Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2020 4:36:31 GMT
Why or why not?
I think they can be compatible since they both exist independently and can give different perspectives that don’t need to conflict with each other. Science and religion are different but both can help someone gain more insight on many certain aspects in life.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Sept 2, 2020 4:58:31 GMT
Depends on the religion, depends on how much you trust the scientific consensus and how literal you take the Bible etc.
In general my answer is no. If you believe the scientific consensus then a bunch of mental gymnastics have to be done to keep hold to your religious beliefs imo. If you don't trust the scientific consensus/method then I would say they obviously aren't compatible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2020 5:07:12 GMT
Depends on the religion, depends on how much you trust the scientific consensus and how literal you take the Bible etc. In general my answer is no. If you believe the scientific consensus then a bunch of mental gymnastics have to be done to keep hold to your religious beliefs imo. If you don't trust the scientific consensus/method then I would say they obviously aren't compatible. I agree it depends on what religion or what beliefs you have are. I think the easiest way to see them as compatible is believing and accepting scientific theories but also believing that God is the cause of all of them. For example, believing in evolution theory but believing it exists because God meant for it to happen that way. |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Sept 2, 2020 5:11:48 GMT
Depends on the religion, depends on how much you trust the scientific consensus and how literal you take the Bible etc. In general my answer is no. If you believe the scientific consensus then a bunch of mental gymnastics have to be done to keep hold to your religious beliefs imo. If you don't trust the scientific consensus/method then I would say they obviously aren't compatible. I agree it depends on what religion or what beliefs you have are. I think the easiest way to see them as compatible is believing and accepting scientific theories but also believing that God is the cause of all of them. For example, believing in evolution theory but believing it exists because God meant for it to happen that way. That isn't religion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2020 5:15:46 GMT
I agree it depends on what religion or what beliefs you have are. I think the easiest way to see them as compatible is believing and accepting scientific theories but also believing that God is the cause of all of them. For example, believing in evolution theory but believing it exists because God meant for it to happen that way. That isn't religion. Some Christians believe this since it doesn’t contradict their religious beliefs. |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Sept 2, 2020 5:28:49 GMT
Some Christians believe this since it doesn’t contradict their religious beliefs. You implied that belief in a deist god doesn't contradict science and partly agree. Christians are not deists though. Maybe I misunderstood what you meant. EDIT - I think you are just coming back to what I said about liberal Christians changing the rules of their religion once they accept evolutionary theory. That is mental gymnastics and isn't at all compatible with what their bible says imo.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 2, 2020 7:50:29 GMT
Why or why not? I think they can be compatible since they both exist independently and can give different perspectives that don’t need to conflict with each other. Science and religion are different but both can help someone gain more insight on many certain aspects in life. An illustration I often use is the one involving deciding on what to build. If everyone agrees they want a bird feeder, science can help. Science can even help attract a bird to control some insect problem. If people cannot decide whether to get a bird feeder, a lawn sprinkler, or a badminton court then science is basically useless. Science can be good at predicting what lifeless nature is going to do next. When living things get involved and start making choices science fails to predict what will happen and utterly fails to manage choices. Evolution is in the Bible because people were breeding plants and animals centuries before the Bible was written. In Genesis 30:31 to 31:13 there is the story of Jacob tending Laban's flocks and modifying the gene pool. The Bible has a "linear" progression of living things, for example fish before land animals, that not all ancient people understood. So the Bible is compatible with science in those ways. People who believe religion defies the scientific method have rather obviously not read more than a page or two of the Bible. So called "fixity of species" is not in there. They are also, despite their fondness for science, stunningly incapable of it themselves. Science ceteris paribus can make very certain predictions about the "natural" world, but extremely few predictions. Quite many of the predictions many atheists expect from science are not science at all. Statistical analysis can have widely varying confidence levels and where living things are involved (again) the multitude and magnitude of unknown variables defies science, religion does not.
|
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Sept 2, 2020 11:07:34 GMT
Evolution is in the Bible because people were breeding plants and animals centuries before the Bible was written. In Genesis 30:31 to 31:13 there is the story of Jacob tending Laban's flocks and modifying the gene pool. The Bible has a "linear" progression of living things, for example fish before land animals, that not all ancient people understood. That is not evolution. Not even remotely close. No one who possessed a biology 101 understanding of the subject would even think of suggesting there is a "linear progression of living things".
Your complete ignorance is once again confirmed.
People who write stupid sentences like that don't have a clue what the scientific method is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2020 11:27:51 GMT
Some Christians believe this since it doesn’t contradict their religious beliefs. You implied that belief in a deist god doesn't contradict science and partly agree. Christians are not deists though. Maybe I misunderstood what you meant. EDIT - I think you are just coming back to what I said about liberal Christians changing the rules of their religion once they accept evolutionary theory. That is mental gymnastics and isn't at all compatible with what their bible says imo. Christians can believe in evolution without contradiction as long as they believe only the body evolves and not their actual soul, which is what makes them unique from any other creation. It is the soul that goes to heaven and not the actual physical body that’s left behind. |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 2, 2020 11:37:18 GMT
Evolution is in the Bible because people were breeding plants and animals centuries before the Bible was written. In Genesis 30:31 to 31:13 there is the story of Jacob tending Laban's flocks and modifying the gene pool. The Bible has a "linear" progression of living things, for example fish before land animals, that not all ancient people understood. That is not evolution. Not even remotely close. No one who possessed a biology 101 understanding of the subject would even think of suggesting there is a "linear progression of living things".
Your complete ignorance is once again confirmed.
People who write stupid sentences like that don't have a clue what the scientific method is.
D'Nile isn't just a river in Egypt.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Sept 2, 2020 12:20:07 GMT
You implied that belief in a deist god doesn't contradict science and partly agree. Christians are not deists though. Maybe I misunderstood what you meant. EDIT - I think you are just coming back to what I said about liberal Christians changing the rules of their religion once they accept evolutionary theory. That is mental gymnastics and isn't at all compatible with what their bible says imo. Christians can believe in evolution without contradiction as long as they believe only the body evolves and not their actual soul, which is what makes them unique from any other creation. It is the soul that goes to heaven and not the actual physical body that’s left behind. So Adam and Eve are just "souls" according to the Bible now? Even though Eve is made of Adam's rib? You really need to reach to make the 7 day genesis story and Adam and Eve match with the science. They do it, but it is bending over backwards. It is one of the many things that raises a lot of funny questions, such as "once animals evolved to the point where some became human, did God insert souls into them?" That is not me asking you a question btw. You do realize that the science says that we evolved from animals right? Therefor according to you God had to insert a soul into the first human beings and there clearly wasn't a first 2 if you believe evolutionary theory. The bible also says that plants came before the sun and we know that isn't true. Don't even get me started on the flood and Noah's ark.
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Sept 2, 2020 12:31:03 GMT
Anytime someone tries to combine the two it typically results in psuedoscience (intelligent design, astrology, New Age Medicine), so no. Whatever your religious beliefs are these should always remain completeley seperate from science. Even devoutly religious scientists like George Lemaitre knew this (he was a Catholic priest who discovered the Big Bang Theory without inserting "God done did it" anywhere in his scientific formulas).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2020 12:52:35 GMT
Christians can believe in evolution without contradiction as long as they believe only the body evolves and not their actual soul, which is what makes them unique from any other creation. It is the soul that goes to heaven and not the actual physical body that’s left behind. So Adam and Eve are just "souls" according to the Bible now? Even though Eve is made of Adam's rib? You really need to reach to make the 7 day genesis story and Adam and Eve match with the science. They do it, but it is bending over backwards. It is one of the many things that raises a lot of funny questions, such as "once animals evolved to the point where some became human, did God insert souls into them?" That is not me asking you a question btw. You do realize that the science says that we evolved from animals right? Therefor according to you God had to insert a soul into the first human beings and there clearly wasn't a first 2 if you believe evolutionary theory. The bible also says that plants came before the sun and we know that isn't true. Don't even get me started on the flood and Noah's ark. The creation story and the Adam and Eve story is very open to interpretation as well as the flood story, but the belief in the soul is what makes us unique from anyone else and our bodies are irrelevant. Evolution exists in the natural world and our souls exist in the spiritual world. As a Christian you don’t necessarily have to believe everything in the bible as literal and most don’t. Some can be seen as only figurative, especially in genesis. The only time science and Christian beliefs would contradict is if they believe in the literal interpretation of those stories. That is very extremist in my opinion and doesn’t represent majority of Christians that at least I’ve known. In that case it wouldn’t be Christianity itself that contradicts science but specific beliefs that some Christians have that contradict it, and not all Christians believe in the same things. |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Sept 2, 2020 13:10:36 GMT
So Adam and Eve are just "souls" according to the Bible now? Even though Eve is made of Adam's rib? You really need to reach to make the 7 day genesis story and Adam and Eve match with the science. They do it, but it is bending over backwards. It is one of the many things that raises a lot of funny questions, such as "once animals evolved to the point where some became human, did God insert souls into them?" That is not me asking you a question btw. You do realize that the science says that we evolved from animals right? Therefor according to you God had to insert a soul into the first human beings and there clearly wasn't a first 2 if you believe evolutionary theory. The bible also says that plants came before the sun and we know that isn't true. Don't even get me started on the flood and Noah's ark. The creation story and the Adam and Eve story is very open to interpretation as well as the flood story, but the belief in the soul is what makes us unique from anyone else and our bodies are irrelevant. Evolution exists in the natural world and our souls exist in the spiritual world. As a Christian you don’t necessarily have to believe everything in the bible as literal and most don’t. Some can be seen as only figurative, especially in genesis. The only time science and Christian beliefs would contradict is if they believe in the literal interpretation of those stories. That is very extremist in my opinion and doesn’t represent majority of Christians that at least I’ve known. In that case it wouldn’t be Christianity itself that contradicts science but specific beliefs that some Christians have that contradict it, and not all Christians believe in the same things. That is my point. You have to turn it into not literal in order for it to work. If it isn't literal then much of it falls apart. The story was seen as literal for a very long time and then science came along and Christians had to change their outlook. Once that happens it becomes even more of a joke. It is then changing the story any time it conflicts with science and at that point why are you even believing it anymore? Science and the soul are not compatible either imo. All the evidence points to there not being a soul. If people are just referring to the soul as the "essence" of a person, then the afterlife is no longer what Christians seem to hope for. Like okay, your essence goes to Heaven. What does that even mean? The soul has no personality anymore, since we know the personality is formed by the physical brain. We know what parts of the brain are responsible for memory and empathy etc., because when certain parts of the brain are damaged a person can lose their memories, not able to make new memories and so on. So what is the soul according to you?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2020 13:29:20 GMT
The creation story and the Adam and Eve story is very open to interpretation as well as the flood story, but the belief in the soul is what makes us unique from anyone else and our bodies are irrelevant. Evolution exists in the natural world and our souls exist in the spiritual world. As a Christian you don’t necessarily have to believe everything in the bible as literal and most don’t. Some can be seen as only figurative, especially in genesis. The only time science and Christian beliefs would contradict is if they believe in the literal interpretation of those stories. That is very extremist in my opinion and doesn’t represent majority of Christians that at least I’ve known. In that case it wouldn’t be Christianity itself that contradicts science but specific beliefs that some Christians have that contradict it, and not all Christians believe in the same things. That is my point. You have to turn it into not literal in order for it to work. If it isn't literal then much of it falls apart. The story was seen as literal for a very long time and then science came along and Christians had to change their outlook. Once that happens it becomes even more of a joke. It is then changing the story any time it conflicts with science and at that point why are you even believing it anymore? Science and the soul are not compatible either imo. All the evidence points to there not being a soul. If people are just referring to the soul as the "essence" of a person, then the afterlife is no longer what Christians seem to hope for. Like okay, your essence goes to Heaven. What does that even mean? The soul has no personality anymore, since we know the personality is formed by the physical brain. We know what parts of the brain are responsible for memory and empathy etc. I think heaven is a spiritual experience and much different than what we are used to here in a material world. The soul is really just a spiritual concept and one can believe in it and not conflict with science since it’s outside of science. I think just because they are separate and different it doesn’t mean they are incompatible. A spiritual belief and religious belief are not evidence based where science is so it shouldn’t be looked at the same. They are two different fields that serve a different purpose of looking at the world. I think an idea of the soul is just our form of personal energy we give off in the world and what distinguishes us from each other. I don’t necessarily believe in a God that created it for the purpose of going to heaven like religious believes |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Sept 2, 2020 13:32:04 GMT
That is my point. You have to turn it into not literal in order for it to work. If it isn't literal then much of it falls apart. The story was seen as literal for a very long time and then science came along and Christians had to change their outlook. Once that happens it becomes even more of a joke. It is then changing the story any time it conflicts with science and at that point why are you even believing it anymore? Science and the soul are not compatible either imo. All the evidence points to there not being a soul. If people are just referring to the soul as the "essence" of a person, then the afterlife is no longer what Christians seem to hope for. Like okay, your essence goes to Heaven. What does that even mean? The soul has no personality anymore, since we know the personality is formed by the physical brain. We know what parts of the brain are responsible for memory and empathy etc. I think heaven is a spiritual experience and much different than what we are used to here in a material world. The soul is really just a spiritual concept and one can believe in it and not conflict with science since it’s outside of science. I think just because they are separate and different it doesn’t mean they are incompatible. A spiritual belief and religious belief are not evidence based where science is so it shouldn’t be looked at the same. They are two different fields that serve a different purpose of looking at the world. And that is irrational thinking as far as I'm concerned. You didn't even answer the question, you just said the soul is a spiritual experience. What does that even mean? Let me be clear. I am aware that the soul is a spiritual concept and if you are saying all it is is a concept then of course it doesn't contradict science. Concepts are produced by the brain. Maybe religious people need to be more clear as what they mean rather than just throwing around vague concepts and acting as if they tie to anything that actually exists. Yes, concepts exist, but they exist as a product of the brain. I normally wouldn't harp on this stuff, but you asked the question.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2020 13:52:59 GMT
I think heaven is a spiritual experience and much different than what we are used to here in a material world. The soul is really just a spiritual concept and one can believe in it and not conflict with science since it’s outside of science. I think just because they are separate and different it doesn’t mean they are incompatible. A spiritual belief and religious belief are not evidence based where science is so it shouldn’t be looked at the same. They are two different fields that serve a different purpose of looking at the world. And that is irrational thinking as far as I'm concerned. I think spiritual and religious belief can motivate a person into wanting to understand the world around us more including science. Our belief that we have a sense of purpose and meaning in life is mainly what inspires us to learn more about anything in general and that’s not scientific. Science is only one aspect of life and human experience. Religious beliefs can help out with personal meaning and experience while still accepting scientific theories at the same. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2020 14:03:33 GMT
I think heaven is a spiritual experience and much different than what we are used to here in a material world. The soul is really just a spiritual concept and one can believe in it and not conflict with science since it’s outside of science. I think just because they are separate and different it doesn’t mean they are incompatible. A spiritual belief and religious belief are not evidence based where science is so it shouldn’t be looked at the same. They are two different fields that serve a different purpose of looking at the world. And that is irrational thinking as far as I'm concerned. You didn't even answer the question, you just said the soul is a spiritual experience. What does that even mean? Let me be clear. I am aware that the soul is a spiritual concept and if you are saying all it is is a concept then of course it doesn't contradict science. Concepts are produced by the brain. Maybe religious people need to be more clear as what they mean rather than just throwing around vague concepts and acting as if they tie to anything that actually exists. Yes, concepts exist, but they exist as a product of the brain. I normally wouldn't harp on this stuff, but you asked the question. Spiritual concepts and scientific concepts are different and aren’t explained in the same way. Science is evidence based but spirituality is not, making it abstract and completely subjective. All of our brains work different too that can’t be fully explained by science. Specific concepts don’t need to make sense to everyone in order to be seen as real to an individual. Spirituality varies in meaning depending on the person since it is a personal experience. Science exists on its own regardless of that. You can’t ask a scientific concept about a spiritual concept since they are separate. so really my main point is that two things being separate or different doesn’t necessarily make them incompatible. |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Sept 2, 2020 14:03:49 GMT
And that is irrational thinking as far as I'm concerned. I think spiritual and religious belief can motivate a person into wanting to understand the world around us more including science. Our belief that we have a sense of purpose and meaning in life is mainly what inspires us to learn more about anything in general and that’s not scientific. Science is only one aspect of life and human experience. Religious beliefs can help out with personal meaning and experience while still accepting scientific theories at the same. Yes, then you are talking about abstract ideas not actual things that exist. Religious beliefs do more harm than good imo. Personal spirituality is not religion. Religions are belief systems with rules and vague unsupported claims and that helps us understand nothing.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Sept 2, 2020 14:07:26 GMT
And that is irrational thinking as far as I'm concerned. You didn't even answer the question, you just said the soul is a spiritual experience. What does that even mean? Let me be clear. I am aware that the soul is a spiritual concept and if you are saying all it is is a concept then of course it doesn't contradict science. Concepts are produced by the brain. Maybe religious people need to be more clear as what they mean rather than just throwing around vague concepts and acting as if they tie to anything that actually exists. Yes, concepts exist, but they exist as a product of the brain. I normally wouldn't harp on this stuff, but you asked the question. Spiritual concepts and scientific concepts are different and aren’t explained in the same way. Science is evidence based but spirituality is not, making it abstract and completely subjective. All of our brains work different too that can’t be fully explained by science. Specific concepts don’t need to make sense to everyone in order to be seen as real to an individual. Spirituality varies in meaning depending on the person since it is a personal experience. Science exists on its own regardless of that. You can’t ask a scientific concept about a spiritual concept since they are separate. so really my main point is that two things being separate or different doesn’t necessarily make them incompatible. Then you are talking about religion in a way that most Christians don't. Some Christians have changed the Bible from rules handed down by God to something else entirely. You and me are not talking about religion in the same way and that is where the confusion is coming from.
|
|
