The major difference though, is that Religion never came in conflict with scientific advancement in these civilisations. On the contrary. Because, let's be honest, science, whether you believe in God or not (I personally don't believe in no mystery god in the sky), isn't able to emphatically irradicate the possibility of God. Because it would depend on one's concept of God. Like Einstain, who believed in Spinoza's God. It simply established, particularely in the case of the Bible, that most of the "revealed" truths turned out to be either false, or...allegorical. Which, from a purely cultural standpoint, cannot be discounted either. Let's remember, that is was the Church authorities, motivated by "religious" and/or political and economic agendas told the masses these were hard facts. This is why scientists in Europe were persacuted in the Middle Ages for trying to explain that the earth is round for example. Science History 101 right? We dont find this scenario elswhere outside of Europe. Science in other more developped civilisations was not perscecuted as such. Asia, Africa and Ancient America never had this problem. Because of one simple reason, most of these religions allowed and encouraged allegorical meaning. The high use of symboles bares witness to this. It encouraged, in many cases, a more tolerant world view and gave science it's breathing space. In fact, without the Arab's desire to understand the way they could position themselves toward their Holy City from any given geographical point, we might still be in the dark ages. Mathematics, Egyptian (via Greek) philosophy, Astronomy and other sciences wouldn't have been resurrected, and we might still be in the dark ages. Because the advancements of the Rennaissance and the Ages des lumieres was highly tributary of this rebirthed knowledge from Baghdad to Andalusia in Spain during it's Moorish African Occupation. This is a case where religion, in the course of history, was useful to scientific progress.
Put it this way, in the words of Stanley Lane Poole, in his book, the story of the Moors in Spain, the world might have been 500 years further then where it is had the Moors prevailed. Of course, this is nothing but a hypothesis. But the point being, there was no conflict. Religion and Science co-existed in those societies.
Case in point, the Great Pyramid. And remember, Creationist is a Western concept, which has roots in it's own history. The paradigm shifts when you try to apply this definition on other cultures. It has to be done on the basis of their own history in relationship to science. Otherwise, it's a rather unfair and biased comparison, don't you find?
This message has been edited by ausar_maat, 10-06-2005 10:14 AM
™ Version 4.2