thoughts on science and religion

[formerly chevyguy350]

ill start with the big bang. the theory doesnt say wht started it. which leaves that open for god. next we have creation. it happened in 7 days according to the bible but science says it took millions of years. since a day is how long it takes for the earth to make 1 rotation the earth could haverotated very slow. also time could have been distorted.

[Double X]

and uh, adam and eve story was actually a metaphor for the first bacteria...

[Grizabella]

ill start with the big bang. the theory doesnt say wht started it

And science fully admits that. But scientists like trying to answer questions, and every day they're trying to answer that question, maybe even making progress. Saying "that leaves it open for god" doesn't answer anything. How did god do it? We might as well say "science did it." Sure, the ambiguity leaves room for god. But it leaves room for a dozen other things. Maybe alien scientists from another universe performed kind of experiment that resulted in the creation of our universe.

since a day is how long it takes for the earth to make 1 rotation the earth could haverotated very slow. also time could have been distorted.

Before these can be taken seriously, we need to show that's it's actually possible.

[Dream]

Originally Posted by chevyguy350

ill start with the big bang. the theory doesnt say wht started it. which leaves that open for god. next we have creation. it happened in 7 days according to the bible but science says it took millions of years. since a day is how long it takes for the earth to make 1 rotation the earth could haverotated very slow. also time could have been distorted.

1. According to the theory, the matter was extremely condensed, and it finally became so tightly packed and so hot that it became unstable and exploded. Expose anything to extreme pressure and heat and it will explode.

I don't see how the theory leaves room for God.

2. How could the Earth have rotated if it did not exist?

3. Time is a human perception. In order to distort time, space must be distorted. I don't see how that would be possible under normal circumstances. We can't actually separate space from time because space is time (a.k.a. spacetime).

[msbunnykins]

I'm going to say this one time and one time only because people try to force me to defend my belief on other peoples religions - I am not a Christian.

Now that is made clear, in my view, science and religion are completely compatible. God created the universe, gave us souls, yadda yadda. He gave us free will whether to believe in Him or not, and to make our own decisions. Reasoning was one of the greatest gifts He gave us, and science falls into this reasoning. Science is a way to explore the world that He gave us, how things work, and why. As my religion refers to this situation....

"If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science, they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible, and there is no outcome but wavering and vacillation."

"This gift giveth man the power to discern the truth in all things, leadeth him to that which is right, and helpeth him to discover the secrets of creation."

"Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's intelligence can soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone he would also make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of materialism."

"When religion, shorn of its superstitions, traditions, and unintelligent dogmas, shows its conformity with science, then will there be a great unifying, cleansing force in the world which will sweep before it all wars, disagreements, discords and struggles--and then will mankind be united in the power of the Love of God."

[Noctis]

I just want to point out that in the infinitesimal possibility that science leaves any room whatsoever for a higher being, it will simply be A higher being or higher beings(plural, as in more than one), not God.

No matter how much you stretch or distort science, science cannot point to God and still be reasonable.

[formerly chevyguy350]

Originally Posted by Double X

and uh, adam and eve story was actually a metaphor for the first bacteria...

actually they could have been two tribes

[formerly chevyguy350]

[quote=Dream;215692]1. According to the theory, the matter was extremely condensed, and it finally became so tightly packed and so hot that it became unstable and exploded. Expose anything to extreme pressure and heat and it will explode.

I don't see how the theory leaves room for God.
then where did the
matter come from that made the big bang

[Noctis]

Originally Posted by chevyguy350

then where did the
matter come from that made the big bang

Where did God come from?

[Double X]

Originally Posted by chevyguy350

actually they could have been two tribes

Or they could have been the actual two people. Just like the Bible explicitly states that it took God 7 days to create the world. Everyone in the 800s took it literally, it's when we have proof to suggest otherwise that the apologetics try to twist it to fit their beliefs.

[Dream]

Originally Posted by chevyguy350

then where did the
matter come from that made the big bang

Matter is energy. The universe consists entirely of energy. What we typically regard as nothing, "empty space", is actually an ocean of energy.

Where did this energy come from? It has always been there. Nothing, the absence of matter/energy, never really existed because nothing is only a concept. Things are not, in reality, created or destroyed. For something to be created or destroyed is only a human concept as well. So, the creation of the universe is only a human concept. A universe cannot actually be created. Outside of human perception, no need for creation exists.

[InSovietRussiaORGASMGotU]

Originally Posted by chevyguy350

ill start with the big bang. the theory doesnt say wht started it. which leaves that open for god.

