Why do You Find Scientific Knowledge and Spiritual Knowledge to be Incompatible?

[mikkel_the_dane]

As one of the members who spoke about science vs spirituality I will say as I always do. This is my personal view, and can be seen as none important if you disagree.
Personally I see science and spiritual teaching as two separate paths toward a "goal/answer" mixing them is the problem that I see, trying to explain spiritual experience with science is not giving any result. Trying to explain science with spiritual teaching is mostly impossible if not fully impossible

But both paths are good as stand alone teachings

You can learn to combine them, but that requires philosophy and soft science as psychology and sociology.

 

[Spirit of Light]

You can learn to combine them, but that requires philosophy and soft science as psychology and sociology.

As I said, in my view they should not be mixed, they are two separate teachings/paths
Science explains the physical realm, spiritual teaching explain non physical realm.

 

[Altfish]

Two of our better known posters have created threads to ask why either science or spiritual views are more important than the other.

Do your spiritual views conflict with science?

Do your scientific discoveries conflict with subjective spiritual revelations?

Why are science and spirituality incompatible?

There is a big difference; scientific knowledge is repeatable and therefore predictable and useful.
Spiritual is at best speculative.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

As I said, in my view they should not be mixed, they are two separate teachings/paths
Science explains the physical realm, spiritual teaching explain non physical realm.

Yeah, that is your belief. In mine they are connect otherwise we couldn't talk about both.

 

[Eyes to See]

Science comes from the Greek word meaning knowledge, to know. Science is the state of having facts, and knowledge, to know things.

When scientists teach things that are not truth or facts then that is known as pseudoscience.

Pseudoscience includes beliefs, theories, or practices that have been or are considered scientific, but have no basis in scientific fact.

When a scientist teaches you that we came from nothing for example, when there is no observational proof of anything coming from nothing, that is pseudoscience. It really isn't science at all. It's snake-oil.

When scientists tell you that primitive man was less intelligent, only used grunts, or had only basic grammar and spelling, that also is pseudoscience. Scientific fact is that civilization appeared suddenly and with complex language. In fact more complex than we have today.

Scientists aren't the only ones that abuse the word for knowledge. There is a cult known as Scientology. The word also derives from the Greek ciencia, knowledge, and ology, study. Or the study of knowledge. It is also known as the Church of Scientology.

In the Bible the church, or congregation (ecclesia in Greek) is not a place but the Christian congregation of anointed ones (or holy ones). Today the Christian congregation, or church, is everyone both called to rule in heaven, and those with an earthly hope that serve unitedly the leader of the Christian congregation, Jesus Christ.

So you can see how L. Ron Hubbard abuses the word much as do scientists. And they peddle fictions as facts. Deal in pseudoscience.

The study of science is only possible because God created the universe. He created the fundamental laws of the universe that we study.

You know I have come to the realization of something a long time ago. We humans, even though we think we know a lot, we don't. And the more you know the more you realize that you don't know much of anything at all. That is why the ignorant are always the loudest and most assertive of their narrow-minded thinking.

There are two things that will always be true. The first is the book of creation. God created the fundamental laws of the universe, and we are discovering these laws and learning how to use them. Man can send an artificial satellite to a moon orbiting around Jupiter. How? Because they can calculate with precision the trajectory and speed and other things needed to get the satellite in orbit all the way across the solar system. This is because God's fundamental laws of the universe are faithful and true. They don't break or bend or change.

We take advantage of these laws to communicate back and forth on the internet.

Also the words found in God's holy word in the Bible are infallible. They are all of them true and accurate. That is real knowledge. Real science right there.

We humans get almost everything wrong most of the time. And without our personal viewpoints on things the universe will still continue to run. Our viewpoints will change, but the truth will always remain. Most humans have been wrong about most things they think throughout the entirety of human history. Today is no exception. The only time we get things right is when we adhere to God's word. His laws found in nature, and this laws found in the Bible.

 

[Aupmanyav]

.. that God created evolution and then stepped out of the picture to let life find its own way.
I believe that God will establish his existence in the near future ..
That is how I see it.

What kind of God is this? Why did he create a world filled with problems? He gave us earthquakes, volcanoes, tsunamis, floods, droughts, typhoons, diseases (currently Coranovirus, plague in Mongolia. Heard that Ebola has returned to some extent), etc. And if he has stepped out of picture why should we bother with him now.
You have given no evidence of there being a creator. Science presents various scenarios in which no creator is required for either the creation of the universe or origin of life.
Near future? A much used threat in your books. Nobody knows exactly when. And no evidence that there is any such thing. Science gives somewhat like a billion years to life on Earth.
You don't see anything. And you disregard what you see. You just parrot your books with ever new explanations, interpretations, and forming new cults each time trying to defend them, bronze-age beliefs, as our friend sun rise has written.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

First of all, I will claim that not all spiritual understanding is accurate. For example, I had a guy tell me once, that he believed that when a person died, their spirit went to the Sun as fuel, to keep it burning!
I say knowledge is that which is accurately understood. Otherwise, it's a belief...like that dude's 'spirit-as-fuel' idea.

I also view some aspects of science as based on subjective belief, not knowledge, i.e., what is known.

Ultimately, when a truth is discovered, genuine religion and genuine science will always agree.

 

[stvdv]

Two of our better known posters have created threads to ask why either science or spiritual views are more important than the other.

I did notice a big difference in both the threads:
One was asking why his view was not seen as more important
The other was asking why his view needed to be seen as less

The first was not in line with your topic
The second was in line with your topic

 

[blü 2]

Two of our better known posters have created threads to ask why either science or spiritual views are more important than the other.

Do your spiritual views conflict with science?

Do your scientific discoveries conflict with subjective spiritual revelations?

Why are science and spirituality incompatible?

The supernatural, as its name in effect says, does not exist in nature ─ does not have objective existence.

So the only way the supernatural exists is as sets of concepts and of things imagined in individual brains.

There's no third option.


The world behaves exactly as if this is the case. God never says or does. Only people say and do.


There is not one authenticated example of a supernatural event in reality, nor of magic, nor of a ghost, or a soul, or a god, or an angel, or a demon.


If a definition of God existed appropriate to a God with objective existence then there'd be a test by which I could determine whether my keyboard is God or not. But there isn't, and I can't.


If a supernatural realm had objective existence then humans perceiving it across many thousands of cultures and years would have tended towards a single consistent description of its nature and contents. Instead we have enormous diversity.

 

[Heyo]

Two of our better known posters have created threads to ask why either science or spiritual views are more important than the other.

Do your spiritual views conflict with science?

Do your scientific discoveries conflict with subjective spiritual revelations?

Why are science and spirituality incompatible?

I think (most) religions are in conflict with science as both have fundamentally different premises. Science rests on the principle of an orderly universe. Many religions and spiritual path require the universe to be chaotic.
Scientists think that the universe can principally be known (by science). Spirituality denies that.
There are a very few religions that agree with the principles of science or at least agree to keep a barrier between both, but they are rare.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

What kind of God is this? Why did he create a world filled with problems? He gave us earthquakes, volcanoes, tsunamis, floods, droughts, typhoons, diseases (currently Coranovirus, plague in Mongolia. Heard that Ebola has returned to some extent), etc. And if he has stepped out of picture why should we bother with him now.

He didn't "create a world filled with problems."
In fact, it was "very good." -- Genesis 1:31

Briefly....

When A&E chose to rebel (Genesis 3), they were choosing to make their own rules, without Jehovah God's guidance. Really, His right to set guidelines -- His sovereignty -- was questioned.

Can man rule himself, or does he need guidance?
It's an issue that needs to be answered.

Furthermore, God has removed His blessing from this Earth...it currently does not receive His complete protection. This is seen in the future promise of Isaiah 11 9

 

[ChristineM]

Two of our better known posters have created threads to ask why either science or spiritual views are more important than the other.

Do your spiritual views conflict with science?

Do your scientific discoveries conflict with subjective spiritual revelations?

Why are science and spirituality incompatible?

I don't particularly have spiritual views. But i do see aspects of spirituality that are threatened by science. Science has repeatedly shown some of these aspects as invalid and fear/trepidation/concern that more aspects of spirituality may be shown to be invalid beliefs will surely be a worry to some people as the gaps in knowledge get smaller.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Because scientific thinking priorities evidence, and spiritual thinking is fine with leading evidence, or ignoring it all together. People who have indulge in both, compartmentalize their views. Or when conflict is inevitable, either ignore evidence in favor if the spiritual, or re-interpret their spiritual beliefs to match the evidence.

What is behind that idea of yours, is that you can do everything with evidence. You know you can't. You just call it opinions.

Well, I am personally of the opinion that my belief in God makes sense. So now what?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

One is based on observation and testing. The other on scripture/faith.
One is predictive, the other...not so much.
One has a methodology, the other not.
One begins with observations and tries to explain them. The other begins with doctrine and tries to defend it.
One tests, the other defends.
One welcomes challenges, the other forbids them.
One changes as new data accumulates, the other's writ in stone.
One seeks answers, the other already knows the answers.
One deals with "how?" The other with "who?"
One welcomes new facts, the other denies new facts.

You really don't understand religion, do you?

