God, religion, Science and a Post-Modern View of Science

[JakeStarkey]

JimBowie jumps in with an OP then offers a very flawed presentation.

Folks carefully show why it is flawed.

So, JimBowie melts down!

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. Evolution is just bullshit, plain and simple, you have been self deceived, if you remotely believe in that.
2. So science is a con-job, at least from a perspective from the believer, you *must* be a willing participant in order to consider science as *truth*, and seeing on the most part science is there to disprove there is a God, then science is just bullshit.
3. When and if science can find a direction that doesn't put it on a collision course with God, and the people of God, then science will create a platform where us Godly people might consider it.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[JakeStarkey]

SirJames,

1. You are not an expert on science, religion, or the philosophy of either.
2. Evolution is more fact than your actual existence.
3. Your number 3 above gives absolute proof of my number 1 here
4. Your number 3 is false. Science proves the wonder of God daily.

Have a good day.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

SirJames,

1. You are not an expert on science, religion, or the philosophy of either.
2. Evolution is more fact than your actual existence.
3. Your number 3 above gives absolute proof of my number 1 here
4. Your number 3 is false. Science proves the wonder of God daily.

Have a good day.

1. Most science hangs all its theories on the nail of evolution.
2. For without this nail science too itself *has nothing*.
3. Evolution is the nail for which *all* science revolves, so I find it amusing when the people of science see me strolling around with a hammer.
4. The only thing science can do is cling to evolution, its their *bedrock*, its their *wellspring*, its their *everything*.
5. If science didn't have this one nail to cling too, then they would fold up like a tent.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[JakeStarkey]

SirJames,

1. Your number 1 above is not evidenced, only an assertion, and if investigated, false.
2. Thus your number 2 fails..
3. Thus we find the argument to be amusing.
4. Thus number 4 is false.
5. Thus your number 5 is false..

 

[Katzndogz]

Of course science is a philosophy! If it isn't then it certainly requires a definite philosophy. The basis is, if it CAN be done, it SHOULD be done because science is only required to satisfy itself.

 

[midcan5]

Well, please give it a shot as I would be quite happy to read what you have to say, beyond what you have posted here.

[ You answered for me. ]

A scientist can use religion to find Truth but not a knid of Truth that is subject to scientific testing. 'God spoke and there was light' is a miracle but the Big Bang is not. They do not contradict each other but compliment each other in paralel spheres of knowledge.

If science cannot test religion, as you write, then religion is not science. Very simple. Miracles are unprovable and non repeatable, thus they are not science. If you thought about your own comments you'd give up this debate.

...3. Evolution is the nail for which *all* science revolves, so I find it amusing when the people of science see me strolling around with a hammer....

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

That wins ridiculous comment of the month award and is in contention for the yearly award. So is it your contention natural selection created gravity so we wouldn't float off into space? Interesting, I wonder how we can test that?

Evolution is accepted by the religious who have seen themselves nude in front of a mirror, and wonder at the dinosaurs, and know that at a biological level we are all related and all made of the same stuff. That plant or animal you eat is a relative. But gawd can be part of this process if you have faith. And faith is not science as gawd comes in all sizes and shapes.


Jake, discussing these facts with these guys is tantamount to explaining the internet to a primitive whose entire existence is spent in a square mile of desolation.

_

 

[Katzndogz]

Faith is an essential part of science. Science could not exist without it. Thomas Edison could not possibly have invented the light bulb if he had not first had faith it was possible.

Science accepts the creation of the universe being the Big Bang. If you have ever read anything about scientific theories about the Big Bang, you will immediately see that it was created by a Singular Anomaly. Meaning that no one knows.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

Well, please give it a shot as I would be quite happy to read what you have to say, beyond what you have posted here.

[ You answered for me. ]

A scientist can use religion to find Truth but not a knid of Truth that is subject to scientific testing. 'God spoke and there was light' is a miracle but the Big Bang is not. They do not contradict each other but compliment each other in paralel spheres of knowledge.

If science cannot test religion, as you write, then religion is not science. Very simple. Miracles are unprovable and non repeatable, thus they are not science. If you thought about your own comments you'd give up this debate.

