A religious question

[RichardE]

So, while thinking about The debate. I am sitting, trying and thinking of how science and religion are mixed. Where religion tells us we god created us out of nothing, (we will stick to Christian religion here.) and Science tells us we were created from a single point of intense energy.

So while thinking about this, I came up with an idea of what if?

What if the bible was real, works written by man inspired by a real god to influence us over generations. The problem arises with what is written does not correspond to what we know.

On another thought, If say my three year old son came and asked me "Dad, where did I come from?"

"Well son, you were a baby and came out of mummies tummy"


Fast forward 10 years, and my 13 year old asks the same question, well, it is time for the "talk"

So perhaps the bible was dumb downed for people of the time. I doubt if the prophets had sat on there perchers and tried to teach modern day physics to the people of the time it would have had the influence they had, they would have probally been called madman and punished for blasphemy. Perhaps religion was meant to grow with science. It is without a doubt that some of the laws that govern our world are seemingly brushed with a divine hand, at the same time, the bible is out of date it seems with its explanations of the world.

What do you guys think? Was religion meant to grow alongside science?

 

[MAW1082]

I think religion is meant as a substitute for science.

Most organized religions offer answers to the unknown. These answers are supposed to be accepted through faith.

Science offers answers to the unknown. These answers are supposed to be answered through observation, experimentation and repetition.

For the most part, I think organized religion and science are incompatible.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: MAW1082
I think religion is meant as a substitute for science.

Most organized religions offer answers to the unknown. These answers are supposed to be accepted through faith.

Science offers answers to the unknown. These answers are supposed to be answered through observation, experimentation and repetition.

For the most part, I think organized religion and science are incompatible.

Oh of course, I am going on the assertion that there is a god. Would he want us to be a gimped as we have been 2000 years ago? Or grow as we discover the world he created. Perhaps the modern church was suppose to grow away from offering explanations for the unknown, to grow to be solely a pace to aid in ones faith of god. Like "the world can be crazy, and frustrating at times, we understand, yet we are here for a place of peace". It just seems that Science and Religion should not fight, when in reality they compliment each other.

 

[MAW1082]

If one believes in a god, I would assume one would believe that a god has designed the world in way such that religion and science would compliment each other.

The real question I think you are asking is: In a world with one god who has designed all that is, why does the only known written 'word of god' directly contradict many of 'theories' modern science has put forward?

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: MAW1082
If one believes in a god, I would assume one would believe that a god has designed the world in way such that religion and science would compliment each other.

The real question I think you are asking is: In a world with one god who has designed all that is, why does the only known written 'word of god' directly contradict many of 'theories' modern science has put forward?

Not totally

My question is, in a word with one god, is it possible that the man who wrote the book that the god gave to us, perhaps did not understand it totally, and only wrote it in terms clean to them. Or perhaps the way god explained it to them was a in a simple form since they would not grasp the true depth of what we now know as science.

I am suggesting that the bible was a "simple" version of the world for "simple" times.

 

[biggestmuff]

Originally posted by: RichardE
So, while thinking about The debate. I am sitting, trying and thinking of how science and religion are mixed. Where religion tells us we god created us out of nothing, (we will stick to Christian religion here.) and Science tells us we were created from a single point of intense energy.

So while thinking about this, I came up with an idea of what if?

What if the bible was real, works written by man inspired by a real god to influence us over generations. The problem arises with what is written does not correspond to what we know.

On another thought, If say my three year old son came and asked me "Dad, where did I come from?"

"Well son, you were a baby and came out of mummies tummy"


Fast forward 10 years, and my 13 year old asks the same question, well, it is time for the "talk"

So perhaps the bible was dumb downed for people of the time. I doubt if the prophets had sat on there perchers and tried to teach modern day physics to the people of the time it would have had the influence they had, they would have probally been called madman and punished for blasphemy. Perhaps religion was meant to grow with science. It is without a doubt that some of the laws that govern our world are seemingly brushed with a divine hand, at the same time, the bible is out of date it seems with its explanations of the world.

