|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Religion or Science - How do they compare? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
GDR writes: I contend that mankind is continuing to gain a more focused understanding of God all the time. You can contend that but you've got no actual evidence of it. You have no more idea of God than I have.
From my perspective the only one I know who has it all correct is me, but even then I continue to question where I might be wrong and make corrections. This is the point - you all make up your own God to suit yourselves.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Aside from the fact that religion is far too diffuse a phenomenon to be characterised so simply, aside from the fact that religions don’t even need any sort of God, let alone one responsible for humans, the religious attitude far too often opposes understanding in the name of dogma. And that very much includes you.
quote: Except there is nothing obvious about that. There is a lot of revisionism, but whether it constitutes revelation is far from obvious. That the pre-Christian books were building up to the supposed climax seems more likely false than true. You may say that you were answering from the perspective of Christian belief, but that simply takes it back to my previous point - dogma is taken as more important than understanding.
quote: I am not sure how you would measure focus, nor how you would count the increase in the number of people - at least in the West - who don’t associate with any formal religion. Moreover a more focussed view is only beneficial if it is focussed on the truth and there is no way to judge that (except, perhaps, in the way that religionists often avoid inconvenient truths, perhaps)
quote: Regardless of individual,weaknesses, scientists as a group are likely more open-minded about science than religionists are about their religion. And, as an institution Science has a much better record than religion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18298 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
PaulK,responding to GDR writes: Remember that by definition religious "understanding" does not require nor even seek evidence in the way that science has to do. Belief involves chosen ideology that supports dogma.
...aside from the fact that religions don’t even need any sort of God, let alone one responsible for humans, the religious attitude far too often opposes understanding in the name of dogma. And that very much includes you.There is a lot of revisionism, but whether it constitutes revelation is far from obvious. Granted that we will be unlikely to arrive at a consensus as to what is obvious without resorting to embracing either belief or evidence as the gold standard.Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Mere adherence to belief without full comprehension - which includes the implications is not understanding. Inventing excuses - themselves poorly understood - to cling to belief is not understanding. Religion is often opposed to understanding - and that is one of the things that makes it very different from science.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
Remember that by definition religious "understanding" does not require nor even seek evidence in the way that science has to do.quote:In other words, "Park your understanding at the door," is pretty much the basis of faith. An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18298 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
n other words, "Park your understanding at the door," is pretty much the basis of faith. Not at all. What I am saying is that you cant expect evidence or the scientific method to corroborate your faith. Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
I just pointed out that the Bible tells you to park your understanding at the door. What I am saying is that you cant expect evidence or the scientific method to corroborate your faith.An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
"Lean not unto your own understanding" is good advice to fallen humanity so prone to error, when we have God who is omniscient and willing to guide us to the truth: "In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths."
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
Faith writes: "Lean not unto your own understanding" is good advice to fallen humanity so prone to error, when we have God who is omniscient and willing to guide us to the truth: "In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths." Yet the Bible is just the product of fallen humans and not anything directly from God. In addition all we have is our own understanding and the best we can ever have is our own understanding which is then tested against physical reality. The Bible is no greater source of wisdom and knowledge than the Qu'ran or Tao Te Ching or the Vedas.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: It’s also a convenient saying for false religions out to enslave people. Like your Christianity Too bad for you that you are one of the most error-prone people I’ve ever met and your religion seems to encourage it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
What we have is shamans - e.g. Bible commentators - who are eager and willing to guide us. But they too are fallen. It makes no difference how perfect The Source is, as long as all of the interpreters are fallen. we have God who is omniscient and willing to guide us to the truthAn honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
Tangle writes: You contend that there is no god but you have no actual evidence of that. You can contend that but you've got no actual evidence of it. You have no more idea of God than I have.I understand the nature of God but what what we have written about Jesus. Sure, I can't prove the accuracy of the Gospel stories, but by understanding that Jesus presented the true nature of God and His model of how we are called to live our lives is something that makes sense of my life, and the world I live in. I am prepared to live my life as best I can adhering to his message that we are to love His creation sacrificially, and that is something that I am prepared to take on faith. Tangle writes: ....as you make up your lack of faith. This is the point - you all make up your own God to suit yourselves.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
PaulK writes:
OK, the theistic religions. I'm wondering what understanding that I have that opposes understanding.
Aside from the fact that religion is far too diffuse a phenomenon to be characterised so simply, aside from the fact that religions don’t even need any sort of God, let alone one responsible for humans, the religious attitude far too often opposes understanding in the name of dogma. And that very much includes you.PaulK writes: Except there is nothing obvious about that. There is a lot of revisionism, but whether it constitutes revelation is far from obvious. That the pre-Christian books were building up to the supposed climax seems more likely false than true. You may say that you were answering from the perspective of Christian belief, but that simply takes it back to my previous point - dogma is taken as more important than understanding. I simply said that it is obvious that The Bible shows an evolving understanding or a progressive revelation. I wasn't arguing that was evidence of its accuracy. I'm only saying that taken from a Christian perspective it is obvious.
PaulK writes:
Of course we don't KNOW the truth. We all choose what we believe to be true. We can look at the world where the idea that sacrificial love is valued in a culture, the better the culture has done.
I am not sure how you would measure focus, nor how you would count the increase in the number of people - at least in the West - who don’t associate with any formal religion. Moreover a more focussed view is only beneficial if it is focussed on the truth and there is no way to judge that (except, perhaps, in the way that religionists often avoid inconvenient truths, perhaps) PaulK writes: Ultimately science can usually prove or disprove there ideas so it is easier to move on than it is with religion. However, as near as I can tell, there certainly are numerous theories in the field of QM that scientists vigorously disagree on and are pretty dogmatic in their beliefs. Regardless of individual,weaknesses, scientists as a group are likely more open-minded about science than religionists are about their religion. And, as an institution Science has a much better record than religion.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
GDR writes: You contend that there is no god but you have no actual evidence of that. Oh come on; you know the rules by now, i don't have to prove there isn't a god.
I understand the nature of God
You do not.
Sure, I can't prove the accuracy of the Gospel stories,
Which is a damn shame because that's all you actually have.
I am prepared to live my life as best I can adhering to his message that we are to love His creation sacrificially, and that is something that I am prepared to take on faith. Well jolly good for you. But I have to say, I can't find any meaning in those words - it's the sort of preachie bollox spun by shamans to impress the gullible.
as you make up your lack of faith. You really must stop doing this, how the hell can I make up a lack of something? It's not there to be made up. Please argue honestly it doesn't do your cause any good to weasel around like this.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: I didn’t say that it was understanding that opposed understanding. It is the wilful ignorance of dogmatic belief that opposes understanding, such as your rather desperate attempts to minimise and downplay the differences in the Appearance stories.
quote: The Bible certainly shows changing views. Whether any of those changes are Revelations is another matter altogether, and certainly not something that can be considered obvious.
quote: And yet we see Christians complaining of persecution when they aren’t given special privileges even today. Let alone all the abuses of the past, the anti-semitism, the murderous conflicts between the adherents of different denominations.
quote: Which only illustrates that science as an institution is not dogmatic, since it tolerates the differing beliefs.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024