Help, My Friend Turned Christian

[Yorda]

You make it sound as if Newtons beliefs are to be taken as seriously as his theories. Did you know that Newton was also wrong about certain scientific phenomenae?

You make it sound as if Newtons beliefs shouldn't be taken as seriously as his theories. It is because you don't understand God. How do you know that he was wrong about some scientific things? Only because the modern science has shown that is it was false? It doesn't necessarily mean that the modern science is right! Both Newton and modern science could be wrong.

 

[cato]

to answer the serious questions first:

cato

anyway, I told her Sunday that I would support her choice and not criticize her. I also told her my little philosophy for making important decisions, because a lot of people turn to religion for guidance.

How did she respond?

I don't think she really likes talking about it with me, because she basically just said "OK."

You seem to believe in physics. Go to the writings of the founder of physics and co-inventor of calculus, Sir Isaac Newton, and do what he would do.

Newton's theories were just explanations of what he observed, they were far from complete. Newton, nor anyone else, has ever found real evidence to support belief in god, therefore it is illogical to do so. that is not self righteous, that is simply a fact. the concept of god relies upon its ambiguity.

religion is a "Cover Crop." A Cover Crop is something you plant after your harvest to protect your soil until you plant your real crop again in the spring. religion is just a way to explain the unknown things about the world until science can give us the truth. its a place holder until we find the truth, thats why religions that relied on a god assigned to specific things (sun, moon, stars, ect) have fallen by the way side. the candle of science has lit up that dark corner of the universe. so if a religion is to survive, it must adapt. thats why religions of today are often described as being unknowable (god works in mysterious ways) or as merely a guiding force behind the physical processes we can explain.

 

[(Q)]

It is because you don't understand God.

I understand peoples perceptions of gods, however difficult at times. But I most certainly cannot formulate my own perception about a god from scriptures as those writings are so full of contradiction and myth.

Both Newton and modern science could be wrong.

Perhaps, but I presume your statement is based on your ignorance of science and your penchant for all that is mystic and fantasy.

 

[(Q)]

I don't think she really likes talking about it with me, because she basically just said "OK."

Maybe she's just not ready to talk about it, especially if she's only just testing the waters, so to speak.

Lets hope she doesn't decide to test your friendship with her religion.

 

[Yorda]

Perhaps, but I presume your statement is based on your ignorance of science and your penchant for all that is mystic and fantasy.

I only believe in what sounds natural and rational to me. I disagree with many scientific theories like the Big Bang theory, and both General Relativity and Quantum physics are partly screwed up and they don't work together. The true science of reality cannot be physics, since the world is not physical. "Metaphysics", the science of consciousness, is the science of the future.

I don't believe in fantasies or mystic things. They sound mystic to you only because you don't understand them. My "fantasies" are in your own mind.

 

[(Q)]

I only believe in what sounds natural and rational to me. I disagree with many scientific theories like the Big Bang theory, and both General Relativity and Quantum physics are partly screwed up and they don't work together.

I'm sure the many years of arduous study in those fields have given you the conceptual and mathematical skills to fully comprehend the disagreements you refer, while maintaining a level of expertice such that you may present those arguments to those who do consider them natural and rational.

I look forward to your series of papers outlining the finds.

The true science of reality cannot be physics, since the world is not physical. "Metaphysics", the science of consciousness, is the science of the future.

Physics does explain much of how nature works and can make accurate predictions that are quite useful. Metaphysics does neither and only tends to feed ones notions of how they want things to work.

I don't believe in fantasies or mystic things. They sound mystic to you only because you don't understand them. My "fantasies" are in your own mind.

Then they be in the minds of many others and we all share them.

 

[Yorda]

I only believe in what sounds natural and rational to me. I disagree with many scientific theories like the Big Bang theory, and both General Relativity and Quantum physics are partly screwed up and they don't work together.

I'm sure the many years of arduous study in those fields have given you the conceptual and mathematical skills to fully comprehend the disagreements you refer, while maintaining a level of expertice such that you may present those arguments to those who do consider them natural and rational.

I look forward to your series of papers outlining the finds.

The true science of reality cannot be physics, since the world is not physical. "Metaphysics", the science of consciousness, is the science of the future.

Physics does explain much of how nature works and can make accurate predictions that are quite useful. Metaphysics does neither and only tends to feed ones notions of how they want things to work.

I don't believe in fantasies or mystic things. They sound mystic to you only because you don't understand them. My "fantasies" are in your own mind.

Then they be in the minds of many others and we all share them.

<strike>Like any of it matters.</strike>