agathodaimon
Senior member
- Jul 11, 2005
- 488
- 0
- 0
I don't reply to off topic threads a lot, but MAN there are a lot of religion/science-oriented threads.
My point wasn't to try to disprove or prove anything. My point was that religion tends to think that if you have faith in anything it proves that religion is more correct somehow.
I have faith that I am not going to get hit by a meteorite today, but that doesn't add any credibility to any other thing you may or may not have faith in.
Yes, but you aren't putting absolute faith in the process, then, because you are reserving judgement based on results. That's like if I say, "I trust in the justice system - except when it fails, like in [insert case here]".
There are many principles in the Bible, hundreds in just the book of Proverbs alone, which can be tested in the life of even non-believers. I myself have tested many of the principles and commandments w/promises in the Bible, and I have yet to find one that did not hold up. If you think the Bible is ridiculous, why not put it to the test (speaking to everyone, here). I am not talking about historical facts in the Bible, nor science, but principles of living and doctrine. Why not history? Because there will always be false historical facts out there thrown at the Bible, and different sources contradict each other extrabiblically. Why not science? Because there will always be faulty or untested science used to attack the Bible. Test the proverbs and doctrinal instructions of the Bible in your life, and see if they hold water.
>Will science ever wipe out organized religion?
I'd say it is more likely that religion will wipe out organized science. Just look at Islam - and the fact that people over there kill folks just because of some cartoons. Then, realize that we are letting lots of muslims move over here and have 8 kids per family. Get ready for Sharia law and armed rebellion in a couple of generations, folks.
I'd say it is more likely that religion will wipe out organized science. Just look at Islam - and the fact that people over there kill folks just because of some cartoons. Then, realize that we are letting lots of muslims move over here and have 8 kids per family. Get ready for Sharia law and armed rebellion in a couple of generations, folks.
I've briefly read about a lot of faulty scientific things that "proved" different religions wrong...either that, or the evidence was taken completely the wrong way (even seen by some strange Christian scholars).
There is a lot of scientific evidence (or other sorts of evidence) that can be used for religions (in particular Christianity).
Simply put, science has actually helped "prove" Christianity (not sure about other religions), so I don't think it will ever wipe it out.
A lot of it, thought, is taking evidence and *reasonably* applying it to your "theory". Some of the same evidence used to "prove" evolution can be used as evidence to "prove" that a massive flood happened on the Earth a few thousand years ago, and etc.
There are many ways that they can work together, science and religion, and many ways they don't. There's enough there though that real, honest science will never wipe out religions.
(Two particular books I can think of are The Case for Christ (Lee Strobel) and In Six Days (Chuck McGowan). The latter I recommend...some ideas may seem stretched, but it's a very interesting read in the least.)
There is a lot of scientific evidence (or other sorts of evidence) that can be used for religions (in particular Christianity).
Simply put, science has actually helped "prove" Christianity (not sure about other religions), so I don't think it will ever wipe it out.
A lot of it, thought, is taking evidence and *reasonably* applying it to your "theory". Some of the same evidence used to "prove" evolution can be used as evidence to "prove" that a massive flood happened on the Earth a few thousand years ago, and etc.
There are many ways that they can work together, science and religion, and many ways they don't. There's enough there though that real, honest science will never wipe out religions.
(Two particular books I can think of are The Case for Christ (Lee Strobel) and In Six Days (Chuck McGowan). The latter I recommend...some ideas may seem stretched, but it's a very interesting read in the least.)
Yes, when the universe destroys all life and the either expands too far for life anywhere to be supported, or contracts again to its original state, science will have wiped out all religion. Of course, it will have wiped out science as well. Unless God saves both, neither will survive.
science will seriously lower the numbers of faith based belief systems and followers,alot of faith based thinkers seek faith in a vain persuit of immortality. Science has already lowered numbers alot. The ripple effect is increased self worship and crime.
I personally believe in god, but I have gone through my thoughts, and for many years my beliefs were vanity and fear based, since I became inclined to some scientific readings nearly 20 years ago and metaphysics 20 years ago I have developed beyond the vanity to the degree that any habitual sinner could.
