Turns Out, Science and Religion Get Along Just Fine

reply to post by raymundoko


No I said a scientist quits making discoveries once he decides that what he can't explain is where god starts effecting things. Then they stop looking for the answer and assume they can't find it because whatever is divinely inspired. I'm assuming you misunderstood me and weren't trying to twist my words....

reply to post by raymundoko

I'm familiar with Georges Lemaître. I've actually brought him up many times in threads when Christians bash the Big Bang Theory Like many Christians in this thread have. Kinda funny that it was hailed as proof god created the Universe from believers then, but now Christians loathe the idea. lol

The only connection to Genesis is that it says the Universe had a beginning and that's what he wanted to find. A beginning. That doesn't support the notion Genesis is true. There are many many religions under the Sun that talk about a beginning of creation. Outside of that. It was based on scientific observations. He was an astrophysicist.

reply to post by raymundoko


Well under faith and science in the first link you posted.it Clearly said he was an agnostic.... In those words....

reply to post by strongfp

the tragic tale of Hypatia comes to mind.

I watched Agora recently. Hypatia is played by Rachel Weisz. That's actually been in the back of my head the whole time I've been reading this thread. A good example to bring up..

reply to post by ArtemisE

Clearly said he was an agnostic.... In those words....

It also said he was a Christian. However in the video he says he's agnostic because he doesn't believe there is any proof either way. As in his faith doesn't depend on the proof. In other words, he separates the science from religion. They are not holding hands for him. Which doesn't support the argument science and religion are reconcilable. So you're right to point out the agnostic bit

reply to post by ArtemisE


See the big bang. I linked the individual. He was a scientist until his death and a leader in astro physics. He was never limited by a belief in god. Your argument holds no merit.

reply to post by ArtemisE


No, the article said it in those words. His words were "I'm a Christian" you just chose to ignore that part.

The article said he was agnostic because he believes no one could ever prove or disprove god.

reply to post by raymundoko

because he believes no one could ever prove or disprove god.

Because he acknowledges science cannot approach it. Like I said earlier in the thread:

"I think science and god are only reconcilable in the sense science knows it cannot evaluate the idea. They are separate."

He's not saying science supports it. He clearly thinks science and faith are separate matters. He reconciled it the way I suggested, not the way your OP seems to.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


Not just the big bang. Also expanding universe as Isaiah said god stretches out the heavens.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


Then you don't know the definition of reconcile...it just means to be friendly towards each other or to settle differences, bury the hatchet...

The media (and a few in this thread) want to portray that real scientists hate religion and vice versa. That isn't true according to the poll in the OP.

Double.

Post.


Dumb phone.

reply to post by raymundoko

Then you don't know the definition of reconcile...it just means yo be friendly towards each other.

In the example of the agnostic theist scientist you're talking about. Science and god are not friendly together. They are indifferent towards each other. Not the same.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


Point taken.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


Actually I thought about it a bit more, and while his work and faith were separate, he was able to have both. The Article in the OP was talking specifically about that. The Media wants to portray "real" scientists as atheists who have "outgrown" god. You see this often especially among comedians like Ricky Gervais, George Carlin and Russel Brand (all of whom I find hilarious). In reality that isn't the case and, per the poll, most scientists have some form of faith in a creator or consider themselves a member of a religious sect. The media also wants to portray "bible thumpers" as anti science goofs. Again, this doesn't match reality. So I suppose your argument of "they made advances in Science in spite of their religion", while caustic in nature, holds some truth depending on the scientist.

Even Artemis in this thread has fallen into the Media perpetuated fallacy that a scientist stops being a scientist when they believe in god. It just isn't true.

reply to post by raymundoko


No it doesn't, because he didn't try and figure out what caused the Big Bang. He thought god caused the Big Bang. So his research stopped right there. That helps prove what I said! It was later scientists that came up with parallel universe theory and others that attempt to explain the Big Bang.

reply to post by raymundoko


Y'all can't stop twisting my words. Of course there are scientists who have a religion! There are plenty of examples now and in history! But there's never been one who used his religion to make a discovery or break through!


It's well documented that, with the famous scientists, when they got stuck in there research and decided this must be what god controles. They stop looking into that field and any advances they might have made stop.

reply to post by ArtemisE


Oh boy...

He was an astro physicist, not a mathematician. He didn't care to know what caused the big bang. He postulated it to explain how the universe started. All he cared about was how the universe was now. You've literally no idea what you are talking about.

reply to post by ArtemisE


Since it is so well documented can you provide links? I've done that to prove you wrong. All you've provided is your opinion.

reply to post by raymundoko
[

I took someone else's word in a previous post that he put forth the Big Bang theory. Or maybe I misunderstood them. I didn't need to look up what he did next . Where I got that from is Niel degrasse Tyson speech on naming rights. I've seen multiple big time scientists state that as fact. I saw Most of the speeches while researching evolution vs. intelligent design.

reply to post by ArtemisE


I'm on my phone so a link is more work then I'm good for. Lol. If you you tube Niel Tyson naming rights it will pull up the speech. It's awsome!!