(Edited on August 7th 2011 for accuracy)
Science and religion are unresolvable differences. The conflict between faith and conditional thinking is irrelevant because both describe reality.
Sciences respond to a felt need to understand the world, and religions respond to a felt need for the world to have meaning. I already understand the world, and now I am learning more about the need to have meaning in life. Everyone wants it. We naturally seek affection.
There are two ways to think about science. You can be a theist, believing that behind the veil of randomness lurks an active, loving, manipulative God, or you can be a materialist, for whom everything is matter and energy interacting within space and time. Whichever metaphysical club you belong to, the science comes out the same.
(The philosophical and religious beliefs of most of the following individuals mentioned below are unknown except Einstein who believed in Spizona's god and Stephen Hawkings who believes in aliens! Some may be taken out of context before I checked the full information. But I'm just making a point about the conflict between the biblical and materialistic or naturalistic thinking. It's irrelevant because both describe reality.)
With all our advancements in technology, Granite is the only rock we cannot make. Granite has polonium in it. Polonium 2-18 has a half-life of about 30 minutes. One kilo of polonium 2-18, and 3 minutes later you have half kilo, and another 3 minutes you have a quarter of polonium, and so on. Polonium 2-18 was encapsulated within 30 minutes of it coming into existence. Therefore, indicating earth could have been created in an hour.
However, polonium can be produced with uranium. How was it that the polonium was there without what was there to create it? We hear scientists saying all to many different things, it's so often difficult who to believe. Try to think of something that doesn't exist. God, where did that come from? Where did these preachers get the idea? God has put His knowledge of His existence into every human being. How can we believe in an ancient book? Maybe we are reading it wrong. Surely with all the popularity on finding the answers, we are bound to come to some answers.
The revere father of evolution,
Charles Darwin wrote Origin of Species and Descent of Man
He is saying man has evolved more intellectually over women. Charles Darwin was even racist, he wants us to believe that black people are not as evolved as whites.
There is a big gap between two transitional versions on species is called the missing link. In the fossil records, there are thousands of bones missing to prove the evolutionary process of a species to the next. For example, the neanderthal man, anthropologists took some bones and put them together to make this man, from finding only a single tooth!
Like a scientist conducts and experiment in his lab. We like to test if the Bible was right or find out when we die. Why do we test God's Word? Why wait till we die to test Him?
Science and religion are unresolvable differences. The conflict between faith and conditional thinking is irrelevant because both describe reality.
Sciences respond to a felt need to understand the world, and religions respond to a felt need for the world to have meaning. I already understand the world, and now I am learning more about the need to have meaning in life. Everyone wants it. We naturally seek affection.
There are two ways to think about science. You can be a theist, believing that behind the veil of randomness lurks an active, loving, manipulative God, or you can be a materialist, for whom everything is matter and energy interacting within space and time. Whichever metaphysical club you belong to, the science comes out the same.
(The philosophical and religious beliefs of most of the following individuals mentioned below are unknown except Einstein who believed in Spizona's god and Stephen Hawkings who believes in aliens! Some may be taken out of context before I checked the full information. But I'm just making a point about the conflict between the biblical and materialistic or naturalistic thinking. It's irrelevant because both describe reality.)
Owen Gingerich said,
"One can believe that some of the evolutionary pathways are so intricate and so complex as to be hopelessly improbable by the rules of random chance, But if you do not believe in divine action, then you will simply have to say that random chance was extremely lucky, because the outcome is there to see. Either way, the scientist with theistic metaphysics will approach laboratory problems in much the same way as his atheistic colleague across the hall."
Albert Einstein said,
"After religious teachers accomplish the refining process indicated, they will surely recognize with joy that true religion has been ennobled and made more profound by scientific knowledge."
"Everyone who is seriously interested in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe—a spirit vastly superior to man, and one in the face of which our modest powers must feel humble."
"I view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views."
Anon said,
"There can never be a conflict between true science and true religion, because they both describe reality."
Peter Atkins said,
"Science is almost totally incompatible with religion."
Mark Friesel said,
"The difference between faith and a conditional reliance on observation of the natural world is profound. It is the unresolvable difference between religion and science."
Charles Darwin said,
"To suppose that the eye could have been formed by natural selection, seems I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."
George Gallup said,
"I could prove God statistically; take the human body alone; the chance that all the functions of the individual would just happen, is a statistical monstrosity."
Sir Isaac Newton said,
"Atheism is so senseless."
Stephen Hawking said,
"It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us."
With all our advancements in technology, Granite is the only rock we cannot make. Granite has polonium in it. Polonium 2-18 has a half-life of about 30 minutes. One kilo of polonium 2-18, and 3 minutes later you have half kilo, and another 3 minutes you have a quarter of polonium, and so on. Polonium 2-18 was encapsulated within 30 minutes of it coming into existence. Therefore, indicating earth could have been created in an hour.
However, polonium can be produced with uranium. How was it that the polonium was there without what was there to create it? We hear scientists saying all to many different things, it's so often difficult who to believe. Try to think of something that doesn't exist. God, where did that come from? Where did these preachers get the idea? God has put His knowledge of His existence into every human being. How can we believe in an ancient book? Maybe we are reading it wrong. Surely with all the popularity on finding the answers, we are bound to come to some answers.
The revere father of evolution,
Charles Darwin wrote Origin of Species and Descent of Man
He wrote,
"The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shown by man attaining to a higher eminence in whatever he takes up than woman can attain, whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands."
He is saying man has evolved more intellectually over women. Charles Darwin was even racist, he wants us to believe that black people are not as evolved as whites.
Sir Arthur Keith the physical anthropologist and physicist said,
"Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation, and that is unthinkable."
There is a big gap between two transitional versions on species is called the missing link. In the fossil records, there are thousands of bones missing to prove the evolutionary process of a species to the next. For example, the neanderthal man, anthropologists took some bones and put them together to make this man, from finding only a single tooth!
Like a scientist conducts and experiment in his lab. We like to test if the Bible was right or find out when we die. Why do we test God's Word? Why wait till we die to test Him?
No comments:
Post a Comment