metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
That's nonsense as I taught it for 36 years.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How good is science as a religion?
- Thread starter robocop (actually)
- Start date
cladking
Well-Known Member
I've always talked to kids and now days almost none of them can tell you why or how science works.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
So, supposedly they're not taught the "scientific method" that's the basis of science?
BS, and I'm done with your stereotyping and biased nonsense. Maybe do some studying, and you can even start here: Science - Wikipedia
cladking
Well-Known Member
I was not referring to science and specifically said so.
I was referring to those who hold it as a belief system, most of whom call themselves "skeptics". I was referring to the many people who believe they know everything because they saw it in a book or know some expert they can eMail.
Of course there are lots and lots of real scientists as well as laypeople who know how science works.
cladking
Well-Known Member
No. It is not.
Metaphysics is far more complex than some silly flow chart. Many of these silly flowcharts now days even include "Peer review" as though experiment or truth can't exist until it sanctioned by just the right people.
The basis of science is the definitions and axioms as well as experimental results. "Paradigms" are NOT science but these paradigms form the basis of all individuals' models which are equally NOT science.
cladking
Well-Known Member
"Everything" is subject to further testing except today most "science" is purchased by the rich and powerful to further their aims. All science is experiment and today there is little experiment occurring.
It is simply human nature to not investigate, think about, or devise experiments to test the obvious. So assumptions across the board get very little attention.
cladking
Well-Known Member
Science is an investigative system, not a doctrine or 'belief system'.
Do you understand what peer review is?
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Well, the unproven assumptions are in effect a doctrine or a belief system. And you can do science with other doctrines and belief systems.
cladking
Well-Known Member
Indeed. These are called 'paradigms" but those who hold science as a belief rarely can isolate the assumptions. Most believe Peers are a kind of Priest whose job is to agree with nature itself so that we poor lesser souls can know what's what and what's not. They never notice that when "science" is wrong every Peer is also wrong and that historically science has always been wrong.
It is belief that has always held our race to the status quo and stood in the way of progress. It is the glue that holds homo omnisciencis together and to its time and place. It is belief that stands in the way of communication and directs our thoughts. Those who believe in science have a hollow religion. Obviously misunderstanding science is not so great a problem if one also believes in reason and can create his own moral codes. We're all blind men trying to describe an elephant in a dark room but belief in science, peers, et als, and the status quo make anomalies very hard to see.
It is the existence of anomalies that prove science is still wrong and it is the recognition of anomalies that have always led to progress and understanding in every species. It is our inability to predict that shows how very very shallow our understanding really is. But if you believe in science you are wholly unimpressed by the ability to predict because from that perspective everything is predictable.
Five Solas
Active Member
Sorry, no misunderstanding. Oh, we can resist or be receptive as much as we wish but when it comes to conversion it is all God’s work.
The biblical fact is this: We all are dead and blind in our sin - rebellious, lovers of this world. We were dead in sin. Dead is dead. So, the glory of conversion belongs to God and that happens when He grants us faith.
Let me tell you about God. God is omnipotent. God’s grace is sovereign grace. He is sovereign. He does what he pleases (Ps 115:3) God accomplishes what he wills. I cannot stop Him; you cannot stop Him, no one can stop Him.
Yes, the Bible says we do resist the Holy Spirit. For example, Acts 7:15 says, “You stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit. As your fathers did, so do you.”
That is only one side of the coin. The fact remains, if my believing were to depend entirely on me or decisively on me, I would not believe, and neither would you.
The other side of the coin is that God overcomes your resistance. He can let you resist ------ again, He can let you resist as long as He wants, but when he decides to save you, He will. He gets all the praise for overcoming our rebellion. We didn’t overcome our deadness, and our rebellion, and our blindness. He triumphed in our lives. We want him to get glory for this. We want to know how secure we are in him.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
I have a different faith. And I am not a part of your "we".
Five Solas
Active Member
I know.
You will only ever get the biblical teaching from me. I try not to 'evaluate' other faiths because my knowledge of them is limited. But I can say how a statement is different from the biblical teaching.
The biblical teaching is that the 'we' applies to all off humanity.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
But you are not humanity and neither am I. So please stop claim that your faith is also mine, because you speak for a "we".
Let me have my faith and I will do the same to you.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
The above has nothing to do with what I posted.
The assumptions are not the science; the knowledge is a product testing and review.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
joelr
Well-Known Member
I don't buy that for one second. It doesn't even make sense. Why are so many Christians choosing to actually look at the facts surrounding their beliefs and realizing that their beliefs are not at all justified and leaving the religion? Many of the historical scholars who studied historicity to be able to learn more and better argue facts about the religion ended up realizing it wasn't true. This happened to Bart Ehrman as well as atheist speaker/debater Matt Dillahunty who was studying to be a Baptist minister. These people were already "saved" and then learned facts that demonstrated their beliefs were not justified.
An omnipotent God is theology from Aquinas which is not even Biblical but is also borrowed from Plato and Plotinus on "the one". - "It is the power to cause to exist everything that can exist, including eternal Intellect and Forms. With the causal power of the One even eternal truths would not exist."
You are just picking from scripture the version that most matches the modernizing Aquinas did. Because this God is also a warrior deity just like Zeus. No one can stop him? Jacob stopped him and forced him to bless him.
Exodus 15:3:
Yahweh is a man of war;
Yahweh is his name.
Isaiah 42:13:
Yahweh goes forth like a mighty man;
like a man of war(s) he stirs up his fury.
Zephaniah 3:17: Yahweh, your God, is in your midst,
a warrior who gives victory.
Psalm 24:8:
Who is the King of Glory?
Yahweh, strong and mighty;
Yahweh, mighty in battle.
Five Solas
Active Member
What you say is hardly news to me.
Yes, there are some writers who are saying what secular society wants to hear and they made good money from it. We have seen people like that come and go throughout history. They offer very little that is lasting.
Aquinas was a Catholic philosopher. I once read some of his work and found it hard to understand.
I think you do not fully understand academic scholarship.
What you fail to mention are the many thousands of Christian scholars. That indicates tunnel vision.
As for me, I am orthodox Reformed in the tradition of Zwingli, Knox, Calvin, and Luther. I still believe it is the purest theology. Christian scholarship is as vibrant as ever.