Submit a question to our community and get an answer from real people.
Submit

Do you trust science, religion, or both? Why?

Report as

Science = Truth and I trust Truth.

Helpful (8) Fun (1) Thanks for voting Comments (8)
Report as
Orroco
not always...
Report as
Orroco
JEsus is truth.
Report as
Jeesh. Let the poster's comment stand. You've already answered, so why must you nail this one with "Jesus is truth"?
Report as
Orroco
because its true.
Report as
Then go ahead and hit my answer with this too.
Report as
Orroco
look, i am not trying to be a flyer, i just wanted to answer the question with my opinion. now stop quarreling with me and we may both begone, please.
Report as
Strangest thing. I always see people saying Jesus is Truth, with a capital T. I have heard that enough, that now I associate capital T Truth with misdirection and dishonesty and lies. Here, AYQ said science was Truth, and Eb said JEsus is truth. I am one confused tiger.
Report as
You aren't alone on that, lol.
Report as
Add a comment...

Religion. I have my reasons.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

Well, I'm a Christian. I was raised a Christian, but God started really moving in my life over the past couple of years.

Helpful (5) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

I trust God.

Helpful (5) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (1)
Report as
100% agreed there not religion or science
Report as
Add a comment...

I trust both. They both fit tigether

Helpful (4) Fun (1) Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

Um both... makes sense.

Helpful (3) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

Religion.. I trust God.

Helpful (3) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (4)
Report as
Why don't you trust the scientists?
Report as
I do, but that don't mean i will leave my faith buried in the sand.
Report as
Whatever floats your boat, man.
Report as
Whatever rocks your socks, dude.
Report as
Add a comment...
Orroco

Jesus is the way, truth, and the life. that should answer that.

Helpful (3) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (1)
Report as
Yeah, no.
Report as
Add a comment...
Strelok

I only trust science, I won't believe anything religious.

Helpful (4) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

God overules science. I'm a christian.

Helpful (2) Fun (1) Thanks for voting Comments (12)
Report as
This is peculiar. Since the knowledge gains in science continually overrule God. Remember when everyone thought the Sky Daddy hung stars on a piece of fabric draped over the Firmament? Do you notice how we no longer think that? Cuz, uh......your Sky Daddy done got overruled.
Report as
People used to think the earth was flat and that the sun rotated around the earth only. Science has overruled again. Proof is proof.
Report as
Remember when God got angry at the gays and sent the EAST coast of the United States hurricanes? Oh, do you also remember when God got angry at Illinois and has NEVER EVER sent them a hurricane?
Report as
science doesn't overrule God. Science is just science. He gave it to us to help us understand. And, man is human and didn't know better about the earth. But, it's been in the scriptures that it's not flat.
Report as
Cuz coins aren't flat.
Report as
Good observation. And? :)
Report as
Why do you think they said the earth was "round" in the Bible? In the same way that spheres are round, or the same way coins are round? Look towards your horizon. See any corners? Of course not. Cuz you live on a coin. Set on foundations. With a firmament in there somewhere.
Report as
Good answer. ;)
Report as
I hate these a$$holes that comment on these answers that say God or Jesus or Christian. If you don't like it ignore it. You can't change a person's religion and you have to have one messed up mind to make them feel different. It's called freedom of speech for a reason you have to respect everyone's opinions on this site. I'm sure you are only doing this to make people feel bad about there religion. I don't believe in Muslim or Atheist beliefs but do I have to get angry at every comment I see? Of course f#cking not.
Report as
(If you're reacting to me) I understand fully that I can't change your religion. I respect your and anybody's freedom of speech, as I have never flagged an answer for removal simply because the person makes religious platitudes. My intent is not to make YOU feel bad about your religion. And I'm not angry.

There are people reading the answers on this site who are young enough that they haven't made up their minds about religion. I imagine some of them click on the religion type questions and answers to aid them in their eventual decision. It is my intent to interject a voice of reason in amidst all the lies spewed at them from the religious side.

I apologize if you don't like to think that your side is the side of lies and deceit, while the side representing atheism is reasonable and logical. Have you looked closely at your faith?
Report as
I'm not referring to you specifically, but, you and others.
Report as
Oh. Good. Any response to the rest of it?
Report as
Add a comment...

Science. Faith is not involved with it. Only facts.

Helpful (5) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

Both,but religion comes first.Why? Well religion cause it'll take us to the right path and science (sometimes) because I know its right,I don't trust anything science based unless I think its right. :)
What about you?

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (6)
Report as
Closed minded much?
Report as
Yeah,I guess I am.
Report as
Well did you know that scientists found out how to make a small object invisible?
Report as
Don't wanna argue bro,we all have different beliefs,let it be. :)
Report as
I know, I just wanted to expand your mind.
Report as
Thanks anyways. :)
Report as
Add a comment...

There is no reason why both can't work together. Just please don't start me on evolution BS...

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (1)
Report as
By no means, we shan't try to get your neurons functioning again.
Report as
Add a comment...

both im Christian and from my POV they both prove and cancel out each other at times
they fit into each other

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

Neither. I have faith in God. As for people the truth is how each person sees it and relates to it. Since science is by people...

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (1)
Report as
Naskey13
Thank-You
Report as
Add a comment...

I only trust science because science has tangible evidence to support facts.

Helpful (4) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

neither

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

Both ... Neither ...

