Turning to G-d does not stall progress of science. Does it ?

[Regiomontanus]

How much science has helped against Corona-Virus, please?

Regards

Not sure. It is a new thing but we have learned a lot about the virus in a short time. It's DNA has been sequenced which will help us combat the virus. And of course it is not some alien that just appeared but is related to other viruses we know a lot about. Much research being carried out. But we obviously have much to learn. I am not dismissing the efficacy of prayer overall. The link I provided is on a result that is not the last word on the question.

 

[paarsurrey]

If one makes the assertion that "prayer works" (meaning that prayer will achieve the desired outcome), then that is automatically a testable and therefore scientific statement.

Prayer does work, it has a religious evidence, and science does not interfere with it, please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

But not a single one of them ever invoked the Bible to refute the results of their experiments.

Because it will be wrong to do that, it is not the teaching of the truthful religion to do that.

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

It depends. If you turn to God but still give due credit to the observed data, hypotheses and theorems, then no.

But if, as in Galileo's day, you have the data available (anyone could look through his telescope and see what he saw), and ignore it in favour of scripture -- as the Catholic Church did -- then yes indeed, you totally stall the progress of science.

As Galileo is alleged to have said, after he was sentenced to lifetime house arrest for proclaiming the earth moved around the sun (which the church If you turn to God but still give due credit to the observed data, hypotheses and theorems, then no.insisted it did not, based on verses in the Bible), "eppur si muove" ("it moves anyway").

"If you turn to God but still give due credit to the observed data, hypotheses and theorems, then no."

I agree with the above, please?

Regards

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Prayer does work, it has a religious evidence, and science does not interfere with it, please?

Regards

Please describe "religious evidence." Also, please define what you mean by "does work" in the context of prayer.

 

[paarsurrey]

So? A great many Christians opposed science in the past and today.

Those who opposed it were wrong to do it. Jesus did not teach to oppose science. Did he,please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

In the ancient religions religion was not asquately addressed one way or another.

What one understand from the word "asquately", please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

That is not what you asked in the OP.
As I said, as long as religion is not used to influence the nature and outcomes of scientific research, religion does not cause an issue for science.

I agree with above,please.
Truthful Religion is an ally of science, so it does not interfere with science. Right,please?

Regards

 

[PruePhillip]

Not in the least.

Sad to say but it can. It did so in the past.
But now that the low hanging fruit of science
has been taken, religion might be less inclined
to tackle new, more less threatening scientific
ideas.
So now science focuses upon string theory,
the mass of a proton, global warming and the
like - it's a lot less threatening than evolution,
geological dating, Copernicus and the like.

 

[Timelli]

Please describe "religious evidence." Also, please define what you mean by "does work" in the context of prayer.

I would say that we need to go farther back and define what we mean by prayer and who or what are we praying to. So, who or what are we praying to in order to get results?

 

[paarsurrey]

Please describe "religious evidence." Also, please define what you mean by "does work" in the context of prayer.

Religious evidence is found in a verse of the truthful religion and its context verses. Right, please?

Regards

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Religious evidence is found in a verse of the truthful religion and its context verses. Right, please?

Regards

In a word?? No.

 

[Milton Platt]

I agree with above,please.
Truthful Religion is an ally of science, so it does not interfere with science. Right,please?

Regards

It is not an ally. It is superfluous and irrelevant.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I would say that we need to go farther back and define what we mean by prayer and who or what are we praying to. So, who or what are we praying to in order to get results?

Well, go ahead! You tell me, because I don't pray, having nobody to pray to, and no expectation that somebody will solve my problems for me if I get on my knees and beg.

I'm sure that there are people who will say, "prayer makes me feel closer to God," or "prayer makes me feel better about myself." Sure, they may be right, but since those are 100% subjective, and also 100% unsubstantiable, what does it matter?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I have tried but don't understand as to what is objective evidence or what is non-objective statement.

Regards

Objective Evidence Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.

Objective Evidence Law and Legal Definition
Objective evidence refers to information based on facts that can be proved by means of search like analysis, measurement, and observation. One can examine and evaluate objective evidence. Even if objective evidence is characterized as completely unbiased, submittal of objective evidence allows a more thorough review.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

No, there's zero evidence for any such thing.

We really cant accurately claim there is zero evidence. It does exist. However, the credibility amd strength of said evidence is a different story.

 

[Milton Platt]

It is not a scientific problem so science has got nothing to do with it, please?

Regards

Disagree. If the claim cannot pass scrutiny under scientific conditions, then there is no way to know if the claim is true. That is why religions are full of untestable claims and rely on faith instead of facts. Those claims of religion which are testable seem to fail regularly.

But none of that is relevant to your original question. You asked whether religion interfered with science. I replied that it did not as long as it was kept out of the scientific process. Science has no need for religion.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

This is a misapprehension. Scientist do not look for "proof" of anything. What they look for is evidence: reproducible evidence.

God is left out of science because science is the study of nature: it looks for natural explanations of phenomena in nature, not supernatural ones.

If God made "nature" then God IS the natural explanation.

 

[Timelli]

Well, go ahead! You tell me, because I don't pray, having nobody to pray to, and no expectation that somebody will solve my problems for me if I get on my knees and beg.

I'm sure that there are people who will say, "prayer makes me feel closer to God," or "prayer makes me feel better about myself." Sure, they may be right, but since those are 100% subjective, and also 100% unsubstantiable, what does it matter?

I would say that prayer for most religions is communicating with someone or something that can answer. So, if you don't believe in anything that can change what you want changed there is no reason to pray. However, you could say prayer is helpful because it helps relieve stress or anxiety by imagining someone listening. This type of helpfulness would then equate prayer with meditation or other exercise used in the field of psychology. sorry for the double post.

 

[Timelli]

If God made "nature" then God IS the natural explanation.

So, the study of God should be the beginning of science?