Hindus have an interest in theology and often a passion for it. Few works of art or literature are purely secular: the intellectual and aesthetic efforts of India, long, continuous and distinguished as they are, are monotonous inasmuch as they are almost all the expression of some religious phase. But the religion itself is extraordinarily full and varied. The love of discussion and speculation creates considerable variety in practice and almost unlimited variety in creed and theory. There are few dogmas known to the theologies of the world which are not held by some of India’s multitudinous sects, and it is perhaps impossible to make a single general statement about Hinduism, to which some sects would not prove an exception.

As a form of life and thought Hinduism is definite and unmistakable. In whatever shape it presents itself it can be recognized at once. But it is so vast and multitudinous that only an encyclopedia could describe it and no formula can summarize it. Essayists flounder among conflicting propositions such as that sectarianism is the essence of Hinduism or that no educated Hindu belongs to a sect. Either can easily be proved, for it may be said of Hinduism, as it has been said of zoology, that you can prove anything if you merely collect facts which support your theory and not those which conflict with it. Hence many distinguished writers err by overestimating the phase which specially interests them.

All these views are tenable because though Hindu life may be cut up into castes and sects, Hindu creeds are not mutually exclusive and repellent. They attract and colour one another.

Every religion started from sun-worship and the depth of deceit by those who continue to promote them is startling. My knowledge of this is due to reincarnation and return to life, as everyone has done some six times (Job 5:19-21). The Old Testament prophecies promote reincarnation, which is why they are not referred to in church doctrines. The New Testament changed the nature of the Divine from Spirit into a three-headed being.

Between lives I was with the Spirit of the Universe, the only God, which fills all of space and is everywhere. It protects and guides things so that a plan is in force to bring the world to an end. This is highly promoted in the messages left to us within that book.

While many cannot accept this as fact and they may ridicule me for it because that is the way religions keep their customers and their fake gods. Overriding the Spirit and putting up the notion that the Divine is something that man can manipulate is part of their power. It’s why people like me are either put down or silenced in one form or another.

Religions hide the truth while they promote their false gods in a constant effort to make them appear great. These gods have no power, however, and those who follow them run foul of the truth. They are idols and icons of man’s illusions and dreams. The images are fake and the doctrines are inventions to fool the masses.

One of the best ways to test how connected one’s religion is will be to look at who is suffering in the world today. Those who worship the false gods are being killed in droves, and that includes Catholics, Muslims, and others. The Barcelona terrorist attacks killed man Catholics while the Muslims also died. So who is kidding who?

Another way is through their ‘marriage’ rituals. Mary is the name of the Mother God of Babylon and men could ‘marry Mary’ by dying on crosses and rising through the sun-circle. When this happened they were called ‘san-t’, ‘sun-t’ or ‘san-t’ from whence comes ‘sent’ nd ‘saint’. These terms all mean ‘sun’s cross’.

This is the basis of the Jesus Christ story and his throne in heaven. Men believe that they would sit on his right-hand side as his disciples after they pass through the cross. The number of crucifixions of god-men in ancient times was enormous. Now it is the Muslims who are rising to take their place beside the ‘virgin’ in the clouds.

People have to wake up to the religious lies and stop abusing people for their sexuality, which they cannot control. In my last life I was a man and in this one a woman. The one thing I missed when born was the strength and prestige that had been enjoyed in my other body. Knowing it would be an uphill battle to perform to my strength in this life it was the Spirit that helped me overcome it.

We don’t need to give way to religious lies to protect some man-made sacrament by the evil Catholic Church, which was established by the one with the number 666. It is the religion of Mary and Babylon (Revelation 17:5). One needs to check it out in the King James bible and not the altered and corrupted Catholic one or the Quran.

From the Associated Press, March 3, 2009 – * Vatican official calls atheist theories ‘absurd’.

Cardinal Levada: No conflict between evolution science and faith in God.

ROME – A Vatican cardinal said Tuesday that the Catholic Church does not stand in the way of scientific realities like evolution, though he described as “absurd” the atheist notion that evolution proves there is no God.

Is Religious Faith compatible with the Evolutionary Sciences?

The good Cardinal Levada may be sure of his position (*See above), but there are reasons for questioning this popular view that science is compatible with religious faith. The view of “harmony between science and faith” can be restated in terms of the following claims:

• A significant number of scientists are also people of religious faith and belief in God.

• The sciences do not disprove God’s existence.

• Being a scientist and doing scientific work is consistent with believing in God.

• Naturalism is a philosophy that is incompatible with supernatural religion, but science is not committed to naturalism as a philosophy.

(This is part of the general view that science and religion are separate endeavors and have nothing to do with each other, e.g. Stephen J. Gould’s idea of science and religion comprising Separate Magisteria.)

Let us consider these claims. First, the alleged compatibility based on the fact that many scientists are also believers in God results in a very weak sense of “compatibility.” As Jerry A. Coyne says, it’s much like saying that marriage is compatible with adultery because some married people practice adultery. Or like saying that being a Roman Catholic priest is compatible with paedophilia because a number of priests sexually abuse young people, or like saying that investment counseling is compatible with fraudulence because some counselors turn out to be frauds. People, like Coyne or Richard Dawkins, who argue that science is not compatible with supernaturalism, are surely aware that some scientists cannot shake free of supernaturalism of some kind. What they argue is that a correct understanding of the scientific approach and knowledge implies a rejection of supernaturalism.

Second, the sciences are not in the business of proving or disproving God’s existence; but any look at the Western history — the rise of science and enlightenment thinking — reveals that the sciences have built (and continue to build) a strong case against any super-naturalistic view of nature, of history and society.

Third, it is a very weak argument to claim compatibility because scientists, like Kenneth Miller and Francis S. Collins, find belief in a god to be consistent with their scientific work. It might be true that neither evolutionary biology nor genetics proves there is no God; thus, belief in such an entity is not directly contradicted by knowledge gained in biology or a genetics. But it is also true that other scientists might hold bizarre beliefs consistent with their scientific work, e.g. some might find belief in ‘Voodoo arts’ to be consistent, some reincarnation, and some find that New Age Mysticism is consistent with their work as chemists. In short, the fact that a Miller or a Collins finds supernaturalism consistent with their science does nothing to show any compatibility between science proper and supernaturalism, unless we also admit a ‘compatibility’ with all forms of occultism, belief in magic or a variety of other bizarre beliefs.

Fourth, this relates to the distinction between naturalism as method and as philosophy, a distinction popularized by Eugenie Scott. As philosopher M. Pigliucci states it, rather than involving philosophical assumptions regarding the nature of reality, methodological naturalism is just a “provisional and pragmatic” position that scientists take in order to do their work. Unlike philosophical naturalism, the methodological type does not involve any denial of the supernatural possibility. Thus, we have scientists like Kenneth Miller pointing out that scientists do not take a vow of philosophical naturalism, but only commit themselves to the methodological kind. He tells us that all science requires is methodological naturalism, and that we “live in a material world,’ and use “the materials of nature to study the way nature works.” Hence, science is limited to “purely naturalistic explanations, because only those are testable, and only those have validity as science.” (From “The Reality Club,” comments on the Jerry Coyne Essay, Seeing and Believing,” http://www.edge.org )

But according to Miller, such commitment does not commit the scientist to a philosophy (viz. naturalism) which denies the supernatural possibility. Thus, religious faith, Roman Catholicism in Miller’s case, is quite safe from erosion by the force of scientific knowledge.

Are people like Miller and Scott correct? Are the sciences correctly characterized as essentially naturalistic method, with no implication of a naturalistic philosophy?

The answer is a resounding “NO” according to a significant number of scientists, theoreticians of the sciences, and philosophers of science. Scientists like Richard Dawkins, Victor Stenger, Taner Edis and others have written books arguing the non-compatibility thesis. Philosophers like Daniel Dennett have also argued impressively against the compatibility claim. A recent article in “The New Republic” by evolutionary scientist, Jerry A. Coyne, (“Seeing and Believing,” February 04, 2009) presents interesting and telling arguments against compatibility. A materialistic explanation of nature, he tells us, is not a philosophical assumption of science but is an idea which has resulted from years of successful scientific research. In other words, the work of science supports the view that nature is to be explained in materialistic terms, completely devoid of reference to the supernatural. In short, the sciences and philosophical naturalism are more closely tied together than Miller and Scott suggest. Mario Bunge, in another recent article agrees [See his “The philosophy behind pseudoscience”, Skeptical Inquirer 30 (4) 29-27 (2006)]. He tells us that every intellectual endeavor, including science, has an underlying philosophy. He states that “the philosophy behind evolutionary biology is naturalism (or materialism) together with epistemological realism.” He adds that “by contrast, the philosophy behind creationism (whether traditional or “scientific”) is supernaturalism (the oldest variety of idealism).”

Given the arguments advanced by these people, the idea that science can be characterized as pure methodology, devoid of naturalistic philosophy, is very questionable. Even Miller, when he argues the case of natural selection against so-called “intelligent design,” does not take evolutionary biology to be pure method. He cites the well-grounded theory and body of knowledge established by the science to make his case against the “Intelligent Design” proponents. But he stops there; he does not use the same biological findings to raise question regarding Christian theism. However, his work and arguments contra creationism and Intelligent Design demonstrate that he really does not limit himself, as a scientist, to method. Granted, we can make the philosophical distinction between method and philosophy; but ultimately this distinction doesn’t do much in the debate between naturalists and super-naturalists, other than offer some psychological comfort to the super-naturalist.

In conclusion, the touted distinction between methodological and philosophical naturalism does little to show that science and religion are compatible. The same can be said regarding the claims that “science does not disprove God,” that many scientists are also persons of faith and find belief in God compatible with their work in the sciences. None of these makes much headway in showing that the sciences are compatible with a commitment to a supernatural view of reality.

When I was younger, I believed in Christianity and everything it stood for, because I hadn’t ever been exposed to anything else. Once I started to learn that there were a few problems with Christianity, it wasn’t long before I wasn’t a Christian anymore.

There are other religions around the world that seem to have the same effect on people. Do you belong to a particular religion, because your choices are limited for some reason? There are a lot of people through out history and living today who follow certain religious guidelines and beliefs, simply because of the people that they are surrounded by.

Think about this for a moment, I believed that Jesus was God and that he died for our sins until I was about 17 years old. Before I turned 18 years old, I thought like most Christians today. I was convinced that Jesus was God and anyone who spoke against him was either mean or evil.

The moment that I decided to do a little more research about Christianity and other religions, it didn’t take me long to find out that there were others like me. Some of the greatest leaders in history weren’t Christians and didn’t belong to any religious organization. How could this be? Wasn’t God suppose to only give good things to people that believed in him? This didn’t make sense to me then and doesn’t make sense to me now.

I don’t know which religions are right and which ones are wrong, but I do believe that what ever religion you believe in, could be a stepping stone in the right direction. Remember I used the word could be in the last sentence. It could also be a hindrance.

I believe that Christianity and other religions that I have studied are just stepping stones on my spiritual ladder towards enlightenment. You don’t need to test your faith and it wouldn’t be evil, to learn more about your religion and others. You could be living in a box surrounded by stepping stones that need to be positioned in the right place, before you can climb out of your old beliefs and on to the next ones.