It depends on the issue, the question being asked - and which religion you're talking about.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

I trust a religion which doesn't contradict with science. My religion is Islam.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

science because science has facts and proof.
religion is just something that people believe in. to me there is no proof.
im not saying i dont believe in god but you know, im the 'i need proof' kind of person.

Helpful (3) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...
JamesKaeberle

Psalms 118:8

It's better yo put your trust in God than have confidence in man.

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (3)
Report as
I'll trust my wife way before I ever trust some religious con man's concept of a God. ........of course, the wife believes in God...... but my point was made.
Report as
@Jameskaeberle: How ironic.
Report as
Congrats
Lol :)
Report as
Add a comment...

Religion because you can't live life without a mystery.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

religion cuz science haven't got answer to many while religion has to all

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (4)
Report as
science haven't got answer to many? religion has to all? You MUST live in the deep South.
Report as
nahhh you got it wrong and science is still not able to prove how adam and even came to earth
you got any?
Report as
Ok. Quick. Don't go to a library. And for Pete's sake, don't look at any websites that feature science. And DON'T take any science classes or educate yourself in any way. Only then will you continue to be able to say "science is still not able to prove how adam and even came to earth" without twitching and jerking your chin to the left. With a blank stare.
Report as
whatever pal!! the story is just the same
Report as
Add a comment...

I see science as our attempt to understand how God does/ did it. Sometimes we are right, sometimes we are wrong. God bless and merry Christmas.

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

I trust science. Science is simply the best method of understanding the universe around us, because it is based on empirical evidence and objective observation. Religion is based on faith, which requires neither observation nor evidence. In my opinion, faith is for fools.

Helpful (7) Fun (1) Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...
clemwillhelpu

science. If i trust religion, its not real. The bible, is not real. I refuse to listen to a BOOK, written by a MAN. No matter how many times you tell me god asked the man to write it, I know its not true. I'm a teenager, and don't believe in fairy tales anymore.

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (2)
Report as
Do you trust your science book? Just kidding, I know what you're getting at.
Report as
clemwillhelpu
lol. :)
Report as
Add a comment...

Both, and neither
In reality, everything we know, we know because a human told us, and we all know how trustworthy someone's word is nowadays

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

I say thank you surgeon, not thank god. Religion holds back science, and science pretty much removes religion. So if you denounce science, might as well live as the Amish. Especially those angry Christians everyone rolls their eyes at, they should know that the father of computer science was a gay atheist. Your computers tainted by more well known non believers such as Bill Gates, Linus Torvald, and Steve Jobs.

Helpful (4) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (5)
Report as
I've always wondered. If all the Christians and Muslims somehow got fed up with each other, and grabbed all their nuclear weapons and charged at each other, FWOOM! No more C or M..... Was it because they were raptured in a way that makes sense to the scientifically minded?
Report as
Some people believe we are getting closer to a day without religion. Others believe we can never remove religion. I don't believe religion is a bad thing. The way humanity works, it's almost a necessity for the weak. People need something to believe in. That's why religion is such a powerful tool to control people. Bad things can happen anytime and to anyone. When a person's mind is broke, they need something to hold on to otherwise they give up. An acorn can't comfort them, neither can any inanimate objects, but an imaginary friend can.
Report as
If I were a kid, I'd choose Hobbes. WAY better imaginary friend...
Report as
Hahaha. Me too. But Hobbes doesn't promise you anything. God does.
Report as
Well, neither does God. People promise us stuff in His name, but they're all charlatans.
Report as
Add a comment...

Those who value logic, reasoning, and evidence will invariably "trust" science. Then, there are many who for one reason or another, don't value those things at all, and they trust their faith. Why? Because the Bible told them to trust God. Why do they trust the Bible? Because God said its words were Truth. This is another thing only the former type of person tends to see, while the latter types of people are completely blind to it. The spin of that Circular Reasoning is worse than a Category 5 eye wall.

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

My Experience /Personal Belief
Gives 1st Preference To God
As T h e Creator Of Every-
thing; Including Science.
Science Is A Discovery
Deal Whereas God
Is Omnipotent;
All Knowing.
Science Is
Second
Place.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (2)
Report as
THERE'S the triangle we all remember!
Report as
Now, Now, Noveltman... I
Get A Little Lazy
Sometime.
Lol :)
Report as
Add a comment...

I think you meant scientists instead of science. Because science is science. It just is. And no religion can change that. But scientists, they are simply people who study science with accurate results! Why would we not trust them? Unlike scientists, religion is one biased mutherf*****!

