Are Science and Religion Incompatible?

[civ2]

Alps
You're more than definitely very unfamiliar with what JEWS think of G-d, Hell and even Paradise.
You think only in Christian terms, which is understandable, yet very much limits your views on G-d.
(It's the SAME G-d we're talking here, anyways.)
While I totally agree that taking one part to be non-literal, is the fastest way to "improvise" on the whole, to the extent of going into woods totally - the rest of your post is totally Christian.
Anyways, JEWS don't believe in eternal punishment (or at least it's a very rare occasion, maybe just few in the whole history), not we have any wish for others to suffer at all.
The ultimate Jewish utopia, is when there's GLOBAL PEACE, accompanied by global awareness of G-d.

ElMach
Did you check my links in my last post to you?
It quite clearly shows, that everyone was present and had very much personal first-hand experience of G-d.
And I also said, that to convince a single Jew is Hell, but to convince so many - simply impossible(or as another example, having in mind OUR discussion), thus when Moses said "you saw", there would be riots to negate it, if it was a hoax.
But we nowhere find any doubt of the Sinai revelation, though we have NUMEROUS rebellions against Moses as a LEADER (not a prophet, which was his role on Sinai), and even some bickering with G-d.
But NO ONE ever said "there's no G-d, Moses just made it up".
Even the golden calf was still attributed to the Exodus, even if in a totally wrong way.
Meaning, the generation had NO DOUBT that G-d spoke with them and gave them His Commandments.
They might've disobeyed it, but they never DENIED it.
For me, it's the perfect evidence of the event, especially KNOWING Jews and myself.

 

[El_Machinae]

Of course they believed Moses. According to you, they'd seen a bunch of really amazing things. They were prone to believing what Moses reported, even if Moses would've been the only witness.

But you're still choosing to believe one person over all of natural history.

 

[civ2]

EM
Not quite my point.
When he says "YOU saw G-d in the cloud etc", he means the ENTIRE NATION, 3 million people.
And still, NO ONE objected to say "I didn't!"
Thus, it was a "silent agreement" testimony on his words.
Not those about G-d's Commandments, but those about actually witnessing Him.

 

[El_Machinae]

Yeah, sorry, I misread that.

 

[AlpsStranger]

Alps
You're more than definitely very unfamiliar with what JEWS think of G-d, Hell and even Paradise.

The Jewish beliefs seem to be extremely varied. Also, Jews aren't usually the ones desperately trying to use my representatives as preachers, so I consider it less relevant. I tend to focus on the people who want to tell me what to do(radical Christians) and the people who would like to kill me(radical Muslims.)

You think only in Christian terms, which is understandable, yet very much limits your views on G-d.

I suppose so, but since any kind of creator could have a dizzying variety of properties I'm not sure I will ever contemplate all of them.

(It's the SAME G-d we're talking here, anyways.)

Yes and no. You're all talking about the same character, but you're positing wildly different personalities.

While I totally agree that taking one part to be non-literal, is the fastest way to "improvise" on the whole, to the extent of going into woods totally - the rest of your post is totally Christian.

Anyways, JEWS don't believe in eternal punishment (or at least it's a very rare occasion, maybe just few in the whole history), not we have any wish for others to suffer at all.
The ultimate Jewish utopia, is when there's GLOBAL PEACE, accompanied by global awareness of G-d.

That sounds much more pleasant, I admit, but such a being wouldn't hate me either. He'd simply consider me misguided and set me straight. It's the crazy raving Jonathan Edwards type God that would kick my ass and burn me forever.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Do you see the bunny in the cloud?

 

[Tycho Brahe]

EM
Not quite my point.
When he says "YOU saw G-d in the cloud etc", he means the ENTIRE NATION, 3 million people.
And still, NO ONE objected to say "I didn't!"
Thus, it was a "silent agreement" testimony on his words.
Not those about G-d's Commandments, but those about actually witnessing Him.

Realy? THATS credible evidence?

The origin of man is written all over our anatomy. Just look at it and it is obvious we share a common ancestor with the apes. Just look at de distribution of species on the continents, and its obvious they didn't all walk from a bout less than 10.000 years ago. Look at layers in the rocks that shows the true age of the planet. It's right in front of our eyes.

Granted, a creator could have created it all to look that way. A creator could have created everything less than an hour ago, including a false memory of what I had for breakfast. Theres just no evindece to support that thesis.

But a narative written down hundreds of years after the event, about a guy who walks down a mountain, and a tribe of unknown size who supposedly saw something in the sky, and supposedly noone objected and said it was just a normal cloud, THATS more credible?

This must be a joke! Or some sort of intellectual exercise. This is a trollish level of ignorance.

 

[AlpsStranger]

The origin of man is written all over our anatomy. Just look at it and it is obvious we share a common ancestor with the apes.

As the battle narrows down to ID vs Evolution I think the number of people who deny common ancestry will be vanishingly small. At least I can call that a win, eh?

 

[Tycho Brahe]

As the battle narrows down to ID vs Evolution I think the number of people who deny common ancestry will be vanishingly small. At least I can call that a win, eh?

Sorry but I don't understand?

 

[AlpsStranger]

Sorry but I don't understand?

Unless I'm mistaken, I don't think ID denies common ancestry. ID appears to be displacing YEC, at least on the surface. Granted, the more cynical part of me suspects that a large part of the ID movement is staffed by out-and-out YECs.

 

[civ2]

Zig
Yeah, it didn't get somewhere on time, too.

Alps
Your last sentence is confusing...
Also, He is constantly trying to straighten us up - we got all those rules exactly and just for that.
G-d has zero wish to punish anyone, nor He even does it.
The sinner simply divests himself from being "looked after" by G-d, and becomes subject to the natural laws 100%.
And "naturally", he loses more than he gains, cause "naturally" all sins are misbehaviors, that directly lead to NATURAL negative consequences.
"A good deed draws another good deed, an evil deed draws another evil deed", is exactly about that.
People that always do good, will continue so even in negative situations, thus removing the negativity.
And those who act egoistically and/or evil, will meet the backfire sooner or later, simply by natural laws.
Hard to explain better...
Let's say it this way, they WON'T get stuck in traffic (unlike the good people, in THIS example) and thus will get on time for Titanic.
Was it something "miraculous" or "punishment"?
No. It was just a natural cause of negativity.
The good ones evaded it, by "coincidence".
The bad ones weren't given that opportunity.

Tyvho
Well, for a total non-expert in Judaism, you can talk.

 

[warpus]

It quite clearly shows, that everyone was present and had very much personal first-hand experience of G-d.

How do you know? YOU WEREN'T THERE

What random guess

 

[Tycho Brahe]

Unless I'm mistaken, I don't think ID denies common ancestry. ID appears to be displacing YEC, at least on the surface. Granted, the more cynical part of me suspects that a large part of the ID movement is staffed by out-and-out YECs.

Ah, I see. But that include civ2?

I haven't read all his/hers post, so I admittedly could have jumped the gun on this.

 

[civ2]

Tychno
A macho here.
As of my stand - I'm a Bible literalist, and I oppose uncheckable science (for non-religious reasons, I'm a skeptic, too, just another type) such as big-scale evolution and universe's age.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Uncheckable science is an oxymoron.

But you, being wise in the ways of science, already knew this.

 

[Tycho Brahe]

Tychno
A macho here.
As of my stand - I'm a Bible literalist, and I oppose uncheckable science (for non-religious reasons, I'm a skeptic, too, just another type) such as big-scale evolution and universe's age.

Okay thanks.

Darwins theory about natural selection HAVE been checked and verified countles times since 1859. But I don't expect my words to make anny impression on you.

 

[El_Machinae]

Realy? THATS credible evidence?

The origin of man is written all over our anatomy. Just look at it and it is obvious we share a common ancestor with the apes. Just look at de distribution of species on the continents, and its obvious they didn't all walk from a bout less than 10.000 years ago. Look at layers in the rocks that shows the true age of the planet. It's right in front of our eyes.

Granted, a creator could have created it all to look that way. A creator could have created everything less than an hour ago, including a false memory of what I had for breakfast. Theres just no evindece to support that thesis.

But a narative written down hundreds of years after the event, about a guy who walks down a mountain, and a tribe of unknown size who supposedly saw something in the sky, and supposedly noone objected and said it was just a normal cloud, THATS more credible?

This must be a joke! Or some sort of intellectual exercise. This is a trollish level of ignorance.

Yes, this is an excellent counterpoint. The fact that the narrative was compiled nearly a thousand years after the purported event does cast some misgivings. But, tbh, I really thought the narrative described Moses getting the tablets privately. I guess it can be read as if a booming voice issued the commandments to all.

It then engenders the same criticism I have of the tales of Jesus. While the described feats are certainly impressive, we have to wonder at the credibility of a 'god' that doesn't even know the natural history of the planet.

How can we believe that Jesus (or the compilers of the Torah) know what God wants if they don't even know what he did? It would be like insisting that my mom wants you to deliver bagels to Antarctica, because she invented a teleportation device there in the 20s to prevent the Great Depression. Even if you suspect that I've got a mum, you've no real reason to think I have any insight into her wants.

 

[Tycho Brahe]

How do you know? YOU WEREN'T THERE

What random guess

I would like to see the attendance record. I bet the Goldblums where late as usual.

 

[Core Imposter]

The two are separate. Science is knowledge, religion is faith. If we knew that God existed, God would be science.

How many times do I have to say this?

A great deal of science is based on theory which has always been wrong until it was right and often when right turned out to be wrong. For the most part we are doing nothing more than taking science by faith.

What is science really? Science is God revealed, one bit at a time.

 

[civ2]

Zig
You're either pretending (95%) or simply troll me on this (4.99%).
The rest (0.01%) is that you actually believe this point.

Tycho
I don't know how many more times I'll have to explain:
1. Extrapolation IS guessing. It's not a TEST that you can actually perform in a lab. ANY lab.
2. Extrapolating short-term PROVED ideas into long-term UNCHECKABLE ones, is no proof for the latter, due to total uncertainty (if honest), whether the extrapolation isn't missing some "tiny" details that would change the outcome drastically at big scale, yet are left unseen at small scale.
Best example: Newton vs Einstein.
At macro objects, Newton is perfect, but he fails at particles, where we already HAVE to resort to Einstein.
Does it make Newton less usable for objects or more usable for particles?
Not at all.
At each scale, there's a theory that fits it perfectly, to the specified precision level.
But when we switch levels, precision also changes, and thus we MUST use another theory altogether.
Same with "evolution": It works in the short-term processes, but we have no way to be SURE, whether it also works at long-term.
THIS is why I consider it uncheckable and not-so-blindly trustable.
(Was there any single word about religion in my lengthy explanation???)