1. 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!

Featured Poll: “Science has proven” and “God says”

Discussion in 'Science and Religion' started by Jim, May 15, 2020.

?
  1. I see problems with “Science says ...” that I don’t see with “God says ...” (Please explain)

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. I see problems with “God says ...” that I don’t see with “Science says ...” (Please explain)

    8 vote(s)
    44.4%
  3. I see most or all of the same problems with both ways of thinking

    6 vote(s)
    33.3%
  4. Other (Please explain)

    4 vote(s)
    22.2%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    16,641
    Ratings:
    +7,920
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    I prefer science is independent of 'Faith in God.'
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  2. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    59,267
    Ratings:
    +17,162
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    Science speaks to factual claims based on the available evidence.

    I agree that scientists shouldn't overstate what the actual science says, but as long as they're speaking only to what's supported by the evidence, why should they limit themselves?

    I mean, if a religion chooses to make claims about some factual issue about the physical world. If it turns out that the religion is wrong, why criticize the peole who discovered this? If the emperor has no clothes, this nobody's fault but the emperor.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  3. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    5,827
    Ratings:
    +4,819
    Religion:
    none
    but as long as they limit themselves to reality, why should they limit themselves?
    Do you also see the contradiction?
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  4. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    59,267
    Ratings:
    +17,162
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    I see the contradiction inherent in NOMA, if that's what you mean.

    Science is self-limited by the available evidence. IMO, any inferences from that evidence are fair statements to make, regardless of whether they ruffle religious feathers or not.

    Maybe you can clarify what you meant when you said "when scientists speak about religion, it usually ends in embarrassment."
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  5. JesusKnowsYou

    JesusKnowsYou Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2019
    Messages:
    907
    Ratings:
    +69
    Religion:
    Latter-day Saint
    I chose "Other".

    I don't see a problem with someone using either science or God or even both in their search for truth.

    The problem with believing that someone needs to pick either science or God assumes that one has to be false.

    These sources of information are not mutually exclusive.

    Both can be true. I believe that both are true.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  6. gnostic

    gnostic The Lost One

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,426
    Ratings:
    +5,019
    Religion:
    Pi π
    @Jim

    Using the words “prove”, “proven” or “proof” are the wrong words to use with science.

    Proof is logical model or logical statements, often represented in the forms of formulas, equations, metric constants, etc. Proof isn’t physical.

    Science relied on evidence, not proof.

    Evidence is physical that can be -
    • observed or detected,
    • quantified,
    • measured,
    • compared against other evidence,
    • tested (which would include verifying or refuting).
    The mathematical constants, like pi, for instance, is proof, not evidence. Newton’s equations for motion, forces and gravity, are all proofs, not evidence. Einstein’s field equations and his famous Mass-Energy Equivalence equation are proofs, not evidence. Ohm’s Law (I = V / R) is proof, not evidence.

    When scientists and mathematicians use the word “prove” or “proven”, they are used in association with mathematical models, by formulating a new equation or formula, modifying equation, deriving a new equation from existing equation, using algebra or calculus, etc, these are ways or techniques that can “prove” equations.

    eg trying to simplify multiple complex equations into a single equation. That’s “proof”.

    While maths (proofs) are useful tools in science, it is evidence, not proof that will determine which models are true or false.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  7. Jim

    Jim Nets of Wonder

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +2,175
    Religion:
    personal development and community service, with love for nature
    I disagree.
     
  8. Jim

    Jim Nets of Wonder

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +2,175
    Religion:
    personal development and community service, with love for nature
    I disagree.
     
  9. Jim

    Jim Nets of Wonder

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +2,175
    Religion:
    personal development and community service, with love for nature
    I agree that it changes quite a bit. I disagree with saying that it is not in a way that’s systematic or error-correcting. I’m thinking that sometimes it is.
     
  10. Jim

    Jim Nets of Wonder

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +2,175
    Religion:
    personal development and community service, with love for nature
    I’m thinking that it’s humans clinging to ancient agendas, and modern ones.
     
  11. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    16,641
    Ratings:
    +7,920
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    I will give a yes and no here without more information. Clinging to anything blindly without reasonable uncertainty is probably unwise, but not believing in anything is anarchy.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  12. Jim

    Jim Nets of Wonder

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +2,175
    Religion:
    personal development and community service, with love for nature
    I’m not doing it to be divisive.
     
  13. Altfish

    Altfish Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    11,834
    Ratings:
    +9,381
    Religion:
    Humanist
    How has a religion changed, in any significant way? I accept new religions have appeared that may better reflect the times.
     
  14. Jim

    Jim Nets of Wonder

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +2,175
    Religion:
    personal development and community service, with love for nature
    Have you actually thought about it, to see if you could think of any changes in “what God says” in Christian churches, in the last few centuries, and even the last few decades?
     
  15. Tony Bristow-Stagg

    Tony Bristow-Stagg One Planet One People Please
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Messages:
    12,319
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    I see we have records of what God has offered us. So it can be said what has been written, is what God has said, our understanding of that may be the issue.

    I see Science has made many discoveries in the material world, so science can say this is what we have found, to date. Thinking that they are absolute truths, may be the issue.

    Regards Tony
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  16. Altfish

    Altfish Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    11,834
    Ratings:
    +9,381
    Religion:
    Humanist
    Yes, of course I've thought about it. Do you think I'm stupid?

    I asked you for an example, please?
     
  17. Mock Turtle

    Mock Turtle Asinine, socialist-leaning, puerile filth
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2018
    Messages:
    7,311
    Ratings:
    +3,534
    Religion:
    Fellowship of the Mutable
    For 'God says', one should really say 'someone has written or spoken in lieu of God' - so that is my main problem - and there are so many of such.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  18. Jim

    Jim Nets of Wonder

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +2,175
    Religion:
    personal development and community service, with love for nature
    I would have no problem with “In one of the Bible stories, God says ...” with the exact words from some version of the Bible.
     
  19. Jim

    Jim Nets of Wonder

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +2,175
    Religion:
    personal development and community service, with love for nature
    Slavery. Homosexuality. Women in the priesthood. Women’s issues in general.
     
  20. Altfish

    Altfish Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    11,834
    Ratings:
    +9,381
    Religion:
    Humanist
    OK, some churches have moved in order to survive. But the 'scriptures' remain the same. Just adapted the way they are interpreted.
    There are still many churches/faiths that have not moved on these issues. The Church of England is facing huge problems with the issues you list, especially with African elements of their church.
    How may female Catholic priests are there? How many female Imams?

    No one has said. "Actually, the Bible is rubbish, we need a re-write"
     
Loading...