There are so many questions attached to religion, and so many people are confused about whose telling the truth. Yet, regardless of the disharmony reported in the news, and that which isn’t, there is one fact that remains constant in every country, and with every religion.

Prayer is the common denominator that binds religions together worldwide. Regardless of the differences the major denominations have, the one major similarity is none other than prayer.

Prayer, a request from a higher source is based on faith. Billions of people pray each day. People from different religions, with different beliefs, different backgrounds and from different countries.

Is there something to be said for a ritual that is held in high esteem by almost every religion known to man-kind?

What is it about this one belief that extends globally? The fact that we can strongly disagree with the religion of others, yet at the end of the day, we still have prayer as a common denominator, means there is hope for peace between the denominations. Prayer is the glue that holds all religions together.

Major Religions of the World

The top five denominations in the world are Christianity, Islam, Secular (Nonreligious) Hinduism and Buddhism. Each of these religions or groups include prayer, except for the Secular. Yet you can find a scientist in any part of the world hoping that the God particle can be substantiated through science.

There are approximately 2.1 billion Christians, 1.6 billion Islam, 1.1 billion nonreligious believers and 376 million Buddhism. The total world population is estimated to be 7 billion. The remaining religions, including African traditional religions, Sikhism, Judaism, Spiritism, Baha’i, to name a few claim the remaining number of people on earth.

Based on these statistics, it’s safe to say that over 87% of the world believes in some form of prayer. Christianity by far is the largest religious group worldwide. The Christian Catholics is the only denomination to have it’s own country.

How Different Religions Pray

The different ways to pray vary according to the different religions practiced worldwide.

For example, Christians usually kneel down on their knees, bow their head and put their hands together. Muslims knell to the ground and allow their forehead to touch the ground-supported prayer mat. Some religions chant, while other religions are silent. The Jews pray while rocking their bodies back and forth. The Native American Indians, use dance as a form of prayer.

Christians pray to a God the Father, or Jesus, while Muslims pray to God/Allah. Catholics ask the Saints for prayers and speak to them as if they were another person. Catholics are not praying to the Saints, but asking the Saints to pray on their behalf. Jews pray to God/Adonia. Hindus believe in one God, Braham.

Regardless of the religion, each group prays to a higher source and must, according to their belief, have faith that their prayers will be answered. Prayer is a common denominator which binds all of us together. From the big bank theory (nonreligious believers) to major world religions, hope is alive.

Religion and Science is a topic that has attracted a tremendous amount of attention in recent times. It has become a meeting point for scientists, philosophers and theologians in a very constructive fashion. According to Oxford dictionary the word religion means '' belief in a superhuman controlling power especially in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship '' and has been described as such by many people. The word science comes from the Latin "scientia," meaning knowledge. I should like to stress, that I use the word science to mean knowledge which has been soundly established. It does not include the theories which, for a time, help to explain a phenomenon or a series of phenomena, only to be abandoned later on in favor of other explanations. These newer explanations have become more plausible thanks to scientific progress.

Vocal materialistic scientists such as Richard Dawkins, have in recent times, aggressively peddled the idea of ​​religion and science as being in a perpetual state of conflict. These beliefs are not uncommon. Many educated atheists have beliefs similar along these lines and its about time that these and other misconceptions are cleared. Firstly if religion and science are in conflict which religion in particular? Is it Hinduism, Buddhism or Christianity? Secondly what is meant by the word '' conflict '' in this context? And finally what '' science ''? Are they talking about a conflict between established scientific data and certain verses in the holy books of all religions? Or is it a conflict between unproven and undependable scientific theories and hypotheses that always seem to take '' U-turns ''? Questions such as these are never raised let alone answered by the scientific community at large. However we will try and answer these questions from a logical point of view in this discussion.

Contradictions
Almost all religions contain internal / external contradictions in their authentic holy scriptures and there's no point in lying or hiding behind linguistic acrobatics or '' metaphorical '' interpretation of certain passages. Also nearly all religions contains scientific and mathematical errors that are logically unacceptable and which weakens their argument for the right to be called '' divine revelations ''.

The Glorious Qur'an
Let's analyze the second largest religion, Islam. Let us see what the relationship between modern established scientific data and Quranic passages are.

Astronomy

Creation of the Universe

It seems here there's a different situation. No longer do we have a religious book littered with contradictions but a religious book which actually anticipates modern scientific data by more than 1400 years. We will begin with astronomy and analyze what the Quran says. The Qur'an contains the following verse on the origin of the universe in Surah Anbiya 21:30 '' Do not the unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation) before we clove them asunder '' ? The striking congruence between the big bang and the Quranic verse is inescapable! The meaning of this verse was confirmed by Dr. Alfred Kroner. He is one of the world's renowned geologists and a Professor of Geology and the Chairman of the Department of Geology at the Institute of Geosciences, Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany. He said: "Thinking where Muhammad came from … I think it is almost impossible that he could have known about things like the common origin of the universe, because scientists have only found out within the last few years, with very complicated and advanced technological methods, that this is the case. " Also he said: "Somebody who did not know something about nuclear physics fourteen hundred years ago could not, I think, be in a position to find out from his own mind, for instance, that the earth and the heavens had the same origin. "

Initial Gaseous Mass Before the Creation of Galaxies

Modern Cosmologists and Astrophysicists state that before the galaxies in the Universe were formed, celestial matter was initially in the form of gaseous matter. In simple terms, huge gaseous matter or clouds were present before the formation of the galaxies. To describe initial celestial matter, the word 'smoke' is more appropriate than gas. The following Qu'ranic verse refers to this state of the Universe by the Arabic word Dukhann which means smoke.
Then He turned to the heaven when it was smoke … (Quran, 41:11)

Scientists now can observe new stars forming out of the remnants of this 'smoke'. The illuminating stars we see at night were, just as was the whole of galaxies, in that 'smoke' material.

