Will science destroy religion

[ClearwaterVol]

I disagree.

And it has everything to do with it. He believed in miracles yet still practiced the scientific process well. He studied science because of God's attributes yet didn't attribute everything he tested to God's direct actions. Weird huh?

I understand you and I are going to disagree about whether miracles occur. However, you must agree that with the occurrence of each miracle regarding the same law, the value of said law is diminished. Also, when does a scientist stop attributing any variance in results to an unknown variable and simply stop testing and attribute the variance to a miracle.

 

[Orangeslice13]

This is very interesting. I do not have much knowledge of the Torah. What place does the Torah have within your faith vs. that of the Bible? Also, what particular branch of Judaism do you practice?

I am practice what is commonly referred to as messianic Judaism. Basically we practice Judaism as the disciples did. We see Yeshua Messiah ( Jesus) as the literal fulfillment of Isiah 53 G-ds suffering servant.
The Old Testament is scripture
The gospels are inspired.
The letters and writings are commentary.
According to the typical Messianic you should be able to defend your faith using the entire bible. You should be able to defend your faith with Torah and the Gospels. You should be able to defend your faith using only Torah. If all 3 are not true then you may not be reading it correctly.

We typically believe salvation is by grace threw faith as taught in psalms 119 and Habakkuk well....threw out. That "the law" of G-d is for our blessing and observation of "the law" is and act of love for G-d.

Finally we believe that G-d is the same yesterday, today and forever. He is not a man that He should change or lie.

We are usually not interested in the conversion of Christians as they have a decent understanding of Faith and where they are misguided will be corrected by G-d in his time. (Abrahamic promise).

The other thing a good portion of Christians have correct is G-d is more concerned with our desire to love Him and/or be good than our actual success at being good.

It's like when your wife wants you to want to do the dishes.

Hope that helps.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

I am practice what is commonly referred to as messianic Judaism. Basically we practice Judaism as the disciples did. We see Yeshua Messiah ( Jesus) as the literal fulfillment of Isiah 53 G-ds suffering servant.
The Old Testament is scripture
The gospels are inspired.
The letters and writings are commentary.
According to the typical Messianic you should be able to defend your faith using the entire bible. You should be able to defend your faith with Torah and the Gospels. You should be able to defend your faith using only Torah. If all 3 are not true then you may not be reading it correctly.

We typically believe salvation is by grace threw faith as taught in psalms 119 and Habakkuk well....threw out. That "the law" of G-d is for our blessing and observation of "the law" is and act of love for G-d.

Finally we believe that G-d is the same yesterday, today and forever. He is not a man that He should change or lie.

We are usually not interested in the conversion of Christians as they have a decent understanding of Faith and where they are misguided will be corrected by G-d in his time. (Abrahamic promise).

The other thing a good portion of Christians have correct is G-d is more concerned with our desire to love Him and/or be good than our actual success at being good.

It's like when your wife wants you to want to do the dishes.

Hope that helps.

Thank you.

 

[Orange_Crush]

I understand you and I are going to disagree about whether miracles occur. However, you must agree that with the occurrence of each miracle regarding the same law, the value of said law is diminished. Also, when does a scientist stop attributing any variance in results to an unknown variable and simply stop testing and attribute the variance to a miracle.

I don't think this discussion hinges on our agreement about the possibility of miracles, but instead upon a scientist's attitude about miracles. You seem to think that if miracles are a possibility, then an ability to recognize natural law is diminished. I heartily disagree for many reasons.

The modern scientific process was founded by theists, most of which believed in the possibility of miracles, and yet this theism convinced them that God is a God of order, so we should expect the world to be repeatable.

Further, you seem to be working from the assumption that Christians will attribute "God-did-it" as first impulse to just about anything. You seem to believe that "miracle" will be attributed right out of the gate and the believer will move on with little thought to the matter.

If that's your assertion, it borders on offensive.

You ask when one is to attribute "miracle" in the process? I don't know. Maybe it's kind of like the difference between art and porn. It's hard to describe but you know it when you see it.

I would lean toward "never" in practice, but "maybe" in philosophy. In other words, allow it as a variable, but continue testing for results.

But again... Most believers that I know view miracles as incredibly rare, and that they will be readily apparent. You have to understand that they are also called "signs" and "wonders". They were of the order of dead people coming to life, lifelong lame people walking, etc... Not "hm... that burned blue once, and yellow 10,000 times... Must'a been God!"

Take care, my friend. It's always fun. :hi:

 

[ClearwaterVol]

I don't think this discussion hinges on our agreement about the possibility of miracles, but instead upon a scientist's attitude about miracles. You seem to think that if miracles are a possibility, then an ability to recognize natural law is diminished. I heartily disagree for many reasons.

The modern scientific process was founded by theists, most of which believed in the possibility of miracles, and yet this theism convinced them that God is a God of order, so we should expect the world to be repeatable.

Further, you seem to be working from the assumption that Christians will attribute "God-did-it" as first impulse to just about anything. You seem to believe that "miracle" will be attributed right out of the gate and the believer will move on with little thought to the matter.

