U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Unexplained Mysteries and Paranormal
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 07-10-2016, 07:45 AM
 
Location: Maine
19,169 posts, read 22,856,153 times
Reputation: 23429

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ocpaul20 View Post
In spite of how anyone argues to the contrary, (and I dont care if it the Pope himself) I jonestly believe that our current science and religion cannot exist side-by-side. Of course scientists who are religious have a conflict of interest and cannot serve two masters. Yes, I know the Vatican has scientisis investigating stuff for it, but I bet the reports are sanitised or left unpublished for inconvenient truths, but thats just my opinion and I have no evidence to back that up - before anyone asks.

When it comes down to the crunch, you have to either take your everlasting life seriously or you take your profession seriously - now, I wonder which one will win?

Those arguing that both can exist together I feel are mistaken.
A few points you should consider:

One, you admit your opinion is not based on any actual evidence. That isn't an opinion. That is a prejudice. Look into the evidence. It might change your mind.

Two, "religion" is a very broad brush, just as "science" is. Non-believers tend to see all religions as the same. They are not, and even a very cursory glance will make that evident. Can strict fundamentalists reconcile their views with science? I don't think so. But very few religions are strictly fundamentalist.

Three, religion is not just about "everlasting life." A person's religion informs every aspect of their life, including their chosen profession.

Four, science and religion have co-existed side-by-side for hundreds of years. When understood and used correctly, they even complement one another.

Anyway, just some things to think about.
Rate this post positively

 
Old 07-10-2016, 07:51 AM
 
Location: Maine
19,169 posts, read 22,856,153 times
Reputation: 23429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vasily View Post
I've been attacked many times here for being a "skeptic", a "scientist", and in general an unbeliever. Then, when I turn around and say yes, well, I do believe in God, unseen powers, and the rest, I get grief from the atheist/agnostic crowd. I get no respect from either side.
That's a pretty good indication you're on the right road.

"The fact that Swinburne was irritated at the unhappiness of Christians and yet more irritated at their happiness was easily explained. It was no longer a complication of diseases in Christianity, but a complication of diseases in Swinburne. The restraints of Christians saddened him simply because he was more hedonist than a healthy man should be. The faith of Christians angered him because he was more pessimist than a healthy man should be. In the same way the Malthusians by instinct attacked Christianity; not because there is anything especially anti-Malthusian about Christianity, but because there is something a little anti-human about Malthusianism" (Chesterton)
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-10-2016, 09:33 AM
 
Location: Greenville, SC
5,779 posts, read 4,492,718 times
Reputation: 10972
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocpaul20 View Post
In spite of how anyone argues to the contrary, (and I dont care if it the Pope himself) I jonestly believe that our current science and religion cannot exist side-by-side. Of course scientists who are religious have a conflict of interest and cannot serve two masters. Yes, I know the Vatican has scientisis investigating stuff for it, but I bet the reports are sanitised or left unpublished for inconvenient truths, but thats just my opinion and I have no evidence to back that up - before anyone asks.

When it comes down to the crunch, you have to either take your everlasting life seriously or you take your profession seriously - now, I wonder which one will win?

Those arguing that both can exist together I feel are mistaken.
Do you ever actually follow the many links people like Mark S and myself have posted and think about what they mean, or do you not bother because you already have your mind made up and don't want unfortunate facts intruding into your world view?

What you say above not only flies in the face of what the evidence Mark and I have presented, it's insulting to everyone who is a scientist and also has religious faith. That includes the three figures I mentioned, none of whom have anything whatsoever to do with the Vatican. You're absolutely 100% wrong, my friend.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-10-2016, 09:34 AM
 
Location: Greenville, SC
5,779 posts, read 4,492,718 times
Reputation: 10972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S. View Post
That's a pretty good indication you're on the right road.

