NationStates Jolt Archive

Yes.

I said it and I meant it.

This will be a small essay on my personal experience and beleifs.

Firstly let me tell you where I stand exactly. I beleive in Evolution, and as well as Creation. Not biblical creation mind you, just that the human version of creation is really transformation. We turn a tree into an Ikea Kitchen Table set, real creation means that everyhting, an infinite expanse of space, energy, and matter came from nothing, or almost nothing. Ill explain.

I grew up in a Montessori School, where we had to say prayer before lunch, being Christian was almost a prerequisite, legally no, but yes, at the same time. If I beleived in God or Jesus Christ at the time, it was because I told I did, and didnt really know the difference, it was something to hang out with all the other Christians.

Then in Junior High/High School I went to public school, where all of a sudden it wasnt a crime to be an athiest, in other words, I could think for myself and it suddenly wouldnt be a massive social pressure to cave in to religion.

And I became an athiest, internally I admitted, that I had no Idea for the basis of the existence of God or a God. I openly mocked and criticized Christians for thier beleifs, I read "Atheism" by George something-or-other (Its real.) at my local Library. I reveled in Science at school and I had/have a fascination for Quantum Physics.

Then, as time passed, and discussions became more enlightened and calm, I listened. I got over being angry at a God who never revealed himself to me, I got over being angry at him for never getting me an "A" on my test. No, I dont beleive that "footsteps" plaque that you see in every bathroom, and living room wall in america, Im just saying that I took some personal responsibility for my own life, and stopped trying to find someone or something too blame my mistakes on.

I read about Jesus Christ, and found out he was a living breathing human being at one time, I actually started to admire the man. He took on the corrupt temple of the pharisees and initiated massive social reform, hell, he was the Martin Luther King of his day.

I also found schools of thought that say he was Married to Mary Magdlene, and had Three Kids with her, that he was a Rabbi, a human being, who lived and suffered as a Human. (I was throwing this in Christians faces YEARS before the Da Vinci Code, folks, so please dont go there. Apologies to Dan Brown!)

I did and stil do beleive that saying "Its in the bible, so it must be true" is a sign of BLIND faith, not faith. The most enlightened preists you meet will admit that the bible, like all works of man, is flawed. Even if something is divinely inspired they say, it is still a work of man.

Then I started to see something. Yes, religion gave us the Crusades, as well as 9-11. But science gave us the atomic bomb too. The unifying factor here? They both produce the same results. Science has given us medicine, religion, before science, gave us unity, community something to beleive in and have hope. Even the athiests that I talk too, who try too disparage all forms of social convention, saying that they can go on with a soley scinetific viewpoint on life, on seeing the inherit meaninglessness of life.

I look at their girlfriends, their need for companionship, and I smile saying nothing. I know that they will always be a human being, just like me. Whether you beleive that we are just a random collection of chemicals ( I do.), or that the Whole is greater then the Sum of its parts (I do.) my point is that historically, man has always craved knowledge. I do believe that god gave us that reason, and intelligence, and ambition to seek it out, through whatever means neccessary.

Religion, before there was science, tried to answer those questions we could not. Science, has answered many questions, but has created many more, and so, the search continues. What do I think is going on now? A Power struggle, nothing less. Those who had power, dont want to let it go. But at the same time, I beleive those enlightened men, dont see the difference.

Now for the Quantum Physics section. What is Quantum Physics? It the science of Possibilities, and Impossbilities. What is a miracle? Is it when particles disappear, then reappear, without any explanation? Is it the fact that WERE ACTUALLY ABLE TO WONDER WHAT THE HELL IS GOIN ON WITH THAT PARTICLE WHEN TWENTY YEARS Ago we were just beggining to build electron microscopes?

Maybe not...maybe its just one of those questions that science has produced. I beleive it is a miracle. But thats just me...I like to think that God is presenting himself to us in a knowledgable from. "Eyes have not seen, Ears have not heard..." and what would be more wonderful than to know God? No reasonable man thinks of God as an Old White Guy in a throne in the sky.

A singularity is described by the dictionary as "Astrophysics. A point in space-time at which gravitational forces cause matter to have infinite density and infinitesimal volume, and space and time to become infinitely distorted." I beleive that this universe derived from a singularity. I have no problem beleiving that An Infinite Universe exploded forth from a single particle, and that somehow virtually an Infinite amount of energy was either released, or created. (A belief that goes against science.)

I have no problem beleiving that Just as Time and Space are connected, (Einstein Theory) that Matter is somehow connected to it too. Its been proven that Matter is 99.9% empty space. We're really bundles of energy. I have no problem that all energy is inheritly the same, and therefore connected. I have no problem believing that that Connection is God.

