Christianity and science

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 818 times

Christianity and science

Post #1

Post by nobspeople »

Christians don't seem to have any problems believing in the science that created the computer they're typing on. Or phone they use. TV they watch. Yet some don't believe science that thwarts their understanding of, or causes issues with, their religion (evolution, abortion issues, homosexuality, etc).

It seems science is OK so long as it doesn't interfere with their beliefs that come from a book written by long, dead men, edited by other men (all of which were imperfect) about a perfect (many say) being.

For discussion:
Is this distrust of science stemming from the distrust of science itself, lack of faith in science and the flawed men that support said science (ironically they have no issues with the imperfect men that wrote and edited the bible but that's something for another topic), lack of faith in their holy book, or something else entirely (please submit YO on what the 'something else' is)?
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

User avatar
Jose Fly
Sage
Posts: 602
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:30 pm
Location: Out west somewhere
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 371 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #101

Post by Jose Fly »

mgb wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 2:01 pmNo. Faith only means there are things we don't understand fully. Like in science.
I've seen this sort of debate plenty of times before and for the most part it hinges on conflating different types of "faith". There's the "faith" that's born of repetition, independent confirmation, direct observation, etc., such as the "faith" I have that when I flip a light switch a light will come on. And then there's the "faith" that's more akin to belief and hope, such as the "faith" some Christians have that Jesus will return. It's the latter type of religious faith that pastors and Sunday school teachers insisted I needed to have when I would ask them questions they couldn't answer ("You just need to have faith").

The two are not the same and IMO folks should avoid conflating them when discussing/debating faith.
Being apathetic is great....or not. I don't really care.

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 818 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #102

Post by nobspeople »

Purple Knight wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 4:06 pm
nobspeople wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 6:30 am
Purple Knight wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:28 pm
nobspeople wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 2:32 pm I reverse engineer a lot of things on a daily. No where have I said 'Dang! Look at that! A creator!!'
You would if you started from there being a creator.
Being a creator there would be no need to reverse engineer
I'm talking about reverse engineering from the answer and getting the process, then confirming your answer. People who start with evolution tend to confirm evolution. People who start with creator tend to confirm creator.
Ah. Then thiis is simply justification of an already accepted principle, not an honest need for an answer.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

mgb
Guru
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Europe
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #103

Post by mgb »

Jose Fly wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 5:38 pm
mgb wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 2:01 pmNo. Faith only means there are things we don't understand fully. Like in science.
I've seen this sort of debate plenty of times before and for the most part it hinges on conflating different types of "faith". There's the "faith" that's born of repetition, independent confirmation, direct observation, etc., such as the "faith" I have that when I flip a light switch a light will come on. And then there's the "faith" that's more akin to belief and hope, such as the "faith" some Christians have that Jesus will return. It's the latter type of religious faith that pastors and Sunday school teachers insisted I needed to have when I would ask them questions they couldn't answer ("You just need to have faith").

The two are not the same and IMO folks should avoid conflating them when discussing/debating faith.
I don't think it is reasonable to split things up like this. Faith/belief is a whole thing. It exists for many many excellent reasons and if you ask anyone to explain fully why they have faith there will be many reasons. The main point is that belief comes from the conviction that a creator is the best explanation for the world and this conviction has many layers. It is not as simple minded as you make it sound.

User avatar
Jose Fly
Sage
Posts: 602
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:30 pm
Location: Out west somewhere
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 371 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #104

Post by Jose Fly »

mgb wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:12 pmI don't think it is reasonable to split things up like this. Faith/belief is a whole thing.
But not all faiths are equivalent. Like I explained, the type of "faith" one has when flipping a light switch is not the same type that Muslims have in believing that Mohammed visited heaven. If you think they're the same type of faith, perhaps you can explain how.
The main point is that belief comes from the conviction that a creator is the best explanation for the world and this conviction has many layers. It is not as simple minded as you make it sound.
Then you should explain.
Being apathetic is great....or not. I don't really care.

mgb
Guru
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Europe
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #105

Post by mgb »

Jose Fly wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:44 pm But not all faiths are equivalent. Like I explained, the type of "faith" one has when flipping a light switch is not the same type that Muslims have in believing that Mohammed visited heaven.
That's a detail within a faith. I'm talking about people who have a strong faith - many such people have thought deeply on many levels about what it is they believe. From philosophy to science to mysticism to their own experience. They have come to the conclusion that God is the most comprehensive answer to many questions in many areas.
The main point is that belief comes from the conviction that a creator is the best explanation for the world and this conviction has many layers. It is not as simple minded as you make it sound.
Then you should explain.
See above.

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 818 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #106

Post by nobspeople »

mgb wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:01 pm
Jose Fly wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:44 pm But not all faiths are equivalent. Like I explained, the type of "faith" one has when flipping a light switch is not the same type that Muslims have in believing that Mohammed visited heaven.
That's a detail within a faith. I'm talking about people who have a strong faith - many such people have thought deeply on many levels about what it is they believe. From philosophy to science to mysticism to their own experience. They have come to the conclusion that God is the most comprehensive answer to many questions in many areas.
The main point is that belief comes from the conviction that a creator is the best explanation for the world and this conviction has many layers. It is not as simple minded as you make it sound.
Then you should explain.
See above.
What about those with weak faith?
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

mgb
Guru
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Europe
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #107

Post by mgb »

nobspeople wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:25 pm What about those with weak faith?
They should read Dawkins. He has done more to promote faith than the pope. He got ppl talking...

User avatar
Jose Fly
Sage
Posts: 602
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:30 pm
Location: Out west somewhere
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 371 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #108

Post by Jose Fly »

mgb wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:01 pm
Jose Fly wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:44 pm But not all faiths are equivalent. Like I explained, the type of "faith" one has when flipping a light switch is not the same type that Muslims have in believing that Mohammed visited heaven.
That's a detail within a faith. I'm talking about people who have a strong faith - many such people have thought deeply on many levels about what it is they believe. From philosophy to science to mysticism to their own experience. They have come to the conclusion that God is the most comprehensive answer to many questions in many areas.
The main point is that belief comes from the conviction that a creator is the best explanation for the world and this conviction has many layers. It is not as simple minded as you make it sound.
Then you should explain.
See above.
I'm sorry, but that reply makes no sense in the context of what I said.
Being apathetic is great....or not. I don't really care.

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 818 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #109

Post by nobspeople »

mgb wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:40 pm
nobspeople wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:25 pm What about those with weak faith?
They should read Dawkins. He has done more to promote faith than the pope. He got ppl talking...
Who is Dawkins and why is he so good IYO?
And how do these weak faithed people deal with the aspect of science? Are they not able to grasps concepts as well as those with strong faith?
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

mgb
Guru
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Europe
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #110

Post by mgb »

nobspeople wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:51 pm Who is Dawkins and why is he so good IYO?
And how do these weak faithed people deal with the aspect of science? Are they not able to grasps concepts as well as those with strong faith?
Dawkins stirs things up and gets people talking. That's a good thing. Some people are just not science minded. A musician or poet for example might not have a very scientific mind. Nothing wrong with that, but if they see science being used against their faith they may just react. Dawkins should never have set science against religion. He just confused things.

Post Reply