RE: What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?
March 29, 2018 at 9:53 am
(This post was last modified: March 29, 2018 at 10:00 am by Drich.)
(March 28, 2018 at 5:10 pm)drfuzzy Wrote:(March 28, 2018 at 4:33 pm)Drich Wrote:
so big bang... evolution... black holes (as gravity wells) and a whole host of other theoretical science... you don't believe in any of it?
How are we missing such an easy point here? Big Bang, Evolution, Black Holes, etc., -- a lot of measurable data exists for all of it.
Theory - basic scientific definition: A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.
Theories are respectable science that is ongoing. There is no "belief" required, just study.
I don't need to "believe" that the Big Bang happened, and if our knowledge of it was updated tomorrow, great, but it doesn't affect my daily life. I don't need to "believe" evolution happened, I accept the large volume of archaeological, biological, geological, migration, development, DNA, and other types of data that have been collected supporting it.
"Belief" is not necessary, we have data. The concepts of "belief" and "faith" are not welcome in my world.
Actually none of those things are absolutes/measurable we have used those things to describe what we believe to be evidences to those theories, but even in the confines of science those very same evidences are used simply by changing the narrative to support other theories. Which theory is correct? that is where your faith comes in. as you do not personally know which one is correct. you believe in Darwinism simply because it is the most popular.
This is evidenced by your faith in pop science when it pertains to other things as well, for instance when we were facing global warming, then global cooling then global climate change when God kept changing the thermostat settings on you all to dispel "the sky is falling" mentality you all were trying to spread.
Then the cfc hole in the Ozone.. that was the first of the sky is falling money makers. I can say what you believed because you all are condition to blindly accept anything 'science' tells you. otherwise name one major scientific discovery that you discount or deny.
You simply and blindly identify with pop science. for you there is no faith in that as it is been programmed into you to be automatic. however the truth is if you took the time to understand all of the competing theories in science on things like the big bang and evolution you'd see that some of it makes more sense as it is a more modern understanding of the evidence or facts that what was postulated several hundred years ago. So again if you understood or acknoweledged anything else not pop science had to offer you could see your own faith in your brand of science.
(March 29, 2018 at 1:11 am)robvalue Wrote: Right. Science is falsifiable. Theories are falsifiable. So the alternative explanation is one of these:
1) No one has noticed these theories are not falsifiable
2) No has noticed that data falsifies these theories
3) There's some worldwide scientific conspiracy that silences people who notice that theories are not falsifiable, or can be falsified by data
How likely are these scenarios? In my estimation, these are so incredibly unlikely that they can be safely discounted. It's more likely that I'm actually crazy/asleep/hallucinating all this, and science makes sense only within the context of this experience. Even if that's the case, it still makes sense internally, and these figments of my imagination aren't doing a good job of persuading me otherwise within my virtual reality. Bad figments.
why would you approach religion as you would approach science?
would it not be more 'fair'/make more sense to approach religion as you would a trial or a court case and process evidences as you would in a legal proceeding?
After all if there is a promise to meet God in this life and people have claimed to have done this, then shouldn't the path to God be examined through the lenses of testimony and verification? rather than try and make God bend or kneel to our scientific understanding/put God in a box.
