God is the ultimate scientist and all others are just trying to catch up.
The existence of God is not going to be proven by science! If we could prove God thru science then we will have figured him out and that would make us God. Since there is only one true God and He is a supernatural mystery...well scientist who are trying to 'prove' there is a God are on a road to nowhere, destined to fail.
1 Corinthians 1:19-21 (The Message)
The Message that points to Christ on the Cross seems like sheer silliness to those hellbent on destruction, but for those on the way of salvation it makes perfect sense. This is the way God works, and most powerfully as it turns out. It's written,
I'll turn conventional wisdom on its head,
I'll expose so-called experts as crackpots.
So where can you find someone truly wise, truly educated, truly intelligent in this day and age? Hasn't God exposed it all as pretentious nonsense? Since the world in all its fancy wisdom never had a clue when it came to knowing God, God in his wisdom took delight in using what the world considered dumb—preaching, of all things!—to bring those who trust him into the way of salvation.
If you want to prove there is a God please take off the lab coat. He is not in your computer, under your microscope, or in your math equation that takes up 3 rooms worth of wall space.
Go outside and plant something, watch it grow, don't analyze it to death. See the beauty. Have a child. Make some friends. Go for a walk in the mountains. Get a life. Study this thing us simple folk call FAITH. Stop looking for the cold calculation and find the warm pulse of God in every place you look.
Aimee,
ReplyDeleteScience and religion don't need to be at odds like this... This makes me feel like I'm on the other side of the Berlin wall... It's only human nature to explore our reality. Why condemn that? Why should there be a door we don't open or a rock we can't look under?
I'm also curious, what have you turned on it's head? Who have you exposed? Seriously, I have an open mind, I'd like to know if you can show me that I'm being misled by science.
Why not use your words to bring ideas and people together rather than stacking more bricks on the wall? I'm not trying to be argumentative, just some friendly debate, although I must say that this article feels hostile to anyone who values science.
-Adam
Richard Feynman Quote:
Poets say science takes away from the beauty of the stars — mere globs of gas atoms. Nothing is "mere". I too can see the stars on a desert night, and feel them. But do I see less or more? The vastness of the heavens stretches my imagination — stuck on this carousel my little eye can catch one-million-year-old light. A vast pattern — of which I am a part... What is the pattern or the meaning or the why? It does not do harm to the mystery to know a little more about it. For far more marvelous is the truth than any artists of the past imagined it. Why do the poets of the present not speak of it? What men are poets who can speak of Jupiter if he were a man, but if he is an immense spinning sphere of methane and ammonia must be silent?
And one more Feynman quote:
I have a friend who's an artist, and he sometimes takes a view which I don't agree with. He'll hold up a flower and say, "Look how beautiful it is," and I'll agree. But then he'll say, "I, as an artist, can see how beautiful a flower is. But you, as a scientist, take it all apart and it becomes dull." I think he's kind of nutty. [...] There are all kinds of interesting questions that come from a knowledge of science, which only adds to the excitement and mystery and awe of a flower. It only adds. I don't understand how it subtracts.
"The Atom Bomb", just for an example. Science is no threat to God. However many times men run before they know how to walk. They forget who is God and who is not. 40% of science is knowledge and 60% is man interpretation. Although every scientist for a thousand years will tell you what they know is fact. "The world is flat and that's that". I welcome the challenge of science if the challenge is on equal footing with religion. Religion has respect for Science but many scientist have no respect for religion.
ReplyDeleteWho is Jimbo? If that's uncle Mickey (he's the only James I saw on your friends list) I will be so disappointed. I want some citation on this statement that Religion respects science.
ReplyDeleteHowdy Jimbo,
ReplyDeleteI don't see science as threat to anyone's God either. We agree there. And I agree that mankind often runs before it can walk... just like babies, it's human nature. We learn from our falls and failures, we only get cocky from our achievements. In the case of 'the bomb', we were also fueled by fear, almost all scientists were very against using this technology for war, the politicians made that call (and who could deny helping their country in those times?). Human nature is the flaw you're seeing here, not science (the bible is in agreement here too I think, original sin and all). Science doesn't choose our actions for us, it's our nature which factors in how to use what we discover the most. In agreement with the duality of good/evil, that same bomb is also our ticket away from an oil based world eventually, so it isn't all cut and dry. Yes, it could destroy or save us... but we choose. Just as we always have.