"The fact that Swinburne was irritated at the unhappiness of Christians and yet more irritated at their happiness was easily explained. It was no longer a complication of diseases in Christianity, but a complication of diseases in Swinburne. The restraints of Christians saddened him simply because he was more hedonist than a healthy man should be. The faith of Christians angered him because he was more pessimist than a healthy man should be. In the same way the Malthusians by instinct attacked Christianity; not because there is anything especially anti-Malthusian about Christianity, but because there is something a little anti-human about Malthusianism" (Chesterton)
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-10-2016, 11:03 PM
 
Location: PRC
4,518 posts, read 4,009,494 times
Reputation: 4035
Quote:
One, you admit your opinion is not based on any actual evidence. That isn't an opinion. That is a prejudice. Look into the evidence.
Now we are getting down to semantics. You can choose to to see it that way if you want, but I think I have been fair. You are trying to make yourself a victim.
Quote:
"religion" is a very broad brush...
I agree
Quote:
religion is not just about "everlasting life."
Who are you kidding? Yourself obviously. Of course it is about everlasting life, otherwise why else would people join? You do not need a religion to be a good and upright member of society with good morals.
Quote:
science and religion have co-existed side-by-side for hundreds of years.
And your point is...? The current scientific and religious understandings are probably not moving towards one another since faith plays a large part in belief systems and plays no part in the scientific method.

Vasily
Quote:
do you not bother because you already have your mind made up and don't want unfortunate facts intruding into your world view?
Yep, thats me. Now, about you - How do you resolve the issues which make your faith at direct odds with your scientific training? It is one thing to point to articles written by prominent scholars of your religion, but another thing completely when it comes to your own situation in life. For example, how does a religious person do work for the government developing weapons knowing that it will cause the destruction and suffering of countless other human beings?

Quote:
What you say above not only flies in the face of what the evidence Mark and I have presented, it's insulting to everyone who is a scientist and also has religious faith. That includes the three figures I mentioned, none of whom have anything whatsoever to do with the Vatican. You're absolutely 100% wrong, my friend.
Firstly, I dont think we can call each other friends, I hardly know you. :-) Secondly you have not presented evidence. You have presented scholarly opinion which I do not think is authorative because I do not believe in the same things you do. Thirdly, if you choose to be insulted, and a victim then that is your choice. Get over it petal. This is a a public forum and most people would probably say I am not being insulting.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-10-2016, 11:09 PM
 
Location: PRC
4,518 posts, read 4,009,494 times
Reputation: 4035
People fit into the scale of religion - whether it be Christianity or any other belief system. I accept that you can do any profession as well as having a belief, it just means there may be more skepticism and less faith than many others in that religion, thats all.

Of course it does not mean you cannot be good scientists if you are religious but I am trying to point out that the two paths cannot agree on some of the issues each path takes as necessary truths. It just means that when the belief system you belong to teaches or tells you authoratively a particular thing, you dont believe it as others in the same religion do. Whether you call yourself a member of that religion is up to you.

At one end of the religious people scale, there are those who no longer believe and at the other end there are those who believe in what some would call ridiculous amounts and I acknowledge there will always be this kind of scale because belief is faith based and we are humans. People can still call themselves Christians with very few similar beliefs, thats fine and I have written about my father and mothers differing beliefs before, but for some, the virgin birth is probably up there at the top of the list somewhere along with a belief that Jesus is divine not human or alien. I dont want to get into all that because I know very little about it all, however, it does seem to me that there are a few crucial things which probably define 'a Christian' (or any other religion) which would make it hard for a person of science to accept with their scientist hat on. This is what I am trying to explain.

I count myself among the people who believe in a God yet I also believe in other dimensions, and beings living there. That to me can explain a whole raft of unexplained phenomena and still leave room for a force which is both sentient and all encompassing of every bit of the Universe we call our reality.