Not exactly. It leaves the possibility for one or more higher beings or deities or gods or even goddesses to have created it. It doesn't instantly rule out all other possible higher beings. However, in addition to leaving room for god, it leaves room for millions of other possibilities, such as other alien life being involved in the making of the big bang.

Science isn't perfect, it doesn't tend to give immediate answers like religion tends to do and so scientists are still at work in trying to determine the origin of the Earth and the universe.

Originally Posted by chevyguy350

next we have creation. it happened in 7 days according to the bible but science says it took millions of years. since a day is how long it takes for the earth to make 1 rotation the earth could haverotated very slow. also time could have been distorted.

There are more problems with this argument than with the first part of your post. First, why would have time been distorted way back when and somehow manage to no longer be distorted? The only way for time to be distorted is if space (or possibly also the universe) got distorted. What do you propose to be the cause of this distortion? Second, you're assuming that the Earth existed long ago when in reality, it didn't. Third, if for some reason Earth was rotating slower back then, what made it speed up its rotations and likewise, what made it decrease its rotations?

The part of the bible saying that everything happened in seven days is open to interpretation. Some may cling to it word-for-word as you're doing but others may use it as a metaphor for saying the God managed to make the Earth and it didn't take a long time for him to do so.

Originally Posted by chevyguy350

then where did the
matter come from that made the big bang

The problem with the question that you pose is that it is double-edged, meaning it not only applies for the Big Bang theory but also for the notion of god. So, what created god? What created the elements that compose him? Many people I've asked tend to answer it with something along the lines of "he always existed". That may be true but he must be composed of something.

[Union Of V]

It's simple whatever way you look at it. Science can neither prove nor disprove religion - religion can be considered an unscientific way of carrying out scientific research.

[Algernon]

Originally Posted by chevyguy350

ill start with the big bang. the theory doesnt say wht started it. which leaves that open for god. next we have creation. it happened in 7 days according to the bible but science says it took millions of years. since a day is how long it takes for the earth to make 1 rotation the earth could haverotated very slow. also time could have been distorted.

I'm a Christian, and this makes me want to say I'm not. Sorry, but you're going to get smashed by probably... Double X, Grizabella, YourNightmare, Ect.

[InSovietRussiaORGASMGotU]

Originally Posted by Union Of V

religion can be considered an unscientific way of carrying out scientific research.

Huh? Scientific research is meant to be done objectively, use a gradient of scientific knowledge, etc... . How can you obtain this if you use something that isn't objective, that doesn't use a gradient of scientific knowledge, etc...?

[Double X]

Come on, you know what he is saying. He means that religion often distorts science.

[andie09]

Well, I am a Christian and I do believe that everything about creating the world in 7 days. But if I remember right there is also something in The Bible that says something about 1 day is kinda like 1000 years to the Lord. In other words I guess that means that time doesn't really mean much to him. The big bang could have happend and that's how most of the Earth got here, but it couldn't have happened without God. That's my opinion anyway.

[InSovietRussiaORGASMGotU]

Originally Posted by Double X

Come on, you know what he is saying. He means that religion often distorts science.

I figured he was hinting at that but he worded it in a rather odd way.

Originally Posted by andie09

Well, I am a Christian and I do believe that everything about creating the world in 7 days. But if I remember right there is also something in The Bible that says something about 1 day is kinda like 1000 years to the Lord. In other words I guess that means that time doesn't really mean much to him. The big bang could have happend and that's how most of the Earth got here, but it couldn't have happened without God. That's my opinion anyway.

Why couldn't have it happened without God?

[Union Of V]

Originally Posted by YourNightmare

Huh? Scientific research is meant to be done objectively, use a gradient of scientific knowledge, etc... . How can you obtain this if you use something that isn't objective, that doesn't use a gradient of scientific knowledge, etc...?

What I mean is that religion tends to consider things science hasn't got to yet. Before science religion tried to explain everything, then as science progressed religion gradually adapted. Nowadays the things religion mainly focuses on are life after death and metaphysical beings, unlike the earlier religions that claimed miracles where being produced everywhere and the virgin mary was visiting a town every month.

So you could consider religion as extremely avantgard science. And don't say it isn't based on fact, it is horever it doesn't have as rigorous a fact-checking mechanism as science.

