Religion vs. Science

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

All that is important is having faith, not in what you believe. Think about it, for thousands of years, there has been the "arguement" about religions, I think its just good to believe in something strongly, as surely, you cannot dismiss the possibility, as a christian, that you're wrong.

Anyway, we have like 50billion topics like this, and I didnt read that massive post up above, just skimmed through.

Of course, it also took the church 300 years (Or thereabouts) to realise that we weren't at the centre of the universe...

Funny isn't it? If a religion said "Yes! God made this huge universe! We are worthless inside it! There are probably thousands of other beings similiar or better than us in it! God did this!" they could probably tap into massive reserves of belief and faith.. But they don't. They want their god to stay local, comparitively weak, and pointlessly interested in human life...

The inquisitors didn't believe they were doing evil. The inquisitors believed they were doing good - it's just that it was good because of their absolutist philosophy, and that "Good" and "Bad" wasn't based on your acts or justification, but on your belief...

Rape is generally regarded as being wrong because we regard all people as equal. Sadly, if you look at almost any religion (Certainly any of the great monotheistic ones) women are regarded as subhuman, or at least submale -even as the foundation of sin. This, however, is probably mainly because all the great monotheistics came from extreme climates (The desert) while most of the more equal cultures came into being in the temperate regions of the world.

Torturing a child may be seen as an evil act. Religion can bend people's minds to see it as not. People can do the same - any and all murderers will have justification that, at least at the time of murder, they saw as correct.

We went to war with the germans, at least as far as the british were concerned, because of a combination of treaties, threatened territory, and some other factors. America didn't enter the war until Pearl Harbour. Morals don't enter into it.

Mate, what you say about "Doing something wrong" - please clarify "Wrong" and "Right". You appear to be working on binary logic here. "Right" and "Wrong" are relative to the person in question.

Archeological evidence wouldn't be expected to directly support evolution. However, if you bother to look at paleontological evidence, oh, hello Homo Erectus and the rest of the Homo family, the Australopithecines, etc.

As for archeological evidence for the bible, where's my ark that can contain every creature in the world, oh, what happened to the records of the hebrew slaves, anyone seen jericho's walls?

And saying that because parts of it are true the rest must be is a load of bullshit. That's like saying of Harry Potter a millenia in the future "Oh, look, there really WAS a station called King's Cross, obviously Harry Potter existed"

Creationism has its own problems - eg. WHERE THE HELL DID GOD COME FROM? As for the origin, that's chemistry, not evolution - see theories re: clay lifeforms, RNA lifeforms, self-replicating molecules, etc.

Please clarify what you mean by "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy". Dark matter would be required to support the "Big Crunch". I have never even heard of Dark Energy. Is it Electromagnetic, Strongweak, or Gravitational?

As for why they're accelerating, think about it; Gravity only has a finite detectable range, and only a finite range where it really applies.. The further the galaxies move apart, the less force there is to inhibit the expansion.

I skipped everything else, as I wasn't working through in a regular order; But, there are other topics, eg. "God" in this forum.

lollololololol dark matter/dark energy. Sounds funny.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rob

lollololololol dark matter/dark energy. Sounds funny.

---

I like your sense of humor mate..;)

Ain't reading that, but theres already a topic on religion.

Dark matter is real, and has be percieved through observing it's effect on light (gravity curves the fabric of space, making light curve with it) http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/200...rse.php?page=1

Alexander, you've read Mere Christianity I take it? Your topics mirror it closely.

I think there is no division between God and science. There is a division between intelligent people, stupid people, and stubborn people. Stupid people like to say that god creates everything out of thin air, like magic. Stubborn people like to use the stupid peoples views to rail against religion. An intelligent person understands that we can find answers to how our universe is working and moving around us, but in no way does that dissprove God. We are ants in an ant farm. Just because we figure out what the dirt is made of doesn't mean a human didn't put it there. We see our world through our own experiences and observations. We only understand things that we can do or can observe. Is it so difficult to think that God influences the universe in a way that we can't (and therefore can't understand).

yay to u43. So basically, there are religious people, who take everything literally (ie. Do you really think that god reated the world in seven days, you have to look at hidden meanings behind all the stuff in the bible) there are people who wont accept others beliefs, and there are those who understand stuff?

Did i read wrong or did you say fear has nothing to do with survival?
Rofl i love these über nerdy conversations ^^
Seems like everyone knows everything about everything. (except me, that is)

Humans have 4 primal urges, which must be achieved or a person WILL go insane. Those who don't experience these are usually considered by the public to BE insane.

