Science and Religion are Not Compatible

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by KaytaggNo religion to indoctrinate kids with = no indoctrination.

I never thought of myself as religious but if this is what atheism is I might just have to "find god".

[edit on 24-6-2009 by thisguyrighthere]

I'm glad someone said it lol. Great point! Atheism does not make you a bad person, wielding atheism as a weapon against others does. Especially when the presentation is ruthless, ignorant, and naive.

reply to post by DaMod


See: www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

No need for me to further rehash what i've already said.

Originally posted by DaModAtheism does not make you a bad person, wielding atheism as a weapon against others does. Especially when the presentation is ruthless, ignorant, and naive.

And the irony is this is true for any belief. Whatever the belief may be there will be fanatics at some level. The "atheists" don't see this? This knocking on doors to spread the message and resorting to name-calling as "dumb" "ignorant" "duped" etc... is exactly the behavior they claim to despise the "religion" (whichever it may be) for participating in.

The church of atheism.

Originally posted by Kaytagg
You're the one stealing -- not me.

i just want to know what the point of your experiment is.

Only when he claims to be speaking the divine, infallible word of god.

hitler thought religion was superstition, stalin insisted there was no god, mao did the same, as did pol pot. seems to me that the most evil men of the twentieth century were all atheists. explain that little conundrum to me.

No religion to indoctrinate kids with = no indoctrination.

so all that "re-education" in china under mao and russia under stalin and germany under hitler was what, exactly?

Go ahead, look it up.

i did, i did, i just wondered who taught it as doctrine. it's not even the craziest thing in the bible, funny but hardly the craziest. maybe all the shouting the kids were doing attracted the bears, maybe gods bald and a bit sensitive, i dunno. it's hardly an article of faith, is it?

They are two different things trying to explain the same things. They just go about doing it in their own ways. But I can see them working together, why not.

Originally posted by pieman

Originally posted by Kaytagg
You're the one stealing -- not me.

i just want to know what the point of your experiment is.

What you're supposed to learn by doing the experiment (which you obviously didn't do) is that stealing does not work in a community where two or more people have to live together, harmoniously.

So you have to make a choice, "Do I want to be able to coexist with other people? Or am I better off taking a few things from people I meet while suffering the consequences of reciprocation, in whatever form it may come, or do I simply agree to not steal from my friend, as long as my friend doesn't steal from me?"

No need for the bible, or god, to explain that to me. I don't steal from my friends because we have a mutual understanding not to hurt each other, and to respect each other. It doesn't need to come from god -- it comes form common sense.

Only when he claims to be speaking the divine, infallible word of god.

hitler thought religion was superstition, stalin insisted there was no god, mao did the same, as did pol pot. seems to me that the most evil men of the twentieth century were all atheists. explain that little conundrum to me.

That's a rather silly argument, as it's a) not entirely true, b) assumed that atheists share a common doctrine. We don't. Atheists don't believe in god, that's all we have in common by default, and it's purely accidental. No "atheist church" converts us, nor do we have a holy book available in every hotel room across the country.

Contrast that with Christians, who share a lot in common -- like a 2000 page book of ethics, morality, teachings, etc.

"Person X was an atheist, therefore all atheists are like person X." That is a logical fallacy. Yet the same argument still works for Christians who share the exact same belief system, laws, morality, etc, BECAUSE they share those morals, laws, beliefs, etc. Although it should be clarified that it's the morals/laws/beliefs that make them similar, not their personality or deeds.

People often make the claim that Adolph Hitler adhered to Atheism, Humanism or some ancient Nordic pagan mythology. None of these fanciful and wrong ideas hold. Although one of Hitler's henchmen, Alfred Rosenberg, did undertake a campaign of Nordic mythological propaganda, Hitler and most of his henchmen did not believe in it .

Many American books, television documentaries, and Sunday sermons that preach of Hitler's "evil" have eliminated Hitler's god for their Christian audiences, but one only has to read from his own writings to appreciate that Hitler's God equals the same God of the Christian Bible. Hitler held many hysterical beliefs which not only include, God and Providence but also Fate, Social Darwinism, and ideological politics. He spoke, unashamedly, about God, fanaticism, idealism, dogma, and the power of propaganda. Hitler held strong faith in all his convictions. He justified his fight for the German people and against Jews by using Godly and Biblical reasoning. Indeed, one of his most revealing statements makes this quite clear:

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."

nobeliefs.com...

No religion to indoctrinate kids with = no indoctrination.

so all that "re-education" in china under mao and russia under stalin and germany under hitler was what, exactly?

I was very wrong. Indoctrination can exist in a world without religion. I retract that.

Go ahead, look it up.

i did, i did, i just wondered who taught it as doctrine. it's not even the craziest thing in the bible, funny but hardly the craziest. maybe all the shouting the kids were doing attracted the bears, maybe gods bald and a bit sensitive, i dunno. it's hardly an article of faith, is it?

It goes to show you that god is not a very nice person (strange that he's all loving and perfect. Is this really how you imagine an all loving perfect being? Somebody who kills 42 children for teasing a bald guy?).

That would be what I take from it, anyways. It also makes me wonder why people defend the bible as a moral book, or even have the audacity to claim moral high ground based on the teachings of the bible.

It's obviously not what we would consider an ethical set of laws in the 21st century, nor can it be used as a reference in science classes, so why do we continue listening to any part of it?

And if you DO find a lesson in the bible that we use, IE thou shalt not kill, there's no reason to credit that to the bible (never mind the fact that the bible contradicts this "law" on many occasions) but it makes sense that for a society to exist, you can't go around shooting people in the face for fun. Nor would most people be interested in doing that even if we were all 100% atheist.

Moreover, there may be times where you have to kill for survival, like self defense, war, to separate dangerous people from society (in the case of the death penalty), etc. Jesus would have us turn the other cheek (He's killed a lot of people as god, but lets just assume we're dealing with the god that says never to kill, in this case). Turning the other cheek will get you hurt, or killed, in some cases.

So, is the bible infallible? Does it even make sense? Should it have any part in 21st century discourse? Other than a quaint reference to a different era?
I don't think it has any place. None.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by DaModAtheism does not make you a bad person, wielding atheism as a weapon against others does. Especially when the presentation is ruthless, ignorant, and naive.

And the irony is this is true for any belief. Whatever the belief may be there will be fanatics at some level. The "atheists" don't see this? This knocking on doors to spread the message and resorting to name-calling as "dumb" "ignorant" "duped" etc... is exactly the behavior they claim to despise the "religion" (whichever it may be) for participating in.

The church of atheism.

Yeah I can agree with that for the most part. See I am christian you will never see me wield Christianity as a weapon. You will never see me using my beliefs against another set of beliefs. You will never see me insult anyone for their faith or lack there of. Sure I may explain what I believe to the best of my ability if you where to ask, but you will never find me shoving it down peoples throats. I know a lot of religious people that are the same. If you want to be christian then great! If you don't well that would be your call. That's why i have such a huge problem with radical atheist extremists (I know I'm almost pushing it.. Almost ).

He who is without sin cast the first stone. Even if you have no faith whatsoever this concept should ring true in everyone. People say morals are made up by religion. Even so, does that make morality a bad thing considering the alternative? Are we forgetting the fall of the roman empire? Do people no longer care about each other? If I was naked and hungry and almost dead would you help me? My issue is not religion, my main issue with discussions like these is people seem to like rationalizing their "don't give a F**K" disease" because it seems to them they can do whatever they want to. Sure they can but when did they consider this the right thing to do? When did people forget about each other? Why do people promote that kind of thinking?..

reply to post by Rams59lb



Religion seems to be too rigid for science.

I'm hoping that one day, SPIRITUALITY and science can be intertwined.

reply to post by Rams59lb


Agreed.

People who say "God created evolution" are just completely, horribly misconstrued.

They should either

1) Read up their biology textbooks with greater clarity.
2) Read up their Bibles with greater clarity.

You can't have your cake and eat it, folks.

reply to post by KarlG


Nobody here has said God created evolution.

You say the two can't exist. I would like you to explain why they can't.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by DaModAtheism does not make you a bad person, wielding atheism as a weapon against others does. Especially when the presentation is ruthless, ignorant, and naive.

And the irony is this is true for any belief. Whatever the belief may be there will be fanatics at some level. The "atheists" don't see this? This knocking on doors to spread the message and resorting to name-calling as "dumb" "ignorant" "duped" etc... is exactly the behavior they claim to despise the "religion" (whichever it may be) for participating in.

The church of atheism.

HAHAHA! Okay, if you want to go by that, mass exageration, I can say that because of a group of pastors, all christians are child molestors, there's even a church of god that's devoted to molesting children, ergo all christians are child molestors.