...3. Evolution is the nail for which *all* science revolves, so I find it amusing when the people of science see me strolling around with a hammer....

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

That wins ridiculous comment of the month award and is in contention for the yearly award. So is it your contention natural selection created gravity so we wouldn't float off into space? Interesting, I wonder how we can test that?

Evolution is accepted by the religious who have seen themselves nude in front of a mirror, and wonder at the dinosaurs, and know that at a biological level we are all related and all made of the same stuff. That plant or animal you eat is a relative. But gawd can be part of this process if you have faith. And faith is not science as gawd comes in all sizes and shapes.


Jake, discussing these facts with these guys is tantamount to explaining the internet to a primitive whose entire existence is spent in a square mile of desolation.

_

1. I am saying God is indeed holding *all* things in order, the way He wants to hold them in order, humans able to postulate how creation works, is not science, its humans postulating, the understanding of creation by humans will always be a little lacking, for things of creation are not all seen, or observed, things in creation happen and work because, *God said so*, which can make no sense to a human who can't measure something thats not measured, but just *is* because *God said it is*.
2. This is the unsolvable mystery of the universe, humans will never see the light on, and coming up with other creative ideas on how all this came about, how everything works the way it does, and casting doubts upon it with natural selection lets say, one of Darwin's main building blocks, isn't going to reveal the total miracle of creation, the absolute wonderment of it all, and how God made it work and is why its held together, now and then, and forever.
3. God isn't going to allow humans a chance to peek over his shoulder on this, for if he did, we would think that indeed we too were *gods*.
4. My ability to actually explain self evident truths about why creation is what it is should reveal much to those whom have a sincere heart to learn all the truth, holding on the center piece of science; Darwinism evolution, this nail will leave you hanging, dangling in the winds of eternity, of damnation, emptiness an dis-pare.
5. Shall I hammer this nail in, or pull it from the wall, this is the only real question that everyone should be wondering, in both counts, seeing when I so do it, the nail is gone, one way its disappeared into the wall, the other way its cast to the ground and trampled, either way it will disappear.
6. Unless humans learn to discover God, and decide he is to be honored and shown love and a desire to please, those who do shall find a reward, those who refuse shall wish that they only had.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[konradv]

When and if science can find a direction that doesn't put it on a collision course with God, and the people of God, then science will create a platform where us Godly people might consider it.

Got a lot of things to do. If you don't want to be along for the ride, that's your decision. Just don't see why we should care. The platforms are out there. Take it or leave it, but don't whine when your kids get left in the dust.

 

[konradv]

Faith is an essential part of science. Science could not exist without it. Thomas Edison could not possibly have invented the light bulb if he had not first had faith it was possible.

Science accepts the creation of the universe being the Big Bang. If you have ever read anything about scientific theories about the Big Bang, you will immediately see that it was created by a Singular Anomaly. Meaning that no one knows.

I wouldn't call it 'faith'. I'd call it 'knowledge'. He knew about electricity. He knew it could generate heat and light when traveling through materials. If there was any 'faith' involved, it was in his belief that he'd be able to find a suitable filament material.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Religion is about faith of evidence unseen, science is about evidence seen and repeatable.

SJ and his buds know not of what they speak.

 

[rdean]

Science is a philosophy?

It is also known as 'natural philosophy'.

Is that because it can be imagined and you don't need "facts"?
Oh, wait, that's the occult, not science.

Or it could be ideology.

Edit: are you trying to be funny? I dont get it.

"Natural Philosophy" is what science used to be called before it included "physics" and "data" and "math". Stuff not included in the "occult".

 

[Middleoftheroad]

Unable to understand any of it themselves, and not encouraged to even try by a growing number of scientists, more and more common is this view that science is just another form of faith system, but instead of priests or shamen, we have men in white coats who call themselves scientists and who are presumed to be oracles of Truth purely on a circular set of assumptions.

I don't know if you wrote that or you are quoting somebody, but seriously, you have no idea. Or else you do not surround yourself with scientists, or those of that bent...

