RE: Science and religion
March 18, 2013 at 9:15 pm
(This post was last modified: March 18, 2013 at 9:33 pm by Tonus.)
(March 18, 2013 at 8:38 pm)jstrodel Wrote: The fact that science cannot explain something does not prove that that doesn't existI think it's more accurate to say that the fact that science has not observed something does not prove that it does exist.
jstrodel Wrote:That is an extremely arrogant way to look at the world, to assume that anything that you do not know falls into the category of some kind of superstitious belief.I think it's more arrogant to assert that "there's nothing unscientific about miracles" and then imply that it's because science just hasn't figured it out yet.
jstrodel Wrote:What if God doesn't want to prove H'shem's ways to people unless they have faith? What if the whole nature of miracles is to test peoples hearts to see who will seek God under conditions of repentance?As I said elsewhere, the universe as described by the believer is remarkably similar to the universe as described by the non-believer. Maybe science hasn't caught up. Maybe god is hiding from us. Maybe he won't let us understand his grand ways.
Well... maybe he's not there, and that's why it seems as if he's not there.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
-Stephen Jay Gould