God vs. Science

Where does belief in God end and belief in science begin? Do you think it's possible to believe in the Lord almighty, his natural law *and* still subscribe to science/scientific explanation?

Yes. If you're able to separate the two. A lot of people can't or just choose not to.

If you truly followed science/scientific explanation it would have you question the multitude of falacies of an old man in the sky throwing lightning and natural disasters to placate all his base human cravings like some depraved despot.

Everyone considers Zeus is a myth and yet ...

Some people try to ride that fence but that creates some conflict with the text of various gods & religions as written. If people believe in a more ethereal, non-specific "god" or "higher power" type being it probably meshes better than when there are books that make very specific claims.

I find my belief in science inseparably tied to my belief in God. If I doubted God, I'd certainly have to doubt science. To me, science is just the way of exploring the things God has made. The fact that the world we live in can have any kind of scientific observation is one of the biggest proofs to me that there is a God to begin with.

I guess.

Gene Roddenberry (creator of Star Trek) was an atheist. In his view, people in the future would embrace only science. Yet, while he rejected God, he also entertained the notion of alien beings that were so powerful they had complete control of space, time, matter and energy. From the Organians, to the Bejoran Prophets, to "Q", the idea of godlike beings that existed outside of normal space-time, who who were powerful enough to see into the future, destroy an entire civilizations with the snap of a finger, and even bring dead people back to life was completely conceivable to him. He believed that this was scientifically plausible. He didn't believe in the supernatural, but that all "magic" in the universe can be explained by science. Any sufficiently advanced science or technology would appear to be magical or supernatural to a less advanced society.

With that in mind, I ask: When does God go from being "supernatural" to "natural"? Is it reasonable to assume that God is impossible simply because we don't understand the science behind his existence? I say that it is indeed possible to reconcile "science" and "God" as being in perfect harmony with each other. And I believe that this idea was actually proven by an atheist who didn't even believe in God. Because if "God" (as explained by the bible) actually exists, then there is nothing "supernatural" about him. His existence is simply an extension of natural laws that we may not comprehend at our level. A thousand years ago, the idea of a man flying in a heavier than air vehicle would have been considered magic. That contradicted what was known about the laws of physics back then (which granted wasn't very much). Today, airplanes are a reality that is fully reconciled with science. There is nothing "magical" about them because we understand how planes fly. Not saying that God exists, but if he does, he only seems "magical" to us because we don't understand how he could do the things that he does (given our limited understanding of the laws of physics).

^

Forgiveness Man wrote:I find my belief in science inseparably tied to my belief in God. If I doubted God, I'd certainly have to doubt science. To me, science is just the way of exploring the things God has made. The fact that the world we live in can have any kind of scientific observation is one of the biggest proofs to me that there is a God to begin with.

Man puts the bible at 5000 years old.. but just as new discoveries are made, and man is infallible, then why can't this be wrong? It supposedly took centuries to write the bible, and the stories were passed down word of mouth for generations. I believe that the stories are like anything else, have SOME truth in them, and morals to them... yet that does not mean that every single thing written is FACT. Even when we watch movies today, they are BASED on true stories.. not documentaries... so why is it so difficult to believe the bible can be the same way.

I believe that earthquakes and asteroids occur naturally--- they are not weapons of mass destruction that God uses as punishment. My God does not care which religion you follow... or by what name you call him. He just wants you to be a good person, and to help and protect others as best you can.

Chris wrote:Where does belief in God end and belief in science begin? Do you think it's possible to believe in the Lord almighty, his natural law *and* still subscribe to science/scientific explanation?

It's possible.

wants2laugh wrote:



Man puts the bible at 5000 years old.. but just as new discoveries are made, and man is infallible, then why can't this be wrong? It supposedly took centuries to write the bible, and the stories were passed down word of mouth for generations. I believe that the stories are like anything else, have SOME truth in them, and morals to them... yet that does not mean that every single thing written is FACT. Even when we watch movies today, they are BASED on true stories.. not documentaries... so why is it so difficult to believe the bible can be the same way.

I believe the Bible can be taken as 100% fact and still go with Science. Honestly, I think anybody who wants to see a conflict will see a conflict. I don't see one. To me there isn't really any conflict between science and my faith. God can violate the rules of science, IMO. He's not limited by it. But that doesn't make it a contradiction. Of course he'd be greater than his creations. I just never saw this big "contradiction" that others seem to see. God designed a world that can be explored and mostly explained using some kind of scientific processes. It all seems complementary to me.

well.. i think the main contradiction that most people have a problem with in the bible is that the old testament shows God as jealous, and warlike, violent. In the new testament, he is a loving gentle god. It is almost as if they are describing two different people. I was told that God is perfect, and never changing... the personas of the bible contradict this.

If God is perfect and all knowing, then animals would not evolve. there would be no need for them to do so, because God would have created them that way. However, one could argue that God created life knowing that it would evolve out of necessity... and that he IS a changing God evolving himself as time passes, as shown in the bible.

i just believe what i believe and do not like ppl to interpret for me... i do not need structured religion.

I don't really find those views as contradictory as others do.

I think God created our earth to be adaptable to changing situations. God's separate from his creation so it's entirely believable to me that the earth could go through changes whereas God remains outside of such changes.