I dont beleive that Jesus Christ is my lord and Savior, anymore then I belive in the Eightfold path of Buddhism (tripitaka, if im not mistaken, litterally the eight baskets)

I do not beleive that Science in its purest form can allow a Human Being to function in Society, I beleive in the need for an Ethical Code. I beleive in the need for Spiritual Fulfillment.

I do not beleive that Religion alone can dictate how a man should beleive or function in society, it can set a Mold, or template, but the need arises to break out of that mold.

I beleive that the two are just different sides of the same coin. The quest to answer our questions, and find fulfillment in our place in the world, and the universe.


But hey, that just me.

(Let the flamefest start.)

Science and religion can coexist, yes - I wholeheartedly agree (now tell that to the militant athiests)

The only time they conflict is when the Bible is interpreted literally. Otherwise, all scientific knowledge can be easily integrated. We have to remember that the Bible was written at a time when people lacked a considerable amount of today's knowledge, and so God had to put his teachings in the Bible in a way that they would understand. Had it been written today, it would be written in a way that would be easily understandable to us.

Science and religion can coexist, yes - I wholeheartedly agree (now tell that to the militant athiests)

Wow you read that already? Speed-Reader! Yes, I know. But I used to be a Militant Atheist, so at least I understand where they're coming from.

Science and religion can coexist, yes - I wholeheartedly agree (now tell that to the militant athiests)
Here is how it will go, A=atheist, T= theist
A: Grobble, grobble, grobble!
T: Rable, rable, moo!
A: Hahaaaaa arghhh!!!
T: God, god, god, merrr!
A: Logic, gerrr!
T: I'm right!
A: I'm right!
*the world explodes*
THE END

Science and religion can coexist, yes - I wholeheartedly agree (now tell that to the militant athiests)

...now tell that to the militant fundamentalists :D

Here is how it will go, A=atheist, T= theist
A: Grobble, grobble, grobble!
T: Rable, rable, moo!
A: Hahaaaaa arghhh!!!
T: God, god, god, merrr!
A: Logic, gerrr!
T: I'm right!
A: I'm right!
*the world explodes*
THE END

LMAO!!! I quote Marx in saying that out of A Thesis, and Antithesis, will come a Synthesis, a combination of the two perspectives...and any scientist will admit, Science is largley a point of view, a series of Hypotheses. Any enlightened Preist will admit that Religion is about Faith, an acceptance that we dont know everything, but beleive anyway. Many people have faith in science.

I've thought for a while that the Bible was the world's first evolutionary tract.

Wow you read that already? Speed-Reader! Yes, I know. But I used to be a Militant Atheist, so at least I understand where they're coming from.
Same here.

LMAO!!! I quote Marx in saying that out of A Thesis, and Antithesis, will come a Synthesis, a combination of the two perspectives...and any scientist will admit, Science is largley a point of view, a series of Hypotheses. Any enlightened Preist will admit that Religion is about Faith, an acceptance that we dont know everything, but beleive anyway. Many people have faith in science.
I'd probably go for Hegel on that one. Marx would say that the whole religion/science debate was a product of class antagonisms and his pet Hegelian adaptation, dialectical materialism.

Science shouldn't be at odds with religion. Wouldn't scienfitic discovery reveal more about God by delving deeper in to creation. If anything, scientific discovery should be encouraged because it can lead to truly wondrous discoveries that will build faith rather than destroy it.

Science shouldn't be at odds with religion. Wouldn't scienfitic discovery reveal more about God by delving deeper in to creation. If anything, scientific discovery should be encouraged because it can lead to truly wondrous discoveries that will build faith rather than destroy it.


My point exactly! (Sheesh is anyone actually READING the essay? ;) )

Well, as any good theist can tell you, the past paleontological discoveries, carbon dating, finds of skeletons that bridge between man and ape, the fruit fly experiments, and every other major scientific discovery about life, the universe, and our origins over the past one hundred years or more- have been faked!

My point exactly! (Sheesh is anyone actually READING the essay? ;) )
I read it, and agree in a general sense. Perhaps don't agree with some of the specifics, but overall, religion and science; very compatible.

My point exactly! (Sheesh is anyone actually READING the essay? ;) )
Well er...people don't actually read have the stuff posted which is why threads become so damn repetitve.
Science and religion clash when the extremes of each group meet.

Well, as any good theist can tell you, the past paleontological discoveries, carbon dating, finds of skeletons that bridge between man and ape, the fruit fly experiments, and every other major scientific discovery about life, the universe, and our origins over the past one hundred years or more- have been faked!

