-
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!
An honest question for believers
- Thread starter Music
- Start date
sandandfoam
Veteran Member
Science continues to bring to light the wonder and beauty of creation.
It would seem odder to me if it did not increase the faith of believers.
It would seem odder to me if it did not increase the faith of believers.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
there are many examples, but a few that stand out to me are the fundamental forces of nature, laws governing the universe, finely tuned cosmos, the human genome project which has concluded we are all from the same stock, the information contained in the dna, the universe beginning with the 'big bang', the instincts that are pre-programed into animals
it all points to design and organization.....that means intelligence. The more complexity that has been found, the more reason there is to believe in an intelligent mind behind the complexity.
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
None of this indicates that life is inherently designed, nor does it indicate what would design it.
It is a fallacy co claim that complexity requires design. There is absolutely no reasoning behind such an assumption, other than a profound lack of ability to differentiate between things that are intentionally designed by man and things that occur and replicate naturally.
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
Pastek
Sunni muslim
Like what for exemple ? What they discoverted that can makes me doubt about my faith ?
Shuddhasattva
Well-Known Member
If one doesn't have a god-of-the-gaps idea of divinity, I see no conflict between science and religion.
Ideas held by some religions have been validated by science in the last 100 years or so, or have yielded results which are interpreted by adherents as validating their views. Atomism, quantum mechanics, superstring & M-theory, etc.
Ideas held by some religions have been validated by science in the last 100 years or so, or have yielded results which are interpreted by adherents as validating their views. Atomism, quantum mechanics, superstring & M-theory, etc.
Science is one tool in humanity's box through which we understand the gods. Science is part of my religion, and that I am a career scientist is a decision I made precisely because I like using science to know the gods. Scientific discoveries neither strengthen or weaken my acceptance of the gods; instead it at times changes how I view them. That the gods exist is never questioned because doing so is nonsense. The gods are everything, and questioning the existence of the universe and everything is just nonsense. Others need not agree with my god-concept, as definitions of things are constructs and thus not things that can be proven or evidenced. I see the gods everywhere because I see magic everywhere; I see beauty everywhere; I see sublime wonder everywhere. The awesomeness of the world I live in is worth being thankful for and honoring with humble reference or worship. Thus, I call it divine.
Super Universe
Defender of God
There is this idea that God is anti-science. God created the universe. He is the original scientist. God is more pro-science than anyone.
In ancient times religion and science were the same thing. The holy man interpreted the signs and told the people what to do to appease God. Then came along more organized religions and more powerful religious leaders.
When smart men began to conduct tests and build telescopes and used them to give humanity more plausible explanations for natural events it caused a riff. The religious leaders wanted the people to look to them for the answers and not to these new so called "scientists". Over time the people began to trust the scientists answers more and more and the religious leaders lost influence and income because of it.
To me, every scientific discovery is another clue to how God did it.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
'Split the atom, and lo,thou whilt find a sun.' I believe that Mahommed said this? Can a Moslem confirm this, please?
Regardless of the above, every new discovery points more surely to God. Even atheist scientists are God's instruments. And now we can see other planets in other solar systems, clearly suggesting how vast God's creations stretch,and how small we are!
God is Great!
Regardless of the above, every new discovery points more surely to God. Even atheist scientists are God's instruments. And now we can see other planets in other solar systems, clearly suggesting how vast God's creations stretch,and how small we are!
God is Great!
I will give you an example; Let me start by asking you a question? When you see a car that has an amazing shape, full option, and fast and strong!! Wouldnt you say that an intelligent mind who paid attention to details was behind making this car? if its not! Then its not good to be used! Right? The amazingly organized system that we live within indicates to an intellectual ability. Because if not you wont find the universe around you in such harmony. For me I dont have to see the complicated scientific discoveries to know that Allah is there, its enough to see that there is a night after the day and that my body needs to rest and needs night as it needs the day ; they are there for human otherwise I would not stop working or not stop sleeping. This is not coincidence!
Moreover the creater of this world has claimed that he made this whole universe; nobody else has claimed to create this universe! And nobody can claim that because its beyond all creatures ability but not beyond the real creaters ability who has said in Quraan look into your own body system and think? dont you see? Dont you understand? Dont you think ? what make believers have more faith day by day is that the latest discoveries have proven Quraan to be correct, because they have seen that what was mentioned in Quraan before more than 1433 years is being discovered now!!
the translated Quraan has more information on this.. limited information wont lead to the truth ....is good to search.