This is religion:
religion | Definition, Types, & List of Religions

Religion, human beings’ relation to that which they regard as holy, sacred, absolute, spiritual, divine, or worthy of especial reverence. It is also commonly regarded as consisting of the way people deal with ultimate concerns about their lives and their fate after death. In many traditions, this relation and these concerns are expressed in terms of one’s relationship with or attitude toward gods or spirits; in more humanistic or naturalistic forms of religion, they are expressed in terms of one’s relationship with or attitudes toward the broader human community or the natural world. In many religions, texts are deemed to have scriptural status, and people are esteemed to be invested with spiritual or moral authority. Believers and worshippers participate in and are often enjoined to perform devotional or contemplative practices such as prayer, meditation, or particular rituals. Worship, moral conduct, right belief, and participation in religious institutions are among the constituent elements of the religious life.
...

Here is one religion:
Our UU Faith
It doesn't fit your version of religion.

 

[Spirit of Light]

What is behind that idea of yours, is that you can do everything with evidence. You know you can't. You just call it opinions.

Well, I am personally of the opinion that my belief in God makes sense. So now what?

As long it make sense to you, that is what counts, others can disagree, but you have your own understanding.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The supernatural, as its name in effect says, does not exist in nature ─ does not have objective existence.

So the only way the supernatural exists is as sets of concepts and of things imagined in individual brains.

There's no third option.


The world behaves exactly as if this is the case. God never says or does. Only people say and do.


There is not one authenticated example of a supernatural event in reality, nor of magic, nor of a ghost, or a soul, or a god, or an angel, or a demon.


If a definition of God existed appropriate to a God with objective existence then there'd be a test by which I could determine whether my keyboard is God or not. But there isn't, and I can't.


If a supernatural realm had objective existence then humans perceiving it across many thousands of cultures and years would have tended towards a single consistent description of its nature and contents. Instead we have enormous diversity.

You confuse science and philosophy and have made your own religion based on that.

 

[bobhikes]

Two of our better known posters have created threads to ask why either science or spiritual views are more important than the other.

Do your spiritual views conflict with science?

Do your scientific discoveries conflict with subjective spiritual revelations?

Why are science and spirituality incompatible?

Science is the discovery of processes in the world. Spirituality is the discovery of self. Though they are not incompatible they are completely different understandings. Each uses different types of discovery to solve and the discovery methods are not similar. Unless one has an open mind and considers the importance of each, one will find them incompatible. They are very compatible and arguably helpful to each as long as you have an open mind.

 

[Jainarayan]

Two of our better known posters have created threads to ask why either science or spiritual views are more important than the other.

Do your spiritual views conflict with science?

Do your scientific discoveries conflict with subjective spiritual revelations?

Why are science and spirituality incompatible?

1. No.
2. No.
3. In Hinduism they’re not incompatible.

Scientific knowledge is usually easily explained by spirituality and the scriptures and other texts. That everything comes from one source (the matter energy equivalence) is a core concept of Hinduism; the repeated cycles of the universe, theories of multiverses, for example. There are many others.

 

[Aupmanyav]

His right to set guidelines -- His sovereignty -- was questioned.

Can man rule himself, or does he need guidance? It's an issue that needs to be answered.

Furthermore, God has removed His blessing from this Earth...it currently does not receive His complete protection. This is seen in the future promise of Isaiah ..

Ah, the jealous dictator who would punish even the sons and daughters of those who differed till their third or fourth generation.

He conned Adam and Eve. Left them alone with the fruit and the serpent. Did he not know that the serpent was around? Who created the serpent? Who allowed the serpent in Eden? And where did he go leaving A & E alone with the serpent? What is this God who cannot even keep his domain safe? And then he rejects Cain's offering that he produced with so much labor and prefers Abel's fat lamb, the glutton. A very poorly formed story.

Yeah, we can do without any God. There are millions of atheists in the world. God and his myriad religions only bring strife in the world.
Promises are promises. Some are not worth the paper they are written on. You cannot test his promise of everlasting life after death.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Ah, the jealous dictator who would punish even the sons and daughters of those who differed till their third or fourth generation.

He conned Adam and Eve. Left them alone with the fruit and the serpent. Did he not know that the serpent was around? Who created the serpent? Who allowed the serpent in Eden? And where did he go leaving A & E alone with the serpent? What is this God who cannot even keep his domain safe? And then he rejects Cain's offering that he produced with so much labor and prefers Abel's fat lamb, the glutton. A very poorly formed story.

Yeah, we can do without any God. There are millions of atheists in the world. God and his myriad religions only bring strife in the world.
Promises are promises. Some are not worth the paper they are written on.

Well, you are not a "we" and you are not God, so I don't listen to you. You don't hold objective authority, proof and what not over other humans and I will fight your subjective, false and wrong "we".