• 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!

Why not God AND Science?

FlyingTeaPot

Irrational Rationalist. Educated Fool.
Fair enough. I made sure to include that latter part of the definition so we could have this very discussion.
I think the WHOLE definition contradicts what science is, not just the latter part.

Recall that I said I wanted to work out common definitions between us for discussion, and I said that Science(1) was a method (proceeding from empirical observations to determine laws), and Science(2) is a religion.
I think we should follow what the dictionary says and not make up our own definitions. It muddles up the whole discussion.

Let's take a look at what role religion plays in people's lives. Just about everyone I've ever had a serious conversation with about the subject has wondered what the purpose of creation is, what is its nature, and why we are here. Religion, in my opinion, attempts to address this very fundamental need within people. The fact of the matter is, everone has a "world view", whether they openly acknowledge it, give name to it, or can even loosely describe it.
On the contrary. I think religion is an answer to the fear of death. I don't think religion has many answers about creation and its purpose. I mean, what sort of a purpose is to worship?
Religion claims to know about the afterlife- what happens to you after you die. That is the fundamental precept on which it is born. Religion doesn't have much to say on the subject of purpose of creation or its nature or why we are here. In sharp contrast, it has much to say about how to behave in order to get a prime spot after death.

In this sense, religion is a form of personal philosophy, which differs from other philosophies perhaps in its reliance upon "superhuman agencies" to explain many of its related concepts. I'm making the case that science in our culture has become another de facto philosophy that bears many similiarities to the major religions of the world.
This follows from your assumption of the previous paragraph. science is not a philosophy. It is true that scientific method leads to a particular humanist philosophy, but science itself is just a method. Also, what similarities does science bear with major religions of the world? I'm curious.

science has become the de facto religion of the western world.

sorry I don't have time to respond to your other points, but this stuck out.
science has become the de facto religion of the western world? Are you aware that more than 70% of the US population does not believe in evolution?
they'd rather go with their religious text instead of the scientific method. I think science has a long long way to go before it replaces religion, even in the western world.
 

otokage007

Well-Known Member
Well the scientific method CAN'T prove God doesn't exist, because the scientific method can't prove the "non existence" of something, just the existence.

To make an example, I will say now that mermaids, witches, Zeus and Alien DO EXIST. I assure none of you can tell me they don't, because science is not made to prove something "doesn't exist". However, what science can do is postulate: "if we can not prove that Zeus exist, then he doesn't exist untill we can".

So, because of this, science disproves God.

Related to your question about which (science or god) are more true, I think you can answer yourself: everything science demonstrate true with objectivity and evidence is by it's own meaning true. But on the contrary, God or his so-called words (the bible) prove nothing and can't be consider "truth", what you can do is what all christianity is supossed to do: have faith in HIM.
 

jtartar

Well-Known Member
Hi all! I'm new here and I just wanted to know if most of you think that it's either God or science that has the most truth? I personally believe that true science proves God not disproves God. What do you think?

Songofmorning,
What you have asked reminds me of what Jesus told Nicodemus, at John 3:12, and what Isaiah recorded at Isa 55:8,9. In Job, the Bible states that God is Perfect in Knowledge, Job 36:4, 37:16. Think about that statement, God knows everything!!
Remember that God created everything on earth and in Heaven, including mankind. This means that God knows everything intimately, completely. Remember that God has lived forever in the past, and will live forever into the future, Hab 1:12, Heb 1:12, Jude 25.
Compared to God Almighty, whose Proper Name is Jehovah, mankind, even collectively, knows nothing. Through science they have discovered a few things, things that God made and knows through and through. Now thy want to question whether God is right or not about what He says about creating all things. Can there be more arrogance, gall, or stupidity than man questioning God???
Another point; Science will never fully understand nature, because they leave out the most important part of the equation. They leave out GOD, which is like leaving out the speed of light in the Energy formula of Einstein.
True science agrees exactly with what the Bible says, only Pseudoscience disagrees with the Bible.
A real problem is that many religious teachers do not ubderstand the Bible accurrately, so they think it says something it really does not say. If science can prove something that is contrary to their beliefs, they believe what they think the Bible says, making themselves fools to the world, clasic Doctrinairism.
Teleological and Cosmological Proof, or Argument, which is argument by design, provesthat a superior mind designed all the things we see and science has discovered. This mind is Jehovah God's.
A person does not need to be a genius to see what others have discovered in the universe. The very name Cosmos, means orderly. Science knows that one of the basic laws of nature is: With ans explosion you have chaos, the larger the explosion, the greater the chaos. BIG BANG THEORY??? What about on earth, if you found an expensive watch, would you believe that it just happened by chance, that no one designed it?? The fact is there is NOTHING that we see in nature that was not designed. We have several branches of science that are trying to copy the designs in nature, to better our world. When a scientist is able to make a copy, inferior as it is, of something that God designed, he is given aclaim, but science tells us that the real thing was not designed, that it just happened that way, that ignorant mother nature made it.
 

idav

Being
Premium Member
A person does not need to be a genius to see what others have discovered in the universe. The very name Cosmos, means orderly. Science knows that one of the basic laws of nature is: With ans explosion you have chaos, the larger the explosion, the greater the chaos. BIG BANG THEORY??? What about on earth, if you found an expensive watch, would you believe that it just happened by chance, that no one designed it?? The fact is there is NOTHING that we see in nature that was not designed. We have several branches of science that are trying to copy the designs in nature, to better our world. When a scientist is able to make a copy, inferior as it is, of something that God designed, he is given aclaim, but science tells us that the real thing was not designed, that it just happened that way, that ignorant mother nature made it.
The fact is it is still very much chaos. You see order only because the chaos has calmed down to a point that it is relatively predictable but many things are still chaos beyond prediction like the weather which is also the same as predicting people emotions and choices. Cause and effect going in an infinite amount of directions is not order. Nature is largely unpredictable without knowing every single thing down to the atomic level including all possible outcomes. Really chaos is another word for out of our range of being able to calculate. Order is just a word saying we see a pattern but in the end it is all just cause and effect so with enough data everything is calculatable and "order" has nothing to do with it.
 

espo35

Active Member
I used to think of Science and religion as polar opposites....until I realized that God is the consummate scientist.
 

chinu

chinu
Hi all! I'm new here and I just wanted to know if most of you think that it's either God or science that has the most truth? I personally believe that true science proves God not disproves God. What do you think?

Science proves God not disproves God >>> Because science is searching God. :)
Searching proves --- that there is something or god. ;)

_/\_
Chinu
 

ScottySatan

Well-Known Member
I've asked this question myself. Science doesn't seem to have anything to do with god. It's pretty telling though, that a much higher proportion of scientists are atheists compared with the rest of the population. Then again, the same is true of modern religious scholars.

Ultimately, Chinu is right. They're searching for answers to satisfy their curiosity and hearsay isn't enough.
 

idea

Question Everything
Well the scientific method CAN'T prove God doesn't exist, ....

The scientific method can be used to find God though.

Observe - the laws / fine tuning of the universe / the existence of life

formulate - create hypothesis - that one of the causal mechanisms behind the order was conscientiously produced

use hypothesis to predict other phenomena or predict new observations - example: predict that RNA is not "junk DNA" randomly left over from trial/errors, but instead contains useful info etc. etc.

perform experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments: experiment - say prayers, follow commandments, take a step of faith in order to experience guidance from this divine conscience...

those who have properly done the experiment, know God exists ;)
 

otokage007

Well-Known Member
The scientific method can be used to find God though.

Observe - the laws / fine tuning of the universe / the existence of life

formulate - create hypothesis - that one of the causal mechanisms behind the order was conscientiously produced

use hypothesis to predict other phenomena or predict new observations - example: predict that RNA is not "junk DNA" randomly left over from trial/errors, but instead contains useful info etc. etc.

perform experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments: experiment - say prayers, follow commandments, take a step of faith in order to experience guidance from this divine conscience...

those who have properly done the experiment, know God exists ;)

Reality is that those experiment you speak of have been already done. The conclusion was: there's no evidence of the existence of God, which doesn't mean that God doesn't exist, it just means that his existence is not supported by the evidences humanity have tried to gather.

And with evidences, I mean really irrefutable proofs, not the Bible or the difficult-to-believe testimony of christians.
 
Last edited:

idea

Question Everything
Reality is that those experiment you speak of have been already done. The conclusion was: there's no evidence of the existence of God.

The experiment, when properly performed, has revealed the existence of God, and is the reason so many people "believe".
 

idea

Question Everything
You really don't expect him to answer you........
grumpy little kitty today? of coarse I will answer!

I come and go on here, but I try to reply to everyone - and if I look over a question, please just PM me and I will always respond!!!

What experiment would that be?

experiment of changing your life to be in tune with God -
prayer / scripture study / faith / repentance / baptism

the experiment is living the Christian life and seeing what it brings you...

just like you learn if a recipe is good by actually going out, getting the food, mixing it up, and trying it out - you have to go try it out - then taste it, see how it tastes...
then there are billions of ways to mess up the recipe (burn it, salt instead of sugar, etc. etc.) as with all things, getting the experiment just right takes a lot of skill / practice / education / which is why so many give up on it... but if you stick with it - the rewards are infinite!