For some, that acceptance of belonging to a belief group seems to really matter (as in life/death issue) yet as soon as we realise that doubt and faith does not make us either 'in' or 'out' of the group but makes us human. It is only others who want to make things black and white for their convenience. Life is just not like that, it is a sliding scale of grey.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-11-2016, 10:34 AM
 
Location: Chicagoland
375 posts, read 409,365 times
Reputation: 559
Quote:
Originally Posted by freedomdove View Post
...The more that people refuse to accept that there are unseen forces in this world, the more it will happen. It's actually quite convenient for these beings.
I am on the fence with this one, but it is worthwhile here to quote CS Lewis:

Hell welcomes " a materialist or a magician with the same delight."
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-11-2016, 11:04 AM
 
Location: Greenville, SC
5,779 posts, read 4,492,718 times
Reputation: 10972
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocpaul20 View Post
Who are you kidding? Yourself obviously. Of course it is about everlasting life, otherwise why else would people join? You do not need a religion to be a good and upright member of society with good morals.
In the intertestamental period (100BC-100AD), the Sadducees did not believe in a resurrection of the dead, the Pharisees did. The belief in resurrection appears to have arisen in Judaism in this period. Many Jews today do not believe in a resurrection of the dead. Yet they're Jews, they follow the practices and laws of their religion. Again, you're wrong wrong wrong.

Quote:
Vasily
Yep, thats me. Now, about you - How do you resolve the issues which make your faith at direct odds with your scientific training? It is one thing to point to articles written by prominent scholars of your religion, but another thing completely when it comes to your own situation in life. For example, how does a religious person do work for the government developing weapons knowing that it will cause the destruction and suffering of countless other human beings?
I've never done work for the government developing weapons, my work was used for developing advanced flight control system and the ISS. My faith is not at direct odds with my scientific training. I've spent years reconciling the two world views, and whether you choose to believe I've successfully done so is your problem.

Quote:
Secondly you have not presented evidence. You have presented scholarly opinion which I do not think is authorative because I do not believe in the same things you do. Thirdly, if you choose to be insulted, and a victim then that is your choice. Get over it petal. This is a a public forum and most people would probably say I am not being insulting.
I said you were insulting the three figures I named, not claiming victimhood for myself. Now, you're reduced to calling me "petal" because you think that's an insult that really really hurts. Whatever.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-11-2016, 08:41 PM
 
Location: PRC
4,518 posts, read 4,009,494 times
Reputation: 4035
Quote:
I said you were insulting the three figures I named,
Now you are looking for arguments. Dont be ridiculous. How can other people be insulted when they know nothing about what is said about them?

People talk about us all, all the time but we dont get insulted if we dont know about it. You and I carry on our happy little lives oblivious to what most others think of us. We are not insulted unless these others come up to us or write about us and we see it or hear it.

Feeling insulted is an emotion right? You cannot be insulted FOR someone, they have to be insulted for themselves. Can't you see how ridiculous that is? You are saying I am insulting someone else when they know nothing about it.

YOU may feel I have insulted them, by what I say because YOU hold them in authority due to your beliefs. But... they know nothing about our conversation. That is why I was adressing you because you feel insulted on their behalf.

Anyway, I was not insulting them and I do not hold them in the same authority you do.

As I said before, there are a whole range of ideas encompassed by a religion as people tend to accept some things and not accept other things. However, generally speaking, it is the attraction of gaining a better or continuing existence after physical death that attracts most people to the orthodox religions, particularly as they get older and nearer that time when they have to leave... Christianity is an example of what I was talking about. Maybe I can say that without an argument?
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-12-2016, 04:39 AM
 
Location: Planet Woof
3,179 posts, read 3,894,947 times
Reputation: 10100
Science is about proof. Religion is about faith. It all comes down to that, and yet they overlap. I examine, explore, identify, and embrace the biological and physical levels of existence as a scientist. I acknowledge, celebrate, and stand in awe of the beauty and intricacy of their design as a believer in the higher power that created them and infuses them with a life force that is mystery.
Rate this post positively
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top