There is absolutely NO contradiction whatsoever between religious faith and science

spidergoat said:
Science does indeed have plausible naturalistic explanations for most of these things. But you act as if the default view were that religion was correct and science has to prove it knows everything before religious myths can be dismissed. That is an error. Nothing supernatural has yet been shown to exist, and yet the applications of science are obvious, proving it's worth as a method of arriving at explanations. You first have to disprove any scientific explanation (however unproven) before a religious explanation might be reasonably considered.
Click to expand...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.


But you act as if the default view were that religion was correct and science has to prove it knows everything before religious myths can be dismissed.


I do not claim that religion , I claim Creator..
Can science verify Big Bang Is this theory not based on belief through extrapolation. Is Big Bang not a myth ?.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

My belief about Creator of life , because there is life . Can you disproof that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I don't question science I worked in scientific field ( research ) for many years

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You first have to disprove any scientific explanation (however unproven) before a religious explanation might be reasonably considered.
..........
The data in Science is constantly improving, science is dynamic , so the theory are going to be changing , there is no thing wrong with that.
This tells me what today is logical or true , tomorrow might be slight different:)
 
yaracuy said:
You first have to disprove any scientific explanation (however unproven) before a religious explanation might be reasonably considered.
Click to expand...

You first have to disprove any religious explanation ,before a scientific explanation might be reasonably considered..

sorry..had to see how the reverse would look..
 
SciWriter said:
OK, I finally got the dollar in the mail.

This thread has been moving fast, yet no proof of God has been forthcoming.



The proof of God is that, you and I we are alive .


Let me ask this question : Can you see the size and shape of the Milky way without getting outside of the Milky Way:)
Click to expand...
 
spiderquote said:
But you act as if the default view were that religion was correct and science has to prove it knows everything before religious myths can be dismissed.
Click to expand...

yaracuy said:
I do not claim that religion , I claim Creator..
Can science verify Big Bang Is this theory not based on belief through extrapolation. Is Big Bang not a myth ?.
Click to expand...

The Big Bang theory is based on an extrapolation from the present, but it isn't a myth. It's based on the observation that the universe is expanding.




yaracuy said:
My belief about Creator of life , because there is life . Can you disproof that
Click to expand...
Yes. Life doesn't look like a creation. A creation can be redesigned from scratch. There is a marked difference between the designs of things like cars vs. the apparent design of evolved things. Evolution must use the parts it started with, it cannot go back and retool. Evolution is often imperfect, it's solutions to problems can be haphazard, such as the Panda's thumb, which is not a true thumb.


yaracuy said:
I don't question science I worked in scientific field ( research ) for many years
Click to expand...
Appeal to authority? Irrelevent.

spiderquote said:
You first have to disprove any scientific explanation (however unproven) before a religious explanation might be reasonably considered.
Click to expand...
..........
yaracuy said:
The data in Science is constantly improving, science is dynamic , so the theory are going to be changing , there is no thing wrong with that.
This tells me what today is logical or true , tomorrow might be slight different:)
Click to expand...
Science is constantly improving, while religion is constantly becoming less credible.


yaracuy said:
Would you believe quiet a few prophesy in the old testament have materialized.
Is this not true scientifically if you have a theory that will foretell:) the outcome of the test ? :)
Click to expand...

It makes no specific predictions. I could also make hundreds of vague predictions and be assured that at least some would come true. The lack of specificity of predictions in the Bible is one of it's biggest flaws.
 
spidergoat said:
The Big Bang theory is based on an extrapolation from the present, but it isn't a myth. It's based on the observation that the universe is expanding.

Not log ago the universe was static

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Yes. Life doesn't look like a creation.


How do you think life come to be in this planet ?

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????



A creation can be redesigned from scratch.



We don't have the ability nor the know how


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


Appeal to authority? Irrelevent.


..........

Science is constantly improving, while religion is constantly becoming less credible.

So what .. The Soviets attempted to eliminate human spirituality , did they succeed ? I am not sure

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


The lack of specificity of predictions in the Bible is one of it's biggest flaws.
Click to expand...



Would you accept the state of Israel acceptable , How about Jesus Christ:)
 
yaracuy said:
The proof of God is that, you and I we are alive.
Click to expand...

Flunk, for you not only didn't refute my disproof of God, but are now still hinting that God planned and made life.

If life needed Life(God) then wouldn't Life(God) need LIFE before it, and even more so, for that huge complexity, or do you then suddenly halt and through your original premise right out of the window?

None can answer… of their Lord forlorn.

I see only first level beliefs here, and not even close to any second level beliefs or knowledge about the beliefs of the first place.
 
yaracuy said:
Would you accept the state of Israel acceptable , How about Jesus Christ:)
Click to expand...
No, neither rises to the degree of a specific prediction. Israel in particular is problematic, since it is the result of belief in a myth. It's like using the magnificence of the Hajj as proof that Islam is true when Islam created the Hajj in the first place.

What about Jesus? He was supposed to come back in a generation and never did. "...This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." . Fail.

spiderquote said:
The Big Bang theory is based on an extrapolation from the present, but it isn't a myth. It's based on the observation that the universe is expanding.
Click to expand...

yaracuy said:
Not log ago the universe was static
Click to expand...
Before we observed the red shift. Again, you are using the flawed idea that because knowledge in science changes, the whole thing is worthless.
spiderquote said:
Yes. Life doesn't look like a creation.
Click to expand...


yaracuy said:
How do you think life come to be in this planet ?

?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????
Click to expand...

Through evolution from simpler forms going all the way back to the organic chemistry of the early Earth.

spiderquote said:
A creation can be redesigned from scratch.
Click to expand...


yaracuy said:
We don't have the ability nor the know how
Click to expand...
You missed the point. A creator could invent something new, while evolution has to work with existing parts. A created thing would have evidence of it's creation in the form of irreducible parts, and things that appear with no predecessor. Study of life on Earth shows no evidence of creation, only evolution. Read "The Blind Watchmaker" by Dawkins.


yaracuy said:
So what .. The Soviets attempted to eliminate human spirituality , did they succeed ? I am not sure
Click to expand...
Atheism is not anti-spiritual. The promotion of atheism or any form of government cannot be imposed from without, it must be a revolution within or it will fail.
Click to expand...
 
SciWriter said:
Flunk, for you not only didn't refute my disproof of God, but are now still hinting that God planned and made life.


I don;t have to proof or disproof . You just tell me how did life start on this planet Otherwise there can not be a discussion of proof

I>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I see only first level beliefs here, and not even close to any second level beliefs or knowledge about the beliefs of the first place.
Click to expand...

Who cares about believe level . I believe life some how initiate or was brought here on this planet . You believe in the Big Bang ( science )
You and I we are alive, Is there any Physical proof on Big Bang
So you believe of some human theory . I believe in atheory which was passed to me for ages .
Both us are believers . You joined a club of Atheists . I joined a group that believe in that our life have a Creator .
I have a fact I am alive , you have an extrapolation that might not intercept zero on the graph.:)
 
yaracuy said:
Who cares about believe level . I believe life some how initiate or was brought here on this planet . You believe in the Big Bang ( science )
You and I we are alive, Is there any Physical proof on Big Bang
So you believe of some human theory . I believe in atheory which was passed to me for ages .
Both us are believers . You joined a club of Atheists . I joined a group that believe in that our life have a Creator .
I have a fact I am alive , you have an extrapolation that might not intercept zero on the graph.:)
Click to expand...

Flunked again. The disproof stands. Nor did you respond to the "LIFE making Life…"

I didn't say anything about the Big Bang.

You have nothing but myth-takes.
 
So, what to do in the meanwhile of this lameness of no one being able to refute my disproof of God nor show a proof of God…

How about the THE ITCHY CONVENTION…

Many of the claimers of absolute knowledge of the workings of the invisible unknown had been gathered into a conference room, for here they would be face to face with all the variant and differing ‘proved’ beliefs of ultimate truth that were so indubitable to each of their sponsors.

Here there would be none of the ‘neglect’ of contradictions, for while the individual beliefs were very personal, and thus unassailable—since they had each merely thought of them, there would be unavoidable debate. We knew, too, that they would all get angry, and so, to accelerate the process, itching powder had been sprayed into the air beforehand.

“There are no Gods, just ways of life indicated by the consciousness of the universe, such as Hindu’s say.”

“Nope, there is one God.”

“Ha, hardly. There are many Gods, Krishna just being of of the better known ones.”

Wham! “Go eat a sacred cow!”

Baam! “There is no Heaven or Hell.”

Whammo! “Have a nice warm trip there.”

“My all loving God wouldn’t torture anyone in Hell; that’s more like a Devil would do.”

Punch! “Don’t call my God a Devil.”

“No change to what ‘is’ is needed.”

“What! One must greatly reduce or banish the ego altogether! it is Satan.”

“Well, can’t use an ego to banish an ego.”

“The ego will surely be gone after death.”

“But we never die; we are an ongoing dream.”

“OK, never mind; I love you, dream girl.”

“Jesus was divine, fat Jewish head.”

“No way, Islamic monster; you stole that concept.”

“Death to you, infidel. Mohammed is the main man, for an angel told him the right everything.”

“God talked to me and said that the Book of Mormon is the true faith; our angel is better than your angel.”

Now you all see the melee over the arbitrary pronouncements of conflicting irrational beliefs claimed as ‘known’.
 
spidergoat said:
No, neither rises to the degree of a specific prediction. Israel in particular is problematic, since it is the result of belief in a myth. It's like using the magnificence of the Hajj as proof that Islam is true when Islam created the Hajj in the first place.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What about Jesus? He was supposed to come back in a generation and never did. "...This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." . Fail.

