It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hrmpf, fundamentalists.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 01:20 PM
link   
Why is it that nearly every single time I try to discuss anything that has physics involved, some fundamentalist believer jumps in and tells me I cannot explain god's work. If not that particular claim, then it has to have something to do with people unable to comprehend anything about the subject in hand, especially if one _is_ able to explain it.

Why is it so god damn difficult to realize that world does work as it works because there are some underlying mechanisms of physics in existence. Why is it that it can in no way be possible for them to think that God maybe created this universe to work by certain rules, and we call those rules physics.

I know there are intelligent fundamentalists out there, but sometimes I would really like to just think everybody who is a fundamentalist being stupid.

Do they even realize that we can make machines that work because we made them work by some rules that we know about? Those machines do not work when they run out of fuel, and that is because of physics that we know aobut. Or maybe they run out of God instead?

Grr, mrr.




posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 03:49 PM
link   
I see no conflict...

See interesting article...

www.templeton.org...



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 04:01 PM
link   
Supplement to your question...here's another...and a response...

See below...

One of our members, Rev. Seiichi Ariga, Ph.D. is both a Christian Minister and Physicist. So, I emailed Seiichi and posed a couple questions to him:

"Are there Quantum Physicist coming to faith in God as a result of their discoveries at the micro-level?"

"Does our knowledge of the quantum level provide us with more 'scientific' information that can easily lead the inquiring mind to seriously consider the existence of a Creator?"

The following is Seiichi's response to me. I felt his response so well researched and thought out that it should be posted on the web site for the benefit of other inquiry minds. I have pasted below his response to my questions.

Hi Bob:

Sorry it took me a while to respond to your last question. I needed to seek advice from "real" physicists before I give my answer. I consulted two professor emeriti, a theoretician of elementary particle physics and an experimentalist in nuclear physics. The former is non-Christian while the latter is an active Christian.

When I asked the question you posed, "Are there Quantum Physicist coming to faith in God as a result of their discoveries at the micro-level?", both of them said they were not aware of any physicist who falls into that picture. The Christian physicist even laughed and said he knows more examples of "the other way", means physicists who have left the church because they had advanced in science.

As I further questioned them, however, both of them agreed with me that both religious and non-religious scientists have more awe to the extremely orderly form of nature, and submit themselves to the "yet-unknown" something/somebody (italics mine). In this sense, they do not deny, if already believe, there is Creator. They, however, tend to reject a simplistic explanation or definition of God in religious terms and any decent scientist would laugh at such a simplistic idea, for example, that the big bang theory is a proof of Genesis 1.

These my older colleagues also suggested that there is an ongoing question to many scientists' mind as to why we have ability to understand mathematics and to formulate mathematical expression of virtually every natural phenomenon. We have a very special kind of brain for sure, and we can attribute it to the "power" that is beyond our understanding.

I do not know of any physicists who have come to faith through quantum physics. I did get acquainted with a professor of brain neurology who has become an active Christian in my denomination. He said he had been caught by an inexplicable awe when he was examining the mechanism of brain function. He concluded that nobody-else than God could have made the brain in such an orderly and sophisticated manner.

So, I can comfortably assume that very many scientists do have a sense of awe to God, but at the same time they are not satisfied with traditional explanations about God and attitude of church as a whole. I often feed it sad that I can often have a deeper spiritual discussion with skeptical students and scientists than so-called "religious" people. We Christians need to be more humble and open-minded, keeping the same kind of awe to God than pretending as if we know God better than those scientists (Italics mine).

I don't know if I have already answered to your question, especially the one, "does our knowledge of the quantum level provide us with more 'scientific' information that can easily lead the inquiring mind to seriously consider the existence of a Creator?". For me, both Newtonian and quantum physics are maps; in an analogy, the former being an Atlas while the latter being a local map. Both express the orderly reality of creation. Galileo never denied God. It was the Church who denied his new map of God's creation.

In other words, quantum physics provides us with a far more precise map of a part of God's creation, and in this respect we get more precise knowledge and understanding of God at least indirectly, but I myself don't think science can ever decisively "prove" the presence or absence of God. To me, God is, like parents, somebody whom we trust and accept without proof. Today DNA may prove my own father being my real biological father, but I don't need such a proof, for I know my father, together with my mother, loved me and cared for me, and that is enough to me. Ultimately, acceptance of God is a matter of faith, not of scientific proof or anything as DNA (Italics mine).

If we Christians would like to bring those inquisitive scientists into faith community, however, I think we should examine our old maps (beliefs, doctrines, dogmas, etc.) more seriously and become more open-minded to refer to the new maps that science would provide us. This does not necessarily mean that we must throw our old maps away and accept new maps uncritically. An old map may still be relevant and a new map may contain false information. Further, it is more dangerous to make a simplistic harmonization of old and new maps. Such a map may mislead people more easily than a single old map would.

I am exhausted. I hope this would have been helpful to your further thinking.

Peace be with you,

Seiichi Ariga

Source: www.renewingyourmind.com...



posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 02:35 AM
link   
But then again people come after the Christians as well in many posts when they just want to discuss something other than the existence of God

just a thought

-Kyo



posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 07:22 AM
link   
Well...

I apreciate your viewpoint, and would answer your question as quick and simple as possible, as a fellow physics major...




Some people want to discovery the way things work...
Others, will just accept being TOLD how things work....




And honestly... doesn't it take a certain amount of faith to belive in either?


And, as someone with apprent schooling in the sciences, can you DISPROVE the existence of something? Things would be simple without god, but, wouldn't things be grand if there were something that we called 'god'... a certain, YET UNDISCOVERED, force... And it is this 'force' that is known as god...

[edit on 8/15/2008 by TKainZero]



posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKainZero
And, as someone with apprent schooling in the sciences, can you DISPROVE the existence of something? Things would be simple without god, but, wouldn't things be grand if there were something that we called 'god'... a certain, YET UNDISCOVERED, force... And it is this 'force' that is known as god...


I don't have that much education, actually. I'm an electrician. For that I do have education for. Physics is just a hobby of mine, I know something about it just because of that.

Anyway, no, I cannot really disprove existence of anything whatsoever. I can only rely on empirical data that shows a law in existence. With enough of those we get boundaries. When boundaries either are not crossed by empirical data, we have usually at that point arrived to a conclusion about things that are impossible. I know things change, but there are things that don't. A lot of those, in my opinion. Without saying anything about any law, what would it require to change boiling point of water if pressure is not taken into account? How DO you change laws governing that? Just a thought.



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 02:39 AM
link   
reply to post by rawsom
 


i used to be a fundie. they are really not doing it to annoy you, but out of the kindness of their heart. they dont want you to go to hell.

dont get mad at them, just use the bible to prove that theyre wrong in what theyre doing--- thatll really screw em up.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join