[John 6:29]

Originally Posted by chevyguy350

ill start with the big bang. the theory doesnt say wht started it. which leaves that open for god. next we have creation. it happened in 7 days according to the bible but science says it took millions of years. since a day is how long it takes for the earth to make 1 rotation the earth could haverotated very slow. also time could have been distorted.

The theory does explain what it started with. It was started with matter. The Universe is constantly expanding, which means it was once so condensed that because of heat and being in such a confined space that the it exploded. But it does not say where the matter came from, which is where it leaves an open end for a Creator, but not God of the Bible, because it goes into great detail how the world was made, and the days were 1 day and 1 night, 24 hours. It explains this in Genesis 1 and 2. Time could have been distorted but if this were the case if the earth rotated any slower things would have not been able to live on earth, because there would have been less gravity which means we probably would have flown off if the rotation of the earth truly slowed down to give the impression of the world being billions of years old.

Although it is possible to believe the earth is billions of years old and still believe in the bible. Creationist tend to believe the earth is no later than 10,000 years old based off the Jewish calendar, but a Calendar may obvious exclude certain events etc. And the earth could be much older than it is. The Bible gives no definite answer for this, as some might claim.

But both are theories that I personally don't believe will be answered without faith. Either faith in science or faith in God. The reason I say this is for example, science may come up with an answer, but it doesn't mean it is completely true. Scientist used to believe that everything revolved around the earth, and this was considered a scientific fact, but we now know this isn't a fact at all... just because technology is advancing does not mean that science is 100% accurate. There may be signs that point to a big bang or a Creator but one will never know except by faith.

My personal beliefs anyways.

[Magic.]

Blah I had this arguement at my old Church youth group ...
I do think that if you're gonna say "Big Bang" then you have to admit that something caused that to happen, something that hadn't triggered before. A lot of scientists admit that could be a higher powere ---> God. Fair enough.
As for creation. Rather than "maybe the Earth went slower" how about time has changed since then? It is listed in the Bible that people lived to be like 800 years old, even without modern health problems I doubt that those 800 years are the same as ours now. And as a non-religious example, there used to be 10 defined months in one year, two were added. The year did not get any longer, but the months got shorter, our measurement of time was adjusted.
I personally believe that science helps provide proof for religion. Before we impacted the Earth with all our crap it still changed, things evolved, something had to cause those changes. For people who have faith, it is fair to assume that that could have been God.

[John 6:29]

Originally Posted by magiciansasssistant

Blah I had this arguement at my old Church youth group ...
I do think that if you're gonna say "Big Bang" then you have to admit that something caused that to happen, something that hadn't triggered before. A lot of scientists admit that could be a higher powere ---> God. Fair enough.
As for creation. Rather than "maybe the Earth went slower" how about time has changed since then? It is listed in the Bible that people lived to be like 800 years old, even without modern health problems I doubt that those 800 years are the same as ours now. And as a non-religious example, there used to be 10 defined months in one year, two were added. The year did not get any longer, but the months got shorter, our measurement of time was adjusted.
I personally believe that science helps provide proof for religion. Before we impacted the Earth with all our crap it still changed, things evolved, something had to cause those changes. For people who have faith, it is fair to assume that that could have been God.

If you read through Genesis 1 through the flood you see why people lived longer. A lot of scholars conclude that maybe it was a lunar cycle or one month that was considered a year. But look at this

Genesis 5:21
"Enoch lived sixty-five years, and became the father of Methuselah."

So if Enoch was 65 years old, and a year is 1 lunar cycle, that means he lived 65 months (technically). If Enoch is 65 months that means he is a little less than 5 and a half years old.

There is no biblical evidence to say that the years or days were longer or shorter. Look here:

Genesis 1:3-5
"Then God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light. God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day."

By these verses we can conclude that one day is equivalent to our days.

Genesis 1:8
"God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day."

This means it was a literal 6 day creation. Day and Night = 1 day.

Now going back to the years being longer. If you read through Genesis 1 through the flood, before the flood in Genesis 2:6 "But a mist used to rise from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground." it says that there was a water vapor that covered the earth's ground to provide vegetation. Some believe that this may have been some what of a canopy that it would have prevented against radiation from the sun. Which I don't know if I believe to be true or not, but it makes sense. The reason I don't know if it is true is because in Genesis 1 it talks about being signs in the sky for the seasons, days, months and years, if a canopy were to cover the earth it is possible that the heavens were blocked and could not be seen. However, pre-flood, many things changed, which in my personal belief I think that although the canopy is logical, these people back then had a closer relationship with God. God would walk among them, they all had a true relationship with their Creator. And God if He wanted to could keep them alive longer if that's what he pleased. Take a look at these charts though:







its clear that after the flood life decreased and God ceased to be in their lives more and more.

