[quote]BBriere wrote:
I’ve also never considered it the role of any religion to define anything scientific. Anyone looking for scientific proof from any religion is going to be very disappointed.[/quote]
I hear this a lot, but I don’t think most believers actually mean it.
What I mean is, believers frequently make absolutist statements that pertain to the material universe. They claim that a supernatural being created the universe, that physical miracles occur, etc. All of these are scientific issues relating to objective facts about the nature of the universe, yet believers not only dip their toe into this world, but they frequently plunge in head first.
I would be completely fine if religion limited itself to moral issues, but unfortunately many of its values are derived from unsubstantiated belief systems about the nature of the material universe.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
Not saying that the earth is spinning solely because of super natural powers. I am not an idiot, but you on the other hand claim that clumps of dirt and rock just started moving one day. For no reason. So, either the Universe has existed forever and is somehow super natural, or it was created and set in motion.
Solely? As in the spinning of the earth depends in part on supernatural powers, and would stop spinning if those magical powers went away? I’m curious if you believe that, and if so, why?
Although I’ve said this repeatedly, you’re still missing it so here it is in bold:
I’m not claiming the universe just decided to start moving one day, for no reason. I’m claiming the universe, or a series of universes, has ALWAYS EXISTED, AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN IN MOTION.
Why are you assuming that something has to be supernatural in order to exist forever? Do you not understand that the First Law of Thermodynamics says that matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed? What is supernatural about that?[/quote]
I said I am not saying that the earth is spinning soley because of Super Natural powers.
Yeah, I understand, but one of your other Natural Laws says nothing can be in motion unless something set it in motion. So, let’s say there is a Super Natural power called God, now he contains more ‘energy’ than anything else in existence combined. God creates the universe and sets everything in motion. First, energy never disappeared, it just changed. Second, it would explain a simple law that your every existing universe can not explain, movement.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Bigd1970 wrote:
Sometimes Science gets things wrong? How can anyone put any credence in something that’s sole purpose is to prove itself wrong?
The purpose of science is to get things right. It achieves that purpose by constantly scrutinizing the evidence, and making refinements as needed based on that evidence, in a progressive path toward knowing the actual facts. Science does a remarkable job at that, you only need to look around you to note the fruits of the scientific method.
[/quote]
Yes, because science has never fudged their results or proclaimed their research found the truth, which in later times was found to be false. Never that would be absurd.
[quote]
Do you think that choosing to have “faith” in some belief system, without any objective evidence to support that faith, and refusing to consider any evidence that contradicts your pet beliefs, is a more honest approach that is more likely to result in actual facts?
…at least when I was a human I lived a good life.
I completely agree with living a good life, I just don’t believe it is necessary to have faith in a supernatural being in order to do so. In fact, I frequently see people NOT living as good a life as they could, due to a flawed belief system, and the “values” that flow from those flawed beliefs.[/quote]
[quote]forlife wrote:
BBriere wrote:
I’ve also never considered it the role of any religion to define anything scientific. Anyone looking for scientific proof from any religion is going to be very disappointed.
I hear this a lot, but I don’t think most believers actually mean it.
What I mean is, believers frequently make absolutist statements that pertain to the material universe. They claim that a supernatural being created the universe, that physical miracles occur, etc. All of these are scientific issues relating to objective facts about the nature of the universe, yet believers not only dip their toe into this world, but they frequently plunge in head first.
I would be completely fine if religion limited itself to moral issues, but unfortunately many of its values are derived from unsubstantiated belief systems about the nature of the material universe.[/quote]
This guy, still does not get it. Faith, is not about moral issues. That is by the nature of God, the creator of the world and the spirit. You get frustrated because your modernistic scientist tell you one thing, yet the Christian’s claim another thing (backed by science) and you just scream and holler this is not right you have no science.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
I said I am not saying that the earth is spinning soley because of Super Natural powers. [/quote]
I know. Which implies that you believe the earth is spinning, at least in part, due to supernatural powers. Yes?
What Natural Law would that be? If something has always been in motion, it’s unnecessary for anything to have set it in motion.
It doesn’t explain anything, because you fail to account for what created your “god” and what set your “god” in motion. You dodge this, by saying your “god” is a special case by being an “uncaused cause”, as if that actually means anything. But if you accept the possibility of an “uncaused cause”, it only makes sense to accept the possibility that the universe itself is an “uncaused cause”, i.e., has always existed.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Yes, because science has never fudged their results or proclaimed their research found the truth, which in later times was found to be false. Never that would be absurd.
[/quote]
Any scientific claims can be confirmed by others. You don’t need to depend on the integrity of the scientists in a particular study, when you can conduct the identical experiment yourself and make the same observations.
That’s a nice contrast from religious claims, which often depend upon having “faith” in the word of somebody else, whether it be the author of a 2,000 year old letter or the pastor preaching from your pulpit.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
This guy, still does not get it. Faith, is not about moral issues. That is by the nature of God, the creator of the world and the spirit. You get frustrated because your modernistic scientist tell you one thing, yet the Christian’s claim another thing (backed by science) and you just scream and holler this is not right you have no science.[/quote]
Thanks for proving my point. You’re saying the opposite of BBriere, because you are insisting that “faith” is about objective reality. Whether the universe actually was created by a supernatural being, or through some other natural cause, is a question of science. It’s not a matter of personal interpretation, where you get to choose whatever answer makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside. It is an objective question about a material fact.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
I said I am not saying that the earth is spinning soley because of Super Natural powers.
I know. Which implies that you believe the earth is spinning, at least in part, due to supernatural powers. Yes?
Yeah, I understand, but one of your other Natural Laws says nothing can be in motion unless something set it in motion.
What Natural Law would that be? If something has always been in motion, it’s unnecessary for anything to have set it in motion.
So, let’s say there is a Super Natural power called God, now he contains more ‘energy’ than anything else in existence combined. God creates the universe and sets everything in motion. First, energy never disappeared, it just changed. Second, it would explain a simple law that your every existing universe can not explain, movement.
It doesn’t explain anything, because you fail to account for what created your “god” and what set your “god” in motion. You dodge this, by saying your “god” is a special case by being an “uncaused cause”, as if that actually means anything. But if you accept the possibility of an “uncaused cause”, it only makes sense to accept the possibility that the universe itself is an “uncaused cause”, i.e., has always existed.
[/quote]
Alright, well you go ahead and put two rocks in a vacuum, and tell me when they start moving on their own.
[quote]forlife wrote:
BBriere wrote:
I’ve also never considered it the role of any religion to define anything scientific. Anyone looking for scientific proof from any religion is going to be very disappointed.
I hear this a lot, but I don’t think most believers actually mean it.
What I mean is, believers frequently make absolutist statements that pertain to the material universe. They claim that a supernatural being created the universe, that physical miracles occur, etc. All of these are scientific issues relating to objective facts about the nature of the universe, yet believers not only dip their toe into this world, but they frequently plunge in head first.
I would be completely fine if religion limited itself to moral issues, but unfortunately many of its values are derived from unsubstantiated belief systems about the nature of the material universe.[/quote]
Well, for me miracles happen everyday. I believe God created the universe which makes it very miraculous that our planet can sustain life when the rest of the cosmos we have explored so far cannot. I respect science as well for it’s explantion of things that religious teachings can’t give us. For instance, during the Middle Ages when Scholasticism was the philosophy of choice all science had to be reconciled with what was in the Bible. Again, the Bible isn’t a science book so scientific learning ceased in Western Europe for centuries. I feel you can respect and study science and still maintain a religious following. Science doesn’t teach salvation and religion doesn’t teach science so they are two completely different things.
By the way, since we are on T-Nation, whose training programs do you like the best? I’m totally a Chad Waterbury follower. I love his 25 rep method.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Well that is what you are saying, that rocks and dirt and gases, just one day decided to move by themselves, no help.[/quote]
I’m going to try this one more time.
I never said the universe suddenly decided to move itself. I said the universe has ALWAYS GONE THROUGH A CYCLE OF EXPANSIONS AND CONTRACTIONS. There was never a point in time that it was completely inert. If energy cannot be created or destroyed, then it logically follows that the universe has always had energy to drive it.
[quote]BBriere wrote:
I believe God created the universe which makes it very miraculous that our planet can sustain life when the rest of the cosmos we have explored so far cannot…
Science doesn’t teach salvation and religion doesn’t teach science so they are two completely different things.[/quote]
These two statements are contradictory. If you believe the universe had a supernatural, rather than a natural, origin then you are “teaching science”. You’re making an objective claim about the origin of the physical universe, which is directly contradicted by current theories of science.
[quote]By the way, since we are on T-Nation, whose training programs do you like the best? I’m totally a Chad Waterbury follower. I love his 25 rep method.
[/quote]
Honestly, I think Chad Waterbury sucks If you’re going to follow an off the shelf program, I would recommend Ian King instead.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
Well that is what you are saying, that rocks and dirt and gases, just one day decided to move by themselves, no help.
I’m going to try this one more time.
I never said the universe suddenly decided to move itself. I said the universe has ALWAYS GONE THROUGH A CYCLE OF EXPANSIONS AND CONTRACTIONS. There was never a point in time that it was completely inert. If energy cannot be created or destroyed, then it logically follows that the universe has always had energy to drive it.[/quote]
Okay so it was always moving I believe that too, but you are still saying rocks move by themselves.
[quote]forlife wrote:
These two statements are contradictory. If you believe the universe had a supernatural, rather than a natural, origin then you are “teaching science”. You’re making an objective claim about the origin of the physical universe, which is directly contradicted by current theories of science.[/quote]
No, I’m not teaching that God created the universe. That’s just a personal belief. You can’t prove God created the universe so it’s not science.
[quote]
Honestly, I think Chad Waterbury sucks If you’re going to follow an off the shelf program, I would recommend Ian King instead.[/quote]
Whatever, Chad Waterbury is the greatest. I noticed that you are from TX. Where at? I’m in Dallas. Also the greatest.
If you’re going to follow an off the shelf program, I would recommend Ian King instead.