Science and Religion?

[BADecker]

^^^ Wasn't I talking about retarded people/babies? So, I guess you partially have me there. There are two answers:
1. The retardation I was talking about is different than yours;
2. In the judgment, ask God. He might even let you know before He pronounces His judgment.

[Ipwich]

I believe in God and I believe in science also, but I don't really dig deeper in science to compared what I believe in my religion.
I know we cannot see God but I feel in my life that he is with me all the time, he keep me safe and give help me to achieve my desire in life.

Our belief in religion is hard to explain since we could have different understanding on what is written in the Bible, science on the other hand is like a law that it's specific and there is a real basis where we can see and thus we can debate it with.

[Astargath]

^^^ Wasn't I talking about retarded people/babies? So, I guess you partially have me there. There are two answers:
1. The retardation I was talking about is different than yours;
2. In the judgment, ask God. He might even let you know before He pronounces His judgment.

Good way to avoid a difficult question. The logic is simple, considering thousands of babies and even fetus die everyday, do they go directly to heaven? If they do, why? It's literally unfair that some people will go directly to heaven without doing anything while others have to pass the test.

[BADecker]

^^^ Let me show you how silly your logic is. Your logic essentially says that everybody should get broken bones and bleed when only a few of them get shot.

The only way to salvation is through Jesus Christ. Everybody knows Christ/God during the time in the womb. If any of them reject their salvation, be it in the womb or out of it, why should they be saved when they reject?

You have been given in the past, and are being given right now, the chance to be saved... to accept Jesus salvation, the only way to be saved. It would be unfair to everyone to save those people who don't accept Jesus salvation.

I mean, if you go to the store and buy strawberries, but some other guy goes to the store and buys peaches, should you get the peach flavor when you eat the strawberries? Wouldn't it be way more logical for you to get what you asked-for/purchased/ate, the strawberry flavor?

Your whole way of thinking doesn't fit with nature and physics. In other words, your personal religion doesn't fit with science.

[Astargath]

^^^ Let me show you how silly your logic is. Your logic essentially says that everybody should get broken bones and bleed when only a few of them get shot.

The only way to salvation is through Jesus Christ. Everybody knows Christ/God during the time in the womb. If any of them reject their salvation, be it in the womb or out of it, why should they be saved when they reject?

You have been given in the past, and are being given right now, the chance to be saved... to accept Jesus salvation, the only way to be saved. It would be unfair to everyone to save those people who don't accept Jesus salvation.

I mean, if you go to the store and buy strawberries, but some other guy goes to the store and buys peaches, should you get the peach flavor when you eat the strawberries? Wouldn't it be way more logical for you to get what you asked-for/purchased/ate, the strawberry flavor?

Your whole way of thinking doesn't fit with nature and physics. In other words, your personal religion doesn't fit with science.

''The only way to salvation is through Jesus Christ. Everybody knows Christ/God during the time in the womb. If any of them reject their salvation, be it in the womb or out of it, why should they be saved when they reject?'' Nothing about this is ever claimed in the bible. So, stop inventing stuff?

[okala]

The both go together religion and science can not go without each other, religion is  the way to worship God but science is a formulation of man in technology and other wise. While region can be limited to worshiping God science on the other hand is can be related to god and human.

[BADecker]

^^^ Technically, science is only the investigation of things to find them out in detail. Religion is the knowledge expressed, with emphasis and detail in certain areas, and lack of clarity in areas not important to the specific religion.

The two of them are in different areas. Essentially, science is the way to prove some of religion, or to prove it is wrong. However, it will take a long time for science to become great enough to prove or disprove a whole lot of religion.

In their efforts to find out knowledge, some scientists have started believing science things that haven't been proven. And they have often rejected formal religion things they have not prove wrong. When they do this, they are turning aspects of science into religion.

[BADecker]

^^^ Except that scientists are never really certain about much of anything. Consider that science theories can be changed on a moment's notice with proper new information. And even things not considered to be science theories, are often simply dropped when they are found to be obsolete. Can't really trust science.

[kotajikikox]

Science and religion there is a big difference. We all know that scientist did not believe in God and they always say that in able to believe is to see is what to believe.they askimg always a proof of something.scientist said that all is happens by nature not by God.
But for me I do believe in God because if not who does our earth,who does all the planet?
How come that earth,sun moon and others planet are revolving even does not holding of anyone.
Also proof that there is a God our life who holds our life.
Even that Gods we never see we know that there is a God and I believe that theres a God.

[BADecker]

^^^ Religion doesn't always mean "God." In fact, it might mean other things more than it means "God." https://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion

When scientists stop using things of science to determine what they call scientific findings, they are using religion. Why? Because it is based on belief rather than on scientific fact.

[Astargath]

^^^ Religion doesn't always mean "God." In fact, it might mean other things more than it means "God." https://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion

When scientists stop using things of science to determine what they call scientific findings, they are using religion. Why? Because it is based on belief rather than on scientific fact.

All scientific theories use the scientific method. All religious books use... nothing. They are simple writings. Notice how the bible provides no evidence or test for anything it claims, it simply claims things without anything to back them up.

[BADecker]

^^^ You suggest that religious books are nothing, but you haven't used the scientific method on them. If you had, you would find out that the science in them is more powerful than the scientific knowledge we have today in the directions that the religious books talk. You would also find which of these books are credible, and which are lacking in scientific and common sense.

Notice how the Bible can be tested against the kind of people that the people of Israel are to show that the writings of the Bible absolutely have to be real, or they wouldn't have been written in such an absolutely down-to-earth fashion that they have been written in.

One of the philosophies of the scientific method is that scientists don't use the scientific method on things that they are not interested in. Since most of the scientists are interested in working with the physical things at hand, why would they even apply the scientific method to religious books to find out which are realistic and which are not?

Just stating that religious books are nothing, is stating that thinking people are nothing, and that science is nothing because it is developed by thinking people, just as the religious books have been. So, you see that it is you who are messed up, because thinking scientists actually do reasonable studies, and their talk about their studies fits the way people talk about things as described in the religious books.

Science and religion are tied right to each other... interwoven, even.

[Astargath]

^^^ You suggest that religious books are nothing, but you haven't used the scientific method on them. If you had, you would find out that the science in them is more powerful than the scientific knowledge we have today in the directions that the religious books talk. You would also find which of these books are credible, and which are lacking in scientific and common sense.

Notice how the Bible can be tested against the kind of people that the people of Israel are to show that the writings of the Bible absolutely have to be real, or they wouldn't have been written in such an absolutely down-to-earth fashion that they have been written in.

One of the philosophies of the scientific method is that scientists don't use the scientific method on things that they are not interested in. Since most of the scientists are interested in working with the physical things at hand, why would they even apply the scientific method to religious books to find out which are realistic and which are not?

Just stating that religious books are nothing, is stating that thinking people are nothing, and that science is nothing because it is developed by thinking people, just as the religious books have been. So, you see that it is you who are messed up, because thinking scientists actually do reasonable studies, and their talk about their studies fits the way people talk about things as described in the religious books.

Science and religion are tied right to each other... interwoven, even.

Considering how many scientific errors the bible contains, what do you mean we haven't used the scientific method on them? Of course we have, there is not much you can do with the scientific method to a book, though. No experiments can be done to test god, no evidence, no hypothesis.

''or they wouldn't have been written in such an absolutely down-to-earth fashion that they have been written in.'' [False dilemma fallacy] '' false dilemma is a type of informal fallacy in which something is falsely claimed to be an "either/or" situation, when in fact there is at least one additional option.[1]''

''Since most of the scientists are interested in working with the physical things at hand, why would they even apply the scientific method to religious books to find out which are realistic and which are not? '' Because a lot of scientists are also religious people so of course they would try to apply the scientific method to the bible, unfortunately they failed and that's why even religious scientists do not talk about it.

[BADecker]

^^^ The only reason why science was barely available in ages beyond 500 years ago, is that science wasn't organized. The earth, nature, and machine usage of people existed for thousands of years. So, the things of nature that science uses in its calculations existed for thousands of years... actually, from the beginning.

Nobody knows the future. Science can't, for a fact, predict the future, just as religion can't. Yet BOTH are used for predicting the future to people, so that people can be more comfortable in their minds about what will happen to them.

So you can see that science and religion aren't very different after all.

[Astargath]

^^^ The only reason why science was barely available in ages beyond 500 years ago, is that science wasn't organized. The earth, nature, and machine usage of people existed for thousands of years. So, the things of nature that science uses in its calculations existed for thousands of years... actually, from the beginning.

Nobody knows the future. Science can't, for a fact, predict the future, just as religion can't. Yet BOTH are used for predicting the future to people, so that people can be more comfortable in their minds about what will happen to them.

So you can see that science and religion aren't very different after all.

What kind of retarded argument is this? Poop and a monkey cannot predict the future therefore, SEE?? THEY ARE NOT THAT DIFFERENT AFTER ALL. Are you this dumb or do you like to troll? Religion is based in faith and nothing more which literally means it's based on nothing, you simply believe it because you do, there are no predictions, no tests, no evidence.

[BADecker]

^^^ That's the thing I like about you. You continue to show your insincerity and your limited ability to think.

Do you have any evidence at all that the things that science uses were not around throughout all ages of the past like religion was (and is)?

Do you have any evidence at all that both science and religion are not there to help people, especially with things that they can't predict because they don't know the future?

The only difference between science theory and religion is that science theory admits by its very nature that it doesn't know the future.

The major difference between science fact and religion is that religion often expresses the emotional reasons why, but science fact never does.

[siarczyn]

I think it`s a little bit more complicated as you all think it is

[Astargath]

^^^ That's the thing I like about you. You continue to show your insincerity and your limited ability to think.

Do you have any evidence at all that the things that science uses were not around throughout all ages of the past like religion was (and is)?

Do you have any evidence at all that both science and religion are not there to help people, especially with things that they can't predict because they don't know the future?

The only difference between science theory and religion is that science theory admits by its very nature that it doesn't know the future.

The major difference between science fact and religion is that religion often expresses the emotional reasons why, but science fact never does.

Yes I have plenty of evidence, people donate money to science, to investigation, to research, they go to hospitals when they are sick, they trust doctors not priests, they do not go to the church when they are sick, they go to a hospital because they know science works, religion doesn't.

[BADecker]

^^^ Science doesn't always work. There are many times when the medical is amazed that there was this result or that result. Religion has the answer for both, the this or the that.

[Astargath]

^^^ Science doesn't always work. There are many times when the medical is amazed that there was this result or that result. Religion has the answer for both, the this or the that.

Science doesnt always work but it works, religion never works, otherwise people would go to churches not hospitals.