Should there be harmony between science and religion?

[Earthling]

This, to me, is precisely what is wrong with religion and what is so right about science. To even think that science was ever arrogantly confident that anything is anything is to be playing in the wrong league of confidence about knowledge from that of science.

The confidence to change one's mind about one's understanding of a trustworthy ladder even while standing on it is what science does and religion rarely achieves.

Don't you think that that's a broad sweeping analysis that has no real application other than irony?

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Religion got us thinking about flying to the sun...

Science would've told Daedalus how to fix that wing problem.

And, of course, science got us to the moon.

Using science to cause death (against eugenics and abortion) and using science for control of others (any Christian worth their salt would be against the idea of barcodes... on people's body or especially microchips inside of people, it's the "Mark of the Beast" because it's literally a cattle brand). I'm not sure the Church would be in favor of nuke bombs, either.

The Church doesn't get to lecture ANYONE about causing harm.

Take the Congressional softball field shooter, the violent angry mobs of antifa, and the serial ricin hate mail sender -- what do they have in common? They aren't Trump supporters by any stretch of the imagination.

We're supposed to be better than that. I have learned just how idiotic my party is. However, Antifa is against fascists (who want entire groups of people DEAD). The fascists are the terrorists, not the people fighting against them, or else all the Allies in WW2 are terrorists and poor little Hitler and Mussolini needed to be left alone.

My grandfather actually was a Nazi.

Explains a lot.

Mendel, on the other hand, wasn't so threatening to established dogma -- plus, he was a monk.

And Darwin forgot he had articles from Mendel on in his office, which is why Darwin didn't link natural selection to genes. Easy to avoid church punishment if no one read your stuff. Kind of reminds me of me. My book sold one copy, LOL.

I think you're buying into the current "violent liberal mobs!" propaganda.

Has to. Nazi. The victims will always be more evil than the people with the guns and gas chambers.

They engage in varied protest tactics, which include digital activism, property damage and physical violence.

How DARE anyone fight back against the KKK and Nazis? All they need *sniffle* is a hug!

 

[Earthling]

Since this is a religious forum in general and a thread about science and religion, I will limit my response to your comment about government. It is off topic.

How very wise of you, if I may say so, sir.

A constitution is only as good as the owners that created that contract. The States own the U.S. Constitution. It is up to the States to enforce it. I agree the federal government regularly exceeds its authority. The further away from the constitution that defines it, however, the closer the nation moves to civil war. It is a very dangerous game they are playing. Here I end any further response concerning government.

Heh. Since you found the post interesting and it managed to distract you from a conversation you were having, I'll take that as a 'thank you'.

I sincerely enjoyed your post. I think it's healthy to stray off topic a little bit every once in a while so long as it's not too distracting, and we were more or less comparing the imperfections of politics with those of religion.

 

[Altfish]

Not at all. Privately funded science regularly doesn't publish. It would 'give away the farm', so to speak. Yet the engineering that comes out of those theories produces the products you buy.

There is no problem in the pharmaceutical industry. Science is not concerned with price. Engineering and marketing are. Price is set by market forces. Any attempt to introduce price controls always fails.

There is a huge problem in the pharmaceutical industry, can I recommend...
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Bad-Pharma...55521&sr=8-1&keywords=bad+pharma+ben+goldacre

 

[Altfish]

Oh, I know it works, and like you say peer review is just discussion and argument. The trouble is when people tend to imply that these methods are, like I said, more significant than they are. For example, that science is ultimate truth, or fact, because it is peer reviewed, experimentation etc.

Not sure who claims that.

 

[Salvador]

Science would've told Daedalus how to fix that wing problem.

We're supposed to be better than that. I have learned just how idiotic my party is. However, Antifa is against fascists (who want entire groups of people DEAD). The fascists are the terrorists, not the people fighting against them, or else all the Allies in WW2 are terrorists and poor little Hitler and Mussolini needed to be left alone.

How DARE anyone fight back against the KKK and Nazis? All they need *sniffle* is a hug!

2018 Reality update...Nazis died long ago and the KKK is now practically non-existent. Anifa stirs up trouble against some very imaginary threats. "Anifa harasses those whom they deem to be fascists, racists and right wing extremists." - Wikipedia

 

[Jose Fly]

Science has no theories about past unobserved events. They are not falsifiable.

Scientists across the globe would be quite surprised to hear that.

 

[Jose Fly]

2018 Reality update...Nazis died long ago and the KKK is now practically non-existent. Anifa stirs up trouble against some very imaginary threats. "Anifa harasses those whom they deem to be fascists, racists and right wing extremists." - Wikipedia

Then who the hell were these people?

 

[oldbadger]

Earth's crust is dirt and rock. It's dirty.

