Why I can believe in God and science, a simple explanation.

It is just as easy to believe that the wonders of the universe are random coincidences instead of the act of a deity? To some yes. Science can go only so far. One thing science cannot do is prove a negative. Hence there will always be room for religion.

Successfully updated karma reason!

KFC Kickin For Christ

Join Date 11/2005

+93

It all comes down to where you place your faith. In science? In God?

In other words both really come down to faith in the long run.

Successfully updated karma reason!

It is just as easy to believe that the wonders of the universe are random coincidences instead of the act of a deity? To some yes. Science can go only so far. One thing science cannot do is prove a negative. Hence there will always be room for religion.

That's why I can believe in science and God at the same time. I came up with this after watching an episode of Family Matter where Steve was asked what his parents thought about him going to church since he was a science geek. he said that he can't see, hear or touch an atom yet he believes it exist. His way of saying so can God. I found that explanation simple and to the point ofr those who wonder how you can be a man of science and a believer in God at the same time.

It all comes down to where you place your faith. In science? In God? In other words both really come down to faith in the long run.

Exactly.

Successfully updated karma reason!

And so we start again.

'Science' doesn't believe that there is life on other planets. Some scientists think that is a possibility that there is life on other planets but with out some sort of evidence it will not be accepted, assumptions need to have evidence behind them. Evidence exists for black holes and black matter - just because it can not been seen doesn't mean that there isn't evidence for their existence.

Science is not based on belief - it is based on evidence. In my scientific career I have seen the working model for several large plant biology systems change as new evidence was found. These were across the entire field world wide while in my project the working model changed every couple of months as new experiments supplied evidence that either supported or contradicted the model. If science was belief I would have made the evidence fit the model - not the model fit the evidence.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I believe in a god because my father told me that G-d exists.

His story was the same.

Ultimately it goes back to whichever ancient ancestor stood at Mount Sinai and saw for Himself.

Since then everybody trusted their teachers. Usually the teacher was a father and the student a son. Why shouldn't a son trust his father? Did I not trust my father with my life when I had no chance of survival without my parents' help?

My father (and my mother) taught my lots of things I have never seen evidence for.

For example, I do not doubt the legitimacy of government. I have never seen proof (but ample anecdotal evidence) that government is a good thing, let alone legitimate. But I trust those who told me that it is necessary.

My father and I used to pray in the evenings. I never had a doubt that whom we prayed to was real and that my father was also convinced of it for the same reason I was.

Successfully updated karma reason!

It all comes down to where you place your faith. In science? In God?

In other words both really come down to faith in the long run.

I place my faith in G-d.

Science has nothing to do with faith. What is, is. Faith has nothing to do with it.

G-d doesn't need faith. I do.

Successfully updated karma reason!

KFC Kickin For Christ

Join Date 11/2005

+93

G-d doesn't need faith. I do.

true...but what does this statement have to do with anything?

Many put their faith in God or in Science. Some believe everything around us is because of God and others looking for an alternative explanation turn to Science instead.

Science involves observation using one or more of our five senses to gain knowledge about the world and to be able to repeat the observations. Naturally one can only observe what exists in the present. Anything else has to be taken on faith.

Since Science doesn't contradict what we believe in God we can quite easily believe in both Science and God as Charles stated in the first place. One doesn't exclude the other.

Successfully updated karma reason!

'Science' doesn't believe that there is life on other planets. Some scientists think that is a possibility that there is life on other planets but with out some sort of evidence it will not be accepted, assumptions need to have evidence behind them. Evidence exists for black holes and black matter - just because it can not been seen doesn't mean that there isn't evidence for their existence.

I just want to be clear on something, I tried to be very specific here. I didn't refer to science. i referred to scientist. There's a difference, science is based on what can be proved; people go by what they believe is possible in order to study the science of it. That is what I mean. Some scientist believe there is life, not science.

It's interesting that you said "just because it can not been seen doesn't mean that there isn't evidence for their existence" since there is evidence that God exists but scientist do not accept it as evidence yet religious people do. I myself have witnessed divine intervention, some would call it coincidence, I say things don't just happen for no reason.

Science is not based on belief - it is based on evidence. In my scientific career I have seen the working model for several large plant biology systems change as new evidence was found. These were across the entire field world wide while in my project the working model changed every couple of months as new experiments supplied evidence that either supported or contradicted the model. If science was belief I would have made the evidence fit the model - not the model fit the evidence.

Actually science is based one belief. If scientist didn't believe that something may exist, they would not try to find it. Some scientist believe in parallel universes, others believe time travel is actually possible and some even believe that warp speed may actually be possible. At one point in time these things were thought to be only in sci fi movies yet today we have scientist who "believe" in the possibility that they either exist or are possible. Again, it's not because science just showed it to them, it's because they believe it's possible.

Tell me Basmas, do you wake up every morning because it's simply a natural reaction or a programming inside of you like a computer or because you "believe" you are suppose to? everything I do I do because I believe I am suppose to. thieves steal because they believe they are suppose to, cops give tickets because they believe they are suppose to and some don't give tickets because they believe at that moment they don't have to. get my point? Everything in life is based on a belief. Obama became President because of a belief.

Science is based one belief, the evidence is to prove or disprove this belief.

Successfully updated karma reason!

true...but what does this statement have to do with anything?

Many put their faith in God or in Science. Some believe everything around us is because of God and others looking for an alternative explanation turn to Science instead.

The statement has everything to do with this.

People can put their faith in lots of things, and it's always because they feel a need to do so. Neither G-d nor science needs faith.

I don't put my faith in science because I don't think that "survival of the fittest", although a scientific concept, is something to hope for.

Science is when I make up a theory, show that it works on the small scale and explain how it could be disproven.

G-d is when I make up a theory, cannot show that it works even on a small scale but can explain how it cannot be disproven.

Either can be true or false. But's it's opposite methods. The latter is ideal for faith. But the former is not.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Actually science is based one belief. If scientist didn't believe that something may exist, they would not try to find it.

Actually, lots of things were found not because scientists were looking for them but because they noticed an unexplainable anomaly in data from an experiment.

Newton found the formula for how fast things fall to the ground (for whatever reason). I doubt that he had a formula in mind and then confirmed it via experiments. I think he experimented and found the formula that way.

I am not sure whether it is faith if you believe in something with intent to disregard it if you cannot confirm it.

Faith, I thought, was for things that cannot be explained. But scientists never look for things that cannot be explained.

Also, in science nothing is ever proven. You are confusing science with mathematics.

Scientific theories are regarded as "true" in the sense of "usable" until disproven. But they are never ever proven. That would be impossible.

Successfully updated karma reason!

KFC Kickin For Christ

Join Date 11/2005

+93

G-d is when I make up a theory, cannot show that it works even on a small scale but can explain how it cannot be disproven.

I don't agree with this Leauki. While I can show you God's works on both a small scale and a large scale I can't show you God. I can show you the evidences of God. Sort of like the wind. I can't show you the wind, but I can show you the evidence of the wind.

I know my son told me that it's quite often that Scientists go looking for evidences that suit their subjective belief or theories and in doing so will disregard anything to the contrary. Papers are written and published with no mention of any contrary evidences. Usually tho, the truth does come out eventually. Truth always prevails. Always. May take some time, but will eventually be brought out into the light. There's dishonesty in Science like there is in every area of life.

I remember reading that Darwin's wife Emma accused him of doing this in a letter she wrote to him. She said he was deliberately concealing evidence that would disprove what he was trying to report.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I don't agree with this Leauki. While I can show you God's works on both a small scale and a large scale I can't show you God. I can show you the evidences of God. Sort of like the wind. I can't show you the wind, but I can show you the evidence of the wind.

You can show me wind, but you cannot show me how the wind has anything to do with G-d.

There is nothing you can show me on the small scale that would be evidence for the existence of G-d. (There are lots of things on a large scall that are evidence for the existence of something great.)

And there is no way to disprove the existence of G-d.

That's how science and faith are different:

Scientific theories can be demonstrated on the small scale and easily disproven.

The existence of G-d cannot be demonstrated and cannot be disproven.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Science is not based on belief - it is based on evidence.

Except Climate science. There the rules ARE belief and consensus.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Why I can believe in God and science, a simple explanation.

Why I can believe in God and science, a simple explanation.

Commonalities?