What do you guys think? Was religion meant to grow alongside science?

i wouldn't say it was dumbed down. It was written by men using their knowledge of science at the time of their existence.

If you read A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking, he discusses how it's possible to believe in God and the big bang theory.

 

[jackschmittusa]

I think what you are doing is an excercise in futility. As a non-believer, I would say that there is no way rationalize or hypothacize any holy book based on mythology and superstition with science. On the other hand, the true believers, depending on their segment's core belief system, will likely tell you things such as: it is the true word of God, do not question it, as a mere mortal, you are not bright enough to understand God's will or plan, to a person of faith, the descrepancies are not worth noting, it is the message that counts.

What you are doing is speculation. While it is a fun exercise sometimes, there are no valid answers because there can be no evidence presented, no test results displayed, no premises considered proven true to derive a true conclusion.

From my experience with others though, if you are, or want to be, a true believer, such questions will not be a barrier to your faith, nor will any imagined answers lead you to it. True faith seems to be made of different stuff.

 

[Moonbeam]

My personal opinion is that religion exists because it must. Because of the unique bicameral nature of our minds that evolution handed us, the ability to have a separate consciousness in each hemisphere of the brain and the fact that we learned to use language in the last 200 thousand years or so, we have fallen ill to a disease that is also most unique. Before language humans existed at one with the universe in perfect harmony with each moment of time. We were totally conscious but unaware that we were. With language came the capacity to abstract, to actually live in our heads. We separated from time and entered the past as all thought is of things we've experienced. Thought is of the past. Thought is fear. We were taught, once we abstracted meanings that there is something called good and evil when in fact these things do not exist. We use language to control, we make others conform by teaching them to fear the withdrawal of love and support if their behavior is evil. We were all made to hate who we were and to be what others expect us to be. We were meant to be God and were turned into the Devil and that's where all the fun of human psychosis began.

Every once in a while somebody experiences the perfection of timeless consciousness either via some deep religious practice or some other kind of rare mental shock and their understanding is radically transformed. And since nobody has much of an idea at all as to what is going on they interpret their experiences according to what they have been taught. Religion is the inevitable result of the fact that we are sick and on rare occasions get well. Naturally those who are well have an urge to help those who are sick. It is difficult for the sick however to know who is a doctor and who is a quack since everybody likes to pretend he is well.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: RichardE
Perhaps religion was meant to grow with science.

It is without a doubt that some of the laws that govern our world are seemingly brushed with a divine hand, at the same time, the bible is out of date it seems with its explanations of the world.

What do you guys think?

Was religion meant to grow alongside science?

There are many ideas, laws etc that are not keeping up with modern times because of Science itself.

Old thinking does not believe in Science because it contradicts modern science.

Take Religious conservatives that are in control of the U.S. for example.

Their hanging on to old world thinking dictates that they don't believe in the new science.

 

[engineereeyore]

I'm not sure Christian religion believes that we were created out of nothing, though I could be wrong. We know the body was not created out of nothing, so I guess it's just the spirit that may be debated. I tend to agree with the Law of the Conservation of Energy. Our spirits could not have been created out of nothing, but organized out of some type of matter, just as the Earth and the rest of the universe was. Where that matter initially came from? Who knows? Plenty of theories on that, I'm sure.

As for religion growing with science, I believe science to be a strong component of religion. Consider miracles. There is nothing special about miracles once you understand how they work. How do sick people get well? Typically their cells begin operating in the proper fashion, rather than incorrectly. You know, like cancers and blindness. They're all a result of cells gone wild. If God can alter or collaborate the behavior of molecules or atoms in order to produce the universe or create a human body, why can he not fix one? What he does it therefore considered a miracle because we don't understand it. But with the help of science and our increase knowledge of how things work, miracles and such begin to make more sense. The only real question is how does God control the elements themselves? Why do they listen to him and obey his will? I'm not sure that science will ever understand that, though it may, but in the meantime, science can really bring people closer to God by helping them understand the power he possesses and understand how he uses this power.

I'm not sure that make sense to everyone, but I don't feel religion was meant to change with science, but that our understanding of religion was meant to grow through science. Perhaps that's a better way of putting it.

 

[fitzov]

Was religion meant to grow alongside science?

Since science didn't exist until quite a bit later on relative to the time the books of the Bible was written, I'd have to say "No".

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Was religion meant to grow alongside science?

Since science didn't exist until quite a bit later on relative to the time the books of the Bible was written, I'd have to say "No".

Science existed, just not modern day science.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore
I'm not sure Christian religion believes that we were created out of nothing, though I could be wrong. We know the body was not created out of nothing, so I guess it's just the spirit that may be debated. I tend to agree with the Law of the Conservation of Energy. Our spirits could not have been created out of nothing, but organized out of some type of matter, just as the Earth and the rest of the universe was. Where that matter initially came from? Who knows? Plenty of theories on that, I'm sure.

As for religion growing with science, I believe science to be a strong component of religion. Consider miracles. There is nothing special about miracles once you understand how they work. How do sick people get well? Typically their cells begin operating in the proper fashion, rather than incorrectly. You know, like cancers and blindness. They're all a result of cells gone wild. If God can alter or collaborate the behavior of molecules or atoms in order to produce the universe or create a human body, why can he not fix one? What he does it therefore considered a miracle because we don't understand it. But with the help of science and our increase knowledge of how things work, miracles and such begin to make more sense. The only real question is how does God control the elements themselves? Why do they listen to him and obey his will? I'm not sure that science will ever understand that, though it may, but in the meantime, science can really bring people closer to God by helping them understand the power he possesses and understand how he uses this power.

I'm not sure that make sense to everyone, but I don't feel religion was meant to change with science, but that our understanding of religion was meant to grow through science. Perhaps that's a better way of putting it.

Thats awsome actually and helped. It definatly answered a few questions I had been posing to myself that I couldn't put into words.

 

[fitzov]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: fitzov

Was religion meant to grow alongside science?

Since science didn't exist until quite a bit later on relative to the time the books of the Bible was written, I'd have to say "No".

Science existed, just not modern day science.

oh really? I would say the scientific method begins with Bacon (17th century), and is entrenched by Popper (20th century). What do you mean by 'science' if not this?

 

[Moonbeam]

The notion that God acts as an agent independent of the human heart and mind is a notion that totally escapes me. Why else pray for His will to be done on earth as it is in Heaven if it's not up to use to manifest His will as ours. How can we be called to do what is good and not evil if we do not know organically what is right and what is wrong. We created God in our Image.

 

[blackllotus]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore
The only real question is how does God control the elements themselves?

The real question is whether God exists or not. Without an answer to that question why bother asking how He controls the elements?

Originally posted by: engineereeyore
If God can alter or collaborate the behavior of molecules or atoms in order to produce the universe or create a human body, why can he not fix one?

There is no reason to believe that God created us.

Originally posted by: engineereeyore
science can really bring people closer to God by helping them understand the power he possesses and understand how he uses this power.

The concept of God will only get weaker as science continues to unravel how the universe works.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: fitzov

Was religion meant to grow alongside science?

Since science didn't exist until quite a bit later on relative to the time the books of the Bible was written, I'd have to say "No".

Science existed, just not modern day science.

oh really? I would say the scientific method begins with Bacon (17th century), and is entrenched by Popper (20th century). What do you mean by 'science' if not this?

Anaximander (Trying to figure what the world was made of)
Epedocles
Hippocrates (Father of medicine)


Leucippus and Democritus (Originally claimed the theory of atoms)

Eratosthenes (spent years determining size of the earth)
Aristarchus (Who orignally came up with the concept of the earth spinning around the sun)

Lest we forget China with the invention of paper, block printing, gunpower, all results of scientific research.

