-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A question
- Thread starter Monomonk
- Start date
blackout
Violet.
Science only takes into account ...
well... what man is able to repeatedly account for
under a specific given condition,
or
by interpretation of mathematical formula.
(you science types are free to correct me if I'm missing something)
In some way this all fits into the grander nature of the MultiVerse.
For me God is All. Pan. The living sentient ever evolving MultiVerse.
Obviously there are loftier..
multidimensional understandings...
that we may, or may not ever know.
Science is an endeavor.
A look at a slice of what exists.
Is it possible to see the overriding whole?
Is it possible to explain the All?
Can science give measure to what it cannot measure?
I have no idea.
well... what man is able to repeatedly account for
under a specific given condition,
or
by interpretation of mathematical formula.
(you science types are free to correct me if I'm missing something)
In some way this all fits into the grander nature of the MultiVerse.
For me God is All. Pan. The living sentient ever evolving MultiVerse.
Obviously there are loftier..
multidimensional understandings...
that we may, or may not ever know.
Science is an endeavor.
A look at a slice of what exists.
Is it possible to see the overriding whole?
Is it possible to explain the All?
Can science give measure to what it cannot measure?
I have no idea.
blackout
Violet.
Well it is always possible,
that science hasn't yet realized some aspect
of the larger, overall equation
which would put a new "spin" on the outcome of a finding.
However in the purest sense...
yes ... all truths in the UniVerse/MultiVerse WILL be compatable by nature.
(be they scientific, religious, philisophical etc etc)
Last edited:
The Voice of Reason
Doctor of Thinkology
Could you (or monomonk) provide us with some evidence that shows us where God created science?
I was under the impression that people like Sir Isaac Newton, Enrico Fermi, and Jonas Salk invented (or created) the items for which they received credit in the history books.
Oddly, I also thought that the scientific method was developed over a couple of milennia, beginning with the Greeks, and later being refined by the likes of Sir Francis Bacon.
What can you show me, in terms of God creating the discipline of science?
Don'tcha know, TVOR: God poofed science into existence no later than the fifth day of creation.
These men, great as their feats were, didn't "create" anything; they learned new ways to use tools that already existed. Understand all the elements for modern technology have always existed; it's just we've only recently realized the potential.
The Voice of Reason
Doctor of Thinkology
The reason that this has happened "recently" is because mankind had to throw off the yoke of religious oppression of rational thought.
After the Dark Ages, and into the Age of Enlightement, the scientific method bloomed into what it is today. The unfettered search for data, facts, and knowledge are what allowed man to develop these tools into the various disciplines of science that have opened our world into what it is today.
And yes - these men (and others like them) did use their intellect to "create" the various things they are credited with. I wouldn't use the term "create", but BigD did, so I simply used his verbiage.
What a truly meaningless and worthless sentence. Would you please list 5 "elements for modern technology" so that the rest of us have some clue as to what you think you're talking about?
Sure. (though, yeah, without explaining what I mean, it is worthless... I apologize for that :sorry1
Steam power (locomotives, steam boats, etc)
Electrical Power (light bulbs, etc)
Radio technology (the radio itself, eventually television(I know it uses a different kind of technology but they're in the same ballpark: sending waves; pictures, sound, or both; from a source into a receiver), etc)
Computer technology (microchip, artificial intelligence, etc.)
Nanotechnology (don't really know if anything has been prototyped using this technology yet but I do know that it's around based on what I've heard from my mom, who is a secretary for scientists who are actually studying it)
My point is, these things, or at least the components used for them, have already existed in the world, though as Voice reminded us, it took a break from religious oppression of science to fully realize these things.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Nanotec and microchips have always existed?
Am I missing something?
Steam I'll grant you has been around since the Greek empire... but microchips?
wa:do
Am I missing something?
Steam I'll grant you has been around since the Greek empire... but microchips?
wa:do
Well it can't, providing the science is true. There is nothing wrong with the religion
as provided in the King James Bible, it is the interpretation of that religion that is
wrong, it is that interpretation that does not agree with true science, or factual science,
or whatever you want to call it. The "creationist" have it wrong. As soon as I have the
time I will explain it all in a Blazing New Blog!
monomonk:yes:
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
So plants existed before the sun?
And bats are birds?
wa:do
And bats are birds?
wa:do
I think, Painted Wolf, you missed the part where I said, components. So even if the technology itself didn't exist, the things that make it up did exist.
And I have heard that all things are made from Stardust, so while our Earthen plants and whatnot didn't exist before our Sun, the elements that make them up did, if you go by this logic. To me, this makes sense, because applied to the natural course of action when Stardust, that is, components that make stars and planets, fuse to make what we know of as stars and planets, everything needed was already there. It just took certain natural chemical reactions for things to have turned out as they did now, though I'm afraid I don't know all the technical details of what scientists say happened.
And I have heard that all things are made from Stardust, so while our Earthen plants and whatnot didn't exist before our Sun, the elements that make them up did, if you go by this logic. To me, this makes sense, because applied to the natural course of action when Stardust, that is, components that make stars and planets, fuse to make what we know of as stars and planets, everything needed was already there. It just took certain natural chemical reactions for things to have turned out as they did now, though I'm afraid I don't know all the technical details of what scientists say happened.
uss_bigd
Well-Known Member
Newton did not invent gravity, he DISCOVERED it exists... God created Humans and the scientific equilibrium that enables life to exists...
The greek's discovered the scientific method be because God Gave US the intelligence to discern his creation ....
God (The God of the Bible) Created Human and all that exists, science included.
The Voice of Reason
Doctor of Thinkology
So, basically, you invalidate the very question posed in the OP. Fair enough.
Do you grasp the concept (much less, the fact) that the majority of the people on this earth do not embrace the God of the Bible? When a given person does not believe in your God (that is, they reject your premise), your argument is no longer valid.
That is an innane assertion.
- And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl [that] may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
- And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good.
- And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
- And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
- And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
- And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
- And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: ...
Day 5
Day 6
Day 6
uss_bigd
Well-Known Member
You or the majority of people doesn't have to believe something to be true it if it is really true....
See galileo vs the Roman Catholic Chruch...:sleep:
The Voice of Reason
Doctor of Thinkology
Okay, now I get it.
If BigD believes something to be true, it is (even without supporting evidence).
If TVOR believes something to be false, it isn't (because BigD wants it to be true).
I like that, BigD. Straight, simple, clearcut. You have established yourself as the arbiter of truth. Heck - that was easy. I only wish that I had thought of it myself.
Oh - wait! I've got a great idea!
I'll declare myself to be the arbiter of the SUPREME TRUTH. That sounds more official than your title, and it will carry more weight.
Now that we have the titles settled, I hereby deem you to be wrong. Oh - and don't bother asking for any type of supporting evidence. I'm right because I say so, and I want it to be this way.
I disagree