Where Do You Put Your Faith?

[nPeace]

Religion has very little to do with God. God doesn't heal the sick and aged. God punished us with these things. Science attempts to remedy them. Which is the inevitable?

I don't think it's accurate to say God punishes us with these things. To say that, imo, is the same as saying, God delights in seeing people suffer, and pushes the 'suffering button' - which isn't true.

If someone takes a needle filled with germ cells, and injects it into a child, did God punished the child?
We don't have to be the brightest of people to know that mankind has been his own worst enemy - either intentionally or unintentionally.

Ecclesiastes 8:9
All this I have seen and applied my heart unto every work that is done under the sun: the time in which one man rules over another to his own hurt.

Man's body is susceptible to many ills, but with proper living, men can live out their days in good health.
However, he can also slow poison it with many pollutants available, or others can do it for him - even if he doesn't want the pollutants.

The sea, and life within it, is susceptible to many ills, but the sea doesn't do anything against itself - nor does God. It is man who pollutes it.
It is man who is ruining the earth, himself, and others with ills.
Isn't it? Revelation 11:18

 

[Earthling]

I don't think it's accurate to say God punishes us with these things. To say that, imo, is the same as saying, God delights in seeing people suffer, and pushes the 'suffering button' - which isn't true.

You're absolutely right. That came up elsewhere in the thread and I had to correct myself. God punished Adam and we feel the effects of that. I misspoke.

 

[1AOA1]

Scientists don't make such "promises". However, science does produce more and better results than religion does. If you're sick, whose treatment would you consider to be more reliable; a doctor and his medicine or a priest and his prayers?

Naturalism was chosen to construct the scenario, not a choice to be made after construction.

 

[Father Heathen]

Naturalism was chosen to construct the scenario, not a choice to be made after construction.

What a strange non sequitur.

 

[LuisDantas]

Everyone wants to live and enjoy life right? Who doesn't enjoy eating an apple, or mango, or grape, or....? The things on this earth that can satisfy man, are almost endless, and the beauty about is is that we never tire of those things - They always seem fresh, and the experience always seem different.

Yet, the reality is, we age, and the body loses its vigor, the taste buds, lose their sensitivity... but the brain still seem to desire these things. Then death end it all.

Scientists are promising to fix that - resurrect the dead - end the aging process - end death.
The Bible says God, the creator, promises the same.

Where do you put your faith, your trust, your confidence, your hope...
In the "big magic man in the sky", or the "puny dreamers on this earth"?

Why?

I think that you are misunderstanding the role of science. And, arguably, that of God as well.

 

[nPeace]

I think that you are misunderstanding the role of science. And, arguably, that of God as well.

I don't know how I ought to respond to that.

Could you answer me one question?
Why do some on these forums just make a statement that just leaves one like ?
Why don't you usually say why you make the statement, so that the one addressed would be able to make a response other than, 'Okay.' 'Why?' 'What do you mean?' 'Why do you say that?'

I'm asking because sometimes I just don't know if to respond, or how to respond. Does the person want a response. It leaves me wondering.

 

[LuisDantas]

I don't know how I ought to respond to that.

That is IMO a good start.

Could you answer me one question?
Why do some on these forums just make a statement that just leaves one like ?

Often it is because they say things that are not based on our own premises and assumptions.

Why don't you usually say why you make the statement, so that the one addressed would be able to make a response other than, 'Okay.' 'Why?' 'What do you mean?' 'Why do you say that?'

That is not always possible.

I'm asking because sometimes I just don't know if to respond, or how to respond. Does the person want a response. It leaves me wondering.

Well, I do not understand why you talk of science as "promising eternal life" either. It is not exactly clear or logical.

 

[nPeace]

That is IMO a good start.



Often it is because they say things that are not based on our own premises and assumptions.




That is not always possible.



Well, I do not understand why you talk of science as "promising eternal life" either. It is not exactly clear or logical.

Well, just go ahead and correct me, or challenge what I said with the facts, or oppose my statements, or views.
isn't that what is done on a debate forum... in a civil manner of course.

Or are you saying that what i said is not clear?

 

[LuisDantas]

Well, just go ahead and correct me, or challenge what I said with the facts, or oppose my statements, or views.
isn't that what is done on a debate forum... in a civil manner of course.

Or are you saying that what i said is not clear?

Fair enough.

Science is about finding reliable knowledge (and testing it).

The expectations of eternal life are, far as I can tell, quite foreign to it - and arguably all-out incompatible.

Why do you feel otherwise?

 

[nPeace]

Fair enough.

Science is about finding reliable knowledge (and testing it).

The expectations of eternal life are, far as I can tell, quite foreign to it - and arguably all-out incompatible.

Why do you feel otherwise?

I don't believe that scientist are able to achieve a lot of things - including immortality. I have my reasons for this.

However, I like to be fair, so I try not to limit myself to only what I believe, or my views. I include what I find is public knowledge - so I do research.

I think some people make the mistake of mixing up the words science, and scientist.
For example, if someone says scientist so so so..., some listeners somehow translate that to science so so so... (I'm not accusing you of that, but this is what I experienced).

Scientist are people - I'm sure you agree - and not all scientist agree. Not all scientist have the same ideas.
So if I say scientist say, I have not said, science says. There is actually a huge difference - almost as huge as east is from west.

So the articles I used here, I believe are credible. If they aren't, then that's where you guys come in. Provide information that shows it to be bogus, or not legit, and i will gladly accept it.

I think that's fair. What do you say?

 

[LuisDantas]

I think that you hold weird expectations for no clear reason.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Where do you put your faith, your trust, your confidence, your hope...

In the One and only God.