But Earth's crust and rock isn't 'dirty'. Why, my wife has the most beautiful examples of Earth's crust .... honestly.

But our atmosphere is something else altogether...,.,.

 

[Earthling]

Not sure who claims that.

I wouldn't use the term "claim" but rather "imply." Perhaps that is a projection on my part, but it does often seem implied.

 

[Salvador]

Then who the hell were these people?

Nazis are defined as belonging to the National Socialist German Workers' Party, which has been defunct since 1945. Everybody at the Unite the Right Rally at Charlottesville in the year 2017 never could have belonged to the Nazi Party. I'm not denying members of the KKK no longer exists, but they're so few of them left, they as an organization lack any significance.

 

[Dawnofhope]

I'm not sure if I did a bad job communicating, but there's a disconnect between what I'm trying to say and your response.

A scientific approach apportions beliefs to the evidence. If the scientific conclusion is "we can't definitely say that God does not exist, but we can find no justifiable reason to say he does," it's a rejection of the science to say "oh, but we're going to take the position that God certainly does exist!"

In this regard, many forms of theism - including yours - uses the same tactic as other forms of rejection of science. Pseudoscience and science denialism often comes down to incorrect assessments of certainty: creationist arguments often hinge on under-representing the amount of certainty warranted by the evidence for evolution. People who sell sham medical treatments and products often base their case on over-representing the amount of certainty warranted by poor evidence like anecdotes.

...so in this regard, most theism - including the Baha'i faith - rejects science with regard to gods. "We just don't know" fundamentally conflicts with "we do know... and we're so sure that we're going to build our lives around it."

It all seems straight forward really. If you want to achieve your goal you need the right approach. You use a hammer to bang nails into wood or use a screwdriver for the screws. A drill may make it easier. You could bring out an electron microscope but its the wrong tool!

Medical doctors know that cough mixture is no better than placebo. However the placebo effect is still important. If someone comes to see me and they are convinced the cough mixture the pharmacist gave them is helping them I'm not going to burst their bubble anymore than a homeopathic remedy that I believe to work for exactly the same reason.

I saw a guy who was psychotic once. He was consuming a native plant daily that was known to contain cyanide, under the mistaken impression it would be good for him.

1. – Poisonous plants and fungi – Te Ara Encyclopedia of New Zealand

There was good reason to advise if he continued he might die. We had him sectioned under the mental health act until he gained a little more perspective.

To be clear, Baha'is do not take the bible in its entirety literally so would be inclined to reject creationists arguments based on a literal interpretation of genesis in favour of science.

So what is God and how do we measure Him? For Baha'is He is an unknowable essence. That almost sounds like a non-existent essence, doesn't it? So God exists beyond the comprehension of man. No doubt you have heard the Baha'is say the way we come to know God is through His Manifestations. So as we apply a telescope to discern the outer reaches of the galaxy, we use reason and intuition to assess the revelation the God may or may not have produced through His chosen Messenger. For those who sincerely want to find Him, He makes Himself known.

I know that isn't a particularly satisfying answer for you. It seems to me, you don't really want to find God and that's fine. I think you also want to be able to prove to theists such as myself that I have an irrational belief. If so, I can wear it. I'm happy to discuss religion but avoid pushing my beliefs onto others. People come to realisations about God in all sorts of ways, while others decide He doesn't exist, often because His existence makes no sense.

For what its worth, I shared some criteria I would apply in investigating whether or not a prophet of God was who He said He was.

Can we prove or disprove the claims of any Messenger of God?

However there are no established criteria that everyone should use. There's probably some common themes though.

 

[sealchan]

Don't you think that that's a broad sweeping analysis that has no real application other than irony?

Yes, I meant mostly the Abrahamic religions, not the Dharmic ones.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Science is not at all opposed to the Catholic religion. In fact, many of the great scientists in history were Catholics. Speaking of religion, the theory of evolution has long become the religion of atheists. But that's another topic for another time. Today the majority of what people view as science is nothing but pseudo-science.

I agree Catholics have contributed a great deal to the developmental of science. Often the Catholic Church has strongly supported scientists. However they haven't always as the story of Galileo attests.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It all seems straight forward really. If you want to achieve your goal you need the right approach. You use a hammer to bang nails into wood or use a screwdriver for the screws. A drill may make it easier. You could bring out an electron microscope but its the wrong tool!

Medical doctors know that cough mixture is no better than placebo. However the placebo effect is still important. If someone comes to see me and they are convinced the cough mixture the pharmacist gave them is helping them I'm not going to burst their bubble anymore than a homeopathic remedy that I believe to work for exactly the same reason.

The placebo effect is mostly bunk, actually. And while you may not have an ethical obligation to stop a fellow customer from buying a homeopathic product, it's unethical for the pharmacist to knowingly misrepresent sham treatments as effective.

