Should science be secular?

[colmcille1]

Whoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo…
King Troll has reported me for trolling!!!:

 

[Moonstruck888]

Moonstruck

*What possible reason can you have to believe in anything that gives no indication of any kind that it exists? *

It gives no indication you will accept. For billions God gives plenty of indication. But they find these indications where you refuse to find them … in the human heart.

“The heart has its reasons of which reason knows nothing.” Blaise Pascal

The heart is for circulating the blood, not for contemplating questions of metaphysics. People who feel God with their heart or rationalise him into existence with their gut are not thinking critically. Like Pinocheo, they think their delusions are real.

 

[Moonstruck888]

Whoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo…
King Troll has reported me for trolling!!!:

Nope. I might say things that are disagreeable to some people, but they are always linked to the theme of the thread.

 

[d_erford]

Again, same problem. Our soul cannot be detected and leaves no trace of it’s existence…

I agree, which is why I made the point about not ‘playing the game’ You feel I am delusional or ‘brain-washed’ because I do not rely solely on my five physical senses, and I feel you have limited your ability to truly understand reality. I know I cannot convince you of what I am talking about because it is something gained through experience, something I cannot share with you. Even physical proof I would bring up (slowly or non-corrupting bodies, bleeding statues, unexplainable medical miracles, etc.) would be denied because you feel THERE HAS TO BE A PHYSICAL EXPLANATION (I did that for emphasis, not to yell; if there is a different way to do that, please let me know ). In other words, while I am happy to answer questions, you give me an impossible task because you are not willing to ‘see’, ‘hear’, etc what I can.

 

[d_erford]

Could you please define “spiritual senses”? I have never heard that term before, and I do not know to what you are referring. What, precisely, is a “spiritual sense”?

I will first apologize because I know I will not do justice to the topic. I suggest looking up other sources for a more formed explanation. Basically, they are senses analogous to our physical senses. For example, we ‘see’ Christ in the Eucharist and others, we ‘hear’ God in our prayers, and so on. My experiences of God, in addition to the physical events believers refer to as miracles, are through these spiritual senses. I used to have a book that discussed them, but I’m afraid I lost it in my recent move I know you probably have a ton of questions about them, but I hope this at least gives an inkling of what I am referring to.

 

[Moonstruck888]

I agree, which is why I made the point about not ‘playing the game’ You feel I am delusional or ‘brain-washed’ because I do not rely solely on my five physical senses, and I feel you have limited your ability to truly understand reality. I know I cannot convince you of what I am talking about because it is something gained through experience, something I cannot share with you. Even physical proof I would bring up (slowly or non-corrupting bodies, bleeding statues, unexplainable medical miracles, etc.) would be denied because you feel THERE HAS TO BE A PHYSICAL EXPLANATION (I did that for emphasis, not to yell; if there is a different way to do that, please let me know ). In other words, while I am happy to answer questions, you give me an impossible task because you are not willing to ‘see’, ‘hear’, etc what I can.

It’s not that I’m not willing to see it, I simply don’t see it… I never will. Over the years I have become more and more skeptical, not the other way round.

 

[d_erford]

It’s not that I’m not willing to see it, I simply don’t see it… I never will. Over the years I have become more and more skeptical, not the other way round.

By coming to the conclusion that you will never see it, you have already closed your mind to the possibility, meaning you are not willing to see it even if it does exist. If you told me that the moon exists, but I told you I am so certain that it does not that I am not even going to look into the sky, or if I looked into the sky and decided the glowing orb was simply a mirage or a distant painting, your view would be that I am not willing to see the moon for what it is, but mine would be that the moon as you describe it does not actually exist. So I understand this is a problem of perspective as well. I do ask, though, how willing are you to at least look up to the sky? To pray constantly and in good faith? If you are not willing to try, then you are not willing to see it. If you are willing to try, then I leave it to the grace of God to help guide you.

 

[seekerz]

To the OP, I think the scientific process should neither favor nor oppose religion otherwise it would lose its objectivity. However, this opinion does not apply to the scientists themselves or to the application of scientific findings or discoveries. Without a religious frame of reference, scientific ethics would be barren to the point of being meaningless.

My pet theory is that if we only allowed it to, without any undue influence whatsoever, science (and scientific discoveries) would lead us to a greater appreciation of God and His works - NOT the other way around.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

*My pet theory is that if we only allowed it to, without any undue influence whatsoever, science (and scientific discoveries) would lead us to a greater appreciation of God and His works - NOT the other way around. *

Your pet theory is shared with you by Pope Pius XII who was pope at the time the Big Bang theory was getting popular.

“True science to an ever-increasing degree discovers God as though God were waiting behind each closed door opened by science.” Pope Pius XII

 

[larkin31]

I will first apologize because I know I will not do justice to the topic. I suggest looking up other sources for a more formed explanation. Basically, they are senses analogous to our physical senses. For example, we ‘see’ Christ in the Eucharist and others, we ‘hear’ God in our prayers, and so on. My experiences of God, in addition to the physical events believers refer to as miracles, are through these spiritual senses. I used to have a book that discussed them, but I’m afraid I lost it in my recent move I know you probably have a ton of questions about them, but I hope this at least gives an inkling of what I am referring to.

What are “analogous senses”? I have never heard of this term, either. Who asserts that these exist?

 

[larkin31]

d_rford, is this what you mean?

TASTE: When we invite others to try a new food, we’ll perhaps say something like: “Taste it, you’ll like it.” Or with kids, I have used this statement: “Just taste it. You’ll never know if you like it or not until you try it.” The Psalmist also uses this same approach for our sense of spiritual taste. “Taste and see that the Lord is good. How happy is the man who takes refuge in Him.” (Psalm 34:8 HCSB) In other words, try and experience His goodness. You will never know until you try it. I know of no one who has experienced a “bad taste in their mouth” by “tasting” the Lord’s goodness and His faithfulness. There is nothing we lack when He is our Shepherd. (Psalm 23:1)

 

[Michael_Francis]

Closed pending Moderator review by Rachel Malloy.