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 Should there be harmony between science and religion?

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by adrian009, Oct 26, 2018.

?
  1. Yes

    28.3%
  2. No

    17.4%
  3. Usually

    6.5%
  4. Usually not

    26.1%
  5. It doesn't matter

    13.0%
  6. I don't know

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  7. This poll doesn't reflect my thinking

    8.7%
  1. Earthling

    Earthling David Henson

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,793
    Ratings:
    +758
    Religion:
    Bible Believer
    Yes I did.

    I've told you. Desperate atheists.

    I'm not foaming at the mouth. What exactly did I say science isn't? Infallible? You agree with me on this, so has my sudden unexplained demonstration of alleged hydrophobia taken you as well?

    So what? So is law and religion and any other endeavor of man. That you seem to think that's something special, like they didn't do that before Darwin because they didn't come to the same conclusions you come to I'm supposed to be impressed by this simple description? It's meaningless.

    Just like anything else. Law. Religion. Fashion.

    Nor you. Nor relevant.

    And again, not you. Nor relevant. Just a claim that has no special properties.

    And you.
     
  2. Looncall

    Looncall Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2010
    Messages:
    2,665
    Ratings:
    +727
    Thanks for your kind remarks.

    However, you did not address my question. What evidence do you have that a personality (a "who") is responsible for reality?
     
  3. Fool

    Fool ALL in all
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2016
    Messages:
    12,160
    Ratings:
    +2,338
    Religion:
    Light Impressed with Love

    22. Jesus saw some babies nursing. He said to his disciples, "These nursing babies are like those who enter the (Father's) kingdom."

    They said to him, "Then shall we enter the (Father's) kingdom as babies?"

    Jesus said to them, "When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter [the kingdom]."
     
  4. 2ndpillar

    2ndpillar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,823
    Ratings:
    +188
    Isaac Newton, a father, or father of science, apparently wrote more about the bible than he did science. He apparently used the OT as an entry point into science. When one surpasses the insights of Newton, then they can comment on their better view. A problem being that most of the bible is a sealed book and the "wicked" have no "understanding" (Daniel 12:10) & (Matthew 13:13), whereas science is basically theories based on approximations, as any observation taints the results. F does not equal ma, but it is very good approximation at low speeds.
     
  5. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    9,100
    Ratings:
    +2,720
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ

    So you have verified the theory, not replicated it. Yes?

    So yes and no, you have verified the theory, or yes and no, you have replicated the theory?​

    Thank you.

    I don't understand why you believe evolution aided in understanding medicines (eg bacterial and viral diseases), and then you include molecular biology, and other various biological and biochemical fields.
    Can you explain that to me please?
    What aided in understanding medicine... evolution, or biology?
    How do you explain medical professionals that refute evolution theory? How do they practice medicine?

    For one thing, I don't think most Christians expect to rewrite a script written by the elites of this system, and they are not going to try.
    All Christians are doing is 1. publicly declaring their position, and 2. sharing the truth with others. In doing so, they also can help the unsuspecting to see below the murky waters, and prevent themselves becoming victims to the "Great Whites".
    2 Corinthians 10:4-6
    4 For the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly, but powerful by God for overturning strongly entrenched things. 5For we are overturning reasonings and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and we are bringing every thought into captivity to make it obedient to the Christ; 6and we are prepared to inflict punishment for every disobedience, as soon as your own obedience is complete.

    1 Peter 3:15 But sanctify the Christ as Lord in your hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have, but doing so with a mild temper and deep respect.

    Acts 26:19-29
    19 “Therefore, King A·gripʹpa, I did not become disobedient to the heavenly vision, 20 but to those in Damascus first and then to those in Jerusalem, and over all the country of Ju·deʹa, and also to the nations, I was bringing the message that they should repent and turn to God by doing works that befit repentance. 21 This is why the Jews seized me in the temple and tried to kill me. 22However, because I have experienced the help that is from God, I continue to this day bearing witness to both small and great, saying nothing except what the Prophets as well as Moses stated was going to take place - 23that the Christ was to suffer and that as the first to be resurrected from the dead, he was going to proclaim light both to this people and to the nations.” 24Now as Paul was saying these things in his defense, Festus said in a loud voice: “You are going out of your mind, Paul! Great learning is driving you out of your mind!” 25But Paul said: “I am not going out of my mind, Your Excellency Festus, but I am speaking words of truth and of a sound mind. 26 For a fact, the king to whom I am speaking so freely well knows about these things; I am convinced that not one of these things escapes his notice, for none of this has been done in a corner. 27 Do you, King A·gripʹpa, believe the Prophets? I know that you believe.” 28 But A·gripʹpa said to Paul: “In a short time you would persuade me to become a Christian.” 29 At this Paul said: “I wish to God that whether in a short time or in a long time, not only you but also all those who hear me today would become men such as I am, with the exception of these prison bonds.”

    Creationists like me? Have you asked them?
    I find skeptics tend to assume what Creationists know, and believe, and oftentimes they are wrong... like now.

    I'm sure you have seen plenty, but I guess it won't hurt to show you again. Stay tuned.
    Do you mean the kind of conclusive evidence that evolution has? What conclusive evidence is that?
    You give me yours, and let me see if it beats ours.

    But when you start wrong, how can you ever end right?
    I made a coconut bread.
    Do you think it reasonable for someone to say, "How is it possible to make coconut into bread"?
    We might think that's silly, but isn't it true that a very small child might ask a question like that? Why?
    He doesn't understand, but if he understood what went into bread making... "Ah." He gets the picture.

    Christians have continually said it as plain as possible, you don't understand the Bible by picking it up, and trying to pick it apart critically. In fact, the one who does so might as well be a one year old, trying to read a dictionary.
    The Bible is not a science text book, or encyclopedia. So it doesn't go into detail on every possible thing it mentions. The one who understands that, and read it to understand its message, will easily grasp, relate to, and appreciate the Bible for what it is - a message from God.

    So God did not just pick up a handful of dirt, and "Abracadabra" Poof! Man was made.
    Eating the fruit did not magically Poof! give the human couple knowledge in the way skeptics read it.
    The serpent did not say a word.

    If one reads the Bible with an open mind, one will get the details.
    If one reads the Bible as skeptics do, then they will go away just as they came.
    This certainly is not a problem for those who acknowledge that God is, and recognize the Bible as his word. (2 Corinthians 4:3, 4; 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12 ) It is the world's oldest book, and most widely translated, available to over 90% of the world's population.
    It's probably the most scrutinized, and opposed. Yet it is enduring, and beating the odds. Hmm.
    Why?
     
  6. j1i

    j1i Smiling is charity without giving money

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2018
    Messages:
    813
    Ratings:
    +305
    Religion:
    Tawhid
    Hello my brother
    Thank you for your words and it is true that I did not understand the question

    I understood and my appetite was open to answer

    What evidence do you have that a personality (the culprit) is responsible for crime
    the crime tools

    Why do we always believe that the offender has committed a crime?
    He may have done this work as a punishment or human grant because this person was carrying a demon

    Why do we believe that crimes are real? Maybe crimes should have been committed in order for the community to be corrected in their assistance

    Many billionaires do not spend social aid

    example
    I have a machine where I put a dollar and get a Pepsi
    Is this deafness tool found by default or is it real
    Coincidence does not make a creature

    The most important science is knowing facts of creator
    Knowing the truth is like an investigative act that does not accept the hypothesis of doubt, but evidence
    The existence of the universe and the stars refers to the causative
    And this culprit believe it is God
    And not necessarily bring evidence because there is a corpses in the heavens and there is a causative
    We believe that he is the Creator, and we must respect and respect him by believing in him
    This creator said this information to the first source Adam
    He said, They must respect me and believe that I am the cause and creator
    But humans because of the movements began generations from scratch because of the loss of information and facts such as a person born without sight and walked without seeing anything and difficult to convince him


    Note
    I am sorry to have delayed the answer for a reason

    I went walking and there was a tree watching me when she saw us caught me and threw me over the sky
    The sky took me and rained me on a remote island
    I cried there
    The nature there sympathized with me and began to make me a boat
    Automatically, the metal turned into cutting tools and began cutting wood, then iron to screws and cotton to a sail
    Then I went home now and opened the laptop and now write the reply
    Please believe this story please :(
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  7. j1i

    j1i Smiling is charity without giving money

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2018
    Messages:
    813
    Ratings:
    +305
    Religion:
    Tawhid
    Biology has contributed to genetic modification
    It has changed the creation of God and not the development of God's creation

    correct :)
     
  8. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    60,764
    Ratings:
    +18,571
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    Newton also wrote more about alchemy than he did about what physics. Should we give alchemy special weight because of this?
     
  9. 2ndpillar

    2ndpillar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,823
    Ratings:
    +188
    According to Paul, he defended his position before men he deemed as "reputed" "pillars".(Galatians 2:9), who were under prior direction to leave the tares alone (Matthew 13:28-30). Paul, as chief tare, and sower of tare seed gets a free pass until the "end of the age" (Matthew 13:30). That applies to his followers, the other tares.
     
  10. j1i

    j1i Smiling is charity without giving money

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2018
    Messages:
    813
    Ratings:
    +305
    Religion:
    Tawhid
    Good luck in your faith brother
    I follow my heart and rest assured of it (no trinity)
    I would like to refer to a very important issue which is that I respect you and respect your opinion :)

    you in your way and I'm in my way :)

    GOD bless you
    amen
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  11. Looncall

    Looncall Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2010
    Messages:
    2,665
    Ratings:
    +727
    Ah, I see, no evidence. It's all in your head.

    Who are this"we" you refer to? It sure doesn't include me.
     
  12. j1i

    j1i Smiling is charity without giving money

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2018
    Messages:
    813
    Ratings:
    +305
    Religion:
    Tawhid
    Dear brother
    I apologize very much but I was trying to help from my heart honestly
    I believe that faith is a gift from God and gives it to people who in their hearts have mercy and far from cruelty
    I do not mean to insult you
    It's not like that
    We have in Islam they say
    A person who works throughout the life of the people of Islam, but at the end of his life changed his religion and becomes an infidel and loses the Hereafter
    And vice versa, a person who works throughout his life the people of disbelief and then in the last age believes in God and die believer and win the prize

    I go back at other times :)

    I pray all times that god guide us to the truth
     
  13. gnostic

    gnostic The Lost One

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,767
    Ratings:
    +5,217
    Religion:
    Pi π
    You don’t “replicate” the theory.

    Where in the hell did you get that?

    You would “test” the theory or hypothesis.

    The “tests” would -

    either (A) verify the hypothesis or theory,

    or (B) “refute” or “debunk” the hypothesis.​

    You need to remember science is about testing the hypothesis, and testing means that you are trying refute or find faults with the hypothesis, are just important as trying verifying.

    Another word for “falsifiability” or “falsification”, other than “testability”, is “REFUTABILITY”.

    While scientists are formulating their respective hypotheses, the only way to be objective is to to find out if the hypothesis is falsifiable (testable or refutable), before they actually perform the tests.

    If, for example, the “potential” or “proposed” hypothesis cannot be tested, then it isn’t falsifiable or refutable. If so, then his or her work isn’t even a “hypothesis”.

    Being a falsifiable hypothesis doesn’t mean the hypothesis is true...not yet. The hypothesis hasn’t been tested yet.

    The hypothesis is never true or false by default. Only the tests or evidences can determine if the hypothesis is true or false.

    But if the hypothesis is falsifiable, then the scientist must figure out how he or she could possibly test the hypothesis; and must document in the hypothesis just HOW the hypothesis will be tested. The tests or experiments must be rigorous enough, that there is a big chance that his or her hypothesis will fail.

    If the hypothesis is able to withstand 100 or 1000 experiments, then the hypothesis has high probability of being true. But if hypothesis failed in most or all of the 100 or 1000 experiments, then it is high probability that the hypothesis has been refuted.

    If the hypothesis failed in their experiments, repeatedly, the scientist can do one of two things:

    1. He or she can give it up and put refuted hypothesis in the trash can or put it through shredder.
    2. Or the scientist can put the hypothesis through a different or alternative type of experiment.
    If the hypothesis continued to fail repeatedly in the second set of test, then hypothesis has been thoroughly debunked the scientist should definitely throw away the refuted hypothesis.

    Michael Behe, a biochemist who have joined Discovery Institute (DI) and followed Intelligent Design (ID), wrote his proposition that support the Designer, called the Irreducible Complexity (IC).

    The Irreducible Complexity failed to be falsifiable, because there are no way to test the Designer, therefore it isn’t even a hypothesis. And if the Designer cannot even be tested, it cannot be a scientific theory.

    Irreducible Complexity is pseudoscience garbage, and should have long ago being discarded. But Behe refused to ditch his unfalsifiable and untestable model. And the Discovery Institute also refused to give up on Behe’s unfalsifiable paper, so they continued to pour money, not on science, but promoting IC in dishonest propaganda campaign.

    Michael Behe is an example of a biased and dishonest scientist. And he isn’t the only dishonest scientist.

    So is Stephen C. Meyer (a geophysicist), one of the front man for Intelligent Design. Meyer together with the theologian Phillip E. Johnson (no science qualifications whatsoever) were responsible for creating Intelligent Design. They were responsible for recruiting Behe into their rank, and Behe was supposed to be their big gun, during the civil court case in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005).

    Behe bringing up IC with Intelligent Design, only made matters worse for Behe himself, since it demonstrated his IC was just as pseudoscience as ID was pseudoscience.
     
  14. j1i

    j1i Smiling is charity without giving money

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2018
    Messages:
    813
    Ratings:
    +305
    Religion:
    Tawhid
    My dear brother that you want to evidence the existence of the Creator
    Do you have evidence that you are the son of your father and your mother

    You did not exist when your father and mother married :D

    I do not mean insulting
    But as a kind of open minded :)
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. AManCalledHorse

    AManCalledHorse If you build it they will come

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    271
    Ratings:
    +54
    Yes there should be. Just like there should be harmony between races. Everyone is different, thinks different, believes different, etc. Being different is not a reason for persecution. Sadly even as much as we have advanced, it hasn't changed as much as it should have.
     
  16. dfnj

    dfnj Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2017
    Messages:
    3,276
    Ratings:
    +1,566
    Religion:
    My Own
    The opposite is even worse. When people are no longer considered sacred but just molecular machines executing the laws of physics there is no restraint or implications in immoral behavior. This is why we have so many wars and weapons of mass destruction because science has taught us religion has no value.

    Science is used more to kill and hurt people than it has helped them.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  17. Looncall

    Looncall Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2010
    Messages:
    2,665
    Ratings:
    +727
    So much wrong here.

    Turfing religion frees humanity to devise much better morality, based on reason and goodwill rather than on the scribblings of ignorant savages.

    You are oblivious to the many good things science has provided, such as increased crop yields, increased life expectancy,, technical conveniences such as the computer you used to send your post, ecological awareness etc.

    It is the religious societies that promote and perpetuate ancient barbarities.
     
  18. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    9,100
    Ratings:
    +2,720
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    Could you explain please.
    Paul did not defend himself against his fellow brothers, as far as one reads. Nor was he a tare, or sower of tares. Nor are his fellow brothers.
    The tares are apostates that flourished in the second century - those who profess Christianity, but produce rotten fruit. Their planting took place long after Paul's conversion. Acts 20:29, 30
     
  19. 2ndpillar

    2ndpillar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,823
    Ratings:
    +188
    The parable of the tares took place before Paul even started stoning the followers of Yeshua. Yeshua directed the disciples he was speaking too, to leave the tares alone. The tares were to exist until the "end of the age" (Matthew 13:40), when the "tares" would be gathered up "first", burned up, and then the "wheat" was to be gathered into the barn" (Matthew 13:30). The church built on the tree of Paul (Matthew 7:16-17) has been producing bad fruit for a long time. Examples being the Inquisitions, the ongoing pedophile scandals, Vatican bank scandals, etc. Trees producing bad fruit will be cut down and "thrown into the fire" (Matthew 7:19).

    Paul's argument was to forget circumcision for the Gentiles. This is the fulfillment of Zechariah 11:10, whereas Paul was one of the two staffs taken to "pasture the flock doomed to slaughter" (Zechariah 11:7).
     
    #339 2ndpillar, Nov 7, 2018
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2018
  20. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    9,100
    Ratings:
    +2,720
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    We first need to identify the tares, and when they sprang up. Do you agree?
    Peter mentioned when, in the book of Acts (Acts 20:29, 30), and Paul mentioned when in 2 Thessalonians 2.
    Recall Paul also said...
    1 Timothy 4:
    1 . . .the inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demons,
    3, For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled.
    4 They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.

    ...and Peter had more to say on it. 2 Peter 2:1

    Remember that during that time, there were false teachers (Sadducee, Pharisees, Scribes), but these were not viewed as the tares. So Jesus had a period in the future in mind.

    When do you think that might have been?
    Or do you believe it started before Jesus arrived on earth? Surely it couldn't have been then.
     
Loading...