Do you think religion and science can get along?
I don't. The reason behind my believe is that science is about establishing the truth based on proven facts and methodology. Religion is primarily faith based and so by definition does not require this and is not open to new evidence.
No scientific theory proclaims absolute truth - it is always open to new evidence being brought to the table. Religious faith however does claim absolute truth. Therefore I believe the two are imcompatable as science by it's very nature rules out absolute truth.
"Science by it's very nature rules out absolute truth."
This statement defeats itself as your saying that science proves that there are no absolute truths but yet make an absolute truth with that statement.
Science and religion can and do get along. It's the misunderstanding of what faith is that's the problem. You practice acts of faith every day, when you watch the news, when you read the newspaper. You take it on faith that the stories are accurate unless you independently verify each and every story.
no absolute truth's? Would torturing a child for fun be considered an evil act regardless of which society you live in?
It may be acceptable however does that make it right? Isn't it still an evil act? If its only based on society, then why did we go to war with the germans?
So, what your saying is that some faith is based on experience that so far this has shown out to be true so therefore, it should remain true?
Archeological evidence does show (and is continuing to show) that the Bible is accurate. Based on faith, i can logically assume if the physical evidence is factual, then that which can't be proven by science should also be factual. If the Bible is gong to be truthful about everything else, then why fabricate stories about other events?
Archeological evidence doesn't support the big bang nor evolution. The evidence that i'm speaking of is all of the cities, towns, rulers, money that are mentioned in the Bible, archeologicist discover.
Are you aware of the Big Bang fudge factor required to make the theory work? Dark matter and Dark Energy, neither of which can be proven or observed. If they didn't put in "dark matter" then there isn't enough matter in the universe, and not enough gravity to form stars, etc, etc.
Then there is dark energy which is needed to explain why things are accelerating instead of moving away at a constant speed, as one would expect.
Evolution has its own problems such as how did life began? Where did the information required for life start. A living organism must be capable of successfully reproducing, also ingesting, assimilating, and processing food
and also must have a system to transport waste products. A stable supply of food must be available in order to manufacture the various complex elements and produce the chemical reactions necessary to obtain the energy needed to insure the organism's survival. Let’s say the first cell used sunlight as a food source. This gives it a stable supply of food. The ability to reproduce, to ingest, assimilate, process the sunlight into a usable energy source in order to drive the chemical reactions to ensure survival and the ability to successfully reproduce have to be in place, at the same time and working correctly in order to survive. If the cell has to evolve them one at a time over a period of many years, then the cell is not going to survive in order to reproduce. The cell needs the information on how to accomplish these tasks and it doesn't have time to figure it out slowly. all of that information must be in place. Information does not evolve and required intelligence. Our understanding of it "evolves" but the information is already there.
The inquisitors didn't consider thier act evil however it still was. If society decides what is good and evil, then why did we go to war with Germany? Why did we put those leaders we caught on trial for war crimes? They didn't consider what they were doing as evil.
archeological evidence does support what is written in the Bible. If that is factual, then it follows to reason that other parts of it are factual.
As an atheist, where did we get our moral stances from? Why is it when you do something wrong, it feels wrong? If its just society that makes that determination then it shouldn't feel that way. How did moriality evolve to the point where it affects emotions? How did murder become wrong? Why does helping someone make you feel good? How can you say what is evil unless you have something good to compare it too?
As a Christian, I know where moriality comes from. Evolutionist can't explain it.
It doesn't answer where did we get our moriality from beside the fact where did we get emotions from. Emotions are not a survival trait. Fear, rage, love, hate, disguest or any of the other's don't help with survival. From an evolutionary stand point, isn't it survival of the fittest? Why is rape wrong when from an evolutionary standpoint the object is to spread your gene's to as many females as possible to ensure that your genetic potential survives. Murder would be the same thing. If i can kill someone else, then i'm the strongest and if i can do it without harm to myself, even so much the better.
Dark matter is accepted within the scientific community because without it, the big bang falls apart and the one thing that most scientist can't allow is a devine foot in the door.
Love helps humans to reproduce however it isn't necessary and it definatly doesn't have any play into animal reproduction. Besides the fact that other species are far better at reproduction and survival then we are. Look at it this way, if a motorcycle will get you from point "a" to point "b" with no trouble, then evolution isn't going to design a town car. Humans have alot of luxeries built in that are not required.
"Survival of the fittest also functions on a higher level, ie, survival of the fittest society. Your species is less likely to survive if your killing each other. "
The reverse is also true. If the strong kill off the weak then only the strongest gene's are being passed along. Human's don't practice that but yet all other animal species do. Besides the simple fact of that the human species is the only one that kills its own for no reason. No other species "murders" its own.
However with out dark matter and dark energy then cosomology falls apart. Besides, the starting point of the Big Bang can also point to creation by God. The big bang theory also has the problem of where did this point of energy/matter come from'? How does this singularity suddenly spring into existance from nothing. this is in violation of cause and effect. Basically stated a temporal effect can't be the cause of itself or you can't get something from nothing.
- Alexander