Why not God AND Science?

[hopefulboy]

There are 3 outs in baseball and 3 points on a field goal. This proves that sports is true religion!
Better yet, there are 7 holes in a Ritz cracker, and 7 is a lucky number so this proves that eating Ritz crackers make you lucky.

read this :
One Day The word “a day” (yewm) is used 365 times in the Quran. The figure 365 does not only represent the number of days in the calendar, but it is also the figure that shows the astronomical relationship between our world and the sun. When our world completes its turn around the sun, it has revolved 365 times around its own axis. In other words, when the world has completed its cycle around the sun, this means we have lived 365 days on earth. It is important that the word “a day” is used 365 times in the Quran, because the world’s revolution around the sun takes 365 days.

The Word​

Number of occurrence​

A day​

365​

The number of the days in which the world completes its revolution around the sun?​

365​

 

[hopefulboy]

4 - Year The derivatives of the word “year” (sinet, sinin) are mentioned 19 times in the Quran. The solar and lunar calendars need correction because of the leap year. When the world revolves around the sun 365 times, the moon revolves around the earth and itself 12 times. This constitutes a year. But when the earth completes its revolution and arrives at the starting point, the moon is behind schedule. It takes the earth and the moon 19 years to meet at the same starting point. This cycle of 19 years is called the Meton cycle. The lunar calendar, rearranged every 19 years, ends up with 7 leap years (355 days) and 12 full years (354 days) during this period. It is also another surprising characteristic of the miracles that the singular year (sinet) is used 7 times, whereas the plural year (sinin) is used 12 times in the Quran. And all the derivatives of the word “year” are used 19 times, an indication of the Meton cycle.

The word ​

Number of occurrence​

Year​

19​

In how many years a meton cycle occurs?​

19​

 

[painted wolf]

Please don't spam this thread with proselytizing.

wa:do

 

[hopefulboy]

The Months The earth’s revolution around the sun makes 365 days while, the moon’s 12 revolution around the earth makes12 months. The Quran says that there are 12 months in year. As we all know, a year consists of 12 months. On the other hand, in the Quran, the word “a month” (þehr) is also mentioned 12 times to indicate that there are 12 months in a year.The following verse mentions this:

36- …twelve is the number of months with God…
9 – Repentance, 36 ​

The word Number of occurrence A month 12
The number of the months or the number of the moon’s revolation around 12 the world in a year 12

 

[Dirty Penguin]

GEOIDAL FORM OF THE WORLD 30- He made the earth egg-shaped.
79-The Snatchers, 30

Not to nit pick but "egg shaped" is not in that verse.

79:30
and the earth-after that He spread it out
Waal-arda baAAda thalikadahaha

This makes it appear as though it is speaking of a flat earth...

 

[Space Cadet]

Science doesn't directly say anything about the supernatural, so in that sense science is compatible with some religious beliefs.
Here's the thing though: to me, you seem to be saying that you want to believe things based on evidence and reason, and also things that have no basis in evidence and reason. I say OK, so long as the non-evidence based beliefs don't contradict the evidence-based ones, fine.
But why do you want to believe things with no basis in evidence?

 

[Thief]

Science is compatible with religion because if one follows the findings of the scientific method, he cannot have beliefs (I myself am in that school of thought). Religion consists of beliefs, and therefore one could say "I know that scientific evidence suggests that my religious beliefs have a low probablility of being correct, but I still believe them," and still be perfectly logically consistent.

However, science certainly does not prove God. The findings of science strongly suggest that god does not exist.



Then you have a pretty poor understanding of Quantum Physics.

In all fairness...I have not read the entire thread....
too many threads...too little time....

But to assert a lack of God for lack of evidence?

Choose....physical reality first?...then spirit?
or..
Spirit first....then chemistry?

Science is a look into how things work.
Faith is simply giving credit of creation to God.

 

[outhouse]

Faith is simply giving credit of creation to God.

But to assert a lack of God for lack of evidence?

is not faith belief in the absence of evidence???????????

 

[Thief]

is not faith belief in the absence of evidence???????????

And your multiple question marks indicate confusion....again.

 

[outhouse]

I think its very apperant who may be confused here

 

[Thief]

I think its very apperant who may be confused here

Another empty remark....
Got an actual rebuttal?

 

[Dan4reason]

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?

It depends on what claims you make about God and the supernatural that are testable by science. If you believe that God personally created the universe 6,000 years ago, then yes, science has refuted you. If you make no testable claims about God, then God has managed to stay out of the way of science and can hypothetically survive.

Of course a scientific mindset would reject believing something unproven and untestable. This is against the very idea of a scientific theory. So in conclusion, it seems like blind faith in the existence of God and mythology, and scientific rationalism are in conflict no matter how you see God.

 

[Manahel.Fatima]

When the science and the thinking power of man ends their the power of GOD start. This is what i think

 

[Thief]

It depends on what claims you make about God and the supernatural that are testable by science. If you believe that God personally created the universe 6,000 years ago, then yes, science has refuted you. If you make no testable claims about God, then God has managed to stay out of the way of science and can hypothetically survive.

Of course a scientific mindset would reject believing something unproven and untestable. This is against the very idea of a scientific theory. So in conclusion, it seems like blind faith in the existence of God and mythology, and scientific rationalism are in conflict no matter how you see God.

That much should be broad casted all through this forum.

Blind faith...believing, but not having seen.

That doesn't take away what you reason (see) to be true.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

It depends on what claims you make about God and the supernatural that are testable by science. If you believe that God personally created the universe 6,000 years ago, then yes, science has refuted you. If you make no testable claims about God, then God has managed to stay out of the way of science and can hypothetically survive.

Of course a scientific mindset would reject believing something unproven and untestable. This is against the very idea of a scientific theory. So in conclusion, it seems like blind faith in the existence of God and mythology, and scientific rationalism are in conflict no matter how you see God.

Agreed.....:yes:

 

[Pegg]

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?

i agree

even the bibles opening words are in harmony with science "in the beginning"

 

[Dirty Penguin]

i agree

even the bibles opening words are in harmony with science "in the beginning"

But as you continue to read you quickly learn that they get out of sync really, really quick....

 

[Thief]

But as you continue to read you quickly learn that they get out of sync really, really quick....

Are you referring to the order of items, as presented verse by verse?

Of course we know them to be mis-arranged.
But Genesis was not a science document.
It was an introduction...the concept of one God...one Creator.

The introduction was presented to people not having 'method'.
But that is not a weakness on their part.
And to say the account is false for it's poor presentation, is too much.

 

[outhouse]

But Genesis was not a science document.

and it never will be, nor should it be viewed remotely as such.

it was never ment to be a literal piece of history either.


to believe in a literal genesis one has to believe in the flood, science shows never happened.

and one has to buy a 6000 year old earth.


so the real question is are you chopping up genesis to meet your own needs or do you believe in YEC?

 

[Thief]

and it never will be, nor should it be viewed remotely as such.

it was never ment to be a literal piece of history either.


to believe in a literal genesis one has to believe in the flood, science shows never happened.

and one has to buy a 6000 year old earth.


so the real question is are you chopping up genesis to meet your own needs or do you believe in YEC?

Poor question on your part.

I've written the piece so many times....my take on Genesis.

How did you not see it?
(are you paying attention?)...from another thread...I quote myself.


"As for my comment about Genesis...Eve had no navel.....
No special training or insight is needed.
It is obvious.
Eve is a clone, generated from the rib of a man.
Therefore she had no navel. She had no mother.
She would be the genetic twin sister to Adam.

I did not write Genesis.
I did not dictate Genesis.
However....see yourself as Someone saying to Moses, the story of Adam and Eve.
Could you use such words as 'clone'? or 'genetic engineering'? or 'cellular division'?
No ....of course not.
You could then say to Moses....
'You are not carved of wood. You are not chiseled of stone.
Nor are you smelted and caste of metal.
You are dust...Moses...I made you of dust...and dust you shall be.'

What God delivers unto Man, is done at the appropriate time.
Everything in it's own hour."


Does that sound like yec, to you?

You get out of Genesis what you are able to.
That you don't find truth and faith is not anyone else's fault.

And neither can anyone say God is not behind it all.
He made the chemistry you walk in.