There is no faith that you will die in space without oxygen. It is a proven scientific FACT.

Humans cannot live under water without breathing apparatus - FACT.

You cannot fly a plane without thrust and lift - scientific fact

I could spend the rest of the year giving examples....

An who has denied any of these?

Bullshit I am denying one of these.

You don't NEED lift to fly a plane. It is helpful in many circumstances, but is not necessary. Otherwise jets wouldn't be able to fly upside down and spaceships wouldn't be able to launch.

 

[JimBowie1958]

JimBowie jumps in with an OP then offers a very flawed presentation.

Folks carefully show why it is flawed.

So, JimBowie melts down!

Lol, you are such a ******* liar.

No one has carefully shown anything yet, and I have not come anywhere near a breakdown.

I did give yo a chance to give some facts to back up your claim I dont understand post-modernism and you backed out like the coward you are, but that is to be expected from a clown jack ass like you.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Religion is about faith of evidence unseen, science is about evidence seen and repeatable.

SJ and his buds know not of what they speak.

And you cant even wuote St Paul correctly.

Damn you are a freaking loser and ahalf.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Science is a philosophy?

It is also known as 'natural philosophy'.

Is that because it can be imagined and you don't need "facts"?
Oh, wait, that's the occult, not science.

Or it could be ideology.

Edit: are you trying to be funny? I dont get it.

"Natural Philosophy" is what science used to be called before it included "physics" and "data" and "math". Stuff not included in the "occult".

No, 'natural philosophy' did indeed include these things in application as well.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Well, please give it a shot as I would be quite happy to read what you have to say, beyond what you have posted here.

[ You answered for me. ]

A scientist can use religion to find Truth but not a knid of Truth that is subject to scientific testing. 'God spoke and there was light' is a miracle but the Big Bang is not. They do not contradict each other but compliment each other in paralel spheres of knowledge.

If science cannot test religion, as you write, then religion is not science. Very simple. Miracles are unprovable and non repeatable, thus they are not science. If you thought about your own comments you'd give up this debate.

Well, since I have pretty much agreed with you I am not sure what we are debating or what you disagree with from my OP.

You just gotta pick a fight, eh?

 

[HUGGY]

So often people say that science and religion are opposed to each other that it is almost considered a fact of the public domain. And yet were it not for the Judeo-Christian faith, science would never have had the influence on society that it has had in Western culture but now that our society is bleaching itself of all its Judeo-Christain values, science is returning to the mystical view that it had prior to the rise of Judeo-Christianity.In the ancient world, the Atomist school of thought and the great philosophers like Socrates and Plato were viewed by the larger society as merely one more competing set of opinions that were on an equal level as the other competing world views that held the u niverse to be irrational and not subject to discovery through reason. Just because fire produced heat did not mean that something was going on with atoms necessarily, according to most, but was perhaps the product of fire elemental spirits. Spirits were attributed to almost everything from mountains to rivers to animals to the stars. So any materialistic analysis was at best presumptive if not foolish.

When Christianity was made the official religon of the roman Empire this began to change slowly. In Christianity, the universe is presumed to be rational since the Creator who made it was Himself rational and the universe would therefore reflect that rationality. So the views of the Atomists, Socrates and his disciples and the overall view of the universe as being capable of being expressed in human language became the root assumption in Western society.

Along with that change in world view that placed Reason as a tool alongside revelation for discovering Truth, the contention between the Protestants and Catholics caused an explosion of literacy among Westerners as people sought to be able to read the Bible themselves and deetermine what religion they would embrace, and this literacy made the whole public capable of reading of science as well and coming to understand it well enough that for many science replaced religion altogether as the principle source of Truths about our universe.

But today in our post-Christian, post0Modern society, the public is returning to a black-box view of science. Unable to understand any of it themselves, and not encouraged to even try by a growing number of scientists, more and more common is this view that science is just another form of faith system, but instead of priests or shamen, we have men in white coats who call themselves scientists and who are presumed to be oracles of Truth purely on a circular set of assumptions. Lacking this understanding the public is prey to all sorts of charlatans posing as scientists or doctors selling all sorts of snake oil.

Eventually the public will tire of this obedience to the science-priests and stop supporting the scientific exploration of our universe and Reality. Already in this election we have idiots asserting that space exploration and colonizing our moon and the planets of our solar system to be an insane waste of precious resources, and people are no longer alerted by scientific studies that show 'X' to be harmful in any way worse than what we accept on a daily basis anyway. They are becoming inurred to the contributions of science and reason.

The great irony here is that this is all happening just as science is on the cusp of its greatest acheivements and the ushering in of a virtual technological utopia of indefinate lifespans, plentiful resources that obsetes the requirement to labor and puts the knowlege of the universe at the finger-tips of anyone who can afford an occasional connection to the internet.

We need to rebuff this notion that religion, and Christianity in particular, is incompatible with science. Most Christians do NOT believe this to be the case, but that percentage is falling day by day. Science and the rest of society stand to lose the most in a democratic political system from this rebirth of irrational world views.

You funny! Make me laugh...longtime...

 

[Obamerican]

Sorry bout that,

Well, please give it a shot as I would be quite happy to read what you have to say, beyond what you have posted here.

[ You answered for me. ]

A scientist can use religion to find Truth but not a knid of Truth that is subject to scientific testing. 'God spoke and there was light' is a miracle but the Big Bang is not. They do not contradict each other but compliment each other in paralel spheres of knowledge.

If science cannot test religion, as you write, then religion is not science. Very simple. Miracles are unprovable and non repeatable, thus they are not science. If you thought about your own comments you'd give up this debate.

...3. Evolution is the nail for which *all* science revolves, so I find it amusing when the people of science see me strolling around with a hammer....

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

That wins ridiculous comment of the month award and is in contention for the yearly award. So is it your contention natural selection created gravity so we wouldn't float off into space? Interesting, I wonder how we can test that?

Evolution is accepted by the religious who have seen themselves nude in front of a mirror, and wonder at the dinosaurs, and know that at a biological level we are all related and all made of the same stuff. That plant or animal you eat is a relative. But gawd can be part of this process if you have faith. And faith is not science as gawd comes in all sizes and shapes.


Jake, discussing these facts with these guys is tantamount to explaining the internet to a primitive whose entire existence is spent in a square mile of desolation.

_

1. I am saying God is indeed holding *all* things in order, the way He wants to hold them in order, humans able to postulate how creation works, is not science, its humans postulating, the understanding of creation by humans will always be a little lacking, for things of creation are not all seen, or observed, things in creation happen and work because, *God said so*, which can make no sense to a human who can't measure something thats not measured, but just *is* because *God said it is*.
2. This is the unsolvable mystery of the universe, humans will never see the light on, and coming up with other creative ideas on how all this came about, how everything works the way it does, and casting doubts upon it with natural selection lets say, one of Darwin's main building blocks, isn't going to reveal the total miracle of creation, the absolute wonderment of it all, and how God made it work and is why its held together, now and then, and forever.
3. God isn't going to allow humans a chance to peek over his shoulder on this, for if he did, we would think that indeed we too were *gods*.
4. My ability to actually explain self evident truths about why creation is what it is should reveal much to those whom have a sincere heart to learn all the truth, holding on the center piece of science; Darwinism evolution, this nail will leave you hanging, dangling in the winds of eternity, of damnation, emptiness an dis-pare.
5. Shall I hammer this nail in, or pull it from the wall, this is the only real question that everyone should be wondering, in both counts, seeing when I so do it, the nail is gone, one way its disappeared into the wall, the other way its cast to the ground and trampled, either way it will disappear.
6. Unless humans learn to discover God, and decide he is to be honored and shown love and a desire to please, those who do shall find a reward, those who refuse shall wish that they only had.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Only a ******* moron quotes himself. You're a "false prophet" and an inbred piece of shit. IMHO you can take your "beliefs" and shove them up your ******* ass.

Have a nice day. I'm sure "your god" will see to that. I don't have one but I'm sure my day will be good tomorrow.