Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Caution: Too Much Science May Make You Religious
Chabad ^ | Nov. 2004 | Velvl Greene

Posted on 12/01/2004 6:06:21 PM PST by yonif

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 last
To: ops33
The same God that wrote the Ten Commandments is the same God that wrote the laws of physics. All things are a manifestation of Him. Whenever we see what appears to be a contradiction between science and God, it is because of our limits in knowledge and understanding.

A pretty sane perspective. My only concern is that when there is competition between some people's conception of God and science, they'd rather contradict science than change their conception of God. As though understanding God is easier than understanding simple physical patterns in nature. I personally am much more inclined to decide that I do not understand God and that science is mostly okay.

41 posted on 12/02/2004 12:45:17 AM PST by tortoise (All these moments lost in time, like tears in the rain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Caution: Too Much Science May Make You Religious

This ought to be a contender for "Headline of the Generation."

42 posted on 12/02/2004 12:47:02 AM PST by the invisib1e hand (if a man lives long enough, he gets to see the same thing over and over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Science doesn’t contradict the Torah.

Quite correct -- and anyone who tries to say Oh, evolution can explain the creation of life, is, in reality, substituting one religious belief for belief in another thing!

Science is good and it's helpful and needed -- but science's role is in explaining what we see in life, Empirical science, not vague theories like cosmology (which I fail to really see the use of)
43 posted on 12/02/2004 12:53:26 AM PST by Cronos (Never forget 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ccmay
1. In biology: Chirality in embryonic development.

That is an artifact of chirality conservation, which shows up all over the place in biology and chemistry. There is no reason to think this is not an extension of that very pervasive effect, since it will be expressed in macro structures.

2. In complex analysis: the equation e(pi*i)+1=0

With all due respect, yours is essentially an argument from incredulity. It is not as profound to people familiar with the art (e.g. mathematicians like myself) as you make it seem.

3. In arithmetic and geometry: the Golden Mean and the Fibonacci sequence.

See the above. These are natural consequences of the properties of the system that is our universe that these particular functions are so commonly expressed -- there are many potentials that are not. Again, more an argument from incredulity than one of significance.

I have no comment on Maxwell's Equations, though they are pretty elegant.

There is a tendency for countable systems like our universe to have very simple and elegant properties, though for theoretical reasons that are anything but "simple to describe" by most standards. Elegance and simplicity do not really indicate design of our universe, as they are emergent properties of the fundamental characteristics of an entire class of ordinary mathematical systems. There are some intriguing mysteries out there, but I do not class any of the above as meriting evidence of God's design.

44 posted on 12/02/2004 1:06:08 AM PST by tortoise (All these moments lost in time, like tears in the rain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: geopyg

Spirit is not explained in science. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist. You have hit the nail on the head.


45 posted on 12/02/2004 3:06:02 AM PST by American in Israel (A wise man's heart directs him to the right, but the foolish mans heart directs him toward the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: yonif
There once was a rich man who had seven sons. It came to be that the father was called to be away from them for a period of time, and so before his departure, the father carefully selected and lovingly wrapped gifts for each son. Their father had painstakingly chosen those gifts with attributes which would closely represent him and remind each child of the father's constant love and care.

It came to pass on the day of the father's departure, he called his sons together and declared, "I leave these gifts for you so you may remember me while I am away and that these may remind you of me and of my love for you." And so the father sojourned on his way.

Each of the sons, after having received their gift, later placed it upon a shelf to admire the pretty packages. For a while, thoughts of their father would developed at the sight of the packages. However, it came to pass that one of the sons asked of the others, "What do you think our father has left inside the packages for us?" The other sons sternly scolded the one and claimed that questioning what was inside was blasphemous to the father and that had the father intended the gifts be opened, he would have given them that way. They reasoned among themselves that they should never question their father's actions for the risk of seeming ungrateful.

The seventh son decided to open his gift, and upon doing so, found many treasures that reminded him of his father's nature and deepened the son's admiration and understanding of his father.

Now I ask the question: Upon the father's return - who do you think would find more favor in the father's eyes by demonstrating an appreciation of his gift to them and a genuine desire to know more of the father's nature?
46 posted on 12/02/2004 6:42:33 AM PST by azhenfud ("He who is always looking up seldom finds others' lost change...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ashtanga
Well, I can only say that the more educated I become, the more I believe in God. Which God? I know, I know, I'm stepping into the intellectual molasses when I say such a thing.

Personally, I picked the God that said don't put any other god before me.

47 posted on 12/02/2004 10:59:30 AM PST by bjs1779
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

Who is G-d?


48 posted on 12/02/2004 8:40:35 PM PST by Clypp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Clypp

You know, we Jews don't like to write out His name completely because if His name is on something, that something is not to be destroyed. So if it's online or on a piece of paper that we might throw away, that's what we do. Hope it didn't offend you.

Blessings.


49 posted on 12/03/2004 10:18:39 AM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: In veno, veritas
I had a question I thought of today for an evolutionist. Why does maternal DNA stop and not go on to when we were monkeys?

Um, what?

50 posted on 12/03/2004 10:22:07 AM PST by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

OK, I have been confused about that for a little while, thanks for clearing it up.
No offense taken anymore.


51 posted on 12/03/2004 10:24:27 AM PST by Clypp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: bjs1779
Personally, I picked the God that said don't put any other god before me.

Well, since that's pretty much all of them...

52 posted on 12/03/2004 10:36:44 AM PST by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
This kind of stuff always cracks me up. Even if you were the smartest ant in the anthill, so what. Sometimes the smart ones are the one who know their own limitations, both intellectually and spiritually.

1 Corinthians 1:18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Like the rabbi, I too do not fear discovery. Why should I? Look at the discoveries of the last two hundred years, yet not one word of the Bible, regarding the cosmos, needs re-writing. Yet the same cannot be said of Darwins works.

Maybe the source of the Bible is a little "higher."

53 posted on 12/03/2004 10:48:27 AM PST by RobRoy (Science is about "how." Christianity is about "why.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

But to Christians, his name is not God. That is merely a word we use to identify him. He is the one true God, which is why we capitalize that word as we do words such as Him, His, etc. And in the flesh His name is Jesus.


54 posted on 12/03/2004 10:52:47 AM PST by RobRoy (Science is about "how." Christianity is about "why.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk

In a polite way, that sort of nails the whole thing.


55 posted on 12/03/2004 10:55:42 AM PST by RobRoy (Science is about "how." Christianity is about "why.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy

Great tag line.


56 posted on 12/03/2004 11:46:52 AM PST by fish hawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk

Thanks, the funny thing is, I believe it is a quote from an evolutionist, Stephen Gould. But I could be wrong.


57 posted on 12/03/2004 12:06:23 PM PST by RobRoy (Science is about "how." Christianity is about "why.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: tortoise
Elegance and simplicity do not really indicate design of our universe, as they are emergent properties of the fundamental characteristics of an entire class of ordinary mathematical systems.

That sort of "observation" merely reclassifies mathematics in the role of God. Who is the author of the systems? To you they are self-existing, one of the attributes of God.

58 posted on 12/03/2004 12:20:28 PM PST by hopespringseternal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
This kind of stuff always cracks me up. Even if you were the smartest ant in the anthill, so what.

So what indeed? Some people beat you over the head with how dumb they can be. Call it "You Can't Make Me See"-ism. Talk about something being a big "So what?" I'd rather argue with someone trying to beat me over the head with how smart he is. That would be refreshing.

59 posted on 12/03/2004 2:37:42 PM PST by VadeRetro (Nothing means anything when you go to Hell for knowing what things mean.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson