Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

science supports God's existence

65 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

Thinking about scientists in the past has made me think about something in nature that always deeply impressed me. How is it that math so nicely models the world? Not only can we use math to model things after the fact, but merely manipulating mathematical symbols according to certain rules leads to incredible predictions about what we do in fact find in nature. An amazing example of this is Einstein's special relativity. A couple postulates followed by exploring their (mathematical) entailment led to the incredible predictions behind time dilation and length contraction as well as mass-energy equivalence. These were subsequently thoroughly tested decades later. How to explain this?

 

On the atheist viewpoint, I don't know that you could answer this question. It is all an incredible coincidence. There is no reasonable expectation, a priori, of finding such tight order and predictability. You certainly couldn't expect to find that abstract mathematics could be used to both model and predict how nature behaves. On the other hand, from the Christian point of view none  of this should be surprising. Genesis 1, Romans 1:20 and a multitude of other such verses suggest that God created nature in an orderly fashion. God explains the connection. This makes it all the more surprising to me that modern scientists are so recalcitrant to see God in nature. Great scientists in the past were not so hesitant and they had less reason to suspect something supernatural. The further things are probed, the more amazing some of these discoveries are. The connection between pen and paper (or computer) mathematical predictions and what is actually found in experiment I think at least should give people pause.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I agree!

 

When I brought a point like this (about math) up in a forum consisting of scientist and science-minded people, the replies given were obviously their best attempts at avoiding the logical conclusion the the mere existence of "math" and how it works points to a Creator.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I agree!

 

When I brought a point like this (about math) up in a forum consisting of scientist and science-minded people, the replies given were obviously their best attempts at avoiding the logical conclusion the the mere existence of "math" and how it works points to a Creator.

 

~

 

Amen~!

 

My son, if thou wilt receive my words, and hide my commandments with thee;

So that thou incline thine ear unto wisdom, and apply thine heart to understanding;

 

Yea, if thou criest after knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding;

If thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures;

Then shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God.

 

For the LORD giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding.

He layeth up sound wisdom for the righteous: he is a buckler to them that walk uprightly.

He keepeth the paths of judgment, and preserveth the way of his saints.

 

Then shalt thou understand righteousness, and judgment, and equity; yea, every good path.

When wisdom entereth into thine heart, and knowledge is pleasant unto thy soul;

Discretion shall preserve thee, understanding shall keep thee:

 

To deliver thee from the way of the evil man, from the man that speaketh froward things;

Who leave the paths of uprightness, to walk in the ways of darkness;

 

Who rejoice to do evil, and delight in the frowardness of the wicked;

Whose ways are crooked, and they froward in their paths: Proverbs 2:1-15

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

This is an argument from incredulity.  You are saying you can't imagine how math could model the universe so God exists.  Also, it seems to be backward.  Math is just a measure of the physical properties of the universe, it is bound by the universe.  It is like being impressed that the water in a mud puddle fits the ground it is bound by perfectly.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

This is an argument from incredulity.  You are saying you can't imagine how math could model the universe so God exists.  Also, it seems to be backward.  Math is just a measure of the physical properties of the universe, it is bound by the universe.  It is like being impressed that the water in a mud puddle fits the ground it is bound by perfectly.

Yes isn't that amazing! God created the forces that make it so, and even today we cannot truly explain gravity. We serve an awesome God!

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

This is an argument from incredulity.  You are saying you can't imagine how math could model the universe so God exists.  Also, it seems to be backward.  Math is just a measure of the physical properties of the universe, it is bound by the universe.  It is like being impressed that the water in a mud puddle fits the ground it is bound by perfectly.

Yes isn't that amazing! God created the forces that make it so, and even today we cannot truly explain gravity. We serve an awesome God!

 

 

Hey Fez,

 

Gravity......You'll open up a whole can of worms with talk like that LOL.

 

 

Also I have a Just a couple of questions for all who view.

 

Ok, maybe this is too simple minded but let me just put this out there just from a personal standpoint.....

 

After Basic Training/AIT where you just learn common skills.....the rest of my Combat Arms Career, roughly 98%... was KNOWING YOUR ENEMY.  Just a relentless day after day studying tactics and strategies/logistics of the Enemy.  Back in those days it was Mother Russia.

 

I guess the principle never left me....it was a Traumatic Experience @ Times LOL.  Having said that:

 

What was the First Sin in the Bible: 

 

(Genesis 3:1) "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?"

 

(Genesis 3:4) "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:"

 

 

So the obvious #1 Tactic (among many, but for brevity) is to first CREATE DOUBT and then CHANGE THE WORD OF GOD.

 

Moreover from Daniel Chapter 10:  (Daniel 10:20) "Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come."

There is a dialogue with the Angel Gabriel concerning his fight with the Prince of Persia the needing the Angel Michael's help to get through.  Now thay're not talking about the Human Prince's (Persia and Grecia) but Principalities and Powers, Right?

 

 

Soooo, I'm not saying the evil one doesn't attack Joe Coffee and Betty Breadmaker but If you were in the DIRE Predicament that he's in, just from a Tactical Standpoint to set up the End of Days and following the Modus Operandi ( Create Doubt and Change GOD'S WORD), what would you do?.....

 

Attack:

 

A.  The Satellite Repairman

B.  Jack the Walmart Manager

C.  WORLD Powers/Establishments/Seminaries/Universities

 

??

 

And my final question:  What "Establishment" on the Planet Earth attempts to Cast the Most DOUBT of the Existence of GOD Bar None???  I'll give you a Hint, it starts with "S" and ends in "E".

 

as for the OP:

 

“Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality. ”

Nikola Tesla

 

Nikola Tesla a home boy, my GrandMother was born in Croatia.  Hail to the Motherland!!  LOL

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

This is an argument from incredulity.  You are saying you can't imagine how math could model the universe so God exists.  Also, it seems to be backward.  Math is just a measure of the physical properties of the universe, it is bound by the universe.  It is like being impressed that the water in a mud puddle fits the ground it is bound by perfectly.

 

It's an argument from design and if I had to formalize it I would have it something like this:

 

1. It is highly unlikely to randomly find the world (and by world I mean everything that exists physically) highly ordered. Out of all of the configurations in which the world could be found, finding it highly ordered is going to be much more unlikely than an unordered one.

 

It is much more likely to find the world ordered if it is not the product of random blind chance, but rather the design of an intelligence.

 

2. The world is highly ordered to the point that we can use abstract mathematics to accurately describe physical reality. We are able to model and make predictions to incredibly precision and accuracy on every scale through this means.

 

3. Point 2 makes the world we actually observe much more likely on God's existence than on atheism. Therefore it's at least reasonable to expect an intelligent designer is behind the existence of the world.

 

Though I wasn't intending to make a formal argument in my OP per se, maybe for clarification that will help a bit. Mostly though, my main point is that it is really, very amazing and interesting to find things so discoverable, predictable, from the quantum world (yes I am aware the predictions there are probabilistic), to biological scales, to astronomical scales. And, every time we dig deeper into the order, things become more unified, symmetric and arguably beautiful. The fact we can use math to describe all this, and make predictions about what exists physically, speaks to just how tight the organization is. It is wonderful, and at least mysterious, whether or not you believe in God.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

 

This is an argument from incredulity.  You are saying you can't imagine how math could model the universe so God exists.  Also, it seems to be backward.  Math is just a measure of the physical properties of the universe, it is bound by the universe.  It is like being impressed that the water in a mud puddle fits the ground it is bound by perfectly.

Yes isn't that amazing! God created the forces that make it so, and even today we cannot truly explain gravity. We serve an awesome God!

 

 

Hey Fez,

 

Gravity......You'll open up a whole can of worms with talk like that LOL.

 

 

Also I have a Just a couple of questions for all who view.

 

Ok, maybe this is too simple minded but let me just put this out there just from a personal standpoint.....

 

After Basic Training/AIT where you just learn common skills.....the rest of my Combat Arms Career, roughly 98%... was KNOWING YOUR ENEMY.  Just a relentless day after day studying tactics and strategies/logistics of the Enemy.  Back in those days it was Mother Russia.

 

I guess the principle never left me....it was a Traumatic Experience @ Times LOL.  Having said that:

 

What was the First Sin in the Bible: 

 

(Genesis 3:1) "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?"

 

(Genesis 3:4) "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:"

 

 

So the obvious #1 Tactic (among many, but for brevity) is to first CREATE DOUBT and then CHANGE THE WORD OF GOD.

 

Moreover from Daniel Chapter 10:  (Daniel 10:20) "Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come."

There is a dialogue with the Angel Gabriel concerning his fight with the Prince of Persia the needing the Angel Michael's help to get through.  Now thay're not talking about the Human Prince's (Persia and Grecia) but Principalities and Powers, Right?

 

 

Soooo, I'm not saying the evil one doesn't attack Joe Coffee and Betty Breadmaker but If you were in the DIRE Predicament that he's in, just from a Tactical Standpoint to set up the End of Days and following the Modus Operandi ( Create Doubt and Change GOD'S WORD), what would you do?.....

 

Attack:

 

A.  The Satellite Repairman

B.  Jack the Walmart Manager

C.  WORLD Powers/Establishments/Seminaries/Universities

 

??

 

And my final question:  What "Establishment" on the Planet Earth attempts to Cast the Most DOUBT of the Existence of GOD Bar None???  I'll give you a Hint, it starts with "S" and ends in "E".

 

as for the OP:

 

“Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality. ”

Nikola Tesla

 

Nikola Tesla a home boy, my GrandMother was born in Croatia.  Hail to the Motherland!!  LOL

 

While I understand that the scientific establishment is not exactly pro-God these days, that doesn't negate the fact that the contents of scientific knowledge support the existence of a supernatural Creator. As far as Tesla, he was profoundly mistaken about several things. I'm pro experiment, entirely, but it seems the most progress is made with balance. The list of stuff predicted from messing with math is impressively long (from anti-matter to time dilation)... it's honestly surprising it can be done at all. That is one fact about the world that always amazed me when I was an atheist. The interplay there between abstract theories and experimental findings is very powerful.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

 

 

=============================================================================

 

As far as Tesla, he was profoundly mistaken about several things

.

Go ahead and list them.  Then list what he was Right about and we'll compare and contrast.

 

 

The list of stuff predicted from messing with math is impressively long (from anti-matter to time dilation)...

 

I'll bet the List from predicting Absolutely Zilch is even Longer.  It's also a Human Construct/Convention and in most cases is Domain Dependent/Specific.  However, having said that, It has it's place and we wouldn't be where we are without it.

 

Speaking of Numbers, the most striking patterns IMHO are Fibonacci Sequences/ Spirals in Nature Living and Non-Living.  It's absolutely Breath Taking and again, IMHO; one of the Signatures of GOD. 

 

 

That is one fact about the world that always amazed me when I was an atheist. The interplay there between abstract theories and experimental findings is very powerful.

 

Agreed

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

 

 

 

=============================================================================

 

As far as Tesla, he was profoundly mistaken about several things

.

Go ahead and list them.  Then list what he was Right about and we'll compare and contrast.

 

 

The list of stuff predicted from messing with math is impressively long (from anti-matter to time dilation)...

 

I'll bet the List from predicting Absolutely Zilch is even Longer.  It's also a Human Construct/Convention and in most cases is Domain Dependent/Specific.  However, having said that, It has it's place and we wouldn't be where we are without it.

 

Speaking of Numbers, the most striking patterns IMHO are Fibonacci Sequences/ Spirals in Nature Living and Non-Living.  It's absolutely Breath Taking and again, IMHO; one of the Signatures of GOD. 

 

 

That is one fact about the world that always amazed me when I was an atheist. The interplay there between abstract theories and experimental findings is very powerful.

 

Agreed

 

I don't want to get off on a Tesla tangent here (you are free to interpret my recalcitrance however you wish). I am not sure how that would really relate to the OP. If we agree that amazing things have been discovered through mathematic models that is really my only point here. There is no reason to expect that we can do that if atheism is true.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

 

 

======================================================================================

 

I am not sure how that would really relate to the OP.

 

Sorry, it's just a habit of mine when I see Generalized Unsupported Statements....it's like Pavlov's Dogs.

 

 

There is no reason to expect that we can do that if atheism is true.

 

Agreed.  But, You really don't need any Math in that "specific" case,  "Specific Complexity" takes care of that quite demonstrably.   The Importance of Math with Observation and Experiment are each self limiting without the other.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

 

 

 

======================================================================================

 

I am not sure how that would really relate to the OP.

 

Sorry, it's just a habit of mine when I see Generalized Unsupported Statements....it's like Pavlov's Dogs.

 

 

There is no reason to expect that we can do that if atheism is true.

 

Agreed.  But, You really don't need any Math in that "specific" case,  "Specific Complexity" takes care of that quite demonstrably.   The Importance of Math with Observation and Experiment are each self limiting without the other.

 

??? I do not follow. And as far as Tesla, I just realized I don't think I really care what people think of him at all. I'm not really an anti Tesla-ite or anything.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

 

 

===========================================================================

 

 

??? I do not follow.

 

What are you not following Specifically???

 

And as far as Tesla, I just realized I don't think I really care what people think of him at all. I'm not really an anti Tesla-ite or anything.

 

The FBI (Government) sure had a "thing" for Tesla.  Anti "Tesla-ite"..... that is too funny.

 

This was my point,......

 

"We have to learn again that science without contact with experiments is an enterprise which is likely to go completely astray into imaginary conjecture"

Hannes Alfven PhD, Noble Prize Physics 1970

 

We're gonna touch on some of that "imaginary conjecture" over the next few weeks and beyond.  We'll start off today with a subject that, as far as I'm aware, hasn't been talked about @ all....The Nebular Hypothesis.  Hopefully, most know it's a Laugher....but you never can tell.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

...

 

“Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality. ”

Nikola Tesla

 

Nikola Tesla a home boy, my GrandMother was born in Croatia.  Hail to the Motherland!!  LOL

Recently There was a big debate re whether or not the ashes of Nikola Tesla will be transferred from a museum in Belgrade named after him to the yard of St. Sava's Temple.

And wasn't Tesla of Serbian descent?

http://www.b92.net/eng/news/society.php?yyyy=2014&mm=02&dd=28&nav_id=89484

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

...

 

“Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality. ”

Nikola Tesla

 

Nikola Tesla a home boy, my GrandMother was born in Croatia.  Hail to the Motherland!!  LOL

Recently There was a big debate re whether or not the ashes of Nikola Tesla will be transferred from a museum in Belgrade named after him to the yard of St. Sava's Temple.

And wasn't Tesla of Serbian descent?

http://www.b92.net/eng/news/society.php?yyyy=2014&mm=02&dd=28&nav_id=89484

 

 

===========================================================================

 

And wasn't Tesla of Serbian descent?

 

Yes, but he was Born in Croatia  :)

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

 

 

And wasn't Tesla of Serbian descent?

 

Yes, but he was Born in Croatia  :)

 

And that matters in this conversation why - so you can elaborate on your fixation with Tesla?  Textbook appeal to authority.

Edited by jerryR34
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

 

"We have to learn again that science without contact with experiments is an enterprise which is likely to go completely astray into imaginary conjecture"

Hannes Alfven PhD, Noble Prize Physics 1970

 

 

 Contact with experiments...that is the problem I have with trying to in inject any gods into science.  Can you name any science experiment that has contact with God?  We can do science while leaving God out of the experiment.  I'm pretty sure he won't mind.  Can you, Enoch, do a science experiment using the scientific method of observation of nature that proves the God of the Bible to someone who does not know the Bible?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

And that matters in this conversation why?

 

 

 

=========================================================================

 

Good Point LOL

 

It probably goes back to this statement earlier in the thread, by me....

 

"Nikola Tesla a home boy, my GrandMother was born in Croatia.  Hail to the Motherland!!  LOL"

 

Which in Turn led to this statement or question by Old School....

 

"And wasn't Tesla of Serbian descent?"

 

Which then subsequently led to this answer, by me...

 

"Yes, but he was Born in Croatia"

 

Good? 

 

We sometimes travel down the "TRUTH" roads of Irrelevant Minutia ...it's part of our Charm.  LOL

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

haha - can't fault you for sentiment...I understand that fully :)

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

 

 

"We have to learn again that science without contact with experiments is an enterprise which is likely to go completely astray into imaginary conjecture"

Hannes Alfven PhD, Noble Prize Physics 1970

 

 

 Contact with experiments...that is the problem I have with trying to in inject any gods into science.  Can you name any science experiment that has contact with God?  We can do science while leaving God out of the experiment.  I'm pretty sure he won't mind.  Can you, Enoch, do a science experiment using the scientific method of observation of nature that proves the God of the Bible to someone who does not know the Bible?

 

 

 

==============================================================================

 

Contact with experiments...that is the problem I have with trying to in inject any gods into science

 

There is only "ONE" CREATOR.  Two or More is Logical Absurdity...just by definition of "CREATOR".

 

Can you name any science experiment that has contact with God?

 

Not off the Top of my Head.  Historical Science...that's a different story

 

 

Can you, Enoch, do a science experiment using the scientific method of observation of nature that proves the God of the Bible to someone who does not know the Bible?

 

No, Impossible.  Can't get by Step 1:  Observe a Phenomenon.  The only way that can be done is for HIM to manifest HIMSELF, AGAIN.  Unfortunately, the next time HE does that...HE'S gonna be a bit BUSY, IMHO.

 

More importantly, There are other techniques employed to ascertain TRUTH besides the Scientific Method:  Intellect (Logic, Deductive/Inductive Reasoning, Critical Thinking/Problem Solving, and good ole fashioned Common Sense).  Combine these with Sound "Scientific Principles"....it's a pretty powerful combination.

 

As I said in the past, two very simple Proofs for Empirical Minded Folks are:  Prophecy and "Specific Complexity"

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

 

 

 

"We have to learn again that science without contact with experiments is an enterprise which is likely to go completely astray into imaginary conjecture"

Hannes Alfven PhD, Noble Prize Physics 1970

 

 

 Contact with experiments...that is the problem I have with trying to in inject any gods into science.  Can you name any science experiment that has contact with God?  We can do science while leaving God out of the experiment.  I'm pretty sure he won't mind.  Can you, Enoch, do a science experiment using the scientific method of observation of nature that proves the God of the Bible to someone who does not know the Bible?

 

 

 

==============================================================================

 

Contact with experiments...that is the problem I have with trying to in inject any gods into science

 

There is only "ONE" CREATOR.  Two or More is Logical Absurdity...just by definition of "CREATOR".

 

Can you name any science experiment that has contact with God?

 

Not off the Top of my Head.  Historical Science...that's a different story

 

 

Can you, Enoch, do a science experiment using the scientific method of observation of nature that proves the God of the Bible to someone who does not know the Bible?

 

No, Impossible.  Can't get by Step 1:  Observe a Phenomenon.  The only way that can be done is for HIM to manifest HIMSELF, AGAIN.  Unfortunately, the next time HE does that...HE'S gonna be a bit BUSY, IMHO.

 

More importantly, There are other techniques employed to ascertain TRUTH besides the Scientific Method:  Intellect (Logic, Deductive/Inductive Reasoning, Critical Thinking/Problem Solving, and good ole fashioned Common Sense).  Combine these with Sound "Scientific Principles"....it's a pretty powerful combination.

 

As I said in the past, two very simple Proofs for Empirical Minded Folks are:  Prophecy and "Specific Complexity"

 

Very forthright and honest replies - thanks.

 

I think a turning point in my life is when I started going to a Baptist church (I was raised Catholic) and their Church charter said they took the Bible literally which meant that they believed the earth was ~6K years old.  I Googled "scientific proof of God", and the first article I read was that we need to "redefine" science to mean what it meant 300+ years ago (which you seem to espouse) instead of the scientific observation of today that has helped us understand our universe – immediate red flags..

 

I went to a couple "science" lectures put on by the church with my oldest daughter, and they brought in people to try to convince the youth to believe that "scientifically" the earth is 6-10k years old.  I saw my daughter's once bright interest in science wane...one of the saddest periods of my life.  She did not feel allowed to believe in God and believe her own eyes - the cognitive dissonance was palpable.    Science is not about philosophy and logic anymore.  We are turning off some of our brightest minds to science because in certain areas they are not allowed to believe what observation tells us.  They should know there is the natural world that is observed by science, and the spiritual world that is faith.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

 

 

===========================================================================

 

(I was raised Catholic)

 

I also

 

 

I went to a couple "science" lectures put on by the church with my oldest daughter, and they brought in people to try to convince the youth to believe that "scientifically" the earth is 6-10k years old.  I saw my daughter's once bright interest in science wane...one of the saddest periods of my life

 

That's not all that surprising.  Depending on your daughter ages, she was INUNDATED from diapers from every conceivable direction that the Earth is Old. Then seeing "evidence" to the contrary and the feelings associated with that, is ripe and a Textbook definition of Cognitive Dissonance....and subsequent issues.

 

believe her own eyes........they are not allowed to believe what observation tells us.

 

Not following?  What from her "Own Eyes" would leave her to believe of an Old Earth?

 

You're equivocating Observation (of something??) with the Scientific Method.  I'm gonna turned this back on you Jerry.  There is not ONE SCIENTIFIC Experiment that proves an OLD Earth.  Name ONE that gets by STEP: 1 of the Scientific Method?

 

They should know there is the natural world that is observed by science, and the spiritual world that is faith

 

 

as I've said to you many times......Science is on a quest for Knowledge (Only through) natural processes. :huh:  It's an Oxymoron.  Knowledge by definition is Supernatural.

 

It's tantamount to trying to discover what we breathe...... but, "a priori" excluding AIR from the choices....and breathing it all while refusing to acknowledge its Existence!!!!!

 

Biblical Faith is not some Whimsical Term that is drenched in a cloak of Spiritual smoke and mirrors. 

 

(Hebrews 11:1) "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

 

Just because it may be unseen doesn't mean it's not TRUTH or Real?  For example....

 

You're walking down a country road nobody around for miles and you come across a BMW. "MOST" intuitively know that nature didn't create the car there had to be an Engineer (Designer). Even though you will most likely never see the (Designer)....you know HE'S out there.

 

Kapish?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

 

as I've said to you many times......Science is on a quest for Knowledge (Only through) natural processes. :huh:  It's an Oxymoron.  Knowledge by definition is Supernatural.

 

...and, I have disagreed often  Science is the quest for knowledge by natural means only.  Injecting God into it makes it something else, and does not advance science at all.  Can you tell me how adding God to molecular biology, physics, electrical theory, gravitational theory, etc advances those fields at all?  What is your view of Occam's razor?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

 

 

as I've said to you many times......Science is on a quest for Knowledge (Only through) natural processes. :huh:  It's an Oxymoron.  Knowledge by definition is Supernatural.

 

...and, I have disagreed often  Science is the quest for knowledge by natural means only.  Injecting God into it makes it something else, and does not advance science at all.  Can you tell me how adding God to molecular biology, physics, electrical theory, gravitational theory, etc advances those fields at all?  What is your view of Occam's razor?

 

 

 

=====================================================================

 

 

...and, I have disagreed often  Science is the quest for knowledge by natural means only.

 

How can you disagree when this is exactly what I said....

 

"Science is on a quest for Knowledge (Only through) natural processes."

 

??

 

Injecting God into it makes it something else, and does not advance science at all

 

Please review then comment on my "air" example

 

 

tell me how adding God to molecular biology, physics, electrical theory, gravitational theory, etc advances those fields at all?

 

It's not a matter of Injecting......  HE'S THE ANTECEDENT or CAUSE.  Without HIM you have none of those.

 

 

What is your view of Occam's razor?

 

Look @ Kinesin.....

 

Kinesin1_zpse680aede.jpg

 

Yes, it's Walking.  Are you saying Nature is the most obvious answer??  :huh:

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

 

 

 

...and, I have disagreed often  Science is the quest for knowledge by natural means only.

 

How can you disagree when this is exactly what I said....

 

"Science is on a quest for Knowledge (Only through) natural processes."

 

??

 

Read closely... there is a not-so-subtle difference.  You said "science is ON a quest"...I sad "Science IS a quest".  You are trying to describe what, for lack of a better word, an entity is doing, while I am describing what that entity is.  Science IS the quest.  It's like saying a wrench is on a quest to loosen a bolt instead of saying the wrench is used to loosen the bolt.

Edited by jerryR34
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0