Peace be upon all.

 

[nPeace]

I think that you hold weird expectations for no clear reason.

Expectations? What expectations do you assume I hold?

 

[nPeace]

In the One and only God.

Peace be upon all.

Good for you.
Oh, welcome to the forums.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Good for you.
Oh, welcome to the forums.

Good on God

We can be but servants of Gods Representatives.

Peace to you and all

 

[nPeace]

I think there is an advantage of religion over science.
The reason? Religion uses science and is not incompatible with it.

science - noun
the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.

At this point I will show why I put my faith in God, more than I do the dreamers on earth.

I think it is first reasonable to consider that as a study, various individuals will be involved in science - both religious and non religious.
Not everyone has the same goals and pursuits. Not all have interest in the same fields of study.

Some scientists would not for example, be interested in Artificial Intelligence, even though they are in the field of Computer Science.

Cutting to the chase.
Some scientists are outright materialistic, and some who have no interest in spiritual things, will pursue goals associated with materialism. In many cases those goals do not take into consideration, the damage to the ecosystem on a whole.

On the other hand, others may be spiritual minded and give more attention to goals that give attention to the betterment of humanity and their environment. (Not saying that some religious are not materialistic)

Scientist have achieved a lot, both good and bad, so I think it would be biased to turn a blind eye to the bad, and speak of science as though it were the ultimate good.
I think it may be that some persons have just blinded themselves, or they have been blinded - due to their point of view. Especially when they just see anyone who has an opinion against their world view as strange.

Why religion is superior.
At this point i should make a distinction, since religion is vast and vastly vary.
The religion I speak of is the one mentioned by the disciple James.
James 1:27
The form of worship that is clean and undefiled from the standpoint of our God and Father is this: to look after orphans and widows in their tribulation, and to keep oneself without spot from the world.
True religion is no part of this world - it does not get involved in wars, politics, worldly holidays, attitudes, speech, etc., and has God's approval.

The powerful Effect of God's word and spirit reaches hearts, and transforms lives.
Example 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, more.
...and provide answers to life's most difficult questions. They learn what is truth.
Resulting in a worldwide brotherhood, made up of people of all nations, tribes, and languages - united in spirit.

Contrast: Can materialistic science transform the hearts of the untamed?
If they could, it would change a lot of things.
[GALLERY=media, 8648]Activist by nPeace posted Aug 20, 2018 at 8:06 PM[/GALLERY]

Lack of proper spiritual education, coupled with greed, leads to...
[GALLERY=media, 8647]Poverty by nPeace posted Aug 20, 2018 at 8:06 PM[/GALLERY]

...which in turn leads to many other ills.
How close are they to changing the hearts of humanity for the better?

Not even close.
Perhaps the pursuit of the ToE, is not really the Theory of Everything, but rather the Theory of Evil, being driven on by a force that escapes their perception. A force too powerful for their limited minds and incapable instruments to detect.
Or perhaps the spirit operative on the hearts of the materialist has already been embraced.

(Romans 1:21) . . .they became empty-headed in their reasonings and their senseless hearts became darkened.
(Ephesians 2:2) . . .according to the ruler of the authority of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I think there is an advantage of religion over science.
The reason? Religion uses science and is not incompatible with it.

Except when religion is absolutely not compatible with science.

Which happens every time science discovers yet again, why religion got it wrong.

Not once, in the entire History of Humans, have scientists had to say:

"Oh! We were wrong! Religion had it correct all along!"

Not.
One.
Time.

 

[osgart]

Religion holds on to mythology, and tries to make the mythology fit the reality. That is a profoundly bad thing.

Science is not the road to ultimate good. I agree, it does just as much harm as it does help.

I put my faith in the spiritual concepts of love, charity, benevolence, compassion, mercy, empathy, virtue, justice, understanding, and care. Those concepts are the pillars of civilization. These ideas/ideals are not electrochemical impulses but they are concepts to live by. They can by choice exist in the hearts of mankind. It starts with the desire for these attributes.

Also science does enable the power and ability of people to help one another. But standing all by itself its more of a tool of destruction.

 

[nPeace]

Religion holds on to mythology, and tries to make the mythology fit the reality. That is a profoundly bad thing.

It is easy to make statements, such as that.
That's not the case when it comes to proving the statements true.

Science is not the road to ultimate good. I agree, it does just as much harm as it does help.

I put my faith in the spiritual concepts of love, charity, benevolence, compassion, mercy, empathy, virtue, justice, understanding, and care. Those concepts are the pillars of civilization. These ideas/ideals are not electrochemical impulses but they are concepts to live by. They can by choice exist in the hearts of mankind. It starts with the desire for these attributes.

Interestingly all of these are what are promoted, and issues from the God who authored the holy writings. Hence why the word of God is alive and impacts so powerfully on the lives of those who live by its truths. Hebrews 4:12, 13
That coupled with the qualifies evident in followers of the Christ, is evidence that God's spirit is operative upon his people, even today.
Galatians 5:16-6

What people can see with their own eyes is clear evidence. It is not dreamed up. It is fact.
It's revealing - something worth noting. When people ignore such clear evidence, that revealing too.
It reveals what Jesus said.
(John 3:19) . . .men have loved the darkness rather than the light, for their works were wicked.

Also science does enable the power and ability of people to help one another. But standing all by itself its more of a tool of destruction.

I don't credit science with such power, but maybe you can give me an example that would change my mind.

 

[Milton Platt]

I like that last bit. That's actually my point - but whereas you might put it down to mere human nature, I believe it is more. But you'd have to not be an atheist to take my side.

You can make me "not an atheist" by simply providing convincing evidence to support your claims.