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (19)
Report as
Because scientists pushed for a science that disproved the Heavenly Father. That's why.
Report as
Ohh. Thanks.
Report as
science cannot disprove the heavenly father.
Report as
If it COULD, but didn't, you'd have something.
Report as
It never will. :)
Report as
That's because you can't dis-prove something that doesn't exist.
Report as
Why lololo, does the fact that your claims aren't verifiable make you so happy. Remember? You smiled.... [ :) ] like that. Why did you smile? Because you're apparently happy that this God concept of yours can never be proven or disproven. Why does that make you content?
Report as
I don't have blind faith. I believe in a God is alive and well. I smile because HE will never be disproved. You cannot put our consciousness under a microscope in a lab. It's the same with God. Science cannot explain everything. It just is.
Report as
Meh. You said the same thing for sunrises, winters, crop yields, and tides. No matter how much science explains, whatever's left (the gap, I guess) is where you'll find comfort, lololo.
Report as
Science helps us understand that which God made. That's how I see it. :)
Report as
I understand that. Many early scientists were working to understand God's creation. But you turn away when the science shows there is no God. They didn't, and that's why we have science today.
Report as
science doesn't equate to no God. There are many christian scientists, too, btw. :)
Report as
Wellllll, I realize science in and of itself doesn't require lack of belief in God. Christian Scientist is a kind of contradiction in terms, though. And you can't ignore that 95% of Doctorate level scientists are atheist. There must be a reason, and that reason ain't Lucifer.
Report as
What do you make of this?:

Out of convicted rapists, 57% admitted to reading
pornography. 95% admitted to reading the Bible.

That doesn't sound too good.
Report as
It's not true that as far as scientists. There are many christians who are scientists. science does not equate NO God. It's just science. I'm not surprised that rapists are into porn. And, as far as reading the bible, just because someone reads it, doesn't mean they follow it and follow Christ. They do the opposite. Satan is a believer....but he's no follower of christ.
Report as
You know, I looked more into it after posting, and the numbers are complicated. What I basically took away from it all, though, was that if you ask people if they believe in a higher power, say, you get a certain percentage of people who agree with that, and that percentage varies according to the profession of the individual. For Doctorate level scientists, that percentage is indeed more than 5%. However, keep going. What about belief in a loving God. That percentage gets a little lower. Personal God? Lower still. How about a loving, personal God who created everything less than 10,000 years ago, and who sent Himself in the form of His Son to earth in order to die for our sins....? That percentage is about 5%.
Report as
Statistics aren't perfectly accurate. I think it's impossible to see into everyones hearts and mind in this. This is where only God truly knows. He knows our hearts even better than we know our own. This is why I also God has the tremendous amount of grace that He does have for us. He knows we are but made of dust. And, BTW, regarding the argument of of rapists. If you say that 95% have read the bible and you believe that most of America is christian/bible believing, Are you saying that most of America are rapists? That's a logical fallacy. :)
Report as
No, the point of that statistic was just that porn obviously ISN'T the cause.
Report as
Well, it doesn't help. Ted Bundy was a serial killer in my area when i was young. I heard he gave a testimony saying that it was porn that got him into killing. It was the door that opened up to lusting after more to the point of violence.
Report as
Add a comment...

I'm a Muslim...in Islam science and religion are one...they can't be apart...science always agree with the Holy Quran :)
may Allah(God) guide you to the right path :)
amen :)
Happy Holiday everybody and merry Xmas to all :)

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (30)
Report as
Madda, Madadnaha, Firasha, Mahdan, Farashnaha, Bisata, Mihada, Dahaha, Tahaha, Sutehat................ALL MEAN FLAT. Every one. So much for that.
Report as
Umm...I didn't understand a thing from what said...could you explain??
Report as
Those were 10 different words used in the Qur'an to describe the shape of earth. Every last one of them means "flat".
Report as
Ohh...Arabic words...well flat for us to walk...round for the night and morning to happen...there's a verse to prove it...[39:5] "He created the heavens and the earth truthfully. He rolls the night over the day, and rolls the day over the night, He committed the sun and the moon, each running for a finite period. Absolutely, He's The almighty, The forgiven."
This verse clearly informs that the earth is round.
We are two small for feeling the "roundness" of the earth that's way to us it's kinda flat but it isn't. It looks flat because buildings doesn't fall we don't fall... You got my point?
Report as
Sounds to me (and any logical reader) that your ignorant God was saying the SKY is round.
Report as
By the way, when I call your God ignorant, and laugh at Him for being so silly and child-like, ..... How come he doesn't bolt-of-lighting me right out of existence???
Report as
Look I think that your the ignorant here...first you don't respect my beliefs you shouldn't insult them...I never called you anything like that...second read the verse again...try to use your mind
Report as
Believe you shouldn't say things like that for the One who made...He made and He can end you...prevent...if you don't like religion then don't bother yourself with it...
Report as
Oh, but I bother myself with it. It's so much fun. You know when you talk to little kids about what they think about Santa, and the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny? It must be similar to that. He didn't make me. And He can't end me. He's completely impotent on both charges.
Report as
Look this is no fairy tail to me...my life is this...so there's no need to do this...you know deep down in your heart that there IS a God...and you know that the The Holy Quran is true...just give it a try...I promise you...it will change your mind...
Report as
I would argue that deep down, you realize there is no God. It's important to you to pretend the Holy Qur'an is true. Otherwise, why would you expend so much effort deluding yourself so completely?
Report as
Tell me this have read the holy Quran or have you read about it?
Report as
Well. I read an English translated Qur'an. And this was only AFTER I knew there was no God. Does that count?
Report as
Have you read read it all??
I think because your mind said "There's No God" affected you...that's way you didn't believe what's in the Quran...but give it another chance...I'm sure you'll change your mind...you won't lose a thing but you'd defiantly gonna win a lot !!!
Report as
I read it whenever people try to claim that a certain passage indicates that the Qur'an contains some sort of scientific knowledge. It never turns out that it actually does, but I read it.
Report as
Trust me mate...just read it again...read it all...you won't find it boring...you'll find it mind shocking!!!...just don't put in your mind that there's no God when you read it...there's a free book in iBook it's called " The Quran and modern science" by dr. Zakir Naik I think...give it a try :)
I hope you change your mind :)
Report as
And I'm sure Zakir Naik you think gets nothing for spreading around his free iBook... I appreciate your encouragement, but unfortunately, A-Rash, there is only one direction for this kind of thing. And you know this, too. We all go from childlike acceptance of the whole shebang, towards less and less belief, until we progress far enough to eliminate belief that every inanimate object has a spirit, or a nymph to go along with it......oh wait. We already have gone that far. Do you think, A-Rash, that we might go a little----just a little?----farther?
Report as
I don't think so man...my faith can't be parted away from me...it's something that's in my heart...I'm just an 18 years old dude who tries his best to let people get to the right path..Believe me my friend...I really do care about you...you won't lose a thing...and I'm sure you can restore your faith and be on the right path :)
Report as
And I don't care about fakir
Report as
Oopss missed something^^^^^^
I don't care about zakir niak's investment or whatever...it's just a good book :)
Report as
There's very little I can do for an individual such as yourself who has decided that evidence and logic shall mean nothing to them, and that they will cling to their faith no matter what.

