Watching the Harris vs Volpe debate and Harris states at 3:55:

"I would challenge anyone here to think of a question upon which we once had a scientific answer, however inadequate, but for which now the best answer is a religious one."

Volpe's answer starting at 6:25 was Marxism as a scientific study of societies. They argue that Marxism is not a science and Volpe states "It isn't (a science) now". They go on and debate this which is worth watching.

Are there other instances where a scientific answer has been replaced by a religious answer?

Steady state theory was replaced with Big Bang theory. What was once called a religious notion became scientific fact.

There have been hoaxes or illusions spun to portray "Christian-Science Controversy" conspiracies that simply didn't happen.

Here's one: http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c034.html

Note the bible verse at the bottom with Isaiah stating the earth is a circle approx 850 B.C.

ROFL, so now religion came up with the big bang?

Actually yes in a way they did. The theory was proposed by a catholic priest. Not that he was alone, like all science it is built on the work of peers.

As for the OP there is nothing wrong with Marxist principles when used as method tool in sociology/history/cultures/societies, it doesn't mean you are arming yourself for a revolution or in any way colour you politically. It is actually a quite elegant way of viewing history based on the works of Hegel.

So I have no idea why that should be an example of anything. It certainly beats 'Your god's chosen people, so you'll have to kill your neighbours'.

So even though he and others built the theory on each other's work, you credit him with it.

And even though he was a scientist and a priest, he has so far only been referred to as a priest by religious people in this thread.

And even though science perfected, tested, and found the evidence for the big bang, you still credit it to religion.

aaaaaaaaaaaamazing

(Prov 8:26-27 NRSV) when he had not yet made earth and fields, or the world’s first bits of soil. When he established the heavens, I was there, when he drew a circle on the face of the deep,

A circle is of course a flat round object. Some would say that the ancient Hebrews had no word for sphere so they used circle, but that is not true. There is a Hebrew word for ball (duwr) used in the bible. A flat round earth was intuitive to these primitive people. If you picture yourself in their place, it would not be too hard to imagine the earth as being round and flat as you turn around to trace the outline of the horizon where the sky seems to meet the earth.

Here is a link to the stuff above and there are some other things worth reading on that page even though its an atheist site.

Are the Hebrews synonymous with God?

Who is the author of the book?

Technically it isn't me who credit him with it, it's like...Einstein and Eddington and stuff. And the only one who has referred to him as a priest is me and I am not "a religious people" nor am I a "religious person".

And yes it is truly amazing I guess.

I'm citing what it says on the site you listed as a reference:

"The Bible of course teaches the correct shape of the earth. Isaiah 40:22 says God sits above “the circle of the earth” (the Hebrew word for “circle” can also mean a “sphere”)."

I'm keepin' it Hebrew yo cause thats your defense.

"Yo"...made me laugh.

Nice link btw. Very educational.

What I'm saying is I think no matter what the Hebrews thought that God still wrote the book and the bible is loaded with "seems like" situations. This I think is a "faith moment" with our theist bias we usually perceive it as God said it right right there. I'd actually call that a mini-revelation if there's such a thing as a small one. The paradox is that its not so small. The bible said the earth is either a circle or a sphere. Even if they had the man made knowledge that seems to simulate a flat sphere it its still right. I always count those sorts of moments as confirmation of my faith. Its like a coin flip: you can call heads or tails or in this case you can say yes its God or no its not God...though in your case if you take the Hebrew route I guess thats agnostic....you just don't know.

Probably all sounds like implausible, I know, but these are the tiny moments that build up one's faith.

Ahhhh, the purview error. Let's frame religion as a science and then show that science is better at science than religion.

The "scientific" understanding of humans, which leads to rational meaninglessness is inferior to religious understanding of humans, which is more in line with the experience of life.

Yeah, I always find it amazing that in scientific articles they don't use "Father Georges Lamaitre". Its almost as if some people are embarrassed the Big Bang theory was first suggested by a Catholic Priest.

Now Rizeagainst do you honestly believe its just a coincidence the father of Big Bang theory was a religious man and that the man who lead the opposition against it was a staunch atheist? That man's name was Fred Hoyle and he laterr became a theist.

Its pretty obvious you don't know the story behind how the big bang theory came to be. There was considerable opposition to the theory on the grounds it was philosophically troubling, as many argued that a beginning implies a cause or a creator.

Now had Steady State turned about to be the better model, you and many others would be saying big bang theory was just some silly religious notion like intelligent design or irreducible complexity. The only reason you consider it today as being science is because it appears to be correct.

God did not write the Bible. I don't believe any book within the Bible even claims to be written by God never mind your claim that all of them were. The word Bible originates from the Greek for library and like most libraries it has many different authors.

"Even if they had the man made knowledge that seems to simulate a flat sphere it its still right."

Please explain what a "flat sphere" is exactly so we can gain further insight into how you think they were right about this.

Why is everything a coin flip to you (with God and religion always winning ldo)? This is in no way like a coin flip, you see the evidence and logic is loaded on one side with nothing (maybe faith) really left on the other.

What makes you so sure God wrote the bible? Doesn't that go against the whole books-named-after-people business?

This is why science is great. It stands by things which appear to be correct until proven otherwise.

Better option is to pretend you are 100% positive and never waver ldo.

Some would say science is as stubborn as religion. Look how long it took plate techtonics to become accepted and the evidence for that was staring us right in the face. But I don't attribute stubborness to science or religion. Its people who are stubborn.

I accept the explanation in the article. All you have to do is read it.

But my point was nittyit's post was like a shell game hiding God's inspired knowledge under the label of "the Hebrews". IOW it was a denial of divine knowledge by substituting man made knowledge.

I see it as a coin flip because its my metaphor for a decision to affirm my faith or deny it. Though there could be some degree leeway between pure atheism and pure faith its really just a simplified symbol for me and I discard all those degrees because in the moment they are irrelevant. Its a revelatory moment or a burst of light (if there's any logic in it its built in and of minute importance). Because its purely spiritual. I believe spirit trumps logic. Logic is mainly useful for solving natural world problems but spirit is a gift from God.

Sry if it sounds like I dissed logic. I'm not. Its just I think logic is slower and more earthbound while the Spirit has the speed of light.

Oh okay. So you take one topic (with no supporting evidence) that was hard to come to terms with in science and it equals the thousands of issues that religion still hasn't come to terms with. Seems unbiased to me!

Fourth grade school children were figuring out plate techtonic by looking at globes while scientist were saying it was silly; that the continents fit together like the pieces of a puzzle was just a coincidence.

Another religious notion that turned out to be true is that matter came to be before light came to be(okay I'm stretching that one).

I don't know enough about this so i will (skeptically) go along with what you are saying for the sake of argument

Religion taking the exact same path with the theory of evolution, the big bang, carbon dating, dinosaurs, and the problem of evil.

Nah, I think I understand what you were getting at better now. I don't think coin flip is a very effective analogy, in fact I found it misleading. I understand that you believe spirituality trumps logic and that using logic is a slower process where as through spiritual insight you are able to just jump right ahead "at the speed of light" and know things to be true in your heart.

This is nothing new and people come to all kinds of conclusions through their religions using their inherent spirituality as an explanation for them. When they come to different conclusions through this process is God just messing with their heads at the "speed of light" or is it not more likely that they are coming to internally and externally(real worldly such as through their priest/rabbai) inspired conclusions about their life and their beliefs which would explain better the variety of conclusions they reach.

What you are observing is people being stubborn. Nobody likes to be shown they are wrong. This is the same for people who wear lab coats or people who wear roman collars. Its part of our nature.