At 10:08 AM 9/19/00 -0400, rad Cooley <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >>If "religion" is not a "set of beliefs", what is it?  a set of truths?  a
> >>set of rules?  a set of best guesses?  a set of empirical observations?
> >>"Religion" is a set of beliefs.  "Religion" is not like the laws of
> >>thermodynamics.
> >
> >It's certainly a set of empirical observations, just like the laws of
> >thermodynamics.>
>
>Wrong.  ...

Well, if religion is based on empirical observations, then it should
be
relatively easy to prove (empirically) that god exists, heaven exists,
hell
exists, angels exists, the soul exists, there is an after life, etc.
etc. etc.

Yet no one has ever done so.  In fact, the best they've ever done is
to
prove that a few isolated incidents in their holy books actually
occurred.

Like I always tell my friends....as soon as you can prove that your
god
exists, I'll be happy to look into the possibility of joining your
religious group....  No takers yet.


--Dena





------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dena L. Bruedigam, Administrative Associate
OSU Fontana Corrosion Center
546 MacQuigg Lab,105 W. Woodruff, Columbus, OH 43210
Phone/Fax: (614) 292-9857; [log in to unmask]