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 Science and hell

Discussion in 'Science and Religion' started by questfortruth, May 17, 2021.

  1. questfortruth

    questfortruth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    2,741
    Ratings:
    +429
    Religion:
    Eastern Orthodox Christianity
    To be published in Is Our World an Intelligent Simulation?, viXra.org e-Print archive, viXra:2104.0152

    Science is defined by its methods. The basic one is to assume the absence of God's
    influence on nature, including the ``absence'' of God in doing the Big Bang.
    Absence of a miracle while the Miracle of Creation of the Virtual World,
    which 7000 years ago has become an actual thing, and remnants of this
    virtual world are invisible Dark Matter and Dark Energy. So, there will
    be no science in a better, sane world and God-driven society. Surely,
    there will be research and knowledge (because ``I am the way'', says God in
    the Bible), but we will manage it without methodological naturalism.

    A believer would say, that nature itself should be the evidence of God's influence.
    Why? It perfectly would work with Atheism or Deism, if one assumes the presence
    of the laws of nature. God does not force us into the right theistic worldview,
    because the knowledge does not save; for satan knows that God exists, but he
    has the spirit of atheism. Yes, it is illogical, but there is no logic in
    mentally sick satan.

    Science assumes not Atheism, but Deism because methodological naturalism
    assumes zero divine action on nature. But in Big Bang, it assumes
    Atheism, not Deism, because God can not do Miracle of Creation
    without doing the miracle. Christianity is not Deism. Thus, science denies
    the most popular understanding of who God is. I am sorry to disappoint you,
    but Science is the Babylon Babe from the Revelation. And we are addicted to her,
    she is so beautiful and dirty!



    If there will be no science in heaven, then there will be no scientists in heaven?
    They will go to hell?
    Because have created A-Bomb?

    More to discuss, and my CV and life principles:
    Science and Psycho | Religious Forums
     
    #1 questfortruth, May 17, 2021
    Last edited: May 17, 2021
  2. sun rise

    sun rise "This is the Hour of God"
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    58,685
    Ratings:
    +27,335
    Religion:
    Love
    So evangelical Christian scientists are going to hell in spite of their love for Jesus. I can tell them you said so.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    48,777
    Ratings:
    +4,890
    you can't separate the Creator from His creation

    Casue and effect
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  4. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    13,202
    Ratings:
    +8,968
    Religion:
    Christian
    There is no assumption of the absence of God in science. A basic assumption of science is that natural causes explain natural events. Since there is no evidence of God for science to consider, it says nothing about God at all.

    Even if there is no science in Heaven, it does not follow that there will be no scientists there. You are instituting a non sequitur.

    And here you are claiming to be a scientist too. If what you said were even remotely correct, that would not be too good for you either.
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Like Like x 1
  5. questfortruth

    questfortruth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    2,741
    Ratings:
    +429
    Religion:
    Eastern Orthodox Christianity
    1. Science assumes not Atheism, but Deism. But in Big Bang, it assumes Atheism, not Deism.
    2. Christianity is not Deism.
    3. Thus, science denies the most popular understanding of who God is.
     
  6. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    13,202
    Ratings:
    +8,968
    Religion:
    Christian
    Science assumes no such thing.

    Science goes where the evidence, logic and reason take it.
     
  7. questfortruth

    questfortruth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    2,741
    Ratings:
    +429
    Religion:
    Eastern Orthodox Christianity
    Google: methodological naturalism. It assumes zero divine action on nature.
     
  8. questfortruth

    questfortruth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    2,741
    Ratings:
    +429
    Religion:
    Eastern Orthodox Christianity
    Science assumes not Atheism, but Deism, because methodological naturalism
    assumes zero divine action on nature. But in Big Bang, it assumes
    Atheism, not Deism, because God can not do Miracle of Creation
    without doing the miracle. Christianity is not Deism. Thus, science denies
    the most popular understanding of who God is.
     
  9. Conscious thoughts

    Conscious thoughts Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2018
    Messages:
    16,204
    Ratings:
    +11,252
    Religion:
    Osmanli Nakshibedi Way, Sufism
    Does scientists firstly believe there is a God than try to disprove this? Or do even christian scientists put away their belief when they work, and ask "what proof is ther for God scientificly"
    And if they can not find "proof" of God, their conclution is "there can not be a God, because we can not find it" ?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    13,202
    Ratings:
    +8,968
    Religion:
    Christian
    You have moved the goal posts. Your first claim is that science assumes an absence of God. Now you have moved to an assumption of zero divine action and switched to methodological naturalism. There seems to be no end to the logical fallacies and flaws that you will chase.
     
    • Winner Winner x 5
  11. SigurdReginson

    SigurdReginson Grēne Mann
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2019
    Messages:
    1,905
    Ratings:
    +2,605
    Religion:
    None
    There are a lot of them, too.

    People are worried about the evils of science, but then people like this dude sell their snake oil to folks who are scared of what they don't understand in the hopes of protecting themselves from Covid...

    [​IMG]
     
    #11 SigurdReginson, May 17, 2021
    Last edited: May 17, 2021
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  12. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    13,202
    Ratings:
    +8,968
    Religion:
    Christian
    Science assumes neither atheism, deism nor anything remotely like that. Some scientists surely assume one or another of many philosophical positions like that, but none form part of the basis of science.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. questfortruth

    questfortruth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    2,741
    Ratings:
    +429
    Religion:
    Eastern Orthodox Christianity
    Science is defined by its methods. The basic is to assume the absence of God's influence on nature -- methodological naturalism. I am sorry to disappoint you, but Science is the Babylon Babe from the Revelation.
     
  14. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    13,202
    Ratings:
    +8,968
    Religion:
    Christian
    I am not disappointed in anything you have posted. Saddened. Concerned. But not disappointed.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    13,202
    Ratings:
    +8,968
    Religion:
    Christian
    Firstly, assumptions are not methods. Secondly, assuming natural causes is not assuming that God does not exist.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  16. SigurdReginson

    SigurdReginson Grēne Mann
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2019
    Messages:
    1,905
    Ratings:
    +2,605
    Religion:
    None
    Says the person utilizing the internet to talk to people instantaneously all over the world (a product of scientific engineering)...

    You know, there are communities that shun technology and medical advancements out there. If science is so bad, why not join one of them?
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    13,202
    Ratings:
    +8,968
    Religion:
    Christian
    Methodological naturalism is the label for the required assumption of philosophical naturalism when working with the scientific method. Methodological naturalists limit their scientific research to the study of natural causes, because any attempts to define causal relationships with the supernatural are never fruitful, and result in the creation of scientific "dead ends" and God of the gaps-type hypotheses. To avoid these traps scientists assume that all causes are empirical and naturalistic, which means they can be measured, quantified and studied methodically.

    From Rationalwiki
    Methodological naturalism - RationalWiki

    You are confusing methodological naturalism with philosophical naturalism.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    13,202
    Ratings:
    +8,968
    Religion:
    Christian
    You think science assumes deism? In those terms nature itself should be the evidence of God's influence.
     
  19. questfortruth

    questfortruth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    2,741
    Ratings:
    +429
    Religion:
    Eastern Orthodox Christianity
    "Methodological naturalism is the label for the required assumption of philosophical naturalism"
    Thus, I see no difference.
     
  20. questfortruth

    questfortruth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    2,741
    Ratings:
    +429
    Religion:
    Eastern Orthodox Christianity
    Why?

    It perfectly would work with Atheism or Deism, if one assumes the
    presence of the laws of nature.
     
Loading...