Can a Scientist Believe in the Resurrection?

Just because it is Easter...
...I want to challenge you with this question...
...but before you answer listen to the following presentation by Tom Wright...
...from the James Gregory public lectures on Science and Religion.

www.jamesgregory.org...
(available from this location as audio, video or transcript)


N.T.Wright is one of the Church of England leading scholars, Bishop of Durham and member of the House of Lords.

I look forward to you considered comments on this subject that was the origin of Christianity.

Reanimation is entirely scientifically possible.

Zombie Jesus Day may or may not be proof but electric currents and such spring things back to life all the time. (Defibrillators as a prime example as well as certain cures of paralysis)

However, without a Dr. Frankenstein type "spark of life" there can be no true resurrection and only reanimation of deceased parts.

(run an electric current through a severed arm and you will see it move as if alive!)

Originally posted by troubleshooter
Can a Scientist Believe in the Resurrection?

I can answer this question pretty simply.

yes and no.

Science is not a system that believes or disbelieves anything...it is a tool to stop beliefs and start understanding. Believing in something comes when there is a scientific void.

They can speculate...they can theorize, they can even come up with hypothesis's. They can formulate personal beliefs based on data, but science is not a system designed to create beliefs in anything...its used for the complete opposite.

a scientist now...he can believe in whatever he wants...and plenty of scientists have beliefs...some from faith, some from assuming data will confirm their belief at a later date...but when they start believing in something, thats when they turn their science background off.

a meat cutter by trade can also make a decent salad...but not because thats his job..its because he is still a person after the job is over.

Originally posted by TheBloodRed
Reanimation is entirely scientifically possible.

Zombie Jesus Day may or may not be proof but electric currents and such spring things back to life all the time. (Defibrillators as a prime example as well as certain cures of paralysis)

However, without a Dr. Frankenstein type "spark of life" there can be no true resurrection and only reanimation of deceased parts.

(run an electric current through a severed arm and you will see it move as if alive!)

I know you didn't have enough time to listen to his talk before responding...
...I would find your comments more credible if you had.

Originally posted by troubleshooter
Can a Scientist Believe in the Resurrection?

Sure, why not? I know many scientists of all faiths and they each accept that while their role as scientists doesn't necessarily balance with the observations they each have over their belief systems the two can exist mutually together.

Now the big question is should a gay atheist just commit suicide?!?

-m0r

Religion is about faith

science is about fact backed up by observation

Science and theology rarely ever see eye to eye, but as i saw in a post previous, re-animation should and most likely is possible. If they can do it with a few single cells, then a human being is the next leap i suppose.

I know several scientists that are religious and it bares no significance on their trade of choice.

Science and theology are 2 different languages that cannot be compared.

reply to post by SaturnFX


Spot on. Science is a method a person uses to determine something. It does not define the person. There are logical scientist and illogical one, ones with faith and ones without. Ones with morals and ones without. It's more a state of mind. So to answer the OP as I understand 'yes' they can. Just because someone has a lab coat and is standing next to a certificate doesn't always make them a scientist.

Perhaps Jesus was somehow under the influence of a paralytic drug which causes a death-like state, like the zombie-powder of voudoun. Longinus was actually in league with him on this scam, and that's what the side-piercing was really all about. How did Jesus not bleed out? No clue.

Originally posted by Solasis
Perhaps Jesus was somehow under the influence of a paralytic drug which causes a death-like state, like the zombie-powder of voudoun. Longinus was actually in league with him on this scam, and that's what the side-piercing was really all about. How did Jesus not bleed out? No clue.

If you take the time to read the accounts of those who saw Jesus post-resurrection...
...it is clear that although His old fleshly body had been 'used up' that He was in a transformed physical form...
...His extensive wounds had healed but scar tissue was still visible...
...after only two days...
...He passed through closed doors...
...but he ate fish, so He was no mere spirit.

You really should listen to the talk listed in the OP.



[edit on 31/3/10 by troubleshooter]

reply to post by troubleshooter


Oh, I thought we were just talking about the resurrection, not every single claim of what he did afterward. Anyway, in my scenario, he would still have been human.

1) The "used up" stuff was exaggeration, or the paralysis stuff reinvigorated parts of his body.
2) It also caused rapid sealing of the wounds.
3) So?
4) Exaggeration.
5) He was a guy who had been asleep for 3 days; he needed his Omega-3's!

Originally posted by FeralMonkeyMagic
Religion is about faith

science is about fact backed up by observation

Science and theology rarely ever see eye to eye, but as i saw in a post previous, re-animation should and most likely is possible. If they can do it with a few single cells, then a human being is the next leap i suppose.

I know several scientists that are religious and it bares no significance on their trade of choice.

Science and theology are 2 different languages that cannot be compared.

lol Where would you catergorize common sense? Would this be fact? The truth is indeed stranger than fiction. Observation? lol

Originally posted by troubleshooter
You really should listen to the talk listed in the OP.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/a141c1bf0ee71cc6.gif[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/7aa148978d50179a.png[/atsimg]

That's about 20 mins long - a lot to ask of someone if you ask me.

Why not sum it up for us instead of hiding behind your illusionary friend?

