Biblestudent_007
Active Member
What do you need scientific evidence for . .?
-
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!
What do you need scientific evidence for . .?
- Thread starter Biblestudent_007
- Start date
Biblestudent_007
Active Member
Generally speaking, people of religious faith do not need scientific evidence for anything.
On the other hand, scientific evidence is always requested by all kinds of people who do not have religious convictions.
On the other hand, scientific evidence is always requested by all kinds of people who do not have religious convictions.
Noaidi
slow walker
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
Not anything, just not for the things you have faith about. You'll need and use scientific evidence (if only indirectly) for everything else just like the rest of us. You don't rely on faith that your medicines are safe and effective, you house won't fall down or your plane won't crash.
Yes, anyone without blind faith about something will require some form of evidence before they accept it as truth - thats pretty much implicit in the definition of the term faith.
There is nothing special about religious claims in this apart from the expectations of the religious that their claims (and their claims alone) should be treated differently to everything else. Why shouldn't we expect evidence before accepting religious claims as being true?
Religious people still need scientific evidence, albeit indirectly. Without it there would be no (reliable, useful) science. And without science, many of life's practical conveniences would be unavailable.
Evidence is necessary because many things have various, alternative explanations. Without evidence it is not possible to tell reliable, credible explanations from those that are simply imaginative or even all-out bogus.
I suppose that religious matters (not religious people) don't have much need for evidence because they are so subjective. Even there, however, it makes a world of difference to know instead of believing - and the difference isn't always well understood and used constructively in their faiths.
Biblestudent_007
Active Member
Yea well . . .Like the ToE !! 
Biblestudent_007
Active Member
Please read what you have just written!
I did . . And it makes relevant sense.
Biblestudent_007
Active Member
For science!
Seriously though, your question isn't very clear. Do you mean why is scientific evidence needed at all, why do we individually need it, for what things is it required or something else?
It has been made clear and evident that people who are non-religious always ask for and request evidence.
How come . .?
Gunfingers
Happiness Incarnate
You should quote who you're responding to, because i have no idea what you just compared Evolutionary Theory to.Yea well . . .Like the ToE !!
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
If someone makes a statement that "X is true", especially if it is followed up with "therefore you should do/not do Y", most people will ask for some kind of evidence to support those claims before accepting them and certainly before acting on them (note that I've made no differentiation on religious grounds there).
You will be no different to anyone else on this in most situations. If I told you that if you stand in the middle of your street on one leg and quote the Pledge of Allegiance, you will instantly receive your greatest desire, I very much doubt you'd be straight out there giving it a go. You would expect some kind of evidence that what I claimed is true and me saying "You just need to have faith!" wouldn't be sufficient.
I'm also curious about your comment on the ToE. How do you feel about it?
Scientific conclusions. You can't have 'em without it.
I'm sure that the staff of the Vatican Observatory would disagree with you.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Attitudes like the OP would have kept us living in caves.
McBell
Unbound
I am not so sure.
I mean, would we have even figured the whole "living in caves" thing out by now?
waitasec
Veteran Member
are you insinuating that science is a distraction?
Science is a way of opening your eyes and opening your mind to the universe you live in. The scientific study of the universe is the most profound and most noble enterprise that the human race has ever been involved in. Science is beautiful. I think clip below is the most eloquent and beautiful expression of this that I have ever heard.
[youtube]Tc5JXbyw1C0[/youtube]
YouTube - dawkins rebuke
[youtube]Tc5JXbyw1C0[/youtube]
YouTube - dawkins rebuke
I'm in agreeance. I don't believe scientific evidence lends any value to religion, faith or belief in "God" for either the theist or the atheist.
Biblestudent_007
Active Member
That King Arthur married Guinevere is true, that is how it happened in the story. The evidence is not scientific but literary. The claim is entirely supported. I'm certain.
Somehow I don't think it's truth of the claim that is being demanded.