Man of Faith
Well-Known Member
The discovery of the start of the universe validated the Bible. Before that discovery, evolutionists of the day were saying that it was eternal in order to have time for evolution to happen.
Nothing about the human experience validates atheism. Love, morality, personhood, ethics, good and evil, consciousness, logic, emotions, language, genetic code, and all the systems in place to support humans that work together, the atmosphere, food, water, all the biological systems that it takes to support life.
Nothing about the human experience validates atheism. Love, morality, personhood, ethics, good and evil, consciousness, logic, emotions, language, genetic code, and all the systems in place to support humans that work together, the atmosphere, food, water, all the biological systems that it takes to support life.
Could you please explain? You presuppose gods and then bring in science ... hopefully you see a problem here.
Not really. I presuppose a definition of the gods that doesn't divorce them from nature like classical monotheism typically does. If the gods are the universe (or immanent, to put it another way), then science is a way of studying the gods. As I already said before, others need not agree with this way of defining the gods. This includes you. I make my choice, you make yours.
The line of thinking for my brand of theism goes like this:
1) The universe exists.
2) The universe is wondrous and awe-inspiring. It's worth being thankful for and revering.
3) The word "god" captures #2, thus I call the universe divine.
I dont' so much presuppose "god" as presuppose the universe exists and that it's awesome. That awesome can be expressed as sacred/god/spirit/magic/whatever.
Last edited:
No, because the term "god" has an emotional character and certain implications that the term "universe/reality" does not. Consider the fact that the majority of people in my culture would not regard the material world as a subject worthy of worship. Consider also that some religions teach the material world is a thing to be shunned, is a thing that is dirty, or is a thing that is inherently wicked. They don't allow nature to be sacred, much less worthy of the same kind of veneration they show for their god-concept.
No, it's not redundant at all. Merely calling it "universe" or "reality" carries no implications of reverence, worship, sacredness, or awe. It doesn't have to be the word "god." I also use the word "spirit" or "sacred" or whatever strikes my fancy. The point is, the universe holds the equivalent position as an object of reverence as, say, the Christian god does to Christians.
Shuddhasattva
Well-Known Member
No, for several reasons.
1. One's attitude towards objects as a subject. Reverence, adoration, worship - especially in a nondual sense which reconciles this subject, object, and mode of knowing, goes a long way towards experiencing reality positively, even blissfully.
2. Altered/transcendent conscious states are implied, and whether or not "existent" or "meaningful" to outside observers, can be subjectively raised efficaciously through premise of the divine - more than belief.
3. Metaphysical implications of god as/beyond universe, in terms of experiencing subjectively reality in a way that scientific instruments cannot, yet which is compatible in observation with them, even synergistic.
I pretty much hold a similar god concept to quintessence, the only difference being I tend to "pluralize" and thus use the term "gods" instead of "god" and "spirits" instead of "spirit". I view the whole universe as divine and see no separation nor any need to believe there is an inherent separation between the natural world(I prefer that term to "material") and the spiritual world or divine world or whatever you wish to call it. As such I see no reason for religion and science to conflict with eachother.
Beyond that I see science as a way to know the universe and religion as a way to know myself. Thus once again I see now reason for conflict between the two.
Beyond that I see science as a way to know the universe and religion as a way to know myself. Thus once again I see now reason for conflict between the two.
mycorrhiza
Well-Known Member
When it comes to the "fine-tuned Universe" I believe it was Douglas Adams who wrote about the puddle and the hole. A puddle finds himself in a hole, it fits him perfectly and he draws the conclusion that the hole must have been made for him. The reality is that the puddle adapted to hole, just like humanity adapted to life on Earth.
While there is a possibility that there is a God that created the Universe for humans I feel that this is quite unlikely.
While there is a possibility that there is a God that created the Universe for humans I feel that this is quite unlikely.
Haha, it's funny you comment about the pluralization, MoonWater, because the main reason I didn't pluralize "god" back there was because it felt grammatically awkward to refer to a singular noun (the universe/reality) in the plural when speaking of its divinity. >_> I definitely work with the divine in a polytheistic fashion, but I wouldn't peg myself as either a monotheist or polytheist. It is like asking of the universe is a single thing or composed of many things. It is both and neither. Depends on how you want to relate to it. I can't relate to something a big as "the universe/reality" as a whole, so I don't even try. Heck, I have a hard time relating to Gaea as a whole even though I live on this beautiful blue-green sphere!