I appreciate that you care about people. That's very nice.

Those "rich in faith" remain so by constantly ignoring what is all around them.

It is nearly impossible for those of us who have departed from such self-forced ways of staying away from science and proof; to go back to squeezing our eyes shut tight, covering our ears, and proclaiming that nothing will shake our acceptance of unverified claims.
Report as
Once again Islam encourage science...one day my friend I hope you find the truth in Islam...just dig deep...and you'll see :)
Report as
One cannot dig deep into the shallow up-throw of hands in the great give-up that is religion.
Report as
One must wonder...why are we alive?
What's the reason in our existence?
How did we came to this world?
What awaits beyond the grave?
Is there life after death?
Why do we die?
Report as
I will answer your questions, A-F.

A) Just dumb luck.
B) There is none.
C) Just badly phrased luck.
D) Death awaits us after death.
E) Ditto
F) Telomeres

Satisfied? Probably not.
Report as
A-Rash Those are questions that end with a question mark not a god.
Report as
Listen people...I'm only tryin' to help you...I did what I should do...now you've been told the truth...now you got the message...it's up to you now...
Report as
I'll make you a deal. I'll sit down and read the Qur'an every night for a month, as long as you're sitting across from me, reading Scientific American.
Report as
Mister...you got your deal...remember I'll this book of yours and you read the Quran...ok??
Report as
Ok. Just get ahold of me on Tom Petty's supernatural radio anytime you want to do a group read.
Report as
Add a comment...

Science gave us technology- religion takes it for granted. Religion gave us drilling holes in living peoples heads to let out the demons- science told us that is BS.

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (1)
Report as
What?!
Report as
Add a comment...

Science doesn't involve "trust". It's based on what is provable and probable.
Religion is belief without evidence.

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (20)
Report as
What?!
Report as
What? What.
Report as
Your def of religion which I think you mean Judeo/Christian is naivete. The Bible says to trust based on evidence not blind faith. True science and reason are not to be feared. Y'shua said, "Know the truth (not ignore) and it will set you free." Christianity and Judaism are founded upon historical events seen by eyewitnesses.

The veracity of the witnesses therefore must be judged. With Judaism it was Mt. Sinai, with Y'shua it was the resurrection. Both rise or fall on these two historical events.
Report as
Well over half of Americans (64% according to a Time poll), when given a fact that contradicts their faith, will reject that fact in favor of their faith. So when you, Marq, are shown that there were no reliable witnesses at Mt. Sinai, in fact the event at Mt. Sinai was likely fictional; you reject that. It contradicts your faith.
Report as
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Text."~
There are still many differing opinions regarding the origin of the Bible, when it was written, and under what conditions; but it is fair to say that, outside fundamentalist circles, modern consensus suggests that the assembling and editing of the documents that were to constitute the Bible began in the seventh century BCE, some three centuries after David's time. (The earliest actual material in our possession, part of the Dead Sea Scrolls, dates to the second century BCE at the earliest).
~
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan] in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
~
: most of the Israelites were in fact formerly Canaanites. The story of Abraham's journey from Ur of the Chaldees, the Patriarchs, the Exodus, Sinai, and the conquest of Canaan, all these were apparently based on legends that the various elements brought with them from their countries of origin. The consolidation of the Israelites into a nation was not the result of wanderings in the desert and divine revelation, but came from the need to defend themselves against the Philistines,
~
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
Report as
Noveltman- Skeptics also reject facts that disagree with their FAITH. All evos believe life evolved from non life. Biogenesis is a proven fact that life can only come life! Therefore life is eternal, matter is not according to the II Law of Thermodynamics again which is a proven fact that all evolutionists reject. All Laws are proven fact. Evolutionary conjecture is neither a fact in any logical sense. There is no I Law of Evolution.

So please don't try to tell me about facts until you get some. Evolutionists could not even present evidence in a court of law in the US Supreme Court in 1987. When the Columbus School System was talking about adding creation science to its curriculum in 1976 the only evidence proffered by evos, and I was there was religion. The ACLU and PAW brought two priests and a Rabbi to argue against it. Evolution has ZERO credibility as a scientific discipline. It has ZERO logic and that is why in the real world of evidence it lacks serious consideration.