(Book of Mormon | Alma 32:26 - 43)

26 Now, as I said concerning faith—that it was not a perfect knowledge—even so it is with my words. Ye cannot know of their surety at first, unto perfection, any more than faith is a perfect knowledge.
27 But behold, if ye will awake and arouse your faculties, even to an experiment upon my words, and exercise a particle of faith, yea, even if ye can no more than adesire to believe, let this desire work in you, even until ye believe in a manner that ye can give place for a portion of my words.
28 Now, we will compare the word unto a seed. Now, if ye give place, that a seed may be planted in your heart, behold, if it be a true seed, or a good seed, if ye do not cast it out by your unbelief, that ye will resist the Spirit of the Lord, behold, it will begin to swell within your breasts; and when you feel these swelling motions, ye will begin to say within yourselves—It must needs be that this is a good seed, or that the word is good, for it beginneth to enlarge my soul; yea, it beginneth to enlighten my funderstanding, yea, it beginneth to be delicious to me.
29 Now behold, would not this increase your faith? I say unto you, Yea; nevertheless it hath not grown up to a perfect knowledge.
30 But behold, as the seed swelleth, and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, then you must needs say that the seed is good; for behold it swelleth, and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow. And now, behold, will not this strengthen your faith? Yea, it will strengthen your faith: for ye will say I know that this is a good seed; for behold it sprouteth and beginneth to grow.
31 And now, behold, are ye sure that this is a good seed? I say unto you, Yea; for every seed bringeth forth unto its own alikeness.
32 Therefore, if a seed groweth it is good, but if it groweth not, behold it is not good, therefore it is cast away.
33 And now, behold, because ye have tried the experiment, and planted the seed, and it swelleth and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, ye must needs know that the seed is good.
34 And now, behold, is your aknowledge bperfect? Yea, your knowledge is perfect in that thing, and your cfaith is dormant; and this because you know, for ye know that the word hath swelled your souls, and ye also know that it hath sprouted up, that your understanding doth begin to be enlightened, and your dmind doth begin to expand.
35 O then, is not this real? I say unto you, Yea, because it is alight; and whatsoever is light, is bgood, because it is discernible, therefore ye must know that it is good; and now behold, after ye have tasted this light is your knowledge perfect?
36 Behold I say unto you, Nay; neither must ye lay aside your faith, for ye have only exercised your faith to plant the seed that ye might try the experiment to know if the seed was good.
37 And behold, as the tree beginneth to grow, ye will say: Let us nourish it with great care, that it may get root, that it may grow up, and bring forth fruit unto us. And now behold, if ye nourish it with much care it will get root, and grow up, and bring forth fruit.
38 But if ye neglect the tree, and take no thought for its nourishment, behold it will not get any root; and when the heat of the sun cometh and scorcheth it, because it hath no root it withers away, and ye pluck it up and cast it out.
39 Now, this is not because the seed was not good, neither is it because the fruit thereof would not be desirable; but it is because your aground is barren, and ye will not nourish the tree, therefore ye cannot have the fruit thereof.
40 And thus, if ye will not nourish the word, looking forward with an eye of faith to the fruit thereof, ye can never pluck of the fruit of the tree of life.
41 But if ye will nourish the word, yea, nourish the tree as it beginneth to grow, by your faith with great diligence, and with patience, looking forward to the fruit thereof, it shall take root; and behold it shall be a tree springing up unto everlasting life.
42 And because of your diligence and your faith and your patience with the word in nourishing it, that it may take root in you, behold, by and by ye shall pluck the bfruit thereof, which is most precious, which is sweet above all that is sweet, and which is white above all that is white, yea, and pure above all that is pure; and ye shall feast upon this fruit even until ye are filled, that ye hunger not, neither shall ye thirst.
43 Then, my brethren, ye shall reap the rewards of your faith, and your diligence, and patience, and long-suffering, waiting for the tree to bring forth fruit unto you.


It is a long experiment - takes a lot of time... just as it takes time to learn how to be a doctor, or a musician, or anything worth while - as with all things, the more you put into it, the more you will get out of it.
 
Last edited:

otokage007

Well-Known Member
grumpy little kitty today? of coarse I will answer!

Hehe :)

experiment of changing your life to be in tune with God -
prayer / scripture study / faith / repentance / baptism

It is a long experiment - takes a lot of time... just as it takes time to learn how to be a doctor, or a musician, or anything worth while - as with all things, the more you put into it, the more you will get out of it.

Will that experiment result show me that God actually exists? I don't think so, maybe it's time to design another! Get into it!

The only possible result to that experiment you speak of, is showing that you can be a christian and be happy, which is something I don't doubt ;)
 

PolyHedral

Superabacus Mystic
experiment of changing your life to be in tune with God -
prayer / scripture study / faith / repentance / baptism

the experiment is living the Christian life and seeing what it brings you...
That's not rigorous. It is not reproducible. It does not filter out any sort of bias from the experimenter's view. It's a non-sequitor to go from "This produces effect X" to "God did it!"
 
Top