Individual Orbits of the Sun and Moon

'' It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each just swims along in its own orbit (according to law). '' (36:40)
This verse mentions an essential fact discovered only recently by modern astronomy, ie the existence of the individual orbits of the Sun and the Moon, and their journey through space with their own motion. The Quranic verse is in perfect conformity with modern scientific discoveries in this field.

Shape of the Earth is Spherical

Previously, in the olden days people believed that the earth was flat. For centuries, men were afraid to venture out too far, for fear of falling off the edge! Sir Francis Drake was the first person who proved that the earth is spherical when he sailed around it in 1597. The earth is not exactly round like a ball, but geo-spherical ie, it is flattened at the poles. The following verse contains a description of the earth's shape:

'' And the earth, moreover, hath He made egg-shaped ''. (79:30)

The Arabic word for egg here is dahaahaa which means an ostrich-egg. The shape of an ostrich-egg resembles the geo-spherical shape of the earth.

Thus the Qur'an correctly describes the shape of the earth, though the prevalent notion when the Qur'an was revealed was that the earth was flat.

Interstellar Matter

Space outside organized astronomical systems was earlier assumed to be a vacuum. Astrophysicists later discovered the presence of bridges of matter in this interstellar space. These bridges of matter are called plasma, and consist of completely ionized gas containing equal number of free electrons and positive ions. Plasma is sometimes called the fourth state of matter (besides the three known states viz. Solid, liquid and gas). The Qur'an refers to the presence of this interstellar material in the following verse:

"He Who created the heavens and the earth and all that is between." [Al-Qur'an 25:59]

It would be ridiculous for anyone to even suggest that the presence of interstellar galactic material was known 1400 years ago! A similar message is conveyed in the Qur'an in 13: 2, 35:13, 39: 5 and 39:21.

The Expansion of the Universe

The observational evidence for the expansion of the Universe was first provided by an eminent American astronomer, by the name of Edwin Hubble in 1929. In this year Hubble formulated the empirical Redshift Distance Law of galaxies, nowadays termed simply Hubble's law, which, if the redshift is interpreted as a measure of recession speed, is consistent with the solutions of Einstein's equations of general relativity for a homogeneous, isotropic expanding space. The expansion of the universe is now an established scientific fact. This is what the Qur'an says regarding the nature of the universe:

'' And it is We Who have constructed the heaven with might, and verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it. '' [Al-Qur'an 51:47]

The Arabic word musioon is correctly translated as 'expanding it', and it refers to the creation of the expanding vastness of the universe.

BOTANY

PLANTS HAVE MALE AND FEMALE

In the olden days, humans did not know that plants too have male and female gender distinctions. Botany states that every plant has a male and female gender. Even the plants that are unisexual have distinct elements of both male and female.

'' And has sent down water from the sky. ' With it have We produced diverse pairs of plants each separate from the others. " [Al-Qur'an 20:53]

FRUITS HAVE MALE AND FEMALE

"And fruit of every kind He made in pairs, two and two." [Al-Qur'an 13: 3]

Fruit is the end product of reproduction of the superior plants. The stage preceding fruit is the flower, which has male and female organs (stamens and ovules). Once pollen has been carried to the flower, they bear fruit, which in turn matures and frees its seed. All fruits therefore imply the existence of male and female organs; a fact that is mentioned in the Qur'an.

In certain species, fruit can come from non-fertilized flowers (parthenocarpic fruit) eg bananas, certain types of pineapple, fig, orange, vine, etc. They also have definite sexual characteristics.

EVERYTHING MADE IN PAIRS

"And of everything We have created pairs." [Al-Qur'an 51:49]

This verse lays emphasis on everything. Besides humans, animals, plants and fruits, it may also be referring to electricity in which the atoms consist of negatively – and positively – charged electrons and protons. And many more things!

"Glory to Allah, Who created in pairs all things that the earth produces, as well as their own (human) kind and (other) things of which they have no knowledge." [Al-Qur'an 36:36]

The Qur'an here says that everything is created in pairs, including things that the humans do not know at present and may discover later.

Seeking Reward From Allah (swt) Only

ZOOLOGY

THE FLIGHT OF BIRDS

"Do they not look at the birds, held poised in the midst of (the air and) the sky? Nothing holds them up but (the power of) Allah. Verily in this are Signs for those who believe." [Al-Qur'an 16:79]

Another verse also touches on birds:

"Do they not observe the birds above them, spreading their wings and folding them in? None can uphold them except (Allah) Most Gracious: truly it is He that watches over all things." [Al-Qur'an 67:19]

The Arabic word amsaka literally means, 'to put one's hand on, seize, hold, hold someone back,' which expresses the idea that Allah holds the bird up in His power. These verses stress the extremely close dependence of the birds' behavior on Divine law. Modern scientific data has shown the degree of perfection attained by certain species of birds with regard to the programming of their movements. It is only the existence of a migratory program in the genetic code of the birds that can explain the long and complicated journey that very young birds, without any prior experience and without any guide, are able to accomplish. They are also able to return to the departure point on a definite date.

Prof. Hamburger in his book 'Power and Fragility' gives the example of 'mutton-bird' that lives in the Pacific with its journey of over 24,000 km in the shape of figure '8'. It makes this journey over a period of 6 months and comes back to its departure point with a maximum delay of one week. The highly complicated instructions for such a journey have to be contained in the birds' nervous cells. They are definitely programmed. Therefore, should we not at least reflect on the identity of this 'Programmer'?