So until you are willing to put your fantasy in a court of law which understands evidence please leave your BELIEF in the privacy of your own home. :-)
Report as
The Second Law completely supports and points to evolution.
Report as
Ravenevan- Of course they would say there are many opinions and outside "fundamentalist circles" the "modern consensus" these are words used, not to enlighten, but to bias the reader to the "writer's" point of view.

Were these archeologists eyewitnesses to the events they claim took place, or did not take place? Because there is a lack of written corroboration is not evidence against an event taking place.

Fact: One can see from photos the Jews had a large Temple during the time Y'shua was there. The leaders at the time as well as the disciples and Y'shua himself taught it to be real history.

Fact: The followers of Y'shua were executed and tortured for claiming they saw and ate with Y'shua after His resurrection. Where are you going to find people who will suffer torture and execution for a lie knowing its a lie? What is the payoff for that?

Skeptics claimed before the Dead Sea Scrolls that the Bible was written in the 7th century AD; CE if you choose which is still based on Y'shua. When you compare the so called beginnings of the Bible supposedly 1000 years after the fact of the Dead Sea Scrolls how can it be so accurate? It is incredulous to hold to your evidences, because if your thesis is to be believed there ought to be tremendous incongruity. Made up legends cannot be that accurate, especially one that contains extensive material data!
Report as
Your fact is itself a lie. Now where are we going to find people who lie about others not knowing a lie? Any payoff there, MarqTithe? I mean, MarqTravis?
Report as
Noveltman- The II Law does not support evo.

I Law: Energy can't be created or destroyed.

II Law: Entropy always increases whenever there is an exchange of energy without a code. With a code there is a limited decrease in entropy. Evo no code; entropy increases.

Evo's claim the universe is a closed system. Therefore, evolution dead.

Reality, something outside the system (open) created energy. I Law of Biogenesis says Omne vivum ex vivo! Omnis cellula e cellula! Cause and effect. This was a personal being, because we are personal beings.

Evolution tries to rape us from our personhood and then tries to add personality back into an impersonal force, by giving the impersonal a name by calling it mother nature.

There is nothing wrong with science I'm all for it. What I don't like are misanthropes masquerading as scientists and claiming things that are lucidly plain for all to see.
Report as
Noveltman- You say my facts are a lie. Who says they are? Where did you get your information from? Ever hear of the Christians being fed to lions? Or do you believe that was also a lie?

Both Judaism and Christianity was started by the Jewish people. All books both Tanach (OT) and Brit HaKadasha (NT) were written by Jews.

Y'shua said, "Yerushalayim will be trampled down (controlled) by the Gentiles until there time is fulfilled." June 1967AD six day war Yerushalayim was taken over by the Jews for the last time.


Bible Study ToolsBible VersionsCJBJoelJoel 3
Joel 3 (Complete Jewish Bible)
View In My Bible

1 "For then, at that time, when I restore the fortunes of Y'hudah and Yerushalayim, 2 I will gather all nations and bring them down to the Valley of Y'hoshafat [ADONAI judges]. I will enter into judgment there for my people, my heritage Isra'el, whom they scattered among the nations; then they divided my land...19 But Egypt will be desolate and Edom a desert waste, because of the violence done to the people of Y'hudah, because they shed innocent blood in their land. 20 Y'hudah will be inhabited forever, Yerushalayim through all generations. 21 "I will cleanse them of bloodguilt which I have not yet cleansed," for ADONAI is living in Tziyon. This is obviously a lie, because there are no Jews in Israel or Jerusalem.
Report as
Let me state further that your statement, "II law completely supports evo" is not evidence. Making statements without evidence is blind faith.

Please show me evidence of decreasing entropy without a code. Please show me evidence of life arising from non life (abiogenesis). Show me in a court of law evidence that was presented to prove evolution.

Finally, tell me the experiment your going to set up to falsify evolution. In order for something to be true it has to be falsifiable. Just let me know what you come up with and how the experiment went.

Report as
Many, many, many, MANY things would falsify evolution. If a dog gave birth to a cat, that would completely falsify evolution. If an insect and an arachnid could successfully mate, that would disprove evolution. Don't you see? You're upset because even though ten billion things COULD disprove evolution, nothing does, because it is sound. And what you are attempting to do is convince others that FAITH and the theory of evolution are on equal ground. Shame on you.

You want evidence? I'm afraid you'll have to read, my friend. I'll give you some titles to start with, but I couldn't possibly show you the evidence here. A good book to start with in order to understand that the 2nd Law completely supports evolution, (in fact, it is BECAUSE of the 2nd Law, that evolution is the only game in town), is "The Atheist's Guide to Reality". I know--you'd be disbarred from your Church if any deacons caught you reading that. Go under a bedsheet with a flashlight. No one will see you.

Dennett's "Consciousness Explained" lays an important framework for understanding how God is completely unnecessary. But it is old, and there are many who disagree with Dennett's findings now. (People who disagree with him on scientific grounds, not Godmustadiddit grounds.)

Sam Harris's "The Moral Landscape" is a good read for anybody wanting explained why people are "good" without any gods present.

"The Case for Faith" by Lee Strobel is the perfect book to read to see how the religious side has absolutely no facts or evidence to argue from. So is his book, "The Case for Christ".