As far as science being 40% knowledge and 60% made up, I have to respectfully disagree. There's no way that this can be more than an opinion. There may be pseudo-science flakes that harm the credibility of true scientists and perpetuate this sort of feeling towards science, but this is just the same as that church in FL burning the Qurans, they do not represent the whole of Christianity. Both religion and science fall victim to flakes and bad ideas, but at it's core science is merely accurately and objectively measuring and observing what we see. On a fundamental level it's an extension of what seeing, hearing and feeling already do.
The thing about science is that it strives for an objective truth that we can all agree on. I say 'strives for' because we will never all agree, but that is the goal - objectivity. Science itself doesn't strive to disprove God or anything else, however that may be some particular individual's agenda. Yes, there are some individuals who pervert the ideas of both science and religion, but they don't represent the establishment.
Science is the struggle for truth in it's most honest form. We believed the earth was flat because, at the time, we had no better way of knowing and all of our advancements thus far seemed to agree with a flat earth. Later, as we traveled further and understood more about our world and the stars we realized we had some things wrong and some people wanted to understand it better. This was, in many ways, an event that proved that we do indeed need science (that is, scientific method of observation and deduction) to help us all find common ground in regards to whats real or not. Without this objective, methodical, repeatable way of looking at things we would still have captians that worry about falling off the edge of the world or maybe politicians banning air travel because they don't know what happens if the plane reaches the edge of the world... That desire to understand what we do not understand is the heart of science, and it is the tenant of science I most admire; the ability to admit we had it wrong and, once better understood, we can simply update our knowledge base now that our observation and technology allow us a more accurate picture of reality.
[continued...]
[...continued]
ReplyDeleteI would hate to live in a world where I could never admit I was wrong about something and could not change my beliefs if I learned something new. That world would not progress and you would not have the freedoms you have as an American, for example, if we couldn't change our beliefs. (I am assuming your an America, apologies if I'm wrong).
I'm just saying that science isn't out to get religion... it doesn't replace faith because there will always be things we don't know for certain. It's just out to show us what, in our world, we can understand with repeatability and certainty and that, if we choose, any one of us can repeat the experiments and see for ourselves. It's about openness of information and honesty, and if that means letting go of something we once believed then maybe it's for the best.
There are plenty of scientists looking to PROVE god exists via science. But most don't seem to care about religion either way in regards to their work (some even go to church on Sunday). They just want to explore and find new things, the way we've always progressed as humans. Sometimes what we find is used for evil, sometiems for good... but that comes down to the human that decided to use it that way. And that's more the realm of religion than science. To fear what people do with discoveries of science is to fear human nature itself, and that's fine, we probably should fear it. But be sure, it isn't science that's to blame, it's ourselves. It's impossible to control everyone, and if your worried about how people use technology for in a free and open society just imagine if only outlaws could partake in science...
I just don't think the two topics need to be so oppositional, there's room enough for us to all find common ground and understand each other better. We're comparing apples to oranges... or rather, trying to disprove apples with oranges.
-Adam
Wow a lot to digest ShipiboConibo and I will read this again soon and respond. (short on time) I see several things I would like to respond to but responding to part without the whole would be an injustice to your post. I see logical and illogical statements in your post. Can't wait to get back here. Thanks
ReplyDeleteSounds good Jimbo, I do get long winded, haha, but it's all in good spirited debate. I just like to reach common ground with people where possible, I think it's impossible and silly to try and prove who's right or wrong, we'll never all agree, but new common ground is progress for everyone.
ReplyDeleteMy blog isn't going to turn anyone on their ear Adam. It's just my opinion that Science cannot find God.
ReplyDeleteO.K. I am back. Missing the old Lap Top. Setting at a desk and not moving around kills me. It is good for my beat up foot however. As I read you post again I believe it is an excellent post well thought out. I believe that we do agree on many things however we are talking apples and oranges here. You refer to science in its purist from, which I will explain is so very hard to find. Worthy of good debate. In that spirit, I will first address your statement that "almost all scientist were very against using this technology for war" referring to the "bomb". That is speculative at best since their were no polls done on the issue at the time, that I could find recorded. I do believe that many truly did not want this force to be use for destruction, however, many scientist around the world were working towards this goal. German scientist sought to use any science to advance their cause of a superior race.
ReplyDeleteJust one correction, I did not say that 60% of science was "made up". I believe I said that 60% of science was man interpretation. This is straight from Darwin. Most honest scientist will agree that we have to interpret the results of any experiment with only the knowledge that we currently possess. Sorry if I didn't make that clear in my first post.
You said that both religion and science fall victim to flakes and bad ideas. I did not here about the Qurans being burned in Florida.. I am not surprise as fear begets prejudice(from where did the fear come). We can talk Islam and Christianity at a later time.
So far we agree, however then you say " But at it's core science is merely accurately and objectively measuring and observing what we see". Here lies the problem, because man is flawed and is so by nature, the very thought of a perfect science coming from flawed man is hard to imagine. Science could be a force for good. At first I believe it was a quest for knowledge that religion had been suppressing. Then over time it changed and today it's the science that repressed the religion. First you say that science is not out to get religion. I wish this were true but I have seen the opposite in my nearly half a century of life. Lets go back to Darwin. He spent his life trying to teach a theory as fact. He was atheist and started all of his experiment with the presumption that their was no God. He was out to prove that their was no Divine Being and that man was not divine.
You said "That desire to understand what we do not understand is the heart of science, and it is the tenant of science I most admire; the ability to admit we had it wrong and, once better understood, we can simply update our knowledge base now that our observation and technology allow us a more accurate picture of reality." however,at the end of his life, Darwin himself turned against his own teachings and declared their must be a divine plan,and he said much more. His theories are taught as fact in schools everywhere still today even though they are misleading. Where is the honesty in science here. You never hear about these teaching because the new religion of science was so powerful and their was no turning back. The anti-god power had been obtained. Global warming is another example of scientist and politicians joining together to promote a false science for gain. Again how will you get pure science from flawed men. You said that science thought the world was flat and that only through new research was the world proven to be round. I suggest you look at many of the ancient religions around the world and you will see that this was not the case for them. Science is limited to what we know or think we know, Religion only limits itself when it doesn't listen to God. God knows all. ( and I will confound the learned, and they will say there is no God ).In science you say that we can find common ground in regards to what is real or not. I would never put my faith in mans science as it has changed more that the weather here in the rocky mountains. God knows science well. But in order to understand all you must first come to know God for he is the creature of all. Then you will see that science can gain a better understanding of all things within our limited ability. Science cannot prove God, God can withstand and confound science.
ReplyDelete"I would hate to live in a world where I could never admit I was wrong about something and could not change my beliefs if I learned something new. That world would not progress,"
This is true and here we do agree. I believe in continued revelation from God. He is alive not dead. But this I can assure you.God has been a constant stable force in my life, science has not. I drifted from God at my own peril. I loved science growing up but have seen it weakness over and over again. To believe in science only is to be tossed to and fro by the false teachings of men, to believe in God is to find Eternal Salvation.
"I just don't think the two topics need to be so oppositional, there's room enough for us to all find common ground and understand each other better."
Well said, My equation is simply GF+S=TK
God first + science equals true knowledge. I am not an enemy of science when applied correctly.
Looking forward to your reply. A healthy debate is fun however time consuming. Early mornings work best for me.
Jimbo
On the issue of my Lap Top. The science of the internet and computers has failed me. I am so glad that the truth of prayer has not. lol:-)
ReplyDeleteJimbo, thanks for writing back! Interesting points, and it goes to show that it can be fun and exciting to talk/debate ideas, even if we go at it from completely different angles. Just like you, I want to take the time to form a worthy response! Hopefully I'll get to write back this evening, but I have band practice tonight so I might not make it back until tomorrow.
ReplyDelete-Adam
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, i'm sorry I misinterpreted your 40%/60%! And Aimee... I'm sorry, I'll try to not post on your blog anymore, I promise! :)
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJimbo... this blog is going nuts, I posted my response in 4 parts, the two disappeared... so I deleted and reposted them again... now they were deleted again. At first I thought Aimee was out to get me but it seems like a website glitch or something... I'll try again later.
ReplyDeleteI just posted my response on my own blog here, It's on a site of mine but I had never actually went live with this blog, so I don't think it matters that I have chunk of a random conversation there, haha.
ReplyDeletehttp://adamgaskins.com/blog/?p=21
Hey Adam I'm not removing anything...I'm not sure what's happening. You're always welcome here.
ReplyDeleteI have read Adam's response. I will respond soon. I will post the response here if that is O.K. Please join in the conversation. :-)
ReplyDeleteSorry I haven't responded yet, life. As soon as I get a chance. If I can just get 15 minutes of peace and quite.
ReplyDeleteSorry for the cut and pace style of debating but in the interest of time and clarity of thought ( shooting from the hip so to speak) I decided on this format.
ReplyDeleteScience can’t touch spirituality, but it in no way means that scientists can’t experience the same wonders and mysteries that the religiously devout can. I’d also say that anyone trying to disprove science with religion is missing the same point too.
As Aimee basically has said, if you are trying to find God through science, it will not happen. God confounds the knowledge and wisdom of even the greatest scientist. Science is of it self a tool for though and knowledge, as you have said it is not a replacement for God. As I have said I don’t have anything against scientist. Even one of the top leaders of my church is a scientist by trade. Not sure what you mean by the same wonders and mysteries that religiously devout can experience. If you believe in a God, then you know that some day science and God will come together. As time goes by science does move to prove the existence of God than disprove. But no man through all of his science and knowledge will ever replace him. To have all of the knowledge a man can acquire and to deny his son Jesus Christ is not worth a dime. The word Dam means to stop progress, my favorite joke is what did the fish say when he ran into the concrete and still. To be damned is to stop your forward progress. As the Bible states to deny Christ is to be damned. You cannot go further. This is only one stage of our existence. It is O.K. to want to use science to gain knowledge. But one of my favorite books is call “To be learned is good, if”. Science cannot replace God. So I agree with your statement below.
I would say that any scientist that is devoted to disproving religion is a quack and not a real scientist.
It seems like we can believe what ever we want and still present it in a way that doesn’t put us at odds with others if we try hard enough and keep egos in check.
Ok. This is a tough one. I have found that people have a hard time keeping their egos in check for two reasons. One, they feel that the person they are talking to is not listening or two, that the person they are talking two is somehow attacking them. Many people know how they feel inside and even know why they feel that way; however they have a difficult time putting it into words. This makes them feel uncomfortable. In a good conversation we must not take offense and at the same time not purposely give offense. The biggest mistake that some protestant religions make is that they feel they have to save everyone, when in fact we are only told to warn our neighbors and share with them how we feel. No one has the right to force someone to believe what they believe. I do believe that the motives are right (Love, Salivations) but it is up to the individual to decided for him or herself what they hold to be true.
the thing with scientists is that they are not required to believe anything science says, in fact a big part of science is about scientists making discoveries that disprove old discoveries.
ReplyDeleteThis is true, in fact it is harder to get two scientist to agree that it is to get a Catholic and a Baptist to agree, lol
Nazi scientists can’t seriously be used to represent the ideologies of science as a whole anymore than the catholic preists who do bad things to little boys can be said to represent religion.
First I do believe that the Catholic priest you refer to does show a failure in the catholic religion. I do not believe in a system that states that man should not marry. Marriage is the foundation of society and is ordained of God. Nazi scientist would were not used to represent science as a whole but in response to the false statement of religion always being used for good. I believe the state about the Nazi’s was a proper response in that instance don’t you?
Man doesn’t even know why he is here, inherently
Oh yes man does know. If there is a God and I testify that there is, then he would be very powerful. Be so powerful would he remain out of site to us like in” Star trek the prime directive”? No he would not. We are not simply something that came about, we are a divine creation and he does love us. He has spoken to us through is Prophets, Preachers and most importantly through his Son. I do know where I came from, why I am here and where I am going. I know who I am. Darwin is very aware of this by now. Darwin’s theories are so outdated that they are a bore to discuss. Even if he didn’t have a so called death bed confession, his missing link theory he did put in doubt and science has discredited it today except for those who see Darwin as their alternative to God.
I posted this same reply to Adams blog but as of today it has been removed. I didn't think it was offensive or at least it wasn't meant to be.
ReplyDeleteJimbo, Wordpress makes me approve messages that are long, apparently. It's up there. I'll reply back to you as soon as I can.
ReplyDeleteGot it, you had me worried that I had offended you.
ReplyDeleteJimbo,
ReplyDeleteSorry for my taking forever on the reply, but I've been working ridiculous hours lately. It's been nagging in my mind to reply to you but I've just now gotten the time to do it. I posted it on the same site as before, here's the link (and I wanted it here too since the conversation started here). http://adamgaskins.com/blog/?p=24