If that's your assertion, it borders on offensive.

You ask when one is to attribute "miracle" in the process? I don't know. Maybe it's kind of like the difference between art and porn. It's hard to describe but you know it when you see it.

I would lean toward "never" in practice, but "maybe" in philosophy. In other words, allow it as a variable, but continue testing for results.

But again... Most believers that I know view miracles as incredibly rare, and that they will be readily apparent. You have to understand that they are also called "signs" and "wonders". They were of the order of dead people coming to life, lifelong lame people walking, etc... Not "hm... that burned blue once, and yellow 10,000 times... Must'a been God!"

Take care, my friend. It's always fun. :hi:

That wasn't my assertion. I wasn't speaking about any person of faith, it was simply questioning where the line would be between more testing and giving up.

It's been fun talking with you and Max. I generally learn a great deal when I do. Cheers.

 

[Orange_Crush]

That wasn't my assertion. I wasn't speaking about any person of faith, it was simply questioning where the line would be between more testing and giving up.

It's been fun talking with you and Max. I generally learn a great deal when I do. Cheers.

Likewise my friend.

 

[LouderVol]

How does the entire world flood at once? Or do you believe in a localized flood with the entire world's population occupying a very small geographic area? Or something different?

Also, is there any biblical evidence showing time period
in which this flood occurred?

no real proof, but multiple civilizations around the world have very similar stories from around the same time. The Mesopotamians, Chinese, Aztec/Inca, Norse, Sub-Saharan Africa.

Impossible to know when any of those individual stories arose, or if they were the same event, but it is pretty clear there have been some great floods.

Inca: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unu_Pachakuti

saving two to bring civilization to the rest of the world.

China:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_(China)

was a major flood event in ancient China that allegedly continued for at least two generations, which resulted in great population displacements among other disasters, such as storms and famine.

Finnish, but Norse is similar:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_flood_myth

attempts a heroic feat that results in a gushing wound, the blood from which covers the entire earth. This deluge is not emphasized in the Kalevala version redacted by Elias Lönnrot, but the global quality of the flood is evident in original variants of the rune. In one variant collected in Northern Ostrobothnia in 1803/04, the rune tells:

The blood came forth like a flood
the gore ran like a river:
there was no hummock
and no high mountain
that was not flooded
all from Väinämöinen's toe
from the holy hero's knee.[2]
Matti Kuusi notes in his analysis that the rune's motifs of constructing a boat, a wound, and a flood have parallels with flood myths from around the world.

the world wounded would kick up some water that wasn't clear.

 

[zeppelin128]

no real proof, but multiple civilizations around the world have very similar stories from around the same time. The Mesopotamians, Chinese, Aztec/Inca, Norse, Sub-Saharan Africa.

Impossible to know when any of those individual stories arose, or if they were the same event, but it is pretty clear there have been some great floods.

Inca: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unu_Pachakuti

China:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_(China)

Finnish, but Norse is similar:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_flood_myth the world wounded would kick up some water that wasn't clear.

Flood stories are commonplace in ancient civilizations' mythologies. I think the catastrophic results of floods led to these stories. I guess I am using Occam's Razor; odds are these localized events devastated local communities and regions, which is why they were written about extensively as the "end of the world."

Place Hurricane Katrina victims in a vacuum without a scientific explanation for the devastation of New Orleans, and I am sure many would write about vengeful gods cleansing the Earth.

 

[joevol320]

https://aeon.co/ideas/why-religion-is-not-going-away-and-science-will-not-destroy-it

It has always been my opinion that The creator is a G-d of laws. Commonly referred to as Torah.
It would make sense that the creation would be based on a natural law.
In my opinion when scripture and science don't agree there are one of two problems 1) misinterpreting scripture/ adding things that are not there. Ex: "the world is 7000 years old" or 2) science hasn't progressed to answer the question.

The article seems to suggest that secularism is problem for science. This is a line of thinking I hadn't previously considered.

So who is worse for the progress of science....religion or secularism?

The Bible does compliment science, it's been proven over and over. When they say science, I'm assuming it's evolution. evolution is not science, ironically, it's as much of a religion as is religion. evolutionists have no facts but only faith and assumptions concerning the earth creation.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Flood stories are commonplace in ancient civilizations' mythologies. I think the catastrophic results of floods led to these stories. I guess I am using Occam's Razor; odds are these localized events devastated local communities and regions, which is why they were written about extensively as the "end of the world."

Place Hurricane Katrina victims in a vacuum without a scientific explanation for the devastation of New Orleans, and I am sure many would write about vengeful gods cleansing the Earth.

Fossils of sea creatures have been found on mountain ranges all over the world. Not saying thats conclusive proof of a world wide flood, but it could be.

 

[midnight orange]

The Bible does compliment science, it's been proven over and over. When they say science, I'm assuming it's evolution. evolution is not science, ironically, it's as much of a religion as is religion. evolutionists have no facts but only faith and assumptions concerning the earth creation.

What? Evolution is about as religious as physics. Evolution is based on about a zillion facts and is why it's meets the threshold of a theory.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

What? Evolution is about as religious as physics. Evolution is based on about a zillion facts and is why it's meets the threshold of a theory.

Lol

 

[LouderVol]

Flood stories are commonplace in ancient civilizations' mythologies. I think the catastrophic results of floods led to these stories. I guess I am using Occam's Razor; odds are these localized events devastated local communities and regions, which is why they were written about extensively as the "end of the world."

Place Hurricane Katrina victims in a vacuum without a scientific explanation for the devastation of New Orleans, and I am sure many would write about vengeful gods cleansing the Earth.

there are a few too many coincidences between stories. The Jewish story and the Norse story tell of the world cracking open and water spewing out. Pretty much all of them mention storms for days and being displaced for months if not years. and its not like these stories are just from the perspective of New Orleans, they mention people of distant countries also being displaced by the same event. and each would have been connected enough to have a general feel for the world around them. Did the Jews know the Inca were getting flooded? even if it is the same event, probably not. but they knew Summeria and Mesopotamia were (Iraq).

Did Noah really build an Arc that had two of each animal? no. was there a massive flood and God told Noah and so he built a large boat to prepare for it? Yeah probably. probably had at least two of each farm animal too.

problem is people get too caught up on the fanciful parts of it and reject the whole thing instead of looking at it and seeing pieces that are probable.

 

[Persian Vol]

The Bible does compliment science, it's been proven over and over. When they say science, I'm assuming it's evolution. evolution is not science, ironically, it's as much of a religion as is religion. evolutionists have no facts but only faith and assumptions concerning the earth creation.

I come to these threads just to laugh at posts like these.

 

[UT-Rex]

Will you explain your beliefs as relates to physical laws and the Bible? ie do you believe that God suspended the physical laws when Johah lived 3 days in the belly of a big fish and can He suspend those laws at any time?

1. Josh 10:13, The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day.
2. Matt 27:45, Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.
3. Many other examples.

Per Scripture, of course He can.

The point of the earlier signs, and the point of the signs/miracles of the appointed-Apostles, was so that the Jews/Israelites of Jerusalem (from whence the Gospel first-rang) would believe in Messiah Jesus.

If, per the encouragement of Jesus, they believed (which they did) that Jonah was spit-out to then go on living and preach to Ninevah (which he did), then they should believe that Jesus rose from the grave and is still alive.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

1. Josh 10:13, The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day.
2. Matt 27:45, Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.
3. Many other examples.

Per Scripture, of course He can.

The point of the earlier signs, and the point of the signs/miracles of the appointed-Apostles, was so that the Jews/Israelites of Jerusalem (from whence the Gospel first-rang) would believe in Messiah Jesus.

If, per the encouragement of Jesus, they believed (which they did) that Jonah was spit-out to then go on living and preach to Ninevah (which he did), then they should believe that Jesus rose from the grave and is still alive.

Do you believe in every story told in the bible or are some of them allegory?

 

[zeppelin128]

there are a few too many coincidences between stories. The Jewish story and the Norse story tell of the world cracking open and water spewing out. Pretty much all of them mention storms for days and being displaced for months if not years. and its not like these stories are just from the perspective of New Orleans, they mention people of distant countries also being displaced by the same event. and each would have been connected enough to have a general feel for the world around them. Did the Jews know the Inca were getting flooded? even if it is the same event, probably not. but they knew Summeria and Mesopotamia were (Iraq).

Did Noah really build an Arc that had two of each animal? no. was there a massive flood and God told Noah and so he built a large boat to prepare for it? Yeah probably. probably had at least two of each farm animal too.

problem is people get too caught up on the fanciful parts of it and reject the whole thing instead of looking at it and seeing pieces that are probable.

The stories themselves could be fanciful. There could be an allegorical meaning about floods, saving certain people and certain animals. We are going on the unknown because we are basing both of our arguments off of texts that have been altered hundreds of times and were written by men with a purpose.

 

[zeppelin128]

Fossils of sea creatures have been found on mountain ranges all over the world. Not saying thats conclusive proof of a world wide flood, but it could be.

That is proof of continental drift and plate tectonics.

 

[zeppelin128]

The Bible does compliment science, it's been proven over and over. When they say science, I'm assuming it's evolution. evolution is not science, ironically, it's as much of a religion as is religion. evolutionists have no facts but only faith and assumptions concerning the earth creation.

This is categorically false.

 

[MercyPercy]

That is proof of continental drift and plate tectonics.

Bingo.

 

[Jim]

My son, who is responsible for sending me the article, (joking) says we have 13 years left.
He says that's when AI is projected to be achieved. After that the machines will exterminate us.

So in a way you may both be right.

Did he just watch terminator 3?

 

[Orangeslice13]

Did he just watch terminator 3?

Been reading articles on actual development of AI.

 

[LouderVol]

The stories themselves could be fanciful. There could be an allegorical meaning about floods, saving certain people and certain animals. We are going on the unknown because we are basing both of our arguments off of texts that have been altered hundreds of times and were written by men with a purpose.

I brought up other sources that support the idea of the flood. While it isn't a primary source, finding multiple collaborative stories does more to prove it, imo, than disprove it.