From: mece1e3@Jane.UH.EDU (Arindam Ghosh)
Subject: Re: Am I a Compu-evengalist
Reply-To: mece1e3@Jane.UH.EDU
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 14:20:20 GMT

>>1. To help in formulating the science of conscience
>	Do we *really* know what conscience is in accepted
>	scientific terms?

That's why we cannot discard the empirical approach known as religion
just because it's empirical. Note that it is experimental: i.e. what
yoga is all about.


>
>>2. To help human beings create a human society
>	What exactly you mean by this? What about the "human society"
>	we have? It is indeed inadequate, imperfect etc - but these are
>	all well known.
>
>>In the process of my search I came across a religion known as
>>the Bahai faith
>	I have to confess that I don't know what this faith is.
>

Pl. send me e-mail if you want to know. People in SCI will kill me if I
post again on this (-:

>>It has been inaugurated by an individual who claimed to be the PROMISED ONE
>>of all religions.
>	Who is this individual please.? I am serious about this. 
>
>

Bahaullah

>
>>Religion has been made a taboo word by the Secular people which I don't
>>believe in.
>	You are mistaken here, IMO. Religion is *not* a taboo and 
>	"secular people" (whoever they are) haveas made no such claim.
>
>


Well I have heard thousand times that I am commiting a grave sin by
discussing "religious" matters and trying to "convert" people in SCI.
That I am a "hating bigot" and an "arrogant fool"




>>My duty, as I see was to let people know that something called THE BAHAI FAITH
>>exists. Many people search for an ideolgy in life, If SCI is not meant to
>>discuss the different ideologies prevalent in India : what is

>	Please understand thinking, discussing about religion is *not* a
>	waste of time at all!. However, perhaps you could clearly state
>	your new faith in a way we can all benefit from it.
>

As I said if I do it again SCI thought police will shoot me (-:. 

>>I don't cry about threats: I know why people are making them and I am prepared
>>to bear with them

>	Please understand that no one is making *threats* of any sort. I, for
>	one, would like to know more about your arguements, sincerely.


Yes, it's only for people like you that I go thru with this act of taking
God's name in a Godless forumn. Otherwise I would have said: Hell with it.


>	But I want to reiterate what I said earlier that *science* and
>	*religion* are two *different* ways of looking at the world
>	around us. There is no conflict between the two from my view.
>

There is no conflict in my view also. And the time has come to apply
scientific method to religion: you can consider the book "Logic and Reason"
for this.


>	But trying to describe a religion in terms of science is a futile
>	effort.

Not in terms of science; but scientic method is not futile at all. Though all
atheists will tell you so as they never made an attempt to study the
scriptures. And never know how exactly each prophecy in Bible is satisfied by
exact dates by Bahaullah:
Consider the book "Thief in the Night"

And still continue to claim scriptures are imagination and a SUPREME
CONSCIOUSNESS is meaningless as it cannot come down to the laboratory
right now


Arindam
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian