M
MH84
Guest
Well I think its fair to say that most scientists would claim that they don’t need God to figure out creation. They have the tools themselves. Even though they would be wrong.
- Status
M
MementoMori3283
Guest
I would say that the concepts of science and religion are made to be adversarial. However, truth can not be against itself. To make an analogy, Jesus states, “How can Satan drive out Satan?”
M
MH84
Guest
Everyone, I was just reminded that I forgot to say something in the OP. A big point that I should have included was about who is behind the world’s science.
Aren’t you as believers in God suspicious of certain scientists who are often trying to prove that God does not exist by using reason and logic? Why should you (as believers) be open to those who have no intention of serving God with their findings? Hence, arent believers who are embracing science with wide open arms then dancing with the devil (so to speak)? Because we are accepting the findings of scientists (and their opinions) even though they have no intention of acknowledging what we believe.
That’s the essence of this thread. Any thoughts?
J
JimO
Guest
Being a scientist and a devout Catholic, I would have to disagree with this. I could say a lot about this, and I have over the years on various threads. But, let me just offer a couple of thoughts. Science is the study of creation, not the study of the Creator, so it is limited.
If the object of an atheistic scientist’s study (whether a biologist, astrophysicist, chemist, or geologist) was a painting, he would begin examination of the painting under the presumption that there was no painter. He would say that the painting just exists and that it was a product of random chance over millions of years where billions upon billions of events occurred where molecules came together and this happens to be the combination we are observing. He would examine its composition and see that it was made up of particles of pigment that had come together in a pattern that resulted in an image that was both recognizable and appealing to the human eye. As technology advanced, he would analyze it more and more, but nothing he could do would prove that a painter does not exist.
The theistic scientist would look at the same painting under the premise that it was painted by someone. He would go on to do all the same analyses as the other scientist, but none of that would negate the fact that the painting had a painter. Its very presence is evidence enough, so he would go on discovering all he could about the painting scientifically without worrying about proving anything regarding the origin of the painting.
A painting is an expression of the artist. The artist puts part of himself in each of his paintings and each painting tells us something about the artist. People spend their entire careers pondering the mood, the lifestyle, the intelligence, and other characteristics about artists through their art. The art also tells them about themselves. For those who deny the artist’s existence, there is no meaning and no discovery beyond the physical characteristics of the painting.
Science isn’t the problem. An atheistic approach to science is the problem. One should never avoid scientific discovery, but simply reject the bias of those who try to use science to “disprove” God. It will never happen. They will claim that we cannot prove God’s existence either. Scientifically, they’re right. We’re not meant to, but even if we were and could, they would reject it the same way they reject all the other “non-scientific” evidence - historical evidence, human experience, miracles, etc. They are like a blind man demanding that you prove light exists. They have cut themselves off from the faculty that allows them to see.
M
miguel
Guest
All truth is God’s truth. Truth is reality, the way things really are. Authentic truth, whether it’s revealed by God, or discovered by science, or by any other realm of human knowledge is part of the same reality. A test for authenticity is if “truth” from one branch of human knowledge contradicts “truth” from another. It can’t, precisely because God, the source of all truth, can’t contradict himself.
M
miguel
Guest
Exactly.
J
JimO
Guest
Well said.
M
MementoMori3283
Guest
All truth is God’s truth. Truth is reality, the way things really are. Authentic truth, whether it’s revealed by God, or discovered by science, or by any other realm of human knowledge is part of the same reality. A test for authenticity is if “truth” from one branch of human knowledge contradicts “truth” from another. ** It can’t, precisely because God, the source of all truth, can’t contradict himself.******
yes, what I said, with more words
T
tonyl
Guest
What happens when you change the word scientist to the word Carpenter. There exist athiest carptenters. Should you therefore be wary of embracing the buildings, closets, stairs, and furniture of carpenters who have no intent of serving god with their creations?
Science is a method of learning about God’s creation. The fact that there exist athiest scientists does diminish the usefulness of the method; just as the existence of athiest carpenters does not diminish the usefulness of the many products carpenters produce.
M
MH84
Guest
I thought about that. Its good you brought it up. Hmm, maybe the Amish have the right idea?
Seriously though, I guess sometimes God brings out the good from the bad. Then again, what’s so good about people drifting away from God because of their scientific work. Is it better to learn about life on other planets if people will more likely leave Christianity for example? Wasn’t Darwin a theist until he started thinking about the extent of this world?
L
Lilyflower
Guest
There has been few advancements during the past 500-years that do not owe some aspect of their discovery to earlier work done by Jesuits [among others] suggesting science and religion go hand-in-hand.
Science asks the question ‘how’, while Religion asks ‘why’!
Science asks the question ‘how’, while Religion asks ‘why’!
J
JimO
Guest
I’m sorry MH, but I just can’t agree with this concern. As a young man, I must admit that I was concerned that science would some day reveal something that would undermine my faith. But this fear was unfounded. Over the years, having grown in a personal relationship with God (and not relying on reason alone) and having faced the many objections to the faith, I have come to believe that scientific endeavors are inherently good. People can be negatively influenced by anything. Darwin could have just as easily been misled by any other work.
- Status