"After the flood the earth was completely different than the earth before. There were widespread global differences. These would include changes in the climate, composition of the atmosphere, hydrologic cycle, geologic features, cosmic radiation reaching the earth, ozone concentration, ultra violet light, background radiation, genetics, diet, and a host of other subtle and/or profound chemical and physiological changes. These changes caused a rapid decline of the longevity of post flood humanity."


"Now when Noah had lived three hundred and fifty years after the Flood, and that all that time happily, he died, having lived the number of nine hundred and fifty years. But let no one, upon comparing the lives of the ancients with our lives, and with the few years which we now live, think that what we have said of them is false; or make the shortness of our lives at present an argument, that neither did they attain to so long a duration of life, for those ancients were beloved of God, and [lately] made by God himself; and because their food was then fitter for the prolongation of life, might well live so great a number of years: and besides, God afforded them a longer time of life on account of their virtue, and the good use they made of it in astronomical and geometrical discoveries, which would not have afforded the time of foretelling [the periods of the stars] unless they had lived six hundred years; for the great year is completed in that interval."
--Jewish Historian, Flavius Josephus

[Double X]

Originally Posted by onion

I am not sure whether to facepalm or laugh. This graph is just...wow. So you think some people lived to be 900 years old? What about basic growth of cells in their body? How does that even work? If someone lives to be 500 years old thousands of years ago, they are definitely going to get colon cancer lol. and if it is lunar cycle, people live to 9 years old?

[John 6:29]

Originally Posted by Double X

I am not sure whether to facepalm or laugh. This graph is just...wow. So you think some people lived to be 900 years old?

Yes, the Bible says so. I'm not going to argue, but there are also genetic factors that God may have given man back then that were not passed down post flood.

There are many explanations for this both in Christian resources and non-Christian resource of possible reasons why people lived this long pre-flood. Both have very logical answers and reasoning behind it. If you wish to research it feel free. These answers also give reasons behind fossilization, and why the universe may appear billions of years old, when in fact may be much less. Personally I do not know how old the earth is but I do not believe it to be billions. Mainly by simple observations, for example... the moon is getting further and further from the earth each year. Which means if the earth is billions of years old this means that the moon at one point collided with the earth.

Whether you consider this absurd or not, there are many scholars both secular and Christian who believe the flood to be a fact, and that people lived much longer pre-flood than post flood. If you are truly interested there are resources out there that you can look up. And about the lunar cycle I was actually disagreeing with this. And as far as cancer etc, this can be explained if you look up resources. Basically it is the vast change of environmental issues that have caused these diseases. It is not possible that years were considered a lunar cycle if you read my example.

But coming from a Christian perspective...
Luke 18:27
"But He said, 'The things that are impossible with people are possible with God.'"

[Double X]

No credible scientist actually believes in a worldwide flood that killed all living things except the species that Noah brought on a boat. To teach otherwise is pseudoscience, plain and simple. The only thing close to it is when a huge glacier melted, altering the agriculture of Europe some 9,000 years ago. Radiometric datings on organic materials have been incredibly consistant up to 50,000 years ago. If you have any groundbreaking sources you would like to share, fine, but I don't believe the drivel spouted off of fundy websites.

[Age of Ignorance]

Originally Posted by onion

If you read through Genesis 1 through the flood you see why people lived longer. A lot of scholars conclude that maybe it was a lunar cycle or one month that was considered a year. But look at this

Genesis 5:21
"Enoch lived sixty-five years, and became the father of Methuselah."

So if Enoch was 65 years old, and a year is 1 lunar cycle, that means he lived 65 months (technically). If Enoch is 65 months that means he is a little less than 5 and a half years old.

There is no biblical evidence to say that the years or days were longer or shorter. Look here:

Genesis 1:3-5
"Then God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light. God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day."

By these verses we can conclude that one day is equivalent to our days.

Genesis 1:8
"God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day."

This means it was a literal 6 day creation. Day and Night = 1 day.

