Do we need science to back up religion?

quote:

---

Originally posted by schrafinator:

I think the better question is "Can a religion which wishes to have a scientific backup support it's claims scientifically?" So far, this hasn't happened.

---

I don't like the division between science and religion. It divides the world, I think, artificially. If something-- anything-- intersects our experience we ought to be able to study it. And religion-- God for example, certainly would intersect our experience.In other words, how is it possible that something-- a miracle, say-- effect the world and it not be quantifiable? Take prayer. If prayer works wonders, a simple study ought to verify it. 30% of prayed-for cancer patients survive vs. the 10% survival of not-prayed-for patients-- that sort of thing.The alternative is that the tenants of religion-- the supernatural or some such-- are real but don't effect anything. If so, I don't see the point. No effects, no consequences... might as well not be.So, yeah, I think religion ought to be scientifically back-up-able.Take care.------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by Percipient:
My guess is that such studies are not scientifically valid because they would need to be double-blind where the patient doesn't know if he's being prayed for or who is praying for him, and the person doing the praying doesn't know which patient they're praying for, if any.
--Percy

---

Right. It would certainly have to be a properly done study.I have a link to one such study. http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9903/07/religion.health/Sorry if that has been posted here before. I don't remember where I found the link.------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com