Get over it, there are good people and bad people, your generalizations are disgusting at best.

If you see a black person steal, do you assume all black people steal!? No because you have common sense, I hope.

I wake up everyday to a advertisement on my door, telling me what sins I have probably done, and why I should go to 'their' church to be forgiven.

When was the last time you had a billion adverts on your door. Noone is forcing atheism on you.

reply to post by Rams59lb

Actually, religion and science DO mix. God created this world through science. Ask anyone in the Vatican. Furthermore, it's been proven that most scientists have a religion, because of those things that they can't explain, like the roundedness of the universe, or why many astronauts have come back from space and shut themselves in their rooms to pray.

There is Col. James Irwin, who even wrote the book Destination Moon: The Spiritual and Scientific Voyage of the Eighth Man to Walk on the Moon.

Rusty Schweickart has mentioned that he was "touched by God".

Senator John Glenn is very adament about his religion.

Also, it's said on [a href="http://www3.telus.net/st_simons/cr0303.htm"] this page[/a]
about the Space Shuttle Columbia, and Shuttle Commander Rick Husband:

The spouses of the crew each were able to pick a song for them to wake up to one of the mornings they're in space. Rick's wife selected "God of Wonders" sung by a Christian artist and personal friend Steve Green. Rick communicated with Mission Control after the song was played. The conversation went something like this: Mission Control - "Good morning. That song was for Rick. It was 'God of Wonders' by Steve Green." Rick - "Good morning. Thank you. We can really appreciate the lyrics of that song up here. We look out the window and see that God truly is a God of wonders!"

www.foxnews.com...|astronauts
Apollo 8 Astronauts read from the Book of Genesis during their orbit around the moon.

www.encyclopedia.com...
www.bookrags.com...
eppc.org...
www.highbeam.com...

There are other such occurences explained in many books, including The Enchantments of Technology by Lee Worth Baily, and The Way of the Explorer: An Apollo Astronaut's Journey Through the Material and Mystical Worlds by Dr. Edgar Mitchell.

Continued in post below

As for scientists and religion, to me, and to many others, religion completes science. Even the Vatican has their own scientists, based in the Pontifical Academy of Sciences:
www.vaticanstate.va...


There is also a Vatican Observatory, and many scientific confrences are held there each year: www.vaticanstate.va...

According to [a href="http://www.acfnewsource.org/science/vatican_science.html"]this article[/a] it was a Catholic priest who came up with the Big Bang Theory.

www.catholic.org...
www.newadvent.org...
www.newadvent.org...

Articles on Pope John Paul II and science www.silk.net...
Center for Theology and Natural Sciences: www.ctns.org...

Evolution is not contradictory to Religion, and religion is not contradictory to evolution. God created us through evolution, ultimately giving us a soul and conciousness, and opening our eyes to His truth.

Also, there was a 2005-07 study, entitled "Religion Among Academic Scientists" (RAAS), which was conducted by Elaine Howard Ecklund, assistant professor of sociology in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University at Buffalo.
www.buffalo.edu...

The first article based the study, co-authored by Christopher Scheitle of Penn State, appears in the current issue of the journal Social Problems (Vol. 54, No. 2).

"Our study data do not strongly support the idea that scientists simply drop their religious identities upon professional training, due to an inherent conflict between science and faith, or to institutional pressure to conform," Ecklund says.
...

Among scientists, as in the general population, being raised in a home in which religion and religious practice were valued is the most important predictor of present religiosity among the subjects.

Ecklund and Scheitle concluded that the assumption that becoming a scientist necessarily leads to loss of religion is untenable.

Ecklund says, "It appears that those from non-religious backgrounds disproportionately self-select into scientific professions. This may reflect the fact that there is tension between the religious tenets of some groups and the theories and methods of particular sciences and it contributes to the large number of non-religious scientists."

articles supporting religion and science
www.guardian.co.uk...

Lists of famous scientists who were religious: www.godandscience.org...
www.rationalresponders.com...
www.adherents.com... - read the entire page

Yes science and religion do coincide, unless of course your religion is based on misinformation and your faith is based on things unknown and your scienctific facts aren't really factual. Faith is not supposed to be blind, as is seemingly accepted today. Faith was, and is, supposed to be based on what is known and or seen to be true. Our family believes in the scriptures and our faith is based on what we see and know to be true. Here is one example.

