelical faith, opposes true science.”

Sociologist and author Rodney Stark :
“Science was not the work of western secularists or even deists; it was entirely the work of devout believers in an active, conscious, creator God.”

Peter Harrison, Andreas Idreos Professor of Science and Religion at the University of Oxford-
“It is commonly supposed that when in the early modern period individuals began to look at the world in a different way, they could no longer believe what they read in the Bible. In this book I shall suggest that the reverse is the case: that when in the sixteenth century people began to read the Bible in a different way, they found themselves forced to jettison traditional conceptions of the world.”
Peter Harrison – “Strange as it may seem, the Bible played a positive role in the development of science. Had it not been for the rise of the literal interpretation of the Bible and the subsequent appropriation of biblical narratives by early modern scientists, modern science may not have arisen at all. In sum, the Bible and its literal interpretation have played a vital role in the development of Western science.”

[emphasis added]

Wow, played a vital role? That pretty much is exactly what I said; science would not exist if it had not been for the Christian Reformation.

---

LOL, Stat bringing the Crazyback?

Nah, just trying to cure yours.

---

Throw in the synagogues and temples, and "religious technology centers" and then I'll raise my hand.

Trying to stop terrorism by committing terror? That must only make sense in your mind. .