GEOLOGY

MOUNTAINS ARE LIKE TENT PEGS

In the field geology, the phenomenon of 'folding', is a recently discovered fact. Folding is responsible for the formation of mountain ranges. The earth's crust, on which we live, is like a solid shell, while the deeper layers are hot and fluid, and thus inhospitable to any form of life. It is also known that the stability of the mountains is linked to the phenomenon of folding, for it was the folds that were to provide foundations for the reliefs that constit the mountains.

Geologists tell us that the radius of the Earth is about 6,035 km and the crust on which we live is very thin, ranging between 2 to 35 km. Since the crust is thin, it has a high possibility of shaking. Mountains act like stakes or tent pegs that hold the earth's crust and give it stability. The Qur'an contains exactly such a description:

"Have We not made the earth as a wide expanse, and the mountains as pegs?" [Al-Qur'an 78: 6-7]

The word awtaad means stakes or pegs (like those used to anchor a tent); they are the deep foundations of geological folds.

A book entitled 'Earth' is regarded as a basic reference textbook on geology in many universities around the world. One of the authors of this book is Dr. Frank Press, who was the President of the Academy of Sciences in the USA for 12 years and was the Science Advisor to former US President Jimmy Carter. In this book, he illustrates the mountain in a wedge-shape and the mountain itself as a small part of the whole, whose root is deeply entrenched in the ground.1 According to Dr. Press, the mountains play an important role in stabilizing the crust of the earth.

The Qur'an clearly mentions the function of the mountains in preventing the earth from shaking:

"And We have set on the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with them." [Al-Qur'an 21:31]

The Qur'anic descriptions are in perfect agreement with modern geological data.

Conclusion

The Quran is a book that not only does not conflict with modern science but actually anticipates modern scientific data by more than 1400 years! The Quran does not contain a single contradiction and neither does it contain a single verse that conflicts with established scientific facts. The Glorious Quran is in perfect conformity with the discoveries of modern science. The scientific facts mentioned above are only the tip of the iceberg because the Glorious Qur'an contains many many more scientific facts that have only been recently discovered by scientist with the use of complex instruments and advanced technological methods. I cannot claim to have done full justice to the subject. The scientific evidences of the Qur'an clearly prove its Divine origin. No human could have produced a book, fourteen hundred years ago, that would contain such profound scientific facts.

The Qur'an, however, is not a book of Science but a book of 'Signs'. These signs invite Man to realize the purpose of his existence on earth, and to live in harmony with Nature. The Qur'an is truly a message from Allah, the Creator and Sustainer of the universe. It contains the same Message of the Oneness of God, that was preached by all prophets, right from Adam, Moses, Jesus to Muhammad (peace be upon them). The conflict between religion and science that is portrayed in the western media is between all the false religions and science and the reason for that is almost all religious scriptures contain many mathematical and scientific errors that are unacceptable to modern scientists. The conflict certainly is not between the religion of Islam and Science for Islam is in perfect harmony with Science as shown.

Ganesha is the youngest member of Lord Shiva's family and is known to be very dear to all the Hindu deities mentioned in the Hindu mythology. Though, there are many famous tales associated with the birth of Ganesha or Ganesh, the most popular is that in which his mother prepares a statue from clay and blesses it with life. The statue turns into none other than Ganesha, who is known to be fond of sweets. The following information talks about other members of the family to which Lord Ganesha belongs.

Shiva, the Destroyer

Lord Shiva, the father of Ganesha, is one of three supreme Hindu Gods, the other two being Lord Vishnu and Lord Brahma. Known to reside at Kailasa Mountain, Shiva is worshipped with different names like Sankara, Rudra, Neelkanth and many more.

Shiva is held responsible for unknowingly cutting the head of his own son, Ganesha, when the latter denied him permission to enter the quarters of Goddess Parvati, Shiva's wife. However, Shiva restored Ganesha to life after discovering the latter to be his own son. Apart from that, Shiva also announced that Ganesha would be worshipped before any other God or Goddess by people in the universe during any type of ceremony.

Parvati, the Shakti

Goddess Parvati, popularly known as Shakti, the power, is the mother of Ganesha. The Goddess is considered to be the center of whole of the energy prevailing in the universe. Parvati is believed to be the second incarnation of Sati, the first wife of Lord Shiva. Kown by other names like Gauri, Bhairavi, Bhavani and many more, Parvati is considered to be very near to her son, Ganesha.

As mentioned earlier, Parvati created Ganesha as a statue from clay to guard the quarters, while she went to take a bath. Apart from the story mentioned in the last section, another famous tale tells how Ganesha got an elephant head. Ganesha's head was turned to ashes, when the cursed God Shani had a look at the newborn child. However, Lord Vishnu soon replaced Ganesh's head with one of elephant.

Famous Ganesh gifts consist of portraits and statues, depicting young Ganesha with his father and mother.

Kartikeya, the Brother

Kartikeya or Skanda is the brother of Ganesha, though their birth chronology is a matter of debate. Kartikeya is a popular deity among South Indians and also the residents of countries like Sri Lanka, Malaysia and Singapore. As per the legends, Ganesha once defeated his brother in a competition by acting wiser.

Riddhi and Siddhi

Though Ganesha is believed to be a bachelor, in some parts of India, he is believed to have two wives, named Riddhi, who represent prosperity and Siddhi, who represent the spiritual power. It is also believed that the Lord has a third wife, named Buddhi, representing wisdom.

Shubha and Labha

Shubha and Labha are known to be the two sons of Lord Ganesha, the former representing auspiciousness and the latter one representing profit.