The Messiah said that many would come in his name claiming that they are him and he said don't follow after them. He also said there would be an image made of a beast that people would bow down to and worship. He also said this beast has a number of his name and the older manuscripts make that number out to be 616. It seems pretty basic. They would use his name, and what name is it they use, jesus of course. and guess what, or rather figure out what, the name adds up to, yep 616, j=yod=10, e=niqqud=n/a, s=shin=300, u=vav=6, s=shin=300. That is why it would make sense then why he says that he will give his new name to those that overcome and it also says at the time of his coming that no one knows his name but he himself. It should be obvious that his followers would receive his new name after he comes.

So what is up with the number 666. Well, calculate this also. and you will find it is the image of that very beast, the crucifix.
6=vav=nail
60=samech=prop or support
400=tav=cross
200=resh=head

The scriptures point out that the end time scenario that is so much talked about would not take place until after the revealing of the man of sin. That man of sin, aka abomination of desolation, awful horror, antichrist, etc... is jesus. If one looks into it further they will realize jesus fits every biblical description of the beast(s) and it will also fit the prophecies yet to be played out including the crucifix being placed where the Dome of the Rock is located.

Whether one believes jesus is the antichrist or not is their own decision, however, it would not merit disregarding the facts. The Lord says to come out of her my children. He says it for a reason.

This would mean that those that claim to follow after Christ really don't. How can you tell the difference? Read the bible it makes it very clear. That is why he says that there is a way that seems right to a man but in the end leads to death.

The only ones that have a problem with this are those that don't want to accept the bible and live the way God wants us to. Most never did. So be it. This is for those who want things different and want others in their life that want the same thing.

The bottom line is if religious beliefs are not supported by scientific facts it is no religion at all but rather an empty way of life.

Facts should support facts. If not you should question whether your facts are actually facts.

resource at www.newhopeforall.info

[edit on 25-6-2009 by The Riley Family]

I have said it before and I will say it again.

Science is the process of applying logic to get an answer.

Religion was the most basic form of science, hence why it is so old. It was the most primitive way to explain things...to attribute it to some greater power we have no idea what it is.

Religion and science DO go together...

Just like every square (religion) is a rectangle (science), but not every rectangle (science) is a square (religion).

The Bible and other religion texts are just some of the oldest science books out there...

The problem is in your OP question.

There will never be absolute proof of either creation or otherwise. That is the way God intended it to be. The door is open for you to make a choice between either believing God or believing scientific fact. Let me explain:

This life is a test. The test began with Adam and Eve. They were given information by God, and they had a choice to believe it or disbelieve it. They chose to disbelieve God and to believe Satan. They believed that the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge was not going to make them die. That free will choice was essential to proving if they loved God, or loved themselves more.

We are undergoing tests daily. God has shown us throughout the Bible that these are tests of love, to see if you love Him or if you love the messenger that counters what He said. For example, Deuteronomy 13:1-3.

1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, 2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; 3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

So, today our dreamers of dreams who are presenting opposing views would be scientists with theories, backed up with scientific facts. When they prove these facts, they disprove the Bible, and by disproving the Bible they replace it with another set of beliefs (other gods, so to speak) that you will serve. You will believe that man is an evolved animal, that there is no God, and morals are defined by man, to name a few things.

So, we can deduce from this that the scientific data will be right. It will state that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Tests will prove it. Evolution will be proven, with transitional forms. Scientists will absolutely prove that man came from apes. However, God said He made it in 6 days. Who will you choose to believe? If you choose to believe it is old, do you lose faith in the Bible? Of course you do. Who wants you to lose faith in the Bible? The same entity that wanted Adam and Eve to lose faith in God.

So, God made the world aged. The starlight was enroute and already arrived. Adam was able to eat ripe fruit and name existing animals. Animals were able to eat grass and herbs that were fully mature. Adam and Eve were not embryonic, but were fully grown. Atomic structures had moved through much of their half-lifes, etc. Everything, including a fossil record, was aged and in existence. Why? Well, logically, if it all scientifically tested to be around 6000 years old, you wouldn't have a choice, would you?

Well, God can do anything He wants. It is no big problem for Him to make an aged world. Take a look at the earth from space in this photo grebz.fr... and with an understanding that God made the entire universe, do you see a problem with Him having the ability to make this world aged?

