Why has science always been the bad guy

[idav]

What in hell are you babbling about?

You had said that I am taking facts as a given and that pretentiousness should be the default for having such facts. Thats how I read it anyway. I don't really think so but the religious do see it that way. Religious see the science trying to be knowledgeable and pretentious above that of what God is, how dare they!!! That does seem to be a huge contention. How dare man even consider that they could know as much as the most high. I don't really think Scientists are trying to step on Gods proverbial toes but it seems that it is what it amounts to.

Science has been the one figuring this stuff out when the material world clashes with the spiritual world. Even through out the bible man has tried to do this and people take this as a sign of what is still happening. But man is making cures and changing things for the better while people continue to wait for god to save them.

 

[DawudTalut]

Peace be on all.
" Why were the Muslims ascendent in Sciences? Three reasons: first, the early Muslims were following the injunctions of the Holy Book and the Holy Prophet. According to Dr. Muhammad Aijazul Khatib of Damascus University, nothing could emphasize the importance of sciences more than the remark that "in contrast to 250 verses which are legislative, some 750 verses of the Holy Quran - almost one-eight of it - exhort the believers to study Nature to reflect, to make the best use of reason and to make the scientific enterprise an integral part of Community's life." The Prophet of Islam - Peace be upon Him - said that it was the "bounden duty of every Muslim - man and woman - to acquire knowledge".

From these injunctions, followed the second reason for our ascendency. Notwithstanding the customary opposition of traditionalists, upto the fifteenth century the scientific enterprise and the scientists in early Islam were supported magnificently by the Muslims principalities and by the Islamic society. Thus, to paraphrase what H.A.R Gibb has written in the context of literature: "To a greater extent than elsewhere, the flowering of the sciences in Islam was conditinal... on the liberality and patronage of those in high positions. So long as, in one capital or another, princes and ministers found pleasure, profit or reputation in partronising the sciences, the torch was kept burning." And some princes - like Ulugh Beg at Samarkand - themselves joined in the scientific quest.

The third reason for our ascendency was connected with the cohesion of the Ummah - the Islamic nations, notwithstanding their political differences, acted as a unified Commonwealth, so far as Sciences were concerned....."
Source: https://www.alislam.org/library/salam-2.html

 

[Willamena]

Ironically Catholicism and Islams and other religions have been helping science out...

Actually, many of them have been science.

 

[idav]

Actually, many of them have been science.

Yes and it never should have stopped, knowledge should never have been demonized, as if scientists were practicing witchcraft or some such nonsense.

 

[Willamena]

Granted facts exist and Science is nothing but pretentious about it mocking all the religionists with their vast superior knowledge. Thank goodness I'm not one of them evil scientists.

I think what Jay meant, and I agree, is that science doesn't need you to defend it, and it's not true anyway, so just don't do it.

 

[Willamena]

Yes and it never should have stopped, knowledge should never have been demonized, as if scientists were practicing witchcraft or some such nonsense.

Who says it's stopped?

 

[idav]

I think what Jay meant, and I agree, is that science doesn't need you to defend it, and it's not true anyway, so just don't do it.

Haha, well I did catch that Jay is rather unfond of this thread.:sorry1:

 

[idav]

Who says it's stopped?

Stagnates is probably more accurate. Almost every time they reach a peak of knowledge and almost inevitably get scared and it hinders the progress.

 

[Willamena]

Stagnates is probably more accurate. Almost every time they reach a peak of knowledge and almost inevitably get scared and it hinders the progress.

I'm not sure to what you're referring. I was talking about Catholic Church members who have been leading scientists, like astronomer Georges Lemaitre who discovered the universe expansion and proposed the Big Bang Theory.

 

[idav]

I'm not sure to what you're referring. I was talking about Catholic Church members who have been leading scientists, like astronomer Georges Lemaitre who discovered the universe expansion and proposed the Big Bang Theory.

I see but not before burning Galileo at the stake for saying the earth is round and not recanting. Or was it house arrest I can't remember maybe both as he bought time?

 

[look3467]

I believe God uses the sciences to confound the wise.
What science can not explain must be taken in faith.
IE. Why are the planets aligned in such a methodical manner?
Why is there a north star for navigation?
Don't tell me, spontaneous arrangement?

Only real conclusion is that there is an intelligent designer........God.

Now, God uses the sciences to accomplish His means.
Don't believe me? Read the old testament.

The only reason science is viewed as against God is for the lack of faith in God.
Otherwise,,,God and the sciences are in perfect harmony.