We are posed to define the term religion and assert several points which affect the defining process as well as to analyze their influences upon the development of our definition. Religion as its very nature exhibits often reveals dissimilar characteristics to different groups and in order to accurately characterize it would command a thorough analysis of the practitioners themselves. Connelly (1996) in his presentation entitled “definition of religion and related terms”, readily confesses that scholars have difficult times in proposing a suitable definition. In their quote, Cunningham & Kelsey, (2010), stated, “Religion cannot stand for any single principle or essence” (Pg. 13). However, as an academic endeavor we will create a valid means of identification.

As acknowledged within the confines of a good religious basics textbook, we see several guidelines which we can revise towards our potential definition. The text remarks that religion relates to “thought, feelings and actions” (Cunningham, Kelsay, 2010, p. 13). With this clearly in mind let’s briefly consider each of these points.

Thought

Thought as measured within this aspect would gracefully embrace the word “Belief”. We as the appraising faction would need to deliberate as to what a particular group of religious opponents might believe. Do they acknowledge as true the concept of one god as most monotheism based religions encapsulate? Or perhaps their beliefs encompass multiple deities such as we discover in several pagan or Wiccan viewpoints. We can relate a long procession of detailed beliefs under this heading and each would be vital towards defining a specific religion. It is apparent that we can not have an established religion without thought (Cunningham, Kelsay, 2010, p. 13). In short, religion attempts to impart order where no order previously existed in an attempt to make sense of our unknown surroundings and environment (Connelly, 1996).

Feelings

As stated within his book entitled, “The Christian Faith”, Friedrich Schleiermacher known as the father of modern theology, identified religion as a “feeling of absolute dependence” (Schleiermacher, 1922). With this concept laid upon the table we see the concept of faith entering the picture as well. If we are so dependent upon a particular set of beliefs or feelings than we would have to base our thoughts upon faith that the unverified beliefs are true and not misleading us.

Actions

Of all the traits for our definitions which affect others, actions would have to be at the top of our list. Actions to me take into consideration both thought and feelings and merge them into one trait – action. Within the particular religious beliefs “actions” would account for the followers unwavering ability to follow the “Words of God” without second guessing its intent or purpose. As provided within our text “Religion… is not only a matter of what people believe but… what people do…” (Cunningham, Kelsay, 2010, p. 15). This is action in the purest sense. Actions result from thought when the individual decides to accomplish something relating to their beliefs and it involves strong feelings towards the value of their actions.

References

Cunningham, L.S.; Kelsay, J., 2010. The Sacred Quest: An Invitation to the Study of Religion, 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc

Connelly, Paul, (1996). Definition of religion and related terms. Retrieved from http://www.darc.org/connelly/religion1.html

Schleiermacher, Friedrich (1922). The christian faith in outline. Retrieved from http://archive.org/stream/christianfaithin00schl#page/n3/mode/2up

Of all of those Big Questions central to philosophical concepts that surround life, the universe and everything, the realms of theology and religions and the nature of deities continue to fascinate. Opinions proliferate in books, articles, videos, conversations in bars and pubs, and in fact anywhere and everywhere two or more humans are in proximity. There’s the pro side; there’s the anti-side. There aren’t too many fence-sitters. I’m still in the anti-camp as the following bits and pieces illustrate.

Regarding Religion

*Religion doesn’t say anything about God. Religions say many things about many different gods (and goddesses).

*You can’t hide behind religion and say religious freedom gives you the right to do whatever you want to do under the guise of that religion – reference for example, Kim Davis.

*Doubt is not a pleasant condition. But certainty is an absurd one. (Voltaire)

*Tell me the reason that you don’t believe in other gods and I’ll parrot back to you why I therefore don’t believe in your gods, god (or God).

*One of the easiest things to do in your lifetime is to establish and start up a brand new religion. Even just in the United States, in the 1880’s you had Joseph Smith (Mormonism). More recently L. Ron Hubbard (Scientology), Jim Jones, David Koresh and Marshall Applewhite. The latter three all suicided along with their flock followers. Then too there was Sun Myung Moon. You had Anton LaVey (Satanism) and Gerald Gardner (Wicca). And how can we forget the theology behind the Flying Spaghetti Monster! You’ll also get a lot of people claiming “Jedi” as their religion although how seriously they really are is open to question.

*Just giving a deity a name yields up not one jot of evidence that the deity with the now name in question actually exists. If you call a wizard “Harry Potter” doesn’t make Harry Potter real.

*If Islam is the religion of peace, how come so many Muslims kill other Muslims (Pakistan, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.)?

*Is it my imagination or have I noticed that the extreme religious right wing, those vehemently anti-gay, anti-same-sex marriage, anti-abortion, anti-national health care, anti-environmentalism (i.e. – climate change), anti-gay-adoption, always happy to attack non-religious institution and people for their bucketing or ignoring of Biblical teachings, are absolutely silent when it comes to giving a thumbs down on the child sex abuse issue by various religious institutions and personnel. Any religious institution is good and God-fearing by definition; anything else isn’t good and has turned their back on God.

*”Human beings have a demonstrated talent for self-deception when their emotions are stirred.” – Carl Sagan

*”A celibate clergy is an especially good idea, because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism.” – Carl Sagan

*”Where we have strong emotions, we’re liable to fool ourselves.” – Carl Sagan

Regarding Religion vs. Science

*[Paraphrasing Matt Dillahunty.] Doesn’t it both me… am I happy going to my grave not knowing the answers to the [Big] Questions [like consciousness]? No, I’m not. None of us are. We are all uncomfortable with this idea of not knowing and that’s why we have science. That’s why we go out and try to find what the actual damn answer is. It’s not that I’m comfortable not knowing. It’s that I’m more uncomfortable pretending that I know.

