Christianity vs. Science

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#1 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts

Oh, wait, there's no conflict.

People say that Christianity is at some sort of war with science. This is ignorant bull****. Puh-lenty of scientists today and throughout all of history were Christians. The Bible endources reasoning several times. Christians like myself love science. However, ignorant asshats who say that science and Christianity are in conflict kind of make it hard for me to enjoy science.

Don't believe me? Here:

Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)
Copernicus was the Polish astronomer who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun. He attended various European universities, and became a Canon in the Catholic church in 1497. His new system was actually first presented in the Vatican gardens in 1533 before Pope Clement VII who approved, and urged Copernicus to publish it around this time. Copernicus was never under any threat of religious persecution - and was urged to publish both by Catholic Bishop Guise, Cardinal Schonberg, and the Protestant Professor George Rheticus. Copernicus referred sometimes to God in his works, and did not see his system as in conflict with the Bible.

Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1627)
Bacon was a philosopher who is known for establishing the scientific method of inquiry based on experimentation and inductive reasoning. In De Interpretatione Naturae Prooemium, Bacon established his goals as being the discovery of truth, service to his country, and service to the church. Although his work was based upon experimentation and reasoning, he rejected atheism as being the result of insufficient depth of philosophy, stating, "It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity." (Of Atheism)

Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)
Kepler was a brilliant mathematician and astronomer. He did early work on light, and established the laws of planetary motion about the sun. He also came close to reaching the Newtonian concept of universal gravity - well before Newton was born! His introduction of the idea of force in astronomy changed it radically in a modern direction. Kepler was an extremely sincere and pious Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the heavenly bodies represent the Trinity. Kepler suffered no persecution for his open avowal of the sun-centered system, and, indeed, was allowed as a Protestant to stay in Catholic Graz as a Professor (1595-1600) when other Protestants had been expelled!

Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo is often remembered for his conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. His controversial work on the solar system was published in 1633. It had no proofs of a sun-centered system (Galileo's telescope discoveries did not indicate a moving earth) and his one "proof" based upon the tides was invalid. It ignored the correct elliptical orbits of planets published twenty five years earlier by Kepler. Since his work finished by putting the Pope's favorite argument in the mouth of the simpleton in the dialogue, the Pope (an old friend of Galileo's) was very offended. After the "trial" and being forbidden to teach the sun-centered system, Galileo did his most useful theoretical work, which was on dynamics. Galileo expressly said that the Bible cannot err, and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the biblical texts.

Rene Descartes (1596-1650)
Descartes was a French mathematician, scientist and philosopher who has been called the father of modern philosophy. His school studies made him dissatisfied with previous philosophy: He had a deep religious faith as a Roman Catholic, which he retained to his dying day, along with a resolute, passionate desire to discover the truth. At the age of 24 he had a dream, and felt the vocational call to seek to bring knowledge together in one system of thought. His system began by asking what could be known if all else were doubted - suggesting the famous "I think therefore I am". Actually, it is often forgotten that the next step for Descartes was to establish the near certainty of the existence of God - for only if God both exists and would not want us to be deceived by our experiences - can we trust our senses and logical thought processes. God is, therefore, central to his whole philosophy. What he really wanted to see was that his philosophy be adopted as standard Roman Catholic teaching. Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon (1561-1626) are generally regarded as the key figures in the development of scientific methodology. Both had systems in which God was important, and both seem more devout than the average for their era.

Isaac Newton (1642-1727)
In optics, mechanics, and mathematics, Newton was a figure of undisputed genius and innovation. In all his science (including chemistry) he saw mathematics and numbers as central. What is less well known is that he was devoutly religious and saw numbers as involved in understanding God's plan for history from the Bible. He did a considerable work on biblical numerology, and, though aspects of his beliefs were not orthodox, he thought theology was very important. In his system of physics, God is essential to the nature and absoluteness of space. In Principia he stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion on an intelligent and powerful Being."

Robert Boyle (1791-1867)
One of the founders and key early members of the Royal Society, Boyle gave his name to "Boyle's Law" for gases, and also wrote an important work on chemistry. Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "By his will he endowed a series of Boyle lectures, or sermons, which still continue, 'for proving the Christian religion against notorious infidels...' As a devout Protestant, Boyle took a special interest in promoting the Christian religion abroad, giving money to translate and publish the New Testament into Irish and Turkish. In 1690 he developed his theological views in The Christian Virtuoso, which he wrote to show that the study of nature was a central religious duty." Boyle wrote against atheists in his day (the notion that atheism is a modern invention is a myth), and was clearly much more devoutly Christian than the average in his era.

Michael Faraday (1791-1867)
Michael Faraday was the son of a blacksmith who became one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century. His work on electricity and magnetism not only revolutionized physics, but led to much of our life**** today, which depends on them (including computers and telephone lines and, so, web sites). Faraday was a devoutly Christian member of the Sandemanians, which significantly influenced him and strongly affected the way in which he approached and interpreted nature. Originating from Presbyterians, the Sandemanians rejected the idea of state churches, and tried to go back to a New Testament type of Christianity.