If these were not enough, I have countless other titles for you to use. Just let me know.
Report as
First of all I do not go to a church, I go to a Messianic Synagogue. Secondly we are free to discuss anything openly in churches as well as the Synagogue as I have debated Theistic Evolutionist in a fundamentalist Church.

Popper saw Positivism being severely criticized and wanted to rescue the underlying ideas of the scientific method. He called his method Critical Rationalism.

He highlighted two problems with induction: the psychological problem of finding what you are expecting to find and the logical problem around the leap from talking about experience to what we have not experienced.

He thus found 'common sense' as a scientific justification inadequate method of prediction and statements about what we have not experienced cannot be deemed as 100% 'true'.

He also noted that a verificationist approach is less likely to result in new discoveries, as it simply seeks to confirm the beliefs of the scientist.

Logical Positivists set the demarcation criteria between science and non-science around observability. In his Hypothetico-deductive model, Popper moved this to testability in the sequence:

1. Consider phenomena

2. Observation and Generation of Ideas

3. Development of Testable Hypothesis

4. Systematic Observation

5. Data Analysis

6. Testing of Hypothesis



7a. Hypothesis Falsified (Refuted)

8a. Reject and / or Revise Hypothesis (return to step 3)

-- or --

7b. Hypothesis is confirmed

8b. Theory (Consists of confirmed hypotheses)

9. Prediction

What evos lack is empiricism; falsification. When debating evos they constantly retort it just evolved that way. It does not matter what is proffered. It's what global warming alarmists use. Climate change = global warming. Evos- genetic change = evo. Both are naivete.

Genetic drift is just adaptation not an increase in complexity. Evolution demands proof for increasing complexity. No such proof exists or it would be shown. As I said it could have been shown in SCOTUS.
Report as
Evos had their chance to proffer their proof, but didn't. Why? NO shred of evidence.

As I stated Wernher von Braun led NASA to the moon, and he ridiculed evos for no evidence of their theory. He stated, "They (evolutionists) challenge science to prove the existence of God. But must we really light a candle to see the sun? They say they cannot visualize a Designer. Well, can a physicist visualize an electron? What strange rationale makes some physicists accept the inconceivable electron as real while refusing to accept the reality of a Designer on the grounds that they cannot conceive Him?"

The Moral Landscape by Sam Harris is an example of double speak. How can you claim something is "good" if there is no absolute standard. What standard do you use for claiming something is "good".

Faith without evidence is blind. So what is your evidence for being "good"?

I currently Homeschool my grandchildren and they get exposed to both scientific models. They will be free to read both sides of the issue. Unlike the Public School system which just indoctrinates their students and do not permit them to think for themselves.

Finally, Your statement of a dog begetting a cat would disprove evo, no it would disprove creationism, since animals must reproduce after their own kind. Evolution would then be proven since it would be mutation with natural selection. However, I must state that Papa dog would be very suspicious! ;-))
Report as
There is no need for an imagined absolute standard for humans to refer to a particular behavior as "good".
You seem to think "good" is only a noun of some kind. it's usually used as an adjective, in other words, the word is a tool for humans to describe something as being beneficial or admirable and many other uses. It's all just a matter of evolution supporting what is most beneficial to our species.
Report as
What religion does is anthropomorphize human ideals and concepts.
Report as
Then you have a personification of human ideals and concepts with, human, third person omniscient perspective; that gives people the feeling of a benevolent presence looking out for us ready to enforce our social ideals.
Report as
Your last paragraph, Marq, is all I need for rebuttal. You're sunk.
Report as
Okay, let's say for the sake of debating that man can determine right from wrong on his own volition. Then whose standards do we use? Yours? Mine? Santa Claus'? An elite? There are 6 billion+ humans on earth so who decides?

If there are no absolute standards than my opinion is just as good as yours. So why then are you arguing with me. You have no basis for arguing, and all arguing is nonsensical.

If two plus two can mean whatever I want it to mean; there are no absolutes, than you can't tell me it equals four.

I'm sorry, but evolutionist lack logic. To even try to say you can use relativity to prove you can come to a logical conclusion is the epitome of ignorance and credulity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR_z85O0P2M You can hear Richard Dawkins spouting this nonsense at Liberty University a Creationist University. Telling how evolution (a non-entity) placed morality in our brain. This is what I mean when I say that evos try to give an impersonal thing personality. Why? Because evos realize that they can't live with this nonsense. So they try to make sense out of nonsense by being nonsensical. They are not true to their own belief system. What is even more telling is there blindness to it.

Proof of your stubborness is in your statement "It's all just a matter of evolution supporting what is most beneficial to our species." Evolution is your God it is omniscient in your eyes so you give it a personality.
Report as
Add a comment...
Naskey13

Neither. I am Christian. Science is just something that man made; it is of the flesh. Religion is something that man made too. Religion causes people to fight over the truth, that may not be the truth; God doesn't want argument and confusion. Science and Religion aren't nothing but two man-made things that put you in the trap of putting your trust in man instead you should be putting your trust in the Lord. Christianity doesn't belong in those two categories,its the truth.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (2)
Report as
I respectfully dissagree.
Report as
Naskey13
I don't care.
Report as
Add a comment...

Religon. There's a whole book on it. It's a worldwide bestseller... the BIBLE!!!!