Blessings, AJ

 

[idav]

I believe God uses the sciences to confound the wise.
What science can not explain must be taken in faith.
IE. Why are the planets aligned in such a methodical manner?
Why is there a north star for navigation?
Don't tell me, spontaneous arrangement?


Blessings, AJ

The answer to these questions is how gravity works and science has been doing well explaining it. Similar to why an object would go around and down a funnel. It looks arranged but that is how space acts with objects, there is so much more to space than we can ever imagine. It might even be God who knows, gravity is the first inklings of something existing when observing the first micro seconds of the universe.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Haha, well I did catch that Jay is rather unfond of this thread.

Sorry about the patently absurd claim or the consequently worthless protest?

 

[Willamena]

I see but not before burning Galileo at the stake for saying the earth is round and not recanting. Or was it house arrest I can't remember maybe both as he bought time?

It was Bruno that was burned.

Historically speaking, it's a two-sided coin and to hold one side up and point at the coin as villain is strawman.

 

[idav]

Sorry about the patently absurd claim or the consequently worthless protest?

I am genuinely trying to understand.

 

[idav]

Historically speaking, it's a two-sided coin and to hold one side up and point at the coin as villain is strawman.

Wow, I did that, straw-manned myself? Haha, how embarrasing.

 

[Debater Slayer]

There is a verse in the Quraan that translates to "the favor of a scientist over a warshipper is like the favor of the moon over the rest of the planets" (yes, the Quraan mentions planets).

Science in that verse does not mean the religious sciences only, but also worldly and material sciences.

Now, regardless to the meaning of the verse and how science compares to worshipping, what we can tell from it is that science in Islam is favorable.

It is still unfortunate, however, that so many Muslims don't reflect that

That is actually a hadith and not a Qur'anic verse.

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "If anyone travels on a road in search of knowledge, God will cause him to travel on one of the roads of Paradise. The angels will lower their wings in their great pleasure with one who seeks knowledge. The inhabitants of the heavens and the Earth and (even) the fish in the deep waters will ask forgiveness for the learned man. The superiority of the learned over the devout is like that of the moon, on the night when it is full, over the rest of the stars. The learned are the heirs of the Prophets, and the Prophets leave (no monetary inheritance), they leave only knowledge, and he who takes it takes an abundant portion. - Sunan of Abu-Dawood, Hadith 1631

Anyway, I don't think all religions or religious people oppose science, and even among those that do, the opposition is usually to certain scientific theories (like evolution) rather than science as a whole. So I don't think it is accurate to say that science has always been the "bad guy" from a religious perspective in general.

 

[Smart_Guy]

That is actually a hadith and not a Qur'anic verse.

Oops, sorry, my bad

Thanks for the heads up

 

[rusra02]

So, are you saying that if they don't accept your interpretation of the creation accounts that they ain't true Christians? Secondly, do you really think that it would be beyond Jesus to accept a narrative that's allegorical and run with it, especially since he often used parables, which are a form of allegory?

I believe a true Christian is one who accepts and follows the teachings and commands of Jesus Christ, not one who merely takes the title "Christian". Jesus said regarding the Scriptures "your word is truth." (John 17:17) There is nothing in the Bible to suggest Jesus or any of his followers believed the account of Adam and Eve to be anything other than historical fact. Luke chapter 3 traces Jesus genealogy back to the first man Adam. Jesus believed the Genesis account, and taught the basis for monogamy is the first marriage of Eve to Adam. What force would that teaching have if based on a myth or allegory? No amount of obfuscation can hide the truth that Jesus and his apostles believed the historicity of Genesis.

 

[metis]

I believe a true Christian is one who accepts and follows the teachings and commands of Jesus Christ, not one who merely takes the title "Christian". Jesus said regarding the Scriptures "your word is truth." (John 17:17) There is nothing in the Bible to suggest Jesus or any of his followers believed the account of Adam and Eve to be anything other than historical fact. Luke chapter 3 traces Jesus genealogy back to the first man Adam. Jesus believed the Genesis account, and taught the basis for monogamy is the first marriage of Eve to Adam. What force would that teaching have if based on a myth or allegory? No amount of obfuscation can hide the truth that Jesus and his apostles believed the historicity of Genesis.

You skirted the question and never answered it, so let me repeat it:

So, are you saying that if they don't accept your interpretation of the creation accounts that they ain't true Christians? Secondly, do you really think that it would be beyond Jesus to accept a narrative that's allegorical and run with it, especially since he often used parables, which are a form of allegory?

Also, if Jesus didn't accept allegory and metaphors, why did he use parables and also cite from the Psalms, which is jammed pack full of both?