I saw a guy who was psychotic once. He was consuming a native plant daily that was known to contain cyanide, under the mistaken impression it would be good for him.

1. – Poisonous plants and fungi – Te Ara Encyclopedia of New Zealand

There was good reason to advise if he continued he might die. We had him sectioned under the mental health act until he gained a little more perspective.

To be clear, Baha'is do not take the bible in its entirety literally so would be inclined to reject creationists arguments based on a literal interpretation of genesis in favour of science.

I have no idea what you're getting at here.

So what is God and how do we measure Him? For Baha'is He is an unknowable essence. That almost sounds like a non-existent essence, doesn't it? So God exists beyond the comprehension of man.

If that's the case, then:

- God is indistinguishable in every measurable way from a god that doesn't exist.
- there can be no rational justification for belief in God.

No doubt you have heard the Baha'is say the way we come to know God is through His Manifestations. So as we apply a telescope to discern the outer reaches of the galaxy, we use reason and intuition to assess the revelation the God may or may not have produced through His chosen Messenger. For those who sincerely want to find Him, He makes Himself known.

If God truly is unknowable, then there's no way for him to "make Himself known" and there's no way to establish that someone is a "Messenger" of God.

I know that isn't a particularly satisfying answer for you. It seems to me, you don't really want to find God and that's fine. I think you also want to be able to prove to theists such as myself that I have an irrational belief. If so, I can wear it.

What you just described IS irrational. In one sense, it's good that you're owning it. In another sense, it's perplexing to me why you would feel attachment to irrational beliefs.

I'm happy to discuss religion but avoid pushing my beliefs onto others. People come to realisations about God in all sorts of ways, while others decide He doesn't exist, often because His existence makes no sense.

For what its worth, I shared some criteria I would apply in investigating whether or not a prophet of God was who He said He was.

Can we prove or disprove the claims of any Messenger of God?

However there are no established criteria that everyone should use. There's probably some common themes though.

The common themes I see: wishful thinking and a failure to think things through.

Beyond the fact that none of your criteria have anything at all to do with gods without begging a boatload of questions, it's inherently contradictory to say on the one hand that God can't be demonstrated and on the other hand say that it can be demonstrated that someone is a "messenger of God." If you could actually demonstrate this, then you would have demonstrated God, since the existence of a genuine "messenger of God" would imply that God necessarily exists. Your positoon contradicts itself.

 

[Nous]

I am speaking mainly for myself I'm sure.

Gotcha. The same goes for me when I speak of religion. My primary contact with religion is by reading philosophy of religion. So what the hell do I know? Nothing!

 

[j1i]

Yes, and what? Man has created machines that are able to do things for him. Man has been doing that since he first broke a stone and realised the edge was sharp.

You may think what you like. Its just thought, we all have them.

Sister please.

HI
my dear sister


God created the universe billions of years ago
BILLIONS MEANS (Superior experience)
And man began to manufacture factories centuries ago simple Hahaha
Those who live longer have greater experience
There are two types of industries
Handmade manufacture also
I think that God created the special things in His hand, especially man and vital intelligence
Artificial intelligence in humans began its early stages

GOD bless you

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

018 Reality update...Nazis died long ago and the KKK is now practically non-existent. Anifa stirs up trouble against some very imaginary threats. "Anifa harasses those whom they deem to be fascists, racists and right wing extremists." - Wikipedia

Dude ... I drive past CSA flags and Nazi flags. I don't know who's editing Wiki, but they're full of crap. I see later you try to argue that you have to belong to a specific party, but BS. You have to follow their creeds. This isn't one of those "everyone has an opinion" things. This is one of those "there are groups who want to outright murder other groups" things. There will never be a Good Nazi. There will never be a good Klansman. Their philosophies are counter to anything even remotely ethical. They must be fought against at every turn. Lives are at stake.

 

[ChristineM]

HI
my dear sister


God created the universe billions of years ago
BILLIONS MEANS (Superior experience)
And man began to manufacture factories centuries ago simple Hahaha
Those who live longer have greater experience
There are two types of industries
Handmade manufacture also
I think that God created the special things in His hand, especially man and vital intelligence
Artificial intelligence in humans began its early stages

GOD bless you

You made a claim that god created the universe... Can you provide proof of this claim or is it just your opinion?

Billions means 1,000,000,000s

Man began manufacturing stone tools thousands of years ago.

 

[Jose Fly]

Nazis are defined as belonging to the National Socialist German Workers' Party, which has been defunct since 1945. Everybody at the Unite the Right Rally at Charlottesville in the year 2017 never could have belonged to the Nazi Party. I'm not denying members of the KKK no longer exists, but they're so few of them left, they as an organization lack any significance.

So what do you call all those angry white men carrying Nazi flags at Charlottesville?