God and Science

[Philip]

Of course, there is a metaphysical force that keeps the basic laws of existence in balance. It doesn't matter what you call it: God, Allah, Energy. If it's easier for you to personalize, this is not a mistake.

It matters VERY much what you call "it" - as one's eternal destination depends upon what you recognize and commit to as that "metaphysical force!" Is it the God of the Bible / Jesus Christ - or just some false deity? And yet, a first step towards identifying the Force that created all things is first realizing there must be some incredible, all-knowing, all-powerful Entity that created and controls it!

[Challenger007]

Of course, there is a metaphysical force that keeps the basic laws of existence in balance. It doesn't matter what you call it: God, Allah, Energy. If it's easier for you to personalize, this is not a mistake.

It matters VERY much what you call "it" - as one's eternal destination depends upon what you recognize and commit to as that "metaphysical force!" Is it the God of the Bible / Jesus Christ - or just some false deity? And yet, a first step towards identifying the Force that created all things is first realizing there must be some incredible, all-knowing, all-powerful Entity that created and controls it!

Where did you get the idea that, for example, Allah is a false deity, and not the god that exists in the understanding of Christians? By what criteria do you determine the truth or falsity of beliefs?

[Philip]

Philip: It matters VERY much what you call "it" - as one's eternal destination depends upon what you recognize and commit to as that "metaphysical force!" Is it the God of the Bible / Jesus Christ - or just some false deity? And yet, a first step towards identifying the Force that created all things is first realizing there must be some incredible, all-knowing, all-powerful Entity that created and controls it!

Challenger: Where did you get the idea that, for example, Allah is a false deity, and not the god that exists in the understanding of Christians? By what criteria do you determine the truth or falsity of beliefs?

Scriptural-based Christianity is the ONLY faith in the world that offers many evidences, historical, specific fulfilled prophecies, and archaeological evidences along with 16 centuries of writings by God’s prophets and apostles. It is the only faith that is not works-based – that is, ALL of the world's religions assert, in various ways, how to acquire some promise of a beautiful afterlife by trying to be good, do good works, and are designed to appease whatever supposed deities, build good karma, typically in a quest and hope that the good one does in life will outweigh the bad things they’ve done. In contrast, the God of Christianity cannot be appeased or satisfied by good works! To gain external life with the true God, one must accept and commit themselves to Him and believe / have faith that Jesus is fully God and was crucified and lives. He has done ALL necessary – we cannot EARN our salvation! NO amount of good works will matter – only a true faith and commitment to God / Christ matter.

The Bible’s most important teachings contradict what other faiths’ teachings assert, in key ways – most importantly, as to whom or what entities they assert to be god. In Christian teachings, JESUS is God, as is the Father, and the Holy Spirit – but these are all Persons that make up the ONE God. Other faiths assert multiple gods or different a different one – and they all deny that Jesus is God.

The Apostle Paul says in 1 Galatians: “6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.” And he continues: “11 For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man's gospel.[c] 12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.”

The law of non-contradiction states that a thing cannot simultaneously be true and not true at the same time. So, we know that with the many and very different beliefs, various faiths assert who God or their god(s) is or how to gain their view of heaven - so we must realize that they cannot ALL be the same path to the real God. Either Christianity is true or one of the other faith or faiths is - but they ALL can't be!

Here’s a good chart that shows some key differences in what various faiths believe: https://carm.org/miscellaneous-topics/c ... son-chart/

[Smith21]

Silas, welcome to the forum!

Not sure what your point is? The scientific METHOD is not fickle - it is consistent. But do the findings of scientific research and understandings, over time, can definitely reveal that theories once held to not be validated by subsequent data? Of course. And there ARE limits to what science is capable of showing us - because it's tools are unable to examine beyond the physical / observable..

Can you share more details about it..

[Philip]

Smith21: Can you share more details about it..

Not sure what you're asking for?

[jhone9dk]

You have given very good information about God and Science. I am interested in the discovery of science. My idea is that God is a fantasy and science is a systematic enterprise. Kinemaster Mod Apk

[Philip]

Welcome to the forum, Jphone!

Why do you think science invalidates God's existence?

[AriDom]

Silas, welcome to the forum!

Not sure what your point is? The scientific METHOD is not fickle - it is consistent. But do the findings of scientific research and understandings, over time, can definitely reveal that theories once held to not be validated by subsequent data? Of course. And there ARE limits to what science is capable of showing us - because it's tools are unable to examine beyond the physical / observable.

Even if the scientific method is consistent, it is FALSIFIABLE. It does mean that every statement is kind of a hypothesis. Which can be falsified and different from universal facts. Look at meditation. The process, the history, the philosophies pointing to the same thing but still evolving over time.
I am not sure how "evidence from god" from science containing any statements ("hypothesis") can be anything but only hypothesis...

[AriDom]

Welcome to the forum, Jphone!

Why do you think science invalidates God's existence?

He did not said that. I think..
seems more like a dystopian view tbh

[Andrew125]

I think many who uphold science forget first that science is extremely fickle and in constant flux. seriously, a published article written five years ago may be 'dated' information now, ten years maybe on the general track, 20 years, it's backwards or embarrassing 50 or more, the information is laughable or absurd. Look at a science book from the renaissance and compare the information with what we have today.
GBWhatsApp
Second, the notion of science is purely objective field is a recent development, probably less than 400 yrs in practice, which is very short time in terms of world history. Even in 1687 Harvard university was still teaching Aristotle's work in physics, Ptolemy in astronomy, and Galen in medicine and likely continued well into the 1770s when fluency in Greek and Latin were the mark of an educated person.Kinemaster Diamond

Yeah, it is indeed great. But going backwards for more than 50 years is indeed embarrassing.

[Philip]

Hello, Andrew - welcome to the forum!

What is your take science issues as they relate to God?

[christkenddy]

I think many who uphold science forget first that science is extremely fickle and in constant flux. seriously, a published article written five years ago may be 'dated' information now, ten years maybe on the general track, 20 years, it's backwards or embarrassing 50 or more, the information is laughable or absurd. Look at a science book from the renaissance and mini militia compare the information with what we have today.

Second, the notion of science is purely objective field is a recent development, probably less than 400 yrs in practice, which is very short time in terms of world history. Even in 1687 Harvard university was still teaching Aristotle's work in physics, Ptolemy in astronomy, and Galen in medicine and likely continued well into the 1770s when fluency in Greek and Latin were the mark of an educated person.

it's backwards or embarrassing 50 or more, thankyou !

there AeE limits to what science is capable of showing us - because it's tools are unable to examine beyond the physical / observable.

[LauraH]

Are religious beliefs sometimes conducive to science, or do they inevitably pose obstacles to scientific inquiry?attorneys at law
finger lakes realty tax attorney columbus ohio

[1over137]

Hi LauraH,

Some example would be Testable Model for Creation by Hugh Ross who formulated the model based on the Genesis.
Also, I think it was Christians who developed scientific method.

see for example: https://www.gcu.edu/blog/theology-minis ... fic-method

For a long time, non-Christians maintained that nature was chaotic and without order. Christians, on the other hand, argued that since God was orderly and gave humanity an orderly moral law, so too His creation, nature, would be orderly and would have natural law.

While there are elements that reach back much earlier, theologian Thomas Aquinas became a significant voice for natural theology in the 1200s AD. He argued that the reason and observation of nature would lead to evidence for the orderliness of the Creator seen in an orderly creation. Aquinas had laid important groundwork for discovering natural laws through the scientific method.
...

As Hugh Ross says, there is a Book of nature and the Book of the Bible...

[louries]

Hi LauraH,

Some example would be Testable Model for Creation by Hugh Ross who formulated the model based on the Genesis.
Also, I think it was Christians who developed scientific method.

see for example: https://www.gcu.edu/blog/theology-minis ... fic-method

For a long time, non-Christians maintained that nature was chaotic and without order. Christians, on the other hand, argued that since God was orderly and gave humanity an orderly moral law, so too His creation, nature, would be orderly and would have natural law.

While there are elements that reach back much earlier, theologian Thomas Aquinas instander became a significant voice for natural theology in the 1200s AD. He argued that the reason and observation of nature would lead to evidence for the orderliness of the Creator seen in an orderly creation. Aquinas had laid important groundwork for discovering natural laws through the scientific method.
...

As Hugh Ross says, there is a Book of nature and the Book of the Bible...

There are so many complex things in this world from the beginning of the universe. Wouldn't you think that there is a superior entity/creator of all of this? Science explains all of gods reasons for creating every single thing in the universe.