Now going back to the years being longer. If you read through Genesis 1 through the flood, before the flood in Genesis 2:6 "But a mist used to rise from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground." it says that there was a water vapor that covered the earth's ground to provide vegetation. Some believe that this may have been some what of a canopy that it would have prevented against radiation from the sun. Which I don't know if I believe to be true or not, but it makes sense. The reason I don't know if it is true is because in Genesis 1 it talks about being signs in the sky for the seasons, days, months and years, if a canopy were to cover the earth it is possible that the heavens were blocked and could not be seen. However, pre-flood, many things changed, which in my personal belief I think that although the canopy is logical, these people back then had a closer relationship with God. God would walk among them, they all had a true relationship with their Creator. And God if He wanted to could keep them alive longer if that's what he pleased. Take a look at these charts though:







its clear that after the flood life decreased and God ceased to be in their lives more and more.

"After the flood the earth was completely different than the earth before. There were widespread global differences. These would include changes in the climate, composition of the atmosphere, hydrologic cycle, geologic features, cosmic radiation reaching the earth, ozone concentration, ultra violet light, background radiation, genetics, diet, and a host of other subtle and/or profound chemical and physiological changes. These changes caused a rapid decline of the longevity of post flood humanity."


"Now when Noah had lived three hundred and fifty years after the Flood, and that all that time happily, he died, having lived the number of nine hundred and fifty years. But let no one, upon comparing the lives of the ancients with our lives, and with the few years which we now live, think that what we have said of them is false; or make the shortness of our lives at present an argument, that neither did they attain to so long a duration of life, for those ancients were beloved of God, and [lately] made by God himself; and because their food was then fitter for the prolongation of life, might well live so great a number of years: and besides, God afforded them a longer time of life on account of their virtue, and the good use they made of it in astronomical and geometrical discoveries, which would not have afforded the time of foretelling [the periods of the stars] unless they had lived six hundred years; for the great year is completed in that interval."
--Jewish Historian, Flavius Josephus

The bible is not fact, don't treat it as such.

[Union Of V]

I just have to say, the major flaw staring us in the face is that *there was no flood*.

[Noctis]

Originally Posted by onion

Yes, the Bible says so. I'm not going to argue, but there are also genetic factors that God may have given man back then that were not passed down post flood.

There are many explanations for this both in Christian resources and non-Christian resource of possible reasons why people lived this long pre-flood. Both have very logical answers and reasoning behind it. If you wish to research it feel free. These answers also give reasons behind fossilization, and why the universe may appear billions of years old, when in fact may be much less. Personally I do not know how old the earth is but I do not believe it to be billions. Mainly by simple observations, for example... the moon is getting further and further from the earth each year. Which means if the earth is billions of years old this means that the moon at one point collided with the earth.

Whether you consider this absurd or not, there are many scholars both secular and Christian who believe the flood to be a fact, and that people lived much longer pre-flood than post flood. If you are truly interested there are resources out there that you can look up. And about the lunar cycle I was actually disagreeing with this. And as far as cancer etc, this can be explained if you look up resources. Basically it is the vast change of environmental issues that have caused these diseases. It is not possible that years were considered a lunar cycle if you read my example.

But coming from a Christian perspective...
Luke 18:27
"But He said, 'The things that are impossible with people are possible with God.'"

I see you're back again.

We've
missed
you.

You'll be pleased to hear that your belief that the moon collided with the earth is, in fact, the prevailing hypothesis in science on how the moon was formed. Why you seem to think it means the earth can't possibly be billions of years old because of that is beyond me.

Perhaps you thought that because the moon is moving away at an unspecified distance away from the earth each year, it automatically means that the earth is less than 10,000 years old. But until you've actually done the math to calculate the distance between the earth and the moon along with the rate at which the moon is moving further away while taking into account the effects of gravity and electromagnetic fields, you're just spouting random nonsense in sheer ignorance.

When you mention secular scholars, could you perhaps name a few? Or are you pulling these random "facts" out of your ass?

I'm also amused by your pathetic attempts to suggest that ancient humans lived longer than those of us living in the modern age. I mean, it sounds like you're suggesting that viruses and bacteria didn't even exist until post-flood. As if that wasn't ridiculous enough, you're also suggesting that ancient humans coincidentally never ran into any predatory animals that could easily have killed them. Then there's the lack of accidents, murder, starvation, and cancer. 500+ years with no problems whatsoever? Fat chance.

Without medicine and proper medical care, the smallest of things can easily kill a person. A small cut can get infected and cause you to lose the whole limb. Someone could kill you literally by coughing on you.

It's not enough to say that humanity won't survive without medicine, but it's certainly enough that the idea of someone living for over 500 years without medical science is about as likely as you enjoying a nice ice cream cone on the surface of the sun.