Helpful (3) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

I trust both because I believe that God's power and majesty are to great to be fully comprehended by mere mortals. But, unlike so many others on this site, I also respect the rights of others to their own beliefs and ideas without ridicule.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

Science for the simple fact of evidence.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

As a Seventh-Day Adventist, I trust my religion, as well as some aspects of science. Not all science is accurate though. There are many aspects of science that I believe to be FALSE, such as evolution.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

I believe that scientific knowledge and belief in the Bible could go together. The Bible is not a science textbook. It is, however, a book of truth, and truth can stand the test of time. (John 17:17)

With much study and research, I became fully convinced that the Bible is in harmony with scientific fact. I have never encountered a conflict between a proved scientific fact and a teaching of the Bible. Often, seeming conflicts are caused by a lack of knowledge—either of a scientific teaching or of what the Bible really says.

So yes I completely trust not religion as a whole, but the truth of God's Word and scientific fact!

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

I trust science, and not religion. Religion is what man wants to happen and what man wants to believe through fear of reality. Religion is what man uses to feel secure. Some say the bible has stood the test of time, but over the years christians have changed what the Bible has said. The Bible is nothing more than another Holy Doctrine made by man. I trust science because at least science admits when it's wrong. And science is always changing as the world is always changing so there's no possible way any holy doctrine can remain the same.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have reasons, but there to complicated to explain, He works in mysterious ways.

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

i believe both....i am a muslim....and my religious book is quran. my best book quran...allows me to believe in logic it given scientific evidences about 1400 years ago...which are being discovered now a days......so whatever is the established science is already explained in the quran 1400 years ...so i believe in both.... have this book...and please read it....u will come to know that science and quran are not different....http://sunnahonline.com/ilm/quran/qms.pdf
or read it online . from this link
http://sunnahonline.com/library/the-majestic-quran/430-quran-and-modern-science-compatible-or-incompatible-the

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

A bit of both! Mainly religion.
I like my religion and there's actually been proof in the scientific community that some of it is recognizably true! (don't get me wrong I believe in my religion anyways lol) for instance science now has reason to believe that the plagues of Moses actually did happen! Cool right? And no one said god couldnt have createdthe world with the big bang. Plus science can't really prove that god doesn't exist.
P.s. I'm a catholic :)

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (1)
Report as
Recently, the archeologists Israel Finkelstein (Tel Aviv University) and Neil Asher Silberman (director of historical interpretation, Ename Center for Public Archeology and Heritage Presentation, Belgium) summarized the archeological findings and latest corrections regarding the historical origins of the Jewish nation. In their words, "The process that we describe here is, in fact, the opposite of what we have in the Bible: the emergence of early Israel was an outcome of the collapse of the Canaanite culture, not its cause. And most of the Israelites did not come from outside Canaan - they emerged from within it. There was no mass exodus from Egypt. There was no violent conquest of Canaan" (3).

Finkelstein and Silberman point out that there is still no evidence for the existence of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Lot, Moses, and Joshua. There is no evidence that Jewish people existed as an identified people that were enslaved in Egypt. There is no evidence that over 600,000 men (plus women and children - the number could have been over a million) had an exodus from Egypt and wandered in the desert for 40 years. According to the Bible, 38 of these 40 years were actually spent encamped at Kadesh-barnea. This area has been turned upside down for decades, looking for even a tiny piece of pottery from this supposed time. It is not likely that this many people would have lived here this long and not left archeological evidence.

The archeological evidence contradicts the Biblical theme of Joshua taking control of the Israelites from Moses and conquering Canaan. For example, the Egyptians had a strong presence in Canaan at this time, yet the Biblical accounts make no mention of this. The Biblical themes of the origins of Israel are myths. Like the gospel accounts of the New Testament, they were fabricated in later times and inserted into earlier times as a tool of religious and political propagandists (2, 4, 5).

One thing is certain. If a god existed, it could not be the god of the Bible or any religion claiming origins from the Bible. Any self-respecting god of average wisdom would not want to be held responsible for inspiring such a collection of myths and ridiculous sayings.
-
http://www.concentric.net/~worgar/exodus.htm
Report as
Add a comment...

I believe in both the Bible and science. The parts of the Bible that do not agree with science I amend in my mind. Simple.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (15)
Report as
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Text."~
There are still many differing opinions regarding the origin of the Bible, when it was written, and under what conditions; but it is fair to say that, outside fundamentalist circles, modern consensus suggests that the assembling and editing of the documents that were to constitute the Bible began in the seventh century BCE, some three centuries after David's time. (The earliest actual material in our possession, part of the Dead Sea Scrolls, dates to the second century BCE at the earliest).
~
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan] in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
~
: most of the Israelites were in fact formerly Canaanites. The story of Abraham's journey from Ur of the Chaldees, the Patriarchs, the Exodus, Sinai, and the conquest of Canaan, all these were apparently based on legends that the various elements brought with them from their countries of origin. The consolidation of the Israelites into a nation was not the result of wanderings in the desert and divine revelation, but came from the need to defend themselves against the Philistines,
~
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
Report as
I meant the parts of the Bible dealing with Jesus and God and what not. See? Science has once more disproved something. I will amend my beliefs.
Report as
According to science it's proven the garden of Eden never existed; mankind is not descended from Adam and Eve; Noah's flood never occurred; the Israelites were never slaves in Egypt; Jesus was never born of the Virgin Mary; Jesus never performed any miracles; Jesus was never resurrected and according to science there is no evidence at all that any God exists.
Report as
Where does it say God does not exist?
Report as
Perhaps there wasn't a flood that flooded the WHOLE world, but perhaps some of the Mediterranean, etc.
Report as
You said you believe in both the Bible and science but according to science there is no evidence that God exists. God is only a personal belief without evidence.
Report as
Why is it impossible for Jesus to perform miracles? Why is it impossible that Adam and Eve did not exist?
Report as
Please, explain.
Report as
Explain why the Big Bang occured. I DARE you.
Report as
THERE'S evidence.
Report as
I suggest you watch a YouTube video.
-
Jerry Coyne on the Odd Couple: Why Science and Religion Shouldn't Cohabit
Report as
I have better things to do.
Report as
If one of those things is religion, I starkly disagree, sir.
Report as
A comment from your video, raven:

Looks like a (expletive) cult. Personally, I don't? really want these geeks as my 'God' - and the choice is one or the other: God,? or humans as God. That's what these idiotic short-sighted self-loving idiots do not get.

What a false dichotomy!! God, or some human is your God. "No God" is not an option for this fellow. Shame.
Report as
No, I meant homework. :)
Report as
Add a comment...

A great man once said, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." That man's name was Albert Einstein.
The implication here is that science cannot endure without religion, nor religion without science. Einstein was trying to explain that science and religion need each other, and can't exist without the other. This being said, we must trust both science and religion. Sometimes religion and science clash. As an example, many Christians reject the idea of evolution simply because the Bible said that "God made man." But then again, the Church does allow Christians to believe in evolution as God's way of creating humans, as long as they affirm that all things were created by Him, man was made in His image, man has a soul, our original parents were created pure, their obedience was tested and failed when they disobeyed God and thus lost the supernatural gifts given to the human race by God at creation, their state of original sin was passed onto their offspring, and that they were promised a Savior. (My answer continues in the comments)

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (11)
Report as
Science will often claim that God doesn't exist. THIS feature is what we must reject. God is real, and loves you and I. He created you and continues to love you with his endearing and infinite love.

Hope this helps! - ManOfKnowledge
Report as
Religion is completely unnecessary, though. Give a man a fish, and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he will eat for a lifetime. Teach a man religion, and he will die praying for a fish.
Report as
How about this one: Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime. Teach a man evolution and he'll die praying to the fish. :-)
Report as
That......that was.....did that make sense in your mind?
Report as
Yes! Don't get it? Think! Environmentalists spend all their energy trying to save this and that fish, animal, plant, insect, whatever, because they're a part of -you name it.

They worship nature and that is what is going on in India and other places around the world where they are starving to death when food is right in front of them. I don't see any country that believes as I do (creationism) are starving to death. Therefore mine makes sense, yours doesn't.
Report as
Marq... HahaLoL, Your "explanation" is even more nonsensical than the original goofy statement. Animism or environmentalism has nothing to do with evolution.
Report as
Hmm. By your logic, Marq, Theocratic nations would be the best fed. Let's take a look shall we?

http://nazret.com/blog/index.php/2008/10/14/33_countries_face_alarming_levels_of_hun

This site lists the 10 countries with the highest percentage of malnourished people.

Angola - Majority Christian country.
Yemen - 99 PERCENT Muslim
Chad - 3 % atheist, 87 % Muslim + Christian
Ethiopia - 94% Christian+Muslim
Liberia - Only 55% C+M, but still more than half!
Sierra Leonne - 80-90% C+M
Niger - 98 PERCENT Muslim
Burundi - 75% Christian, 5% Muslim
Eritrea - 97% C+M
DRC - 95% Christian. CHRISTIAN.

So, Marq, now that I've systematically DESTROYED your argument that believers in creationism are fat with pig meat, what are you going to do? Argue more? Admit I was right, and be gracious in defeat? Probably not, huh?
Report as
Ravenman- It has everything to do with evolution, because all of these claim evolution as their tenet. Carl Sagan the populist evolutionist claimed that Hinduism is the epitome of evolution. An oscillating universe, or universes without end.
Report as
Noveltman- No, these are theistic evolutionist countries. Creationist believers are and always have been in the minority. Flat Earthers were evos not creationists. The Catholic church has always compromised with evo doctrine.

The head of the Vatican science department says God is a lover not a designer. He watched the Universe create itself and fell in love with it.

The Muslims also believe in theistic evolution, so far from DESTROYING my argument you actually enhanced it.

Most Christian denominations in America teach theistic evolution, some teach atheistic evolution and this is why we as a nation are suffering in science.

Liberation Theology of which the Democratic Party aligns itself with want a world wide theocracy. It is not religion that will save the world, but a correct understanding of who God is.

God is a God of omniscience, all knowledge, and we need to know His ways. God said to "Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea, the birds in the air and every living creature that crawls on the earth." Complete Jewish Bible

Subdue (Hebrew) kavash to bring under control. The only way we can do that is by understanding nature (knowledge). The greatest scientists were creationists.
Report as
I smell a quote mined out of context (re: Sagan).
Report as
No, just paraphrased!
Report as
Add a comment...

religion

Helpful Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...
Do you have an answer?
Answer this question...
Did you mean?
Login or Join the Community to answer
Popular Searches