*[Paraphrasing Matt Dillahunty.] I’d like to believe as many true things as possible and as few false things as possible.

*If a church steeple has a lightning rod attached doesn’t that show a total lack of theological confidence?

*Science doesn’t tend to be overly concerned with religious thoughts, but religions are often concerned with scientific thinking.

*”Who is more humble? The scientist who looks at the universe with an open mind and accepts whatever it has to teach us, or somebody who says everything in this book must be considered the literal truth and never mind the fallibility of all the human beings involved?” – Carl Sagan

*”It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.” – Carl Sagan

*”The idea that God is an oversized white male with a flowing beard who sits in the sky and tallies the fall of every sparrow is ludicrous. But if by ‘God’ one means the set of physical laws that govern the universe, then clearly there is such a God. This God is emotionally unsatisfying… it does not make much sense to pray to the law of gravity.” – Carl Sagan

*”The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion and politics, but it is not the path to knowledge; it has no place in the endeavor of science.” – Carl Sagan

*”For a long time the human instinct to understand was thwarted by facile religious explanations.” – Carl Sagan

*”It took the Church until 1832 to remove Galileo’s work from its list of books which Catholics were forbidden to read at the risk of dire punishment of their immortal souls.” – Carl Sagan

*”A religion, old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the universe as revealed by modern science might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by conventional faiths. Sooner or later such a religion will emerge.” – Carl Sagan

Regarding Faith & Belief

*A matter of faith means for those of faith that they don’t have to actually think!

*Faith is not just believing something is so with insufficient evidence to back you up, it’s believing that something is so irrespective of the evidence.

*Faith isn’t proof of anything as a visit to any mental health institution (insane asylum; funny farm, etc.) will more than adequately demonstrate.

*How one can believe in God (or any other deity) and retain any intellectually honesty is beyond me.

*If all you have is just faith based on no actual evidence, then you also need to have belief that your faith could be incorrect.

*If you just have faith in one religion, then you can’t really distinguish between the multitudes of religions on tap since all of the other True Believers in those multitudes of religions also have faith equal and opposite to yours.

*True Believers like to put their faith in ideas that are comfortable rather than in ideas that are demonstrably true.

*Why should I believe what you believe when you can’t demonstrate that what you believe in has any degree of reality at all?

*”You can’t convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it’s based on a deep seated need to believe.” – Carl Sagan

Regarding Prayer & Miracles

*If you pray to your god (or God), you are basically telling Him that he has screwed things up and so you’re going to tell Him, via your prayer, how to set things to rights.

Regarding Morality

*We don’t have ingrained into ourselves at birth a moral compass, an ethical sense, or a legal library. But rather we acquire our morals, our ethics our legal obligations from others in our society – societies and cultures which differ from place to place and from time to time thus resulting in slightly differing moral values, ethical values and legal values.

*We do not need divine permission to know right from wrong. (Christopher Hitchens)

*It’s a sin to be jealous of your neighbor for owning slaves (thou shall not covet) yet it’s not a sin to own slaves.

Regarding Heaven & Hell

*Even a MAFIA Boss couldn’t torture you forever, but God apparently can!

Regarding the Afterlife

*If there is no reason to believe that God or god(s) presides over this existence, then there’s no reason to believe that God or god(s) presides over your afterlife – assuming an afterlife – existence.

*One reason why what our reality actually is matters has to do with our final act within that reality – which is dying – for it’s the nature of that reality which will determine what happens next – if anything.

Regarding the Bible

*If there are mistaken or misconceptions about God in the Bible (i.e. – God supports slavery), then isn’t it God’s responsibility to correct those misconceptions or mistakes? That being the case, why hasn’t God done this?

*Why can’t God give us the one true – no interpretation needed – Bible instead of the hundreds of versions and translations that’s on tap?

*We True Christian Believers believe in the literal Biblical word of God except when it’s inconvenient.

Regarding God

*According to the Bible, there have been several eyewitnesses to the Big “G” (God). Witnesses include Adam & Eve, Cain, Noah, Moses, Abraham, Jonah, Job, and there may be others. That should count for something in terms of evidence for God’s existence. However, for those eyewitnesses to have any bona-fides, theists must first demonstrate that these people were actually historical flesh-and-blood beings. Can theists actually verify the historicity of even any one of these individuals?

*The personal experience of God might be [mentally] real but that doesn’t of necessity mean that God is real.

*If God were really all-powerful and really on His toes, He would have created life, the Universe and everything in a split nanosecond instead of dragging things out over six days!

*Does God exist? Well first define the god in question. Then state what would be the state of the Universe, what would the Universe look like if that god actually existed – does expectation match reality?

*So according to the best physical anthropological evidence, modern humans have existed as a species for roughly 200,000 years – give or take. Let’s say to err conservatively its 100,000 years. So that means that the big “G” waited for roughly 95,000 years and then, and only then, decided that He’d better go downstairs and introduce Himself to the great unwashed. But only to a very select few and only within a tiny geographical region of the total global geography, all of which – apart from Antarctica and parts of Polynesia were also inhabited by the great unwashed, or modern humans. Really? Does that make any real sense?

*The stars are pretty. That is NOT evidence that God exists!

*What absolute pure luck – I was born into the only society, time and place that got religious things right!

*You can’t just choose the nice bits and say therefore there is a God. You have also got to come to grips with the nasty stuff, and then ask “why, God?”

*Stephen Fry to God: Bone cancer in children?

*What kind of God requires faith over evidence? Not rational.

*How come that existence (our Universe) requires an explanation, yet that explanation (i.e. – God) doesn’t require an explanation? So what’s the explanation for the explanation? God’s existence requires God’s own God. So here is a variation on the theme of God’s existence as proposed by St. Thomas Aquinas in his “Summa Theologica”.