-m0r

PS: Tetrotoxin and datura were mixed to make Haitian zombies - so it's possible that Jebus did a Blaine or something (If he managed to get to America to grab some datura first)

Originally posted by FeralMonkeyMagic
Religion is about faith

science is about fact backed up by observation

Science and theology rarely ever see eye to eye, but as i saw in a post previous, re-animation should and most likely is possible. If they can do it with a few single cells, then a human being is the next leap i suppose.

I know several scientists that are religious and it bares no significance on their trade of choice.

Science and theology are 2 different languages that cannot be compared.

Christianity did not begin with belief...
...it began by confrontation with the physical resurrection of a person...
...it was empirical observation recorded as historical accounts.

One surprising thing about the accounts is their unanimity and lack of historical reflection...
...when you read the accounts you are reminded of a intrepid reporter trying get down the facts about an unprecedented event...
...which it was.

reply to post by troubleshooter


People who believe in Jesus' resurrection will be appalled when those who have been cryogenically frozen are attempted to be brought back to life.

Obviously scientists are still debating on whether or not it will ever be possible - but for the sake of argument lets say it is.

I have said this before in another thread so I guess I'll repeat myself... If someone were to be resurrected through the crygentic process using nano tech or something like it to heal the brain and such, when the body comes back to 'life' who is to say the consciousness will be there (aka the soul)? I mean, that's what I believe - the consciousness/soul is one and when you die it lives on. Well why would it come back to your resurrected body?

And let's say it DID come back to the reanimated body, would it force the soul to be split in some way and be forced back inside the body? Would it be torture the soul in some sort of way?

I think the concept of resurrection is a joke (no offense to any religious people here). When the biological body dies - it decomposes - once it decomposes it will never be the same ever again.

People need to really think about this a lot more. It's easier to put faith into a book that is said to hold secrets about life (aka the bible) than to actually do the research, find the science, and see if it's even possible. And I know all I'll hear is "Well Jesus is God's son! He can do anything!" Well in this instance I'm talking a normal, mortal, human being. If you want to get biblical on me, then there is no argument because 'God' will always beat everyone.

reply to post by troubleshooter

Can a Scientist Believe in the Resurrection?

Let me ask this...is it entirely impossible for such a phenomena to exist, is there not even the most slightest fraction of a chance? Of course there is chance such a thing is possible, and is simply outside the current realm of our scientific understanding...however, I do believe absolutely EVERYTHING can be scientifically explained with sound reasoning and logic...so if re-animation isn't entirely impossible, that means it is entirely possible...however, I wouldn't trust what the bible has to tell me whether re-animation is possible or not. Peace.

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by troubleshooter
Can a Scientist Believe in the Resurrection?

I can answer this question pretty simply.

yes and no.

Science is not a system that believes or disbelieves anything...it is a tool to stop beliefs and start understanding. Believing in something comes when there is a scientific void.

They can speculate...they can theorize, they can even come up with hypothesis's. They can formulate personal beliefs based on data, but science is not a system designed to create beliefs in anything...its used for the complete opposite.

a scientist now...he can believe in whatever he wants...and plenty of scientists have beliefs...some from faith, some from assuming data will confirm their belief at a later date...but when they start believing in something, thats when they turn their science background off.

a meat cutter by trade can also make a decent salad...but not because thats his job..its because he is still a person after the job is over.

I think that is a good summary...

The resurrection is not really available to scientific enquiry...
...but few once off historical events are...
...because science is the study of the reproducable...
...but a scientist can believe in history, his own history to begin with...
...and necessarily the history of his science...
...and the Easter Resurrection is available to history.

The definition of terms Biblical is lacking here entirely,
Faith is not "blind" and to Believe isn't simply "trusting" either,
maybe this stems from the word for GOD in Greek THEOS being thought "theory"?

The words writing Bible are absolutes in their time of transmition
but our extended reception has become reinterpreted to dissolution,

Science is founded upon reasonable doubt and seeks the definatives
so apply the rigor of scientific process to the simple 5,000 word vocabulary of the sources
and exact what it says before going on tangents with may might would could should...

concerning this subject, the Shroud of Turin is what is in question,
so remove the Bio-plastic shell already and get down to business!

reply to post by highlyoriginal

I think the concept of resurrection is a joke (no offense to any religious people here). When the biological body dies - it decomposes - once it decomposes it will never be the same ever again.

Why you no good for nothing son of a BLEEP....No offense taken..LOL..
Tell me something ...what happens to the soul...spirit, when the physical body dies?

reply to post by YeHUaH ELaHaYNU


I'd say the fact that the bible has been translated poorly on 3 separate occasions so the Western world can read it is more indicative of dissolved transmission than anything else.

Wasn't the shroud proven to be fake already?

-m0r

Originally posted by CHA0S
reply to post by troubleshooter

 

Can a Scientist Believe in the Resurrection?

Let me ask this...is it entirely impossible for such a phenomena to exist, is there not even the most slightest fraction of a chance? Of course there is chance such a thing is possible, and is simply outside the current realm of our scientific understanding...however, I do believe absolutely EVERYTHING can be scientifically explained with sound reasoning and logic...so if re-animation isn't entirely impossible, that means it is entirely possible...however, I wouldn't trust what the bible has to tell me whether re-animation is possible or not. Peace.

On one hand your saying yes, on the other your saying no.Which one is it dude!!!lol