Can you be religious and pro science and technology?

[Cecilie1200]

I know a southern Baptist who served as a military officer who loves movies like The Martian, Star Wars, etc and TV shows like Babylon 5, Star Trek, and Battlestar Galactica.

I love science but hate bigots like Dawkins

Dawkins reminds me a lot of Galileo: brilliant and informed in his field, but too arrogant to prevent himself from pompously pronouncing on issues about which his opinion is no more informed and valuable than any random person on the street.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Scientific Revolution was a product of the Catholic Church.

True

Agreed, albeit if that "science" didn't meet up with Catholic policy, then the scientists were forced to recant or face the wrath of the Church.

Most famous example: Galileo.

Fallacy. Galileo didn't get in trouble because of his science; he got in trouble because of his need to pronounce upon theology while on the Church's dime.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is a prime example of what I'm talking about.

Here is a scientist who smugly says he can't believe in something like the Bible, when the author of Revelations obviously knows nothing about cosmology because he does not understand how stars work.

What he is ignorant of is that the same author in the same book later said that "stars" are symbolic of angels.

Dolt.

If Tyson wishes to tell me something about science, I will be glad to listen. When he wants to talk theology, he'll need to show me his degree in THAT subject before I will care.

 

[Divine Wind]

You probably are, but unfortunately for you, you don't get to escape that easily.....

LOL

 

[Divine Wind]

Fallacy. Galileo didn't get in trouble because of his science; he got in trouble because of his need to pronounce upon theology while on the Church's dime.

Nice spin on your part. You would have been awesome during the Spanish Inquisition.

The Galileo Controversy | Catholic Answers

 

[Mudda]

Science disproves the bible, Torah and Koran in many place. So to the OP, no.

No. It doesn't. God loves science. He created it. We can use science t better understand what He has created.

Those three books are at odds with science. It's a fact.

Nope. Sorry, you are wrong again.

The world was proven by science to have not been made in 6 days, among a ton of other things. You even had to move your own goalposts to try to accommodate it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

No. The Bible itself is proof of that, dumbass.

So where's the proof that the world was made in 6 days is an allegorical story? And Noah and the ark has proof as well? The story about Adam banged the girl and getting tossed from heaven has proof also? Ok, go.

Yep, all allegorical, except that bang the girl thingee, that's not in there.

So where's the proof?

You need proof that it is allegorical? You mean you can't figure that out on your own? I did.

.

You need proof that it is allegorical? You mean you can't figure that out on your own? I did.

the 4th century bible had no reason to be allegorical, they fully expected their congregation for one reason or another to be convinced or mesmerized by their version of events they could not explain.

You don't know much about storytelling, conveying information, teaching . . . pretty much communicating in general. The reason for allegory was the same then as it is now. Perhaps if you look up the definition of "allegory", you might grasp the concept.

Or not.

 

[Divine Wind]

If Tyson wishes to tell me something about science, I will be glad to listen. When he wants to talk theology, he'll need to show me his degree in THAT subject before I will care.

From what university did you earn your theology degree?

 

[ding]

Science disproves the bible, Torah and Koran in many place. So to the OP, no.

No. It doesn't. God loves science. He created it. We can use science t better understand what He has created.

Those three books are at odds with science. It's a fact.

Nope. Sorry, you are wrong again.

The world was proven by science to have not been made in 6 days, among a ton of other things. You even had to move your own goalposts to try to accommodate it.

The Bible tells us that Creation had a beginning. Science tells us that 14 billion years ago our universe started in a hot dense state “roughly a million billion billion times smaller than a single atom” and expanded and cooled.

 

[ding]

If Tyson wishes to tell me something about science, I will be glad to listen. When he wants to talk theology, he'll need to show me his degree in THAT subject before I will care.

From what university did you earn your theology degree?

Why would CECILIE1200 need a degree in theology to recognize that Tyson was outside of his area of expertise when commenting on theology?

 

[Mudda]

Science disproves the bible, Torah and Koran in many place. So to the OP, no.

No. It doesn't. God loves science. He created it. We can use science t better understand what He has created.

Those three books are at odds with science. It's a fact.

Nope. Sorry, you are wrong again.

The world was proven by science to have not been made in 6 days, among a ton of other things. You even had to move your own goalposts to try to accommodate it.

The Bible tells us that Creation had a beginning. Science tells us that 14 billion years ago our universe started in a hot dense state “roughly a million billion billion times smaller than a single atom” and expanded and cooled.

Science tells us that this universe started 14 billion years ago. It makes no mention if this is the beginning of everything, because to know if something was already existing before the BB is not knowable at this point in time. The creation story of the bible is a pure guess that it can't prove.

 

[Divine Wind]

If Tyson wishes to tell me something about science, I will be glad to listen. When he wants to talk theology, he'll need to show me his degree in THAT subject before I will care.