I seriously hope that was a joke...

Interesting to read if nothing else. I'd agree that religion and science can co-exist. I'd agree that in a sense they are very similar: "The quest to answer our questions, and find fulfillment in our place in the world, and the universe."

Religion just seems to need so much more faith in something (a metaphysical being) that I can't see how proof can be given for in a sense that I would accept. But equally, there are many scientific theories I am hesitant to accept when I know so little about them.

I don't think science is the be-all and end-all. Maybe someday but right now I think there's more to everything. That could just be wishful thinking seeing as I don't like the idea of everything just being electrons and atoms and impulses. There's also so much science hasn't explained and maybe cannot explain.

I don't believe in any true religion but I think they offer good teachings (which could also have come about without religion) and have done good things.

I don't believe religion is the be-all and end-all. I'm quite happy not knowing and keeping an open mind. Maybe for someone religious they'd see it differently because it takes up such a huge part of their life but for me my belief/lack of belief isn't of that much significance in my life.

Stephen Jay Gould wrote an excellent essay/short book on this subject called Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life. I highly recommend that you pick it up.

I've always maintained that science and religion are not inherently inimical. They're parallel creations that, when used correctly, can coexist quite easily. Religion gives belief context, meaning and portability. Science gives a richer understanding of physical reality and the ability to predict it's outcomes. Neither is "superior" to the other because, fundamentally, their goals are different and not at all at cross-purposes.

The trouble starts when people try and use one as a justification or criteria for the other. Like I said, they're parallel, so there may be similar development between them. That does not mean they are the same thing, though, in essence. It seems to me this is where people get confused, on both sides.

Interesting to read if nothing else. I'd agree that religion and science can co-exist. I'd agree that in a sense they are very similar: "The quest to answer our questions, and find fulfillment in our place in the world, and the universe."

Religion just seems to need so much more faith in something (a metaphysical being) that I can't see how proof can be given for in a sense that I would accept. But equally, there are many scientific theories I am hesitant to accept when I know so little about them.

I don't think science is the be-all and end-all. Maybe someday but right now I think there's more to everything. That could just be wishful thinking seeing as I don't like the idea of everything just being electrons and atoms and impulses. There's also so much science hasn't explained and maybe cannot explain.

I don't believe in any true religion but I think they offer good teachings (which could also have come about without religion) and have done good things.

I don't believe religion is the be-all and end-all. I'm quite happy not knowing and keeping an open mind. Maybe for someone religious they'd see it differently because it takes up such a huge part of their life but for me my belief/lack of belief isn't of that much significance in my life.

"Whether you beleive that we are just a random collection of chemicals ( I do.), or that the Whole is greater then the Sum of its parts (I do.) my point is that historically, man has always craved knowledge. I do believe that god gave us that reason, and intelligence, and ambition to seek it out, through whatever means neccessary."

The Monetary worth of the Human Body (IE its essential Chemical Components, Calcium, Water, etc.) is something like 60-some-odd-dollars, so Im told.

But a Human Being is so much more than that.

Am I satisfied with what Ive written here? Of course not.

Do I lie awake at night wondering what the hell Im doing here? Of Course.

Science shouldn't be at odds with religion. Wouldn't scienfitic discovery reveal more about God by delving deeper in to creation. If anything, scientific discovery should be encouraged because it can lead to truly wondrous discoveries that will build faith rather than destroy it.

That's an interesting question. Personally, I don't think it would. The purposes and goals of science and religion are so fundamentally different at heart that I'm not sure one can even produce relevant results in the other. They're like two incredibly different languages, each one serving it's purpose in it's own context, possibly even occassionally donating words and terms to one another, but always remaining, at the core, separate.

Well, as any good theist can tell you, the past paleontological discoveries, carbon dating, finds of skeletons that bridge between man and ape, the fruit fly experiments, and every other major scientific discovery about life, the universe, and our origins over the past one hundred years or more- have been faked!

Was that completely necessary?

Was that completely necessary?

I found it amusing. Whether a joke or not, I got a good laugh, on a serious note however, there have been hoaxes on both sides. So ha! Take THAT bible bangers and Militant Atheists!!

**Looks around at Mob of Bible-Bangers and Militant Atheists moving in for the kill**

Well, at least I got them agree on something!!

"Whether you beleive that we are just a random collection of chemicals ( I do.), or that the Whole is greater then the Sum of its parts (I do.) my point is that historically, man has always craved knowledge. I do believe that god gave us that reason, and intelligence, and ambition to seek it out, through whatever means neccessary."

The Monetary worth of the Human Body (IE its essential Chemical Components, Calcium, Water, etc.) is something like 60-some-odd-dollars, so Im told.

But a Human Being is so much more than that.

Am I satisfied with what Ive written here? Of course not.

Do I lie awake at night wondering what the hell Im doing here? Of Course.

I am interested in it and always love thinking about these things and hearing new theories, don't get me wrong, I just don't feel any need to know (and don't think we can know) to have a satifying life.

I am interested in it and always love thinking about these things and hearing new theories, don't get me wrong, I just don't feel any need to know (and don't think we can know) to have a satifying life.



Of Course, I didnt mean anything offensive to you in any way...Im just one of those people who HAS to know, know what I mean?

Science and religion can coexist, yes - I wholeheartedly agree (now tell that to the militant athiests)I can't count all the threads I've said this in.

Well, as any good theist can tell you, the past paleontological discoveries, carbon dating, finds of skeletons that bridge between man and ape, the fruit fly experiments, and every other major scientific discovery about life, the universe, and our origins over the past one hundred years or more- have been faked!...and faked by God himself to make the world look as if it were only six thousand years old! (Isn't faking stuff a sin? Apparently not.)

*looks at postcount* I tell you, Jolt's titles are insane. "Sometimes Deadly"?

Science shouldn't be at odds with religion.

I agree with this only in so far as to say, it's like comparing apples & oranges.

Religion is based on faith and hope.

Science is based on theory and logic and facts.


They are not even in the same category.

I agree with this only in so far as to say, it's like comparing apples & oranges.

Religion is based on faith and hope.

Science is based on theory and logic and facts.


They are not even in the same category.Then why are creationists confusing the two? And, on a lesser note, can someone explain to me what "Sometimes Deadly" means (besides that I have made 400 posts)?

Then why are creationists confusing the two? And, on a lesser note, can someone explain to me what "Sometimes Deadly" means (besides that I have made 400 posts)?

Of course I can only answer this from my point of view, but I think religion seeks to have the same credibility as science has. However, like I said, that is just my point of view.

As for your title, that's just what jolt uses. It has nothing to do with any thing except your post count.

No.

Religion and Science are both belief systems. Both are based on what we know happened and what we think happened. Can we prove that there is a big guy up there making people and animals and another guy down there trying to get us to sin to get our souls? Can we prove that those guys exist? Can we prove that they don't exist? When we die, what happens to us? I don't mean our bodies, I mean us. What do we see? What do we hear? What do we feel? Both Science and Religion try to answer these questions. In fact, religion really is a form of science, but science isn't a religion because the thing that seperates religion from philosophy is the presence or absence of a deity. How do we know if the big guy created us or if we are the result of a billion years of evolution started by a single bacteria? Both Science and religion give us something to believe in and somewhere to get answers. Religion relies heavily on faith. Science is mostly guesses, hypothises, and theories. How do we know if those fossils aren't misinterpreted by us? Maybe they aren't millions of years old. We are using methods in which we don't know if they are as accurate as we think they are. Maybe half-lives become third-lives and fourth-lives. We don't know. We might never know. All I know is, I have something called religion to give me answers. Scientists and Atheists have science to give them answers. Religion gives more answers. Religious people get mad when science gives them theories that aren't proven to be 100% accurate, go against their belief system, and are told that science is right and religion is wrong. Many scientific folk get mad when religious people are given science and reject much of it because they believe differently. If science and religions try to co-exist, terrorism would be pretty much dead and world peace would be achievable.

Avika -- See the only problem with your argument is that science has proven many things, thus giving it credibility. Religion on the other hand has yet to do so and has had a lot more time to do so. Thus, it doesn't have credibility in a scientific kind of way. Religion is based on nothing scientific, only faith. Which is fine. Just don't confuse the two is all I'm saying.

Then I started to see something. Yes, religion gave us the Crusades, as well as 9-11. But science gave us the atomic bomb too.

Very well written essay, and I agree with you entirely save this point. The Crusades and 9-11 were the results of the teachings of certain religions. The atomic bomb was not.

It's not as if scientists gathered around a table and said, "Ok, E equals M C squared, so let's make a bomb and kill some Japs." The atomic bomb was built to stop a war that was started, if you look back far enough, by religion.

The Crusades were wars sanctioned by the Papacy to recapture the Holy Land, and 9-11 was part of a jihad as instructed by the Taliban's skewed teachings of the Koran that say it's ok to kill anyone who's not a Muslim.

Anyway, very nice post. I enjoyed reading it.

Thats true, its not the same thing precisley. Religions start war, the atomic bomb kills thousands in a flash. Im saying that both sides produce morally reprehensible things, evenif they claim too have ethics within thier system. Its always the individuals.