Science will lower the belief count ,but not eradicate it,as there are some who purely believe,and its a manifestation of self love and community love; so as science would say , a person with a high endorphan count. LOL
I personally believe in god, but I have gone through my thoughts, and for many years my beliefs were vanity and fear based, since I became inclined to some scientific readings nearly 20 years ago and metaphysics 20 years ago I have developed beyond the vanity to the degree that any habitual sinner could.
Science will lower the belief count ,but not eradicate it,as there are some who purely believe,and its a manifestation of self love and community love; so as science would say , a person with a high endorphan count. LOL
highly relevant article
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/04/magaz...e75680e73&ex=1173243600&pagewanted=all
"This internal push and pull between the spiritual and the rational reflects what used to be called the ?God of the gaps? view of religion. The presumption was that as science was able to answer more questions about the natural world, God would be invoked to answer fewer, and religion would eventually recede. Research about the evolution of religion suggests otherwise. No matter how much science can explain, it seems, the real gap that God fills is an emptiness that our big-brained mental architecture interprets as a yearning for the supernatural. The drive to satisfy that yearning, according to both adaptationists and byproduct theorists, might be an inevitable and eternal part of what Atran calls the tragedy of human cognition."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/04/magaz...e75680e73&ex=1173243600&pagewanted=all
"This internal push and pull between the spiritual and the rational reflects what used to be called the ?God of the gaps? view of religion. The presumption was that as science was able to answer more questions about the natural world, God would be invoked to answer fewer, and religion would eventually recede. Research about the evolution of religion suggests otherwise. No matter how much science can explain, it seems, the real gap that God fills is an emptiness that our big-brained mental architecture interprets as a yearning for the supernatural. The drive to satisfy that yearning, according to both adaptationists and byproduct theorists, might be an inevitable and eternal part of what Atran calls the tragedy of human cognition."
No. There is zero both ways, just as there is zero proof of and against the existence of unicorns.
This is off-topic but, the modern image of the unicorn (white horse with a single, spiraling horn) probably never existed, but perhaps the tales of such dating back thousands of years ago were based on the rhinoceros or a different animal, and there are evidences for the various theories. Read the Wikipedia article.
The fact that so many people believe in God proves that a belief in God is superior to atheism. If such a belief were not superior then it wouldn't have evolved as a dominant trait in so many societies. So Darwinism proves the superiority of religious beliefs.
The whole premise of this thread is that science contradicts religion, for which there is no proof. In many areas of science you learn new things only to find more questions and things you don't know. For example, I've taken several years of psychology in college, and the most recuring theme is that there are multiple theories to explain human behavior and how the human mind works, but none of those theories are taken as fact, nor do they explain everything. In short, you're assuming that science will one day have the answer to everything, and there's no proof for that either.
So you're comparing atheism with idiocy? So you believe since we are in a easy environment atheism will predominate in the future? Things like promiscuity are no longer taboo and atheist will out breed those whose breeding is inhibited by religious taboos. You might be right.
EXman
Lifer
- Jul 12, 2001
- 20,079
- 15
- 81
typical trolling from an anti-Christian know it all.
If anyone can prove there is no God, which I think is an arrogant and more than likely a waste of time cause our science cannot prove everything, please stop calling church peeps stupid.
Can I prove there is a God? probably not to your satisfaction, no. Can you prove there isn't...
nom b/c science can never answer the deeper questions we as human beings struggle with:
1. who am i?
2. what is my purpose?
3. where am i going?
1. who am i?
2. what is my purpose?
3. where am i going?
Dinosaurs existed.
Simply because the earth is 4.5 billion years old. The old testament isn't a valid historical reference btw.
God is a creation of man, to serve as an explanation of the unknown and as a convenient comfort for that which is inevitable. Death.
zinfamous
No Lifer
- Jul 12, 2006
- 111,994
- 31,558
- 146
Sure it can!
1. I am Zaak (also human)
2. facilitating the exchange of O2 into CO2; procreation; or better yet--there really isn't a purpose, I just "am"
3. Omaha? eventually, though: worm food.
The question that science truly can't answer, however: "Is there life after death/Is there a soul?"
Find a way to test this claim and you may not win the Nobel, but you'll probably get a lot of tail...which would at least help to facilitate your role in answer 2, above.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter