What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?

[drfuzzy]

---

awe, you don't understand the depth of my analogy and your making fun of the surface points.

How about this:
By the definition God gives of Himself in the bible (still with me?/How God defines Himself) if 'science' could summon/produce or experiment on God, then by definition He would cease being God/Alpha and Omega. Therefore not worthy of worship. Do you get it? the one method you want to 'proove' disqualifies Him as God according to his own words. In fact if Science could reach God despite his will of hiding from the wise and learned of this world, would make science God.

Do you get what I am saying now? Why seek God with a method doomed to fail because it circumvents what God is said to be.. Rather why not seek God using a method He PROMISED to meet us on?

---

---

Eh, I was going to reply to your earlier response, but the crew here has done a much better job that I would have.  And then there is your stubbornness in using the terms "faith" and "belief" with regard to science.  They simply do not apply.

But the easy response here is in reply to the question above.  
     "Why seek God with a method doomed to fail."  Well, let's see, if an omnipotent, omniscient being WANTS humans to "find" it, it will make it impossible for me NOT to find it.  If that same being places such limitations on achieving this "connection and awareness" as to make it limited to not only the information found in a hugely flawed single piece of literature, the correct interpretation of said literature, and the proper mindset while praying, then it has doomed 90 + percent of humanity to failure from the moment its plan was put into place.  Which makes it evil.  
   And even THEN, the question is irrelevant. Because there isn't enough proof that the creature exists.

You should shorten that to "why seek god?".  It's the same as "why seek the Great Pumpkin"?  It's a total waste of my time, and only up for debate because we are surrounded by people who judge us for not dedicating our lives to the Great Pumpkin.

---

Seriously?!?!?

Do you people really think I am the only person who thinks this way?

Here are some liber/non God affiliated sources who take the same view as I do that there is indeed a measure of faith in science because all of science is not known. maybe they can exlain it to the degree you need to understand.

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/24/opini...avies.html
https://www.edge.org/conversation/paul_d...e-on-faith
https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2013/0...uire-faith

The NPR article is especially enlightening (Which mean you should skip it if you wish to retain a closed mind.)

The crux of it highlights the construction of the hadron super colider in search of the higgsboson particle. Now if you are unaware the h/b was touted as the 'god particle' it was to unlock all the secretes of subatomic creation and tie all theories together. Now before this colider was built is was speculated that the particle existed, why because the found what they thought was particle decay from this particle in smaller coliders... Now it took over a trillion euros to build this POS colider based on "Scientific fact." then the ran it, and it blew up. they fixed it and ran it again for like 4 years what did they find the same particle decay as before, but this time this 'evidence' was enough to confirm the particle.

Now tell me you do not see 'faith' being used to justify the expenditure of trillions of euros...
[/quote]

drfuzzy Reply :
Something has gone all wonky with the quote tags here.
People use the term "faith" for many, many reasons.  I have scientist friends who do use it in the sense of "I have faith that the data is pointing to ____ and eventually we will find ____."   It's a term they were raised with - as was I.  It doesn't HAVE to have any religious connotation at all.  LHC scientists and others use it, fine.  Some scientists are theists and use it, fine.  Who cares?  

For me, the term is an insult.  I refuse to use it.  Simple.