From what university did you earn your theology degree?

Why would CECILIE1200 need a degree in theology to recognize that Tyson was outside of his area of expertise when commenting on theology?

She doesn't. Tyson, you nor I don't need one either. Only a hypocrite would demand someone else have a theology degree to comment on theology then, sans degree, freely speak on theology whenever they feel like it.

 

[ding]

If Tyson wishes to tell me something about science, I will be glad to listen. When he wants to talk theology, he'll need to show me his degree in THAT subject before I will care.

From what university did you earn your theology degree?

Why would CECILIE1200 need a degree in theology to recognize that Tyson was outside of his area of expertise when commenting on theology?

She doesn't. Tyson, you nor I don't need one either. Only a hypocrite would demand someone else have a theology degree to comment on theology then, sans degree, freely speak on theology whenever they feel like it.

Let me see if I can explain this to you. I would not expect to understand a faith not my own. Why would I expect someone, an atheist no less, to correctly be able to state the theology of my faith. It would be straw man after straw man. Now do you understand?

 

[Divine Wind]

Let me see if I can explain this to you...

Awesome. Now explain it to your hypocrite friend.

 

[ding]

Let me see if I can explain this to you...

Awesome. Now explain it to your hypocrite friend.

I thought we were all friends. I'm pretty sure CECILIE1200 already knows it.

 

[PK1]

Can you be religious and pro science and technology?

Of course you can ... if you cherry-pick scientific research to fit your subjective religious belief.

Otherwise, religion & science are not compatible regarding knowledge acquisition. Science is based on objective methods & evidence, while religion is based on dogma reflecting "easy button" explanations for simple-minded people.

 

[Divine Wind]

I thought we were all friends. I'm pretty sure CECILIE1200 already knows it.

She might, but I don't know her well enough to know. What I do know is that her behavior indicates a strong streak of hypocritic pomposity.

 

[ding]

No. It doesn't. God loves science. He created it. We can use science t better understand what He has created.

Those three books are at odds with science. It's a fact.

Nope. Sorry, you are wrong again.

The world was proven by science to have not been made in 6 days, among a ton of other things. You even had to move your own goalposts to try to accommodate it.

The Bible tells us that Creation had a beginning. Science tells us that 14 billion years ago our universe started in a hot dense state “roughly a million billion billion times smaller than a single atom” and expanded and cooled.

Science tells us that this universe started 14 billion years ago. It makes no mention if this is the beginning of everything, because to know if something was already existing before the BB is not knowable at this point in time. The creation story of the bible is a pure guess that it can't prove.

Actually science does tell us that space and time came into existence. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics precludes an infinite universe AND all the laws of physics break down at the event horizon which means that space and time did not exist before the expansion. There was no space and time, Einstein. SPACE AND TIME DID HAVE A BEGINNING.

 

[Votto]

No. It doesn't. God loves science. He created it. We can use science t better understand what He has created.

Those three books are at odds with science. It's a fact.

Nope. Sorry, you are wrong again.

The world was proven by science to have not been made in 6 days, among a ton of other things. You even had to move your own goalposts to try to accommodate it.

The Bible tells us that Creation had a beginning. Science tells us that 14 billion years ago our universe started in a hot dense state “roughly a million billion billion times smaller than a single atom” and expanded and cooled.

Science tells us that this universe started 14 billion years ago. It makes no mention if this is the beginning of everything, because to know if something was already existing before the BB is not knowable at this point in time. The creation story of the bible is a pure guess that it can't prove.

The King James version of the Bible tells us that creation was in six days, however, the Hebrew version of Genesis was different.

Early theologians in Judaism seemed to indicate as much, suggesting that the six days were not really six literal days due to the Hebrew wording that was botched in the KJV. These Jewish theologians were pre-modern science, and only came to this conclusion based upon the Hebrew verbiage

Dr. Gerald Schroeder wrote a book called, "Genesis and the Big Bang" to reveal all this. He is part theologian and Physicist. For you see, to have respect for both fields one must study both fields. Human beings tend to become arrogant ass hats in areas in which they think they have expertise, and diminish other fields where they do not. This applies to theologians and, yes, to the heavily unpartisan angelic men who are impartial to all who are known as scientists

Here Is a taste if you are interested.

 

[Divine Wind]

Can you be religious and pro science and technology?

Of course you can ... if you cherry-pick scientific research to fit your subjective religious belief.

Otherwise, religion & science are not compatible regarding knowledge acquisition. Science is based on objective methods & evidence, while religion is based on dogma reflecting "easy button" explanations for simple-minded people.

Disagreed. There's a huge difference between those that do cherry-pick to form their own perceptions of reality and a requirement to do so.

Saying religion and science are incompatible is like saying swimming and horse-racing are incompatible; they're different sports, but there's no reason why a person can't do both well and remain unconflicted with them. It's simply important to remember they are two different things.