Five traditional arguments for the existence of God’s God. Who / what was God’s God?

– Who / what moves the first / prime mover (i.e. – God)? God’s God, that’s who.

– Who / what caused the first cause (i.e. – God)? God’s God, that’s who.

– Who / what created the being that created creation (i.e. – God)? God’s God, that’s who.

– Who / what should God be compared to if God is alleged to be perfection? God’s God, that’s who.

– Who / what designed the designer (i.e. – God)? God’s God, that’s who.

This by the way is an infinite regression.

*”Anything you don’t understand… you attribute to God. God for you is where you sweep away all the mysteries of the world, all the challenges to our intelligence. You simply turn your mind off and say God did it.” – Carl Sagan

*”What I’m saying is, if God wanted to send us a message, and ancient writings were the only way he could think of doing it, he could have done a better job.” – Carl Sagan

Regarding God’s ‘Morality’

*Numbers 31:7 (King James Version)

“And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males.”

Numbers 31:9 (King James Version)

“And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods.”

Numbers 31:15 (King James Version)

“And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?”

Numbers 31:17 (King James Version)

“Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.”

Numbers 31:18 (King James Version)

“But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.”

Translated: Kill everyone EXCEPT the young virgin females! I can leave the rest to your imagination! Further, God’s A-OK with this.

And how many were the “women children”?

Numbers 31:35 (King James Version)

“And thirty and two thousand persons in all, of women that had not known man by lying with him.”

*If I am more moral than God, and I am since I’ve never committed genocide or mass murder or child abuse and have never endorsed or condoned slavery, then it’s clear that I did not get my morality handed down from on high.

*When you test or compare God’s morals vs. human morals, then human morals trump God’s morals. The average human is more moral than God.

*Why should we spend a lifetime on our knees worshipping God when God is such an immoral thug?

*God’s most common interaction with people in the Old Testament is to kill them.

*God has way more concern over what you eat than over what you own, as in humans as your property (i.e. – slavery). Slavery ranks lower in God’s list of priorities than any of the other over 600 commandments He dictates. In fact, God absolutely endorses slavery (Exodus 21).

*Consider the following Biblical passage:

Regarding God’s Ten Commandments

*Contrast the following Commandment in Exodus with Luke 14: 26

Exodus 20:12 (King James Version)

“Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.”

OR

Deuteronomy 5:16 (King James Version)

“Honour thy father and thy mother, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee; that thy days may be prolonged, and that it may go well with thee, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.”

Hence…

Exodus 21:15 (King James Version)

“And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.”

Exodus 21:17 (King James Version)

“And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.”

Luke 14:26 (King James Version)

“If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.”

*Consider God’s ‘Thou shall not kill” Commandment in Exodus or in Deuteronomy.

Exodus 20:13 (King James Version)

“Thou shalt not kill.”

Deuteronomy 5:17 (King James Version)

“Thou shalt not kill.”

Now that apparently doesn’t apply to someone you know who 1) violates the Sabbath; 2) erects a graven image, or 3) takes the Lord’s name in vain. Then you are supposed to kill them!

And we all know about this contradiction.

Exodus 22:18 (King James Version)

“Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.”

Regarding Jesus

*Jesus is coming? Santa is coming? At least you know when Santa will arrive!

Regarding Atheists & Atheism

*Atheism is disbelief in one and only one proposition, the proposition that supernatural deities exist. Given the lack of hardcore physical evidence that such beings / entities actually do exist, atheists take a skeptical position on the issue adopting the mantra that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

We have a new religion in town, it is called the Religion of Comfort. People everywhere are joining this religion for the sole purpose of attaining more material possessions. In today’s culture, comfort is synonymous with wealth or materialism. It not wrong to acquire the so-called comforts of life to make one feel materially comfortable and “happy”. This is normal human thinking and behavior. However, when we focused our energies solely on acquiring wealth by all means and paying less attention to the spiritual aspect of our being we are fulfilling only one aspect of our existence. This way of thinking will cause us to join the Religion of Comfort.

The Religion of Comfort alters our way of thinking. Our egos are inflated and we are not our brothers and sisters keepers anymore. We are driven by greed and negative selfish actions which hinders our true inner potential. This religion blinds our judgment, since we are fixated on acquiring more wealth. We justify our actions simply by numbing our spiritual inner-self. Joining the Religion of Comfort is easy, since it requires of us only to lust after materialism. Life is NOT only about attaining wealth ONLY, it’s also about attaining spiritual growth linked to a Higher Spiritual Source. We are all spiritual beings linked to a Higher Spiritual Source and not until we come to this realization will we free our selves from the Religion of Comfort.

I am not saying that we should abandon the comforts of life and go live in a cave. This is not what I am proposing. What is essentially wrong today is the personal inner passion in some of us to acquire ONLY material possessions at all cost. Some people who are part of this religion would do anything to attain wealth…Anything! Our focus in life should be balanced with both a spiritual and a material component. And both components should have a positive reason and reality attached to them.

Many people today escape from the realities of life when they abuse alcohol or drugs, as well as applying other negative circumstances in their lives to make themselves “feel good”. What they are actually doing, is simply numbing their inner true potential. Life and nature create in each of us the ability to withstand every pressure that may come our way without using any crutches that may prevent us from attaining true inner happiness. True happiness lies deep within our hearts and minds and this is one primary portion of nature’s comforts. Being caught up in the rat race of wanting to have more “things” than one can basically afford is also another way of inviting greed into one’s life and this is also part of the Religion of Comfort. There is but one secret to life and that secret is finding truth!