A Muslim writes about Jesus - Is This The Most Embarrassing Interview Fox News Has Ever Done?

[ultima]

happydolphin said:

ultima said:

1. So tell us the, what is the value of "science" behind religious study? How is it inherently more important than, say, history?

Theology is the study of religion, creationism is the absurd idea that humans were intelligently designed by some creator. Don't insult theology by clumping theologists with creationists.

He has a point about creationist theory pseudoscience, and it's a point you encountered earlier in this thread. Creationist "scientists" go in with the agenda of backing up their biblical stories, then pick out scientific facts that they see as being consistent while ignored other facts that clearly show their theory to be at the very least fundamentally flawed.

@bold. Facepalm I didn't, your friend in skepticism Osc did. Regardless I respect creationists for what they do so I wouldn't care if they were considered to a comparable level of discipline each in their own field. But when someone is bundling the words pseudoscience when talking about religious studies, you know you have a boso on your hands.

@1. Religious studies makes use of history, for example, to explain ideas found in religious texts that may seem contradictory. Whether it has life implications to you or not doesn't change the fact that it is a very complex and in-depth multi-disciplinary study that really resembles detective work. It requires knowledge of linguistics, history, archaelogy, and many other disciplines in order to find answers to theological questions.

He used pseudoscience when referring to creationism, and that's a moniker that is completely justified. You, then, put creationists and theologists together, as if creationists do anything that is considered productive. I think most theologists would find that offensive; rightly so.

I didn't ask about the process or the difficulties of theological research. I had a vague idea of that already. I inquired about its value. What makes it so valuable as to warrant such explicit description?