When illogical supertitions and rational knowledge cohabit

I think it is odd how people seem to ignore the scientific evidence we have to prove that God doesn't exist. Why are they denying this? Are we so insecure that we have to just believe in anything so we don't have to take responsibility for our own lives.

Thanks for another thought provoking discussion. You aren't the only one whose rating is suffering, through interesting discussions.

Well, I'm not a scientist. Nor am I a christian. So remember that as you read my opinions. lol

I find that religion and science should work hand in hand, together. And I think it's perfectly possible for that to be. For example, when I was in High School I had a Physics/Chemistry teacher who was devoutly christian. Every so often he would make side comments that tied his religion into the class (not to convince us, but more as interesting tidbits). One example he used was the periodic table. After the table had been reformed numerous times, we've come across an organization of the table that makes complete sense. And, there were once gaps in the table that have since been filled. As if we found the layout for all elements on our planet. As the teacher said "It's as if someone planned it all out before hand."

I think if you are truly religious, you wont merely believe in your religion, ignoring facts. But instead learn to merge the two together. That's what any rational, intelligent person should do.

I was raised Mormon, so I'm not unaware of the christian religion or anything. In the Church, we have some extra scholastic works. For example, when God created the world, he didn't make it in literally 6 of our days. Instead, 6 of his days. Mormons have the book of mormon, which many other christian groups dislike, but in this book theres a section that explains how God keeps time. A star called Kolob is 'nearest to the throne of god' and one cycle of this star around where God is, is a day for him. But it 1000 years for us. Or some number like that. Essentially that if god created the earth in 6 days, it was actually 6000 years, or so.

But that concept that perhaps a God has a timeset in a different way, could be twisted into accepting that god created earth. Even if we find fossils older than what we thought. Then, if you are a believer, you try to decode the bible to have it fit with the facts.

The same way we had to re-think the periodic table, to have it fit the elements we found.

I don't think it's wise to have two mindsets, and accept them on their own terms as fact. That's just sillyness. They should be compatible with each other.

There now, it is this type of thing that caused me so much confusion, and at the time, feelings of guilt.

I spent all my time in church as a child, different chruch every day.. missionettes, awana, bible club, bible study, the list goes on.

Then I got a little older and got heavily into the sciences..I found physics most interesting.

But the more I learned, the more I doubted everything I had been taught in all those churches..

And I felt this horrible guilt. So I studied more science.
I won't say exactly what my beliefs are now, you know why.

I must say though, I can't imagine being so dual minded that i could reconcile two completely different realities into my one mind. It would have to be one or the other for me.

These people juggling preconceived fantasy with the real world have a distinct handicap. If they could dedicate their research fully to their studies they would possibly be making breakthroughs which could propel evolution of humanity. As it is their studies are hampered within parameters of a make believe world.

Best regards ras

you love debates don't you lol?
i believe that when alot of the biblical recordings were being written down they were long before the julian calendar or what we call roman calendar existed and in those days defining time was different to how we define time today..
so although today's archeological findings maybe correct in terms of time..the spiritual aspect of How everything came into being is not disproven by this ..so yes one can still hold onto his spiritual beliefs..funnily enough islam is one religion that condones scientific research that is why so many mathematicians and scientist evolved out of early islam..

there were alchemists and scientists and mathematicians..like in medieval times in europe..

love your topics Thomas.i laways rate a plus lol
happy valentines..hehe

Wow, heavy subject. I cant speak how this man was able to separate the two. COnsidering what he proved or disproved in his studies. I do believe this quandry will be around for a while.
I can only surmise, that he has a personal conflict with dicounting his belief system. Or his faith that he grew up with? That it is/was so greatly instilled into his life that he is able to justify it within his own mind? Or just afraid to see the question that is laid out or other people, such as yourself, to wonder? Maybe it would be a taboo in his beliefs to discount it?
Personally, I can say I believe in what science has offered. Yet I can not discount faith on the whole.
One is concrete the other more abstract.
Is it possible that a God, if you will or a higher power created the science(the ever unknown secret) of it all? We may never know, or at least we may not in this lifetime. It is an interesting topic. Heavy, but nice to mull about in the noggin.
Of course there are many you would balk at such. I find it to be interesting and stimulating. Of course I have questioned this subject and many of the like most of my life anyways, but thats another discussion.

After reading through your post and a few of the replies I started to see a different light. As we are taught our religious beliefs from young on we assume they are talking the same language we know . ie a day is a day. When in fact like someone else has already said that day as scientific proven may have actually been 10000 years. I have never seen a conversion chart anywhere 1 Day= 10,000 Years. So we go about with a wrong conception of what transpired and how long it actually took. So when a scientist comes up with facts that differ from that we originally were told we tend to be taken back when in fact we should use that conversion chart and see if the two really fit. Like you or someone else has also said, no one has diproven the theory of a supreme being. Be it God or whatever you choose to call him/her. I know realistically there has been a lot of scientific research that would disprove certain beliefs of religion. But none that I know of that has disproven a supreme being exists. Even if one believes that man evolved from the Ape, That ape had to get here somehow. Or the big bang. Somehow those objects that banged had to come from some place. Who is not to say it was not that supreme body we call God??

The world is full of these kind of thinkers. Religions do such a thorough job of brainwashing that one does not know that he does not know. This is a brilliant case of a totally confused mind. Is this guy a politician in his spare time? lol. Maybe he is really living in two worlds, and has a completely split personality.

You make a great point that religions are based on so much superstition that it is impossible to accept it. For instance, the ground where a churh is built is accepted to be holy ground. That concept is all in the mind as no ground is more holier than any other. A++ rating.

That makes no sense to me. You know what's really funny? My dad is a geologist, and he actually believes something frighteningly similar. He believes the Biblical story, but what he argues is that angle in the Bible of God's time and man's time running differently. So, in essence, what's he's saying is that sure, Mosasaurus probably did live 65 million years ago in human time, but that may have only been day 3 for God.

That would make my head hurt. I don't frankly see how the two can exists side by side. We argue all the time about evolution, since he teaches biology in a school that forces creationist drivel down people's throats. And he incorporates his own theory about man's/god's time. We never come to anything but an impasse, as you can imagine.

And I gave you a positive response, in protection of your star rating.

Thomas, I am a scientist and try to live my life by Christioan principles (ie not kill anyone, not steal from anyone etc). I believe that the bible was written 2000 years ago, in a way that the people living 2000 years ago could relate to and understand. The concept of the earth being 2.6 billion years old would be totally alien to them, and without modern methods, eg Carbon dating, seafloor spreading, Plate Techtonics then it is unlikely that scientists now would differ much from 2000 year old beliefs. (Incidentally did you know that there is a limit to carbon dating, once you go past a certain date(can't remember offhand what the date is) then Carbon dating is unreliable, 1 suggeston for this is that there could have been some kind of nuclear explosion which produced a large amount of Carbon14 which contaminated the atmosphere, there could also be a number of other reasons for this.

It is difficult after 2000 years to know exactly what in the bible is true, and what has been changed over the years, some perhaps by mistranslation, (as the bible had to be copied by hand), or deliberately to fit in with Vatican ideals.

However unless anyone was actually at the creation of the earth, then there will never be 100% proof that creationists are not right (even if they got the date wrong). I'm sure that I read somewhere that some Christian Scholors have used the date 4004 BC for the date of creation.