Yeah, science existed, as I said, not modern day science, but people have been looking for truth for a long time.

 

[beyoku]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: fitzov

Was religion meant to grow alongside science?

Since science didn't exist until quite a bit later on relative to the time the books of the Bible was written, I'd have to say "No".

Science existed, just not modern day science.

oh really? I would say the scientific method begins with Bacon (17th century), and is entrenched by Popper (20th century). What do you mean by 'science' if not this?

Anaximander (Trying to figure what the world was made of)
Epedocles
Hippocrates (Father of medicine)


Leucippus and Democritus (Originally claimed the theory of atoms)

Eratosthenes (spent years determining size of the earth)
Aristarchus (Who orignally came up with the concept of the earth spinning around the sun)

Lest we forget China with the invention of paper, block printing, gunpower, all results of scientific research.

Yeah, science existed, as I said, not modern day science, but people have been looking for truth for a long time.

Imhotep was the real father of medicine.

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Was religion meant to grow alongside science?

Since science didn't exist until quite a bit later on relative to the time the books of the Bible was written, I'd have to say "No".

I would most certainly not think so. If that was the case, up till the point we discovered "science" we'd still be in caves just grunting to one another.

"science" is just the process of understanding how things work as it exists in the world...and we've been doing that since day 1.

 

[fitzov]

"science" is just the process of understanding how things work as it exists in the world

Sorry, that's metaphysics.

 

[fitzov]

Yeah, science existed, as I said, not modern day science, but people have been looking for truth for a long time.

Coming up with an invention or a recipe does not amount to science. "Looking for truth." can be done in many ways non-empirical (e.g. logic, math, geometry).

Science requires a methodology in which hypotheses derivable from theory can be verified or falsified by empirical means. Discovering facts about the world by making observations is not scientific in and of itself.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: fitzov

"science" is just the process of understanding how things work as it exists in the world

Sorry, that's metaphysics.

I thought it was bad grammar.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Yeah, science existed, as I said, not modern day science, but people have been looking for truth for a long time.

Coming up with an invention or a recipe does not amount to science. "Looking for truth." can be done in many ways non-empirical (e.g. logic, math, geometry).

Science requires a methodology in which hypotheses derivable from theory can be verified or falsified by empirical means. Discovering facts about the world by making observations is not scientific in and of itself.

Where did you obtain your definition? I have heard many, but never yours.

 

[Stunt]

Religion and Science are intended to co-exist. RichardE and I have had numerous conversations on this topic, but I will summarize my opinion on this matter.

Science is excellent and has a great track record of describing what is...not explaining how or sometimes why. For example, science knows that gravity exists and can solve many problems using it. But it doesn't know why or how objects are attracted to each other. Science will continue to get exceedingly accurate at describing the atmosphere around us; but it will will never understand our 'existance' or what is 'moral'.

This is what religion was developed for...a system of beliefs to help explain the unknowns; I don't endrose or practice religion but I do understand its purpose and I think it's great to see people seek deeper meaning. Everyone wants to be spoon fed answers and youth these days are raised studying scientific theories as if they are fact. When you reach the university level, you finally get to see how highly inaccurate these theories are; and this is describing what is...not how or why.

I believe in this day in age we are surrounded by all this impressive technology which fools us into thinking science has all the answers...when in fact it knows very little. Over time we will see science progress; but again, it will never replace the basic principles a religion will provide.

 

[Moonbeam]

People make a lot of guesses when they don't know anything. They fill in the unknowns at the end of the map with monsters. The monsters, of course, are the projection of our self hate.

We know noting, also of course, because we don't want to. Knowledge is knowing all about monsters. Do you know about the monster within? No, I didn't think so. Ah but how much more pleasant are airy fairy theories instead. How many angles can stand on the head of a pin, and what and when or how did science begin....... These are things you can sink your gums into. Leave the monsters to people with teeth.

But Mulla, your are riding your donkey backward. Ah said the Mulla, it's the donkey that's the wrong way round.