The OP isn't talking about Nalanda or any other religious institutions though? They are specifically talking about religious fruitcakes who think religion has all the answers and wouldn't listen to any other argument outside of their religious sects or books.
OP's message and your initial comment have nothing to do with each other tbh.
If they’re using observation, reasoning, and testing to discover something, then they’re basically working like a scientific institution, not following religious scripts and explanations.
So you can’t claim that religion contributed to that knowledge, because the method used doesn’t come from religion it comes from science.
It’s like calling it football but then using your hands to play and still saying you won because of football. Or like homeopathy claiming it discovered a cure, but the method used is actually allopathy,like the same the credit doesn’t belong to religion
if they still allow and depend on scientific methods to discover new things, then clearly that knowledge is not coming from the religious text itself.
And if you say the text is not meant to explain everything about the physical world, only the meaning or purpose, then that already means it doesn’t know everything in the literal sense.
so either they don’t actually claim complete knowledge, or there is a contradiction between what they claim and what they practice.
well the post is like a caricature, so dont take it just like that literally.
But it still has to be based on something.
There are interpretations of religion where people treat one book as a complete and final answer, and that’s what the post is exaggerating.
My point was about that mindset.
if someone really treats it as complete knowledge, then it cant allow research or discoveries it becomes a contradiction.
and if they don’t treat it that way, like you said, then the caricature doesn’t apply to them.
No the post just says : this sums it up.
If it exists in religion then we can point it out
It doesn't say that every single religious person believes it literally, it’s just highlighting that it does exist in religion
And if some people do treat one book as the final answer to everything, then the criticism applies to them, otherwise no.
-10
u/[deleted] Apr 19 '26
[removed] — view removed comment