1. Freedom from discomfort
2. Freedom from fear
3. Power over one's enviroment
4. Feeling value or worth (sometimes called love)

Fear has everything to do with survival.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rob

yay to u43. So basically, there are religious people, who take everything literally (ie. Do you really think that god reated the world in seven days, you have to look at hidden meanings behind all the stuff in the bible) there are people who wont accept others beliefs, and there are those who understand stuff?

---

Basically, that's how I feel about it.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying people with beliefs different than my own, or no beliefs are stupid. But when you're talking to people about god and science, I think there are only those three groups. You've got people that deny science because they think that if it isn't in the bible it must be a lie from the devil; you've got the people that think that every scientific find somehow disproves god (usually these people focus on the "stupid people" for their arguments); and there are people that think that science provides us glimpses into the amazing creation that God has given us. Like gears in a clock.

My belief is that god absolutely exists, and evolution is real. And those two don't cancel each other out, in fact they prove each other. Evolution allows things to change and grow; and I think we can all agree that God wants his universe to change and grow. Science and scientific finds don't speak on the existence of God, in my mind. The Big Bang, evolution, dark matter, etc., etc. show us how God has touched the universe to make it how it was intended to be.

Hey, I just registered today at the forums. I just downloaded PSP 7.0 today and i am going through some of the tuts and creating my own shiaza and I must say this site is badass and very useful for noobs as myself.

Anyways, I personally believe that science and God (not religion, I dislike religion) cannot be explained unless they are used together. I have just recently been researching this year about our beginning and different theories about God.

You are correct Alexander, there are no absolute truths. But you will find little bits of truth everywhere. But it does exist i promise you. Our human mind can only comprehend so much so don't expect to unlock the secrets of life. Scientists today are just beginning to scratch the surface of this issue. Atheist scientists are now saying there must be a God. Because they can't prove much without one. I personally would rather read about science than the bible because it gives you theories that can be understood and how it can be so.

These are some of the books you may want to look into if you are actually interested.

You need to know about the Big Bang Theory and Einsteins Theory of Relativity to begin to start reading, because most scientists base their hypothesis off Einstein and talk a lot about the big bang.
These books are about Quantum Science. Fun to read and really fun to talk about and mess with your buddy's heads!
QUANTUM REALITY. BY NICK HERBER
THE MATTER MYTH PAUL DAVIES AND JOHN GRIBBIN
THE MIND OF GOD PAUL DAVIES PAPERBACK
WHERE DOES THE WEIRDNESS GO? DAVID LINDLEY
THE SCIENCE OF GOD GERALD SCHROEDER
GENESIS AND THE BIG BANG GERALD SHROEDER
THE HIDDEN FACE OF GOD GERALD SCHROEDERThese books will probably blow your mind. I just got finished reading "The Universe In a Nutshell" By Stephen Hawking. Very interesting book.

Sorry If I haven't exactly why they cannot be explained without each other. I've made documents for school assignments for this and it turned out to be many, many pages long and I don't think anyone is that interested to hear my theories of bullshit.

It is very interesting that I saw this here. One of my dad's friends (great guy) is making a book all about this. He backs everything up with scripture, scientists, and facts. It is a great book, but hasn't been published yet, because he is getting proofread by a scientist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rob

yay to u43. So basically, there are religious people, who take everything literally (ie. Do you really think that god created the world in seven days, you have to look at hidden meanings behind all the stuff in the bible) there are people who wont accept others beliefs, and there are those who understand stuff?

---

This is exactly what I am talking about. I love it rob! It is true God most likely didn't make the Universe in 7 days in todays time.
GENESIS AND THE BIG BANG GERALD SHROEDER[FONT=verdana,geneva,lucida,'lucida grande',arial,helvetica,sans-serif]
States that he actually made it in many billions of years. If i recall right
it was 8 but thats just a theory. No one really knows. Time behaved differently back then.
Another interesting thought is that God in a way didn't take no time at all. In the realm
of God there is no time. If you've read about traveling at the speed of light you know that you do
not age and time doesn't pass. I won't go into detail but just think about it.
Hell some scientists don't believe in time like Julian Barbour. He states that time only exists in measuring
between one event and another.

Anyways hope you find what i have said interesting. Please take what I have said as a theory not a fact.
[/FONT]