Templeton Religion Trust

Templeton Religion Trust

When we hear the word “religion,”
we often think of dusty texts and static, dogmatic ideas. Like a typewriter, religion can feel like
something that’s outlived its usefulness. But Sir John Templeton believed spiritual texts
alone were not enough … that they should be supplemented by empirical discovery. He felt we know only a tiny fraction
of the spiritual realm that surrounds us. And that, rather than being stuck in the past, religion can be adaptive and vibrant,
driving human flourishing, toward a better future. How about you? “Religion” may make you think of some choice words. But what if …
Religions of all kinds took a humble approach, admitting they know less than 1% about spiritual reality? What if religions were discovery-oriented,
taking an empirical approach to spiritual exploration? What if religions look forward, not backward,
expecting to grow and learn from their mistakes? What if religions sought to benefit from the most
inspiring bits of other religions, and not just tolerate them? Could religion evolve and progress? Driving new discoveries and revealing
previously unseen realities? Could it be a dynamic force for positive social change? We’re working with people of all faiths. And people of none. Philosophers and theologians,
artists and scientists of all kinds to learn more about the mysteries,
forces and unseen realities surrounding us. We’re seeking connecting threads –
between the “how” of science and the “why” of theology. We’re seeking to uncover what fundamental laws of nature
reveal about what it means to be human. We’re looking for signals of transcendence. Trail markers, pointing to the infinite. We’re changing the conversation about religion,
together with you, and all who are curious.

You May Also Like

About the Author: Emmet Marks


  1. Sounds like you are trying to promote a variation of the gods of the gaps fallacy. The reason why religion is known as archaic is because it cant change or it would against the religion.

  2. Watching the video I couldn’t help but wonder. How would you get anyone to take you seriously? Cause basing all of your findings on experiences alone is shoddy experimentation at best. As well as being academically dishonest. Since the supernatural is not observable how do you even know that it’s 1%? If it’s really 1% could you be simply claiming it’s 1% out of ignorance? What if it’s actually 0%? How will you avoid the God of the Gaps logical fallacy? How will “prophets” take your findings since their words are gospel and your findings might refute their teachings?

    Heck people used to think that our earth was a part of a geocentric solar system. This was the pseudoscientific findings of religious figure a few hundred years ago. And those who refuted that were called heretics. How would you avoid simply asserting that you have the answer without physical evidence to back it up?

    It’s not every day you get someone legitimately trying to prove their imaginary friend is real. Reading into religion creates Atheists for a reason lol.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *