Should religion and science be regarded as NOMA (non-overlapping magisteria)?

spidergoat said:
The religious will always be able to give reasons why prayer didn't work, but as long as it shows no effect, the experiment supports godlessness.
Click to expand...

I don't think it supports "godlessness" - rather, it supports the idea that there are particular things that one shouldn't ask of God.
 
NMSquirrel said:
what if their life is such that it would be doing them a service to let them die (sorry for the harshness, but understand what i am trying to say)
what if their death benefits others?
Click to expand...

It's easy to talk like that as long as it isn't your ass that is on the line.

And thank God it's them instead of you!
 
spidergoat said:
The subjective can be studied by science using things like polls. Subjective states of mind are also by products of the physical brain. Anyway, most religions aren't completely subjective experiences, they aspire to describe the natural world, how it works, and how it came to be.
Click to expand...

Again, it is ridiculous to assume any human would naturally tend to schizophrenically divorce themselves from their subjective beliefs. Thus the religious (including the writers of scripture) are bound to make statements about the world. This is no different from a person of any other worldview.

spidergoat said:
However, while supernatural entities may not be directly observable, any effects these entities might have on the material world should manifest themselves as observable phenomena. Anything observable is subject to scientific inquiry. On the other hand, if the supernatural has no observable effects on the natural world, then why even worry about it?​

Victor Stenger
Click to expand...

You must subscribe to the notion that a god necessarily has an effect that may differ from naturalistic processes. This is neither necessary nor usually claimed to be subscribed to by those making such arguments.

Why worry about it? Because there is sufficient evidence that things such as a belief in free will, commonly espoused by religions, is beneficial.
 
Last edited:
Yes, a God must necessarily have an effect that differs from naturalistic processes, otherwise he does nothing.

Is the belief in free will a religious belief? And how is it beneficial? And do we have to accept nonsense in order to reap the benefits?
 
wynn said:
It's easy to talk like that as long as it isn't your ass that is on the line.

And thank God it's them instead of you!
Click to expand...

um..that would be a good point for most ppl..what you do not know is that I HAVE prayed for God to take me out..(third time is up to God..)
so it isn't to hard for me to imagine being in their situation thinking it would be better to just leave this world..
 
Syne said:
Again, it is ridiculous to assume any human would naturally tend to schizophrenically divorce themselves from their subjective beliefs. Thus the religious (including the writers of scripture) are bound to make statements about the world. This is no different from a person of any other worldview.
Click to expand...

ah..finally someone else that acknowledges the humanity of the authors of the bible..
 
NMSquirrel said:
ah..finally someone else that acknowledges the humanity of the authors of the bible..
Click to expand...
Many of us acknowledge the humanity of the authors... Granted, some of the authors had great insights into the human condition. Then again, so did Douglas Adams, Mark Twain and Will Rogers.
 
NMSquirrel said:
um..that would be a good point for most ppl..what you do not know is that I HAVE prayed for God to take me out..(third time is up to God..)
so it isn't to hard for me to imagine being in their situation thinking it would be better to just leave this world..
Click to expand...

As it is, you're still here, and still going.
 
spidergoat said:
Aren't you just trying to rationalize the lack of results?
Click to expand...

Not in this case.

It is reasonable to assume that there are things that God wouldn't do, or which are wrong to ask for (for a number of reasons, such as that said thing is logically impossible, or would be bad for one in the long run).

The issue is, rather, what are the things that we reasonably should expect God to do, upon our request?


spidergoat said:
Yes, a God must necessarily have an effect that differs from naturalistic processes, otherwise he does nothing.
Click to expand...

God is usually defined as (among other things) "controlling the Universe" and that "not a blade of grass moves without His will." Per this, naturalistic processes are all His doing to begin with.
So He apparently does quite a lot.
 
wynn said:
Not in this case.

It is reasonable to assume that there are things that God wouldn't do, or which are wrong to ask for (for a number of reasons, such as that said thing is logically impossible, or would be bad for one in the long run).
Click to expand...
lol..what were we just talking about?

The issue is, rather, what are the things that we reasonably should expect God to do, upon our request?
Click to expand...
short answer is we should not 'expect' him to do anything..(yea, i know..its too easy a statement for you atheists to commandeer..(not speaking directly to you wynn))

its like asking how do we manipulate God?..
so the reasonability comes into question also, not just the expectation part..

one prayer that seems to be easier to explain seems to be the one about 'God grant me patience' then he puts something in your life to teach you patience..(kids are the best way to learn patience)
so then the person would claim that his prayers were not answered because he would be expecting immediate results..IE I didn't pray for kids, i prayed for patience..
 
NMSquirrel said:
one prayer that seems to be easier to explain seems to be the one about 'God grant me patience' then he puts something in your life to teach you patience..
Click to expand...

Or, just by thinking about it, the problem went away, as a purely natural response. That would be more consistent with the parameters of a study.
 
wynn said:
The issue is, rather, what are the things that we reasonably should expect God to do, upon our request?
Click to expand...
Help, heal, make things better for humanity.



wynn said:
God is usually defined as (among other things) "controlling the Universe" and that "not a blade of grass moves without His will." Per this, naturalistic processes are all His doing to begin with.
So He apparently does quite a lot.
Click to expand...
That's illogical. By definition if the process is naturalistic it requires no external interference and none can be detected.
 
Aqueous Id said:
Or, just by thinking about it, the problem went away, as a purely natural response. That would be more consistent with the parameters of a study.
Click to expand...

that is a valid supposition..
some times the solution to a problem is to do nothing at all..

when you say 'natural' response are you saying that since it isn't a supernatural response then its not from God?
 
spidergoat said:
Help, heal, make things better for humanity.
Click to expand...

so going back to the Holocaust point..

some ppl ask why would God let the Hitler kill that many ppl?
I ask do you think that will ever happen again?
so wouldn't this make it better for humanity?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top