Gregor Mendel (1822-1884)
Mendel was the first to lay the mathematical foundations of genetics, in what came to be called "Mendelianism". He began his research in 1856 (three years before Darwin published his Origin of Species) in the garden of the Monastery in which he was a monk. Mendel was elected Abbot of his Monastery in 1868. His work remained comparatively unknown until the turn of the century, when a new generation of botanists began finding similar results and "rediscovered" him (though their ideas were not identical to his). An interesting point is that the 1860's was notable for formation of the X-Club, which was dedicated to lessening religious influences and propagating an image of "conflict" between science and religion. One sympathizer was Darwin's cousin Francis Galton, whose scientific interest was in genetics (a proponent of eugenics - selective breeding among humans to "improve" the stock). He was writing how the "priestly mind" was not conducive to science while, at around the same time, an Austrian monk was making the breakthrough in genetics. The rediscovery of the work of Mendel came too late to affect Galton's contribution.

William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907)
Kelvin was foremost among the small group of British scientists who helped to lay the foundations of modern physics. His work covered many areas of physics, and he was said to have more letters after his name than anyone else in the Commonwealth, since he received numerous honorary degrees from European Universities, which recognized the value of his work. He was a very committed Christian, who was certainly more religious than the average for his era. Interestingly, his fellow physicists George Gabriel Stokes (1819-1903) and James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) were also men of deep Christian commitment, in an era when many were nominal, apathetic, or anti-Christian. The Encyclopedia Britannica says "Maxwell is regarded by most modern physicists as the scientist of the 19th century who had the greatest influence on 20th century physics; he is ranked with Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein for the fundamental nature of his contributions." Lord Kelvin was an Old Earth creationist, who estimated the Earth's age to be somewhere between 20 million and 100 million years, with an upper limit at 500 million years based on cooling rates (a low estimate due to his lack of knowledge about radiogenic heating).

Max Planck (1858-1947)
Planck made many contributions to physics, but is best known for quantum theory, which revolutionized our understanding of the atomic and sub-atomic worlds. In his 1937 lecture "Religion and Naturwissenschaft," Planck expressed the view that God is everywhere present, and held that "the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is conveyed by the holiness of symbols." Atheists, he thought, attach too much importance to what are merely symbols. Planck was a churchwarden from 1920 until his death, and believed in an almighty, all-knowing, beneficent God (though not necessarily a personal one). Both science and religion wage a "tireless battle against skepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition" with the goal "toward God!"

Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Einstein is probably the best known and most highly revered scientist of the twentieth century, and is associated with major revolutions in our thinking about time, gravity, and the conversion of matter to energy (E=mc2). Although never coming to belief in a personal God, he recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "Firmly denying atheism, Einstein expressed a belief in "Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists." This actually motivated his interest in science, as he once remarked to a young physicist: "I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details." Einstein's famous epithet on the "uncertainty principle" was "God does not play dice" - and to him this was a real statement about a God in whom he believed. A famous saying of his was "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

Not enough? Try this:

Christianity aiding the development of science

Still think there's a war between the two? What about these:

Science and Faith Associations

  • Access Research Network
  • American Scientific Affiliation
  • Association of Christians in the Mathematical Sciences
  • Association of Christian Astronomers International
  • Canadian Science and Christian Affiliation
  • Christian Association for Psychological Studies
  • Christian Medical & Dental Associations
  • Christians in Science
  • Institute on Religion in an Age of Science
  • Metanexus Institute
  • Pascal Centre
  • Presbyterian Association on Science, Technology, and the Christian Faith
  • Reasons To Believe
  • Science and Religion Forum
  • Zygon Center for Religion and Science

If you're STILL not convinced, give me a PM and I'll give you even more.

THERE IS NO CONFLICT.

Avatar image for GettingTired
GettingTired

5994

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 GettingTired
Member since 2006 • 5994 Posts
Oh god (no pun intended), here we go again.
Avatar image for Mumbles527
Mumbles527

7706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Mumbles527
Member since 2004 • 7706 Posts
I didn't realize we need one of these every single day. Oh wait, now I remember. We don't. This is just your pathetic attempt to get e-attention by making a thread that is bound to get a lot of replies.
Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#5 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts

I didn't realize we need one of these every single day. Oh wait, now I remember. We don't. This is just your pathetic attempt to get e-attention by making a thread that is bound to get a lot of replies.Mumbles527

No, this is my pathetic attempt to quell the fountain of ignorance on the matter.

If you ddon't like the thread, stay out.;)

Avatar image for Total-KO
Total-KO

4057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#6 Total-KO
Member since 2006 • 4057 Posts

I didn't realize we need one of these every single day. Oh wait, now I remember. We don't. This is just your pathetic attempt to get e-attention by making a thread that is bound to get a lot of replies.Mumbles527

At least this thread evokes a great degree of truth to it and not just assumptions.

Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#7 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts

True... it's infact a war between reason and stupidity.

jointed

Uhh, no.

Avatar image for Mumbles527
Mumbles527

7706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 Mumbles527
Member since 2004 • 7706 Posts

[QUOTE="Mumbles527"]I didn't realize we need one of these every single day. Oh wait, now I remember. We don't. This is just your pathetic attempt to get e-attention by making a thread that is bound to get a lot of replies.Silver_Dragon17

No, this is my pathetic attempt to quell the fountain of ignorance on the matter.

If you ddon't like the thread, stay out.;)

The only reason I don't like the thread is because they are absolutely pointless. There is no convincing people either way. I could give you all the evidence in the world that Christianity is pure BS, but you still won't give a damn, because you will continue to blindly believe it. None of the links you provided actually prove anything. So great, there have been 12 people who liked both science and religion...that automatically means that the two don't go against each other? They quite obviously go against each other, and to say otherwise is just ridiculous.
Avatar image for Video_Game_King
Video_Game_King

27545

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 28

User Lists: 0

#9 Video_Game_King
Member since 2003 • 27545 Posts
OK, so science and religion aren't enemies, but they aren't really friendly with each other. I believe Copernicus was put under house arrest until his death because of his beliefs. But its not like these guys were saying "Ha, take THIS Christianity, I have destroyed your entire infrastructure with these findings!", they were usually reluctant to post their findings and did so years afterward. Hell, Einstein was in denial with some of his discoveries.
Avatar image for FragStains
FragStains

20668

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 FragStains
Member since 2003 • 20668 Posts

I'll admit that I didn't read everything in the first post...but I have to say that this is one of the most focused first posts in a debate thread I've seen in a long time.

It states a thesis, and backs it up with facts rather than opinions.

Well done. We'll have to just wait and see if your debate opponents take the same intelligent approach in their attempts...

Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#11 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts
[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="Mumbles527"]I didn't realize we need one of these every single day. Oh wait, now I remember. We don't. This is just your pathetic attempt to get e-attention by making a thread that is bound to get a lot of replies.Mumbles527

No, this is my pathetic attempt to quell the fountain of ignorance on the matter.

If you ddon't like the thread, stay out.;)

The only reason I don't like the thread is because they are absolutely pointless. There is no convincing people either way. I could give you all the evidence in the world that Christianity is pure BS, but you still won't give a damn, because you will continue to blindly believe it. None of the links you provided actually prove anything. So great, there have been 12 people who liked both science and religion...that automatically means that the two don't go against each other? They quite obviously go against each other, and to say otherwise is just ridiculous.

There is no evidence.

Christ copycat myths have been utterly disproven.

Bible contradictions are explained.

Historical evidence is being found all the time.

I don't blindly believe in anything.

My links prove that there is no conflict. I'm not trying to prove that Christianity is true.

There are more than twelve people. http://www.tektonics.org/scim/sciencemony.htm

That site gives literally hundreds of Christian scientists. Take your ignorance elsewhere.

Avatar image for deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
deactivated-5901ac91d8e33

17092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
Member since 2004 • 17092 Posts
[QUOTE="jointed"]

True... it's infact a war between reason and stupidity.

Silver_Dragon17

Uhh, no.

Ehh, yes. Believing in medieval superstition you have no proof of is rather stupid...

Sorry, I guess all these religion topics has screwed up my tolerance metre.

Avatar image for Mumbles527
Mumbles527

7706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 Mumbles527
Member since 2004 • 7706 Posts
[QUOTE="Mumbles527"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="Mumbles527"]I didn't realize we need one of these every single day. Oh wait, now I remember. We don't. This is just your pathetic attempt to get e-attention by making a thread that is bound to get a lot of replies.Silver_Dragon17

No, this is my pathetic attempt to quell the fountain of ignorance on the matter.

If you ddon't like the thread, stay out.;)

The only reason I don't like the thread is because they are absolutely pointless. There is no convincing people either way. I could give you all the evidence in the world that Christianity is pure BS, but you still won't give a damn, because you will continue to blindly believe it. None of the links you provided actually prove anything. So great, there have been 12 people who liked both science and religion...that automatically means that the two don't go against each other? They quite obviously go against each other, and to say otherwise is just ridiculous.

There is no evidence.

Christ copycat myths have been utterly disproven.

Bible contradictions are explained.

Historical evidence is being found all the time.

I don't blindly believe in anything.

My links prove that there is no conflict. I'm not trying to prove that Christianity is true.

There are more than twelve people. http://www.tektonics.org/scim/sciencemony.htm

That site gives literally hundreds of Christian scientists. Take your ignorance elsewhere.

So the fact that they agree on some things automatically proves that theres no conflict whatsoever? If things were that easy, there'd have been a lot less wars. There are obviously areas of great conflict between religious people and scientific people. Take the creation of the world. To say that there is no conflict of ideas between the scientific explanation for the creation of the world and the religious explanation is ignorance at its finest.
Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#14 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts
[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"][QUOTE="Mumbles527"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="Mumbles527"]I didn't realize we need one of these every single day. Oh wait, now I remember. We don't. This is just your pathetic attempt to get e-attention by making a thread that is bound to get a lot of replies.Mumbles527

No, this is my pathetic attempt to quell the fountain of ignorance on the matter.

If you ddon't like the thread, stay out.;)

The only reason I don't like the thread is because they are absolutely pointless. There is no convincing people either way. I could give you all the evidence in the world that Christianity is pure BS, but you still won't give a damn, because you will continue to blindly believe it. None of the links you provided actually prove anything. So great, there have been 12 people who liked both science and religion...that automatically means that the two don't go against each other? They quite obviously go against each other, and to say otherwise is just ridiculous.

There is no evidence.

Christ copycat myths have been utterly disproven.

Bible contradictions are explained.

Historical evidence is being found all the time.

I don't blindly believe in anything.

My links prove that there is no conflict. I'm not trying to prove that Christianity is true.

There are more than twelve people. http://www.tektonics.org/scim/sciencemony.htm

That site gives literally hundreds of Christian scientists. Take your ignorance elsewhere.

So the fact that they agree on some things automatically proves that theres no conflict whatsoever? If things were that easy, there'd have been a lot less wars. There are obviously areas of great conflict between religious people and scientific people. Take the creation of the world. To say that there is no conflict of ideas between the scientific explanation for the creation of the world and the religious explanation is ignorance at its finest.

That is not conflict between Christianity and science. That is conflict between some Christians and some scientists. There's a difference.;)

Avatar image for The_Ish
The_Ish

13913

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#15 The_Ish
Member since 2006 • 13913 Posts

True... it's infact a war between reason and stupidity.

jointed

Less about stupidity, more about insecurity. At least thats how I have been interpreting it. Most Christians or religious people who don't accept some Scientific facts don't do it because it questions their beliefs, which are based on their interpretation of religious teachings and it is something they hold dear.

Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#16 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts
[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"][QUOTE="jointed"]

True... it's infact a war between reason and stupidity.

jointed

Uhh, no.

Ehh, yes. Believing in medieval superstition you have no proof of is rather stupid...

Sorry, I guess all these religion topics has screwed up my tolerance metre.

Then leave. I'm in no mood to deal with bigots.

Avatar image for mig_killer2
mig_killer2

4906

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 mig_killer2
Member since 2007 • 4906 Posts

There is no conflict, but that depends on your interpretation of biblical events

Avatar image for Mumbles527
Mumbles527

7706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 Mumbles527
Member since 2004 • 7706 Posts
[QUOTE="Mumbles527"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"][QUOTE="Mumbles527"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="Mumbles527"]I didn't realize we need one of these every single day. Oh wait, now I remember. We don't. This is just your pathetic attempt to get e-attention by making a thread that is bound to get a lot of replies.Silver_Dragon17

No, this is my pathetic attempt to quell the fountain of ignorance on the matter.

If you ddon't like the thread, stay out.;)

The only reason I don't like the thread is because they are absolutely pointless. There is no convincing people either way. I could give you all the evidence in the world that Christianity is pure BS, but you still won't give a damn, because you will continue to blindly believe it. None of the links you provided actually prove anything. So great, there have been 12 people who liked both science and religion...that automatically means that the two don't go against each other? They quite obviously go against each other, and to say otherwise is just ridiculous.

There is no evidence.

Christ copycat myths have been utterly disproven.

Bible contradictions are explained.

Historical evidence is being found all the time.

I don't blindly believe in anything.

My links prove that there is no conflict. I'm not trying to prove that Christianity is true.

There are more than twelve people. http://www.tektonics.org/scim/sciencemony.htm

That site gives literally hundreds of Christian scientists. Take your ignorance elsewhere.

So the fact that they agree on some things automatically proves that theres no conflict whatsoever? If things were that easy, there'd have been a lot less wars. There are obviously areas of great conflict between religious people and scientific people. Take the creation of the world. To say that there is no conflict of ideas between the scientific explanation for the creation of the world and the religious explanation is ignorance at its finest.

That is not conflict between Christianity and science. That is conflict between some Christians and some scientists. There's a difference.;)

No there isn't. The vast majority of the scientific community agrees with what you call "some Christians" and the vast majority of religious people believe that God created the Earth. Thats a conflict between Science and Religion. And thats merely one example. I could provide numerous others if you'd like me to.
Avatar image for Loonie
Loonie

3455

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 Loonie
Member since 2003 • 3455 Posts
The problem with naming all those scientists religious is that most of them lived in a time where you could be burned at the stake for being a heretic. Much less get your scientific works published.
Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#20 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts

The problem with naming all those scientists religious is that most of them lived in a time where you could be burned at the stake for being a heretic. Much less get your scientific works published.Loonie

Only the first few lived in such a time.:|

Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#21 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts
[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"][QUOTE="Mumbles527"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"][QUOTE="Mumbles527"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="Mumbles527"]I didn't realize we need one of these every single day. Oh wait, now I remember. We don't. This is just your pathetic attempt to get e-attention by making a thread that is bound to get a lot of replies.Mumbles527

No, this is my pathetic attempt to quell the fountain of ignorance on the matter.

If you ddon't like the thread, stay out.;)

The only reason I don't like the thread is because they are absolutely pointless. There is no convincing people either way. I could give you all the evidence in the world that Christianity is pure BS, but you still won't give a damn, because you will continue to blindly believe it. None of the links you provided actually prove anything. So great, there have been 12 people who liked both science and religion...that automatically means that the two don't go against each other? They quite obviously go against each other, and to say otherwise is just ridiculous.

There is no evidence.

Christ copycat myths have been utterly disproven.

Bible contradictions are explained.

Historical evidence is being found all the time.

I don't blindly believe in anything.

My links prove that there is no conflict. I'm not trying to prove that Christianity is true.

There are more than twelve people. http://www.tektonics.org/scim/sciencemony.htm

That site gives literally hundreds of Christian scientists. Take your ignorance elsewhere.

So the fact that they agree on some things automatically proves that theres no conflict whatsoever? If things were that easy, there'd have been a lot less wars. There are obviously areas of great conflict between religious people and scientific people. Take the creation of the world. To say that there is no conflict of ideas between the scientific explanation for the creation of the world and the religious explanation is ignorance at its finest.

That is not conflict between Christianity and science. That is conflict between some Christians and some scientists. There's a difference.;)

No there isn't. The vast majority of the scientific community agrees with what you call "some Christians" and the vast majority of religious people believe that God created the Earth. Thats a conflict between Science and Religion. And thats merely one example. I could provide numerous others if you'd like me to.

That is not a conflict. Science does not say that God didn't create the world.

Ignorance is bliss.:roll:

Avatar image for Mumbles527
Mumbles527

7706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 Mumbles527
Member since 2004 • 7706 Posts
That is not a conflict. Science does not say that God didn't create the world. Ignorance is bliss.:roll:Silver_Dragon17
If you truly believe this, perhaps you should recheck your facts before making a thread about it.
Avatar image for Loonie
Loonie

3455

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 Loonie
Member since 2003 • 3455 Posts

[QUOTE="Loonie"]The problem with naming all those scientists religious is that most of them lived in a time where you could be burned at the stake for being a heretic. Much less get your scientific works published.Silver_Dragon17

Only the first few lived in such a time.:|

1826 was the last time someone was executed for heresy so that means the first 8 fall into that bracket (9 but only by a few years), which is over half. Einstein believed the universe was god so i fail to see how that supports christianity.

Avatar image for Sonick54
Sonick54

7947

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#24 Sonick54
Member since 2005 • 7947 Posts

I didn't realize we need one of these every single day. Oh wait, now I remember. We don't. This is just your pathetic attempt to get e-attention by making a thread that is bound to get a lot of replies.Mumbles527

SERIOUS BUSINESS UP IN HERE!

Avatar image for The_Ish
The_Ish

13913

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#25 The_Ish
Member since 2006 • 13913 Posts

[QUOTE="Loonie"]The problem with naming all those scientists religious is that most of them lived in a time where you could be burned at the stake for being a heretic. Much less get your scientific works published.Silver_Dragon17

Only the first few lived in such a time.:|

They still lived in times where their works may not have been published for their beliefs, that's something you can't deny.

Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#26 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts

[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]That is not a conflict. Science does not say that God didn't create the world. Ignorance is bliss.:roll:Mumbles527
If you truly believe this, perhaps you should recheck your facts before making a thread about it.

If science flat-out says that God did not create the world, then it is not science.

Science does not presuppose the existence or non-existence of God.

This is middle-school stuff here.

Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#27 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts
[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="Loonie"]The problem with naming all those scientists religious is that most of them lived in a time where you could be burned at the stake for being a heretic. Much less get your scientific works published.The_Ish

Only the first few lived in such a time.:|

They still lived in times where their works may not have been published for their beliefs, that's something you can't deny.

I'm not denying it. However, these people were devoted Christians for the most part.

Avatar image for Mumbles527
Mumbles527

7706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 Mumbles527
Member since 2004 • 7706 Posts

[QUOTE="Mumbles527"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]That is not a conflict. Science does not say that God didn't create the world. Ignorance is bliss.:roll:Silver_Dragon17

If you truly believe this, perhaps you should recheck your facts before making a thread about it.

If science flat-out says that God did not create the world, then it is not science.

Science does not presuppose the existence or non-existence of God.

This is middle-school stuff here.

And this is exactly what I meant when I said theres no reason arguing against people who blindly believe in religion. So I'm done. Have fun trying to prove your nonsense.
Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#29 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts
[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="Loonie"]The problem with naming all those scientists religious is that most of them lived in a time where you could be burned at the stake for being a heretic. Much less get your scientific works published.Loonie

Only the first few lived in such a time.:|

1826 was the last time someone was executed for heresy so that means the first 8 fall into that bracket (9 but only by a few years), which is over half. Einstein believed the universe was god so i fail to see how that supports christianity.

Eistein did not believe in a personal God, like I said.

Avatar image for acekall
acekall

3676

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#30 acekall
Member since 2003 • 3676 Posts

hmm

just like the pope says using a condom to prevent aids is not allowed....

Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#31 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts
[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="Mumbles527"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]That is not a conflict. Science does not say that God didn't create the world. Ignorance is bliss.:roll:Mumbles527

If you truly believe this, perhaps you should recheck your facts before making a thread about it.

If science flat-out says that God did not create the world, then it is not science.

Science does not presuppose the existence or non-existence of God.

This is middle-school stuff here.

And this is exactly what I meant when I said theres no reason arguing against people who blindly believe in religion. So I'm done. Have fun trying to prove your nonsense.

I don't blindly believe in anything. Nor am I trying to prove Christianity.

All you have done is troll and flame about how religious people are stupid. So it is not I who is lacking reason.

Avatar image for Mumbles527
Mumbles527

7706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32 Mumbles527
Member since 2004 • 7706 Posts
I don't blindly believe in anything. Nor am I trying to prove Christianity. All you have done is troll and flame about how religious people are stupid. So it is not I who is lacking reason.Silver_Dragon17
Where did I say anything about religious people being stupid? I provided examples of how there is an obvious conflict between religion and science, you deny them by using nonsense as your evidence.
Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#33 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts

[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]I don't blindly believe in anything. Nor am I trying to prove Christianity. All you have done is troll and flame about how religious people are stupid. So it is not I who is lacking reason.Mumbles527
Where did I say anything about religious people being stupid? I provided examples of how there is an obvious conflict between religion and science, you deny them by using nonsense as your evidence.

I deny them because your "obvious conflicts" are not conflicts between Christianity and science. You seem to be under the delusion that science presupposes the non-existence of God, or you seem to think that God has been disproven by science: Both are false, as I have shown, and as anybody who knows anything about science can show.

Avatar image for Mumbles527
Mumbles527

7706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 Mumbles527
Member since 2004 • 7706 Posts

[QUOTE="Mumbles527"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]I don't blindly believe in anything. Nor am I trying to prove Christianity. All you have done is troll and flame about how religious people are stupid. So it is not I who is lacking reason.Silver_Dragon17

Where did I say anything about religious people being stupid? I provided examples of how there is an obvious conflict between religion and science, you deny them by using nonsense as your evidence.

I deny them because your "obvious conflicts" are not conflicts between Christianity and science. You seem to be under the delusion that science presupposes the non-existence of God, or you seem to think that God has been disproven by science: Both are false, as I have shown, and as anybody who knows anything about science can show.

I've never said either of those things. You merely try to make it sound like I did to further support your ridiculous claim. The facts are, however, that even if the scientific field does not come out and say there is no God, they work hard to find out the truth, whatever the truth might be. This is in direct conflict with religious people who are happy with not knowing the truth and just assuming that the bible is truth. Science works to discover the truth, while religion just sits there and believes in whatever they want to. That is a conflict.
Avatar image for Ravirr
Ravirr

7931

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#35 Ravirr
Member since 2004 • 7931 Posts
Lots of good points and lots of pointless arguements. This is in answer to all the science vs christianity threads. THIS IS NOT PROvinG CHRISTIANITY RIGHT OR WRONG! This is merely saying yes teh two can *gasp* work in harmony.wow amazing. Who would have thought...
Avatar image for pie-junior
pie-junior

2866

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#36 pie-junior
Member since 2007 • 2866 Posts
[QUOTE="Loonie"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="Loonie"]The problem with naming all those scientists religious is that most of them lived in a time where you could be burned at the stake for being a heretic. Much less get your scientific works published.Silver_Dragon17

Only the first few lived in such a time.:|

1826 was the last time someone was executed for heresy so that means the first 8 fall into that bracket (9 but only by a few years), which is over half. Einstein believed the universe was god so i fail to see how that supports christianity.

Eistein did not believe in a personal God, like I said.

you're making too much of these threads....

Einstein was born jewish so how does he support Christianity?

Newton Didn't believe the idea of the holy trinity....

stop talking so much about this....

Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#37 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts
[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="Mumbles527"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]I don't blindly believe in anything. Nor am I trying to prove Christianity. All you have done is troll and flame about how religious people are stupid. So it is not I who is lacking reason.Mumbles527

Where did I say anything about religious people being stupid? I provided examples of how there is an obvious conflict between religion and science, you deny them by using nonsense as your evidence.

I deny them because your "obvious conflicts" are not conflicts between Christianity and science. You seem to be under the delusion that science presupposes the non-existence of God, or you seem to think that God has been disproven by science: Both are false, as I have shown, and as anybody who knows anything about science can show.

I've never said either of those things. You merely try to make it sound like I did to further support your ridiculous claim. The facts are, however, that even if the scientific field does not come out and say there is no God, they work hard to find out the truth, whatever the truth might be. This is in direct conflict with religious people who are happy with not knowing the truth and just assuming that the bible is truth. Science works to discover the truth, while religion just sits there and believes in whatever they want to. That is a conflict.

Religion wants to discover the truth as well.

We don't just sit by and think we know everything about everything. Again, if this was the case, no Christian could ever become a scientist.

Not a conflict, because it is non-existent. Some Christians will just follow the Bible and not look at science, but unless every one of them does the same, it is not a conflict between the religion and the science.

Avatar image for Mumbles527
Mumbles527

7706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 Mumbles527
Member since 2004 • 7706 Posts
[QUOTE="Mumbles527"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="Mumbles527"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]I don't blindly believe in anything. Nor am I trying to prove Christianity. All you have done is troll and flame about how religious people are stupid. So it is not I who is lacking reason.Silver_Dragon17

Where did I say anything about religious people being stupid? I provided examples of how there is an obvious conflict between religion and science, you deny them by using nonsense as your evidence.

I deny them because your "obvious conflicts" are not conflicts between Christianity and science. You seem to be under the delusion that science presupposes the non-existence of God, or you seem to think that God has been disproven by science: Both are false, as I have shown, and as anybody who knows anything about science can show.

I've never said either of those things. You merely try to make it sound like I did to further support your ridiculous claim. The facts are, however, that even if the scientific field does not come out and say there is no God, they work hard to find out the truth, whatever the truth might be. This is in direct conflict with religious people who are happy with not knowing the truth and just assuming that the bible is truth. Science works to discover the truth, while religion just sits there and believes in whatever they want to. That is a conflict.

Religion wants to discover the truth as well.

We don't just sit by and think we know everything about everything. Again, if this was the case, no Christian could ever become a scientist.

Not a conflict, because it is non-existent. Some Christians will just follow the Bible and not look at science, but unless every one of them does the same, it is not a conflict between the religion and the science.

So according to you, every single person in one group has to believe in the conflict for it to be considered a conflict? I guess theres nothing going on in Iraq currently, since not every American supports the conflict there. It must just be peaceful and pleasant.
Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#39 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts
[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"][QUOTE="Loonie"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="Loonie"]The problem with naming all those scientists religious is that most of them lived in a time where you could be burned at the stake for being a heretic. Much less get your scientific works published.pie-junior

Only the first few lived in such a time.:|

1826 was the last time someone was executed for heresy so that means the first 8 fall into that bracket (9 but only by a few years), which is over half. Einstein believed the universe was god so i fail to see how that supports christianity.

Eistein did not believe in a personal God, like I said.

you're making too much of these threads....

Einstein was born jewish so how does he support Christianity?

Newton Didn't believe the idea of the holy divinity....

stop talking so much about this....

Newton didn't believe in the Trinity. So what? Many Christians don't.

Einstein doesn't support Christianity; He supports the fact that science and Christianity are not mutually exclusive.

I will stop when the ignorance stops.

Avatar image for Silver_Dragon17
Silver_Dragon17

6205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#40 Silver_Dragon17
Member since 2007 • 6205 Posts
[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"][QUOTE="Mumbles527"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="Mumbles527"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]I don't blindly believe in anything. Nor am I trying to prove Christianity. All you have done is troll and flame about how religious people are stupid. So it is not I who is lacking reason.Mumbles527

Where did I say anything about religious people being stupid? I provided examples of how there is an obvious conflict between religion and science, you deny them by using nonsense as your evidence.

I deny them because your "obvious conflicts" are not conflicts between Christianity and science. You seem to be under the delusion that science presupposes the non-existence of God, or you seem to think that God has been disproven by science: Both are false, as I have shown, and as anybody who knows anything about science can show.

I've never said either of those things. You merely try to make it sound like I did to further support your ridiculous claim. The facts are, however, that even if the scientific field does not come out and say there is no God, they work hard to find out the truth, whatever the truth might be. This is in direct conflict with religious people who are happy with not knowing the truth and just assuming that the bible is truth. Science works to discover the truth, while religion just sits there and believes in whatever they want to. That is a conflict.

Religion wants to discover the truth as well.

We don't just sit by and think we know everything about everything. Again, if this was the case, no Christian could ever become a scientist.

Not a conflict, because it is non-existent. Some Christians will just follow the Bible and not look at science, but unless every one of them does the same, it is not a conflict between the religion and the science.

So according to you, every single person in one group has to believe in the conflict for it to be considered a conflict? I guess theres nothing going on in Iraq currently, since not every American supports the conflict there. It must just be peaceful and pleasant.

That's not what I said.

I said that if every Christian starts to conflict against science, then we have a real conflict.

Unless the Bible flat-out says that science is wrong, there is no conflict between the religion and the science.

Avatar image for Putzwapputzen
Putzwapputzen

4462

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#41 Putzwapputzen
Member since 2005 • 4462 Posts
go christianity! :)
Avatar image for MichaeltheCM
MichaeltheCM

22765

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 1

#42 MichaeltheCM
Member since 2005 • 22765 Posts
I love ur arguments Silver D. seriously they are perfect. u state smthg and u back it up with hard evidence. and i totally agree with you. thank you! Christianity and Science can co exist and even work together
Avatar image for Ravirr
Ravirr

7931

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#43 Ravirr
Member since 2004 • 7931 Posts
Fact no case study is ever left with a clear cut definition of what causes there will always be the one kid who raises there hand and says I know a kid who has x and is y . While that kid maybe the minority in general terms we look at the majority of the group when discussing a concept like this. Just because there are some who say OMG I disagree, doesn't mean that the other 90% or so who agree are in conflict.
Avatar image for Mumbles527
Mumbles527

7706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44 Mumbles527
Member since 2004 • 7706 Posts
Fact no case study is ever left with a clear cut definition of what causes there will always be the one kid who raises there hand and says I know a kid who has x and is y . While that kid maybe the minority in general terms we look at the majority of the group when discussing a concept like this. Just because there are some who say OMG I disagree, doesn't mean that the other 90% or so who agree are in conflict. Ravirr
But that is not the case here. 90% of people who believe mainly in science do not also completely accept religion. To say that there is no conflict between the two is absurd.
Avatar image for pie-junior
pie-junior

2866

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45 pie-junior
Member since 2007 • 2866 Posts
Newton didn't believe in the Trinity. So what? Many Christians don't.

Einstein doesn't support Christianity; He supports the fact that science and Christianity are not mutually exclusive.

I will stop when the ignorance stops.

Silver_Dragon17

where did it say that Einstein claims that christianity does not contradict in your little paragraph?

although it doesn't have too.....

Avatar image for MindFreeze
MindFreeze

2814

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46 MindFreeze
Member since 2007 • 2814 Posts

Hmm ok great?:roll:

There doesn't have to be a conflict, but there obviously is...

Avatar image for Ravirr
Ravirr

7931

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#47 Ravirr
Member since 2004 • 7931 Posts

[QUOTE="Ravirr"]Fact no case study is ever left with a clear cut definition of what causes there will always be the one kid who raises there hand and says I know a kid who has x and is y . While that kid maybe the minority in general terms we look at the majority of the group when discussing a concept like this. Just because there are some who say OMG I disagree, doesn't mean that the other 90% or so who agree are in conflict. Mumbles527
But that is not the case here. 90% of people who believe mainly in science do not also completely accept religion. To say that there is no conflict between the two is absurd.

Thats mainly the point, of his entire thread. You can believe in both. You can research the universe and still have a belief in God. You can work with stem cells or make medicine and believe in God. The two are seperate from each other. Science doesn't prove Religon right and Religon doesn't prove science wrong . The two are seperate there for you can have your cake and eat it too.

My statement was for the minority of religous people who refute science and follow the teachings.

My thoughts though..take of it what you will

Avatar image for Mumbles527
Mumbles527

7706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#48 Mumbles527
Member since 2004 • 7706 Posts

Hmm ok great?:roll:

There doesn't have to be a conflict, but there obviously is...

MindFreeze
Thats what I've been trying to tell them, but they won't listen.
Avatar image for Ravirr
Ravirr

7931

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#49 Ravirr
Member since 2004 • 7931 Posts
[QUOTE="MindFreeze"]

Hmm ok great?:roll:

There doesn't have to be a conflict, but there obviously is...

Mumbles527

Thats what I've been trying to tell them, but they won't listen.

It seems its human nature to argue non issues or moot points. So goes the cycle of life Cheers!

Avatar image for Decessus
Decessus

5132

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: -5

#50 Decessus
Member since 2003 • 5132 Posts

Original post was here Silver_Dragon17

The cornerstone of the Christian faith is the death and ressurection of Jesus Christ. This belief is common to all denominations of Christianity, and without it one can hardly be called a Christian. How can you claim that science and Christianity can coexist, when the very pillar of the Christian belief contradicts our scientific understanding of death?