That is in the New Testament , According to Isaiah he come . the second coming is his business > I can't tell him what to do.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Before we observed the red shift. Again, you are using the flawed idea that because knowledge in science changes, the whole thing is worthless.
I am familiar with the shift indicating motion, I do not say science is worthless ( I worked in science for 40 years ) science is beautiful I encourage my son to pursue science. Science is a process of learning nature , which is great. amen...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


Through evolution from simpler forms going all the way back to the organic chemistry of the early Earth.

Let me help you at the beginning there was no organic chemistry to speak unless you speak space generated small molecules , I even would go that far as to accept some amino acids , and please don't come with the Miller experiment in the 1950

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You missed the point. A creator could invent something new, while evolution has to work with existing parts.

I need some one Create or bring One cell . I understand evolution that is not a problem to me. Once I have a cell she might subdivide and God knows how the environment will modify and reshape the offspring
A created thing would have evidence of it's creation in the form of irreducible parts and things that appear with no predecessor.

The spirit of the Creator is in us to see the intelligent mechanism that was put together .
Now go empty a cell and you have all the component for life can you make to bring it back to life, it not then the content of the cell will be dispersed of if there are other cells it will food only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Study of life on Earth shows no evidence of creation, only evolution. Read "The Blind Watchmaker" by Dawkins.

No comment about Dawkins He is not a biochemist.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Atheism is not anti-spiritual. The promotion of atheism or any form of government cannot be imposed from without, it must be a revolution within or it will fail.
Click to expand...

Have you been in the former Eastern block ; Churches are growing like mushrooms. Why ? because freedom of choice ?:)
Click to expand...
 
please don't come with the Miller experiment in the 1950
Click to expand...
Why not? It was more relevant than is generally known. Forget the word "organic" if you find that problematic, we came from chemistry, perhaps in the pores of rocks which formed the template for the cell.

The spirit of the Creator is in us to see the intelligent mechanism that was put together.
Click to expand...
No! It wasn't intelligent, that's the whole point. If evolution is evidence of an intelligent creator his IQ would only need to be 1, slightly better than pure randomness.

I do not say that the first life was a cell, obviously by the time cells came about, it was already quite advanced. Life was simpler than that, all the way back to a point when it would be difficult to call it life at all, rather than a geological process.

Have you been in the former Eastern block ; Churches are growing like mushrooms. Why ? because freedom of choice ?
Click to expand...
Contrary to popular opinion, religion never left those countries. Religion is the predecessor to atheism. Atheism is growing too.
 
spidergoat said:
Why not? It was more relevant than is generally known. Forget the word "organic" if you find that problematic, we came from chemistry, perhaps in the pores of rocks which formed the template for the cell.

Good luck but if I would be you would look deeper int what a cell is and its nechanism

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

No! It wasn't intelligent, that's the whole point. If evolution is evidence of an intelligent creator his IQ would only need to be 1, slightly better than pure randomness. I TALK ON HOW A CELL IS PUT TOGETHER AND HOW IT FUNCTIONS.

Please try to read my point with room for opem mindness
I do not say that the first life was a cell, obviously by the time cells came about, it was already quite advanced. Life was simpler than that, all the way back to a point when it would be difficult to call it life at all, rather than a geological process.

The question becomes what is life ? What do I need to make life . Even if I have a pore as a catalyst that inorganic catalyst will not produce large variety of monomers , then how do I polymerize , I will need at least 20 types of amino acids to be joined in some facion to make a proteine .
O man there are many more steps
Sorry I will prefer to have a Creator then think of random happening
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Contrary to popular opinion, religion never left those countries. Religion is the predecessor to atheism. Atheism is growing too.
Click to expand...

Yes Atheism is growing . It is much simpler not have to account to any body like Supreme, ( I know you atheists grow of rocks ) you guys are gods yourself , that is fine with me. :)
 
I guess everyone converted to Science.


UNCENTERED…

The Earth was found not to be the center of all, nor the solar system or even the galaxy, and now it is even that it could be that our universe is not the center of the multiverse. When people climbed Mt. Olympus and saw no Gods there, that mountain of myth crumbled, too. That the connect-the-dots gods of astrology were not to be was another crack in the foundation that violated the building code.

Then there are the scientific indications that the complex derives from the ever simpler, the ultimate simplicity now being seen as the causeless, for there cannot be infinite causes beneath causes of that ‘something’ that always was (there's more to it, but it only gets worse); so, then, when there is no creation, there can be no Creator.

Nothing gave pause to the religious who attacked the truth of science, such as upon Galileo’s findings, but, the church could not burn the truth away, for it remains.

‘God’ is just a notion; however, the church’s deception is, as in fact, to speak of it as the truth. They should go to confession and do a really lot of penance for preaching a notion as truth.

Game really over now—all momentum gone.
 
A rocky planet formed from stuff. It had no life; 4 billion years (a really long time) later, after slow, mindless evolution, here we are. The so-called 'problem' is surrounded. Plus, the DNA of fossils matches the junk DNA in live creatures.

The End. 'God' has left the building that He never was in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top