Lucky for us, there is a help for the Christian believer from Jesus on this very important topic. Jesus gives the believer some confidence. The Bible says that Jesus made everything that was made:

Colossians 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

Well, in the New Testament we find a curious verse: John 2:11 This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him.

So, the first miracle He did in the Old Testament was making the creation of everything. The first miracle He did in the New Testament was the miracle at Cana, where He turned water into wine. Let's look further: The creation occurred in 6 days. There were six waterpots of water turned into wine. The creation was made aged. The wine was made aged. The water was turned into wine in a town named Cana. The meaning of Cana is "to create, build".

Believe in the scientific facts. I do. I absolutely believe that the scientific facts show the world is 4.5 billion years old, and that the universe is over 13 billion years old. I believe the fossil record shows that man and animals have either gone through an extinction process from their original creation, or else they have evolved. I believe the scientific data shows this quite conclusively. However, God said He made it in six days.

He made it aged. There never was a conflict between creationists and scientific data. Even the Bible says that in 1 Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: 21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith.

The oppositions of science are not oppositions. They are called that falsely. The have nothing to do with what God said. In fact, they cause you to "err concerning the faith." You have abandoned the Almighty God, who made the world aged, and put your faith in other "gods," if you will, leading you to disbelieve in the God that made you and loves you.

Return unto me and I will return unto you, saith the Lord.

[edit on 25-6-2009 by Jim Scott]

Originally posted by Jim Scott
You have abandoned the Almighty God, who made the world aged, and put your faith in other "gods," if you will, leading you to disbelieve in the God that made you and loves you.

Return unto me and I will return unto you, saith the Lord.

rubbish.
we're supposed to believe that a god, who is omnipotent, knows everything that ever was and ever will be, who knows before we're born weather we will be good christian fundi's or rabid, ignorant athiests, needs to set up an elaborate series of traps we won't be able to see for most of existence in order to test our faith?

and this belief in the most convoluted and clearly illogical story is more important to god than your behavior towards other people and the world around you?

and then you say god loves us? sounds to me like your god is a drunken redneck looking for an excuse to beat his red headed step child. i'll take my chances, thanks.

and this belief in the most convoluted and clearly illogical story is more important to god than your behavior towards other people and the world around you?

No, a Christian would love one another. Love for one another is paramount with Jesus and God. See this thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...

But this thread is about creation, etc.

[edit on 25-6-2009 by Jim Scott]

Originally posted by Kaytagg
I don't steal from my friends because we have a mutual understanding not to hurt each other, and to respect each other.

so what does common sence tell you about stealing from strangers or people you don't like?

"Person X was an atheist, therefore all atheists are like person X." That is a logical fallacy.

that wasn't my point, do try to keep up, my point was that people are evil without any need to refer to god.

Yet the same argument still works for Christians who share the exact same belief system, laws, morality, etc,

this isn't true, just clearly isn't. it's just ignorance on your part. the only unifying factor among christians is that they believe jesus was something to do with god, they don't even all believe he was god.

now weather or not hitler believed in god or not is irrelivant, it's not an argument that is worthwhile because the point still stands if i just mention the other three.

So, is the bible infallible?

absolutely not.

Does it even make sense?

yes, when read in it's entirety and in order and from the perspective of it being a document showing the development of a belief system, it makes sence.

Should it have any part in 21st century discourse?

it's the single most important element in the development of our society and civilization, so there really isn't any choice in the matter. it really doesn't make any difference weather you believe in it or not, it is the basis of our political system, justice system and social/moral system.

if you don't understand it, know about it and have the ability to apply it to society your going through life half blind.

Originally posted by ozzraven
in 2000 years our actual science will be remembered as "religion"

We have to wait 2000 years?

Science is religion. It's a set of beliefs and rules, a code. Perharps not a moral one as such, and sure, those beliefs are 'proven' by rigorous testing and peer review, but things science has believed have been proven to be wrong before. Just like things some religions have said in the way of predictions, have been proven to be wrong. The people who practice science will strongly defend their methods and beliefs.

Except that science is the religion of the day. So we don't call them beliefs, we call them facts. Until they're proven wrong, then they're 'once-held beliefs'. For now, though, they're facts.

Science and religion are not compatible, just as religions are not compatible with each other. When you hold one belief against all others, without any kind of open mind, you instantly become incompatible with others holding the same belief.

And sure, an open mind would be nice, but how often do you see an open mind in science? Or in religion for that matter?