Scientific Falsification and Religion
When the Hindu claims that a certain mountain range in India is actually a huge snake under the surface, science can falsify that. If the revealed portion of their religion demands that the snake hypothesis is true, then that "revelation" is false and the Hindu is in a dilemma if he wants to keep his view.
The Christian example of a 6,000-year universe is a case wherein the revealed portion of the religion does not demand a "young earth" view. Since the Hebrew language in Genesis allows (and seems to indicate in places) an old universe, the Christian can embrace that view in keeping with the evidence.
If tomorrow we discovered indisputably that the universe is only 6 to 10 - thousand years old (that ain't gonna happen), I would shrug my shoulders and say I guess the young-earth view was correct! It's not an essential of the Christian Faith but is a peripheral issue.
But in what way could the science you're talking about detect God himself? If God exists, he is immaterial, timeless, and spaceless, etc. Science is therefore limited to investigating vestiges or indications of God predicted by theism or the revealed portion of the religion(s), but then any speculations as to what can be inferred by scientific studies moves out of the realm of science per se, and into the realm of philosophy.
So what are some things that Christian Theism would affirm or predict according to both Natural Theology and Revealed Theology that science could investigate? Examples would be:
- A finite universe.
- Widespread belief in God or an ontologically ultimate being.
- An enduring "religious" interest and nature innate in every culture.
- Intricate design in the universe from the Big Bang to biological systems.
- Widespread belief in objective moral values and duties.
- Archeological discoveries of sites and artifacts crucial to the claims of Christianity.
- Historical confirmations and indications of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.
Secondly, even if certain scientific discoveries lead to considerations that God exists, it requires further philosophical/theological speculation as to which of the World Religions has the best candidate for God.
Finally, as a Christian Theist, I think scientific discovery will progressively confirm the following predictions:
- Continual confirmation of cosmological models that require an absolute beginning (even in the case of multi-verses or oscillation).
- Neurological studies that indicate mind and brain interact but are distinct to the extent that mind is not reducible to brain (or physical components).
- Further discoveries of conditions and constants in the Big Bang itself that are fine-tuned for intelligent life.
- No discoveries will conclusively overturn the historical and archeological confirmations supporting the origins of Christianity, but will continue to affirm it.
Tags: Christ, Christianity, archeology, falsification, neurology, of, predictions, resurrection, scientific
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Kevin Harris on -
Jack, not sure how to do that. I just receive emails if there is a reply to this thread. Let me know what I can do. Thanks,
-
Permalink Reply by Dave G on -
Jack, at the bottom of each page in this thread should be a 'Stop following' link. Click on that and you'll stop getting emails when people reply.
-
Permalink Reply by Akshay Bist on -
Of all the posts by theists, this one bugs me the most. With the others, the ignorance & stubbornness of the posters is easily seen. Here it is hidden under the guise of intelligence.
What I've gathered from your posts is that you have twisted, what little knowledge you have of science, around your beliefs & now are convinced that science is on your side.
Science doesn't have all the answers, but given enough time, it can find them. Things, which in the past, were mystical have been conclusively explained by science. Rain, thunder, lightening all explained & now can even be forecasted. Hurricanes, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, disease outbreak, famine are no longer considered the wrath of god. Earth isn't flat, nor is it the center of the universe. Solar & lunar eclipses, no, the body less head of a demon doesn't swallow the sun & moon to cause eclipses(from Hinduism). Even things that people never thought about or questioned, like why do we stay on the ground & not float into the sky, have been answered.
Now lets focus on what you have posted.
Hindu claims that a certain mountain range in India is actually a huge snake under the surface
Nope, no one claims that or if they do, it must a local legend. Get your facts right before posting.
The Christian example of a 6,000-year universe is a case wherein the revealed portion of the religion does not demand a "young earth" view. Since the Hebrew language in Genesis allows (and seems to indicate in places) an old universe, the Christian can embrace that view in keeping with the evidence.
So you're saying that the bible contradicts itself? Not a very reliable religious book is it?
Science is therefore limited to investigating vestiges or indications of God predicted by theism or the revealed portion of the religion(s)
The goal of science isn't to disprove god, its just an unintended side-effect. An example would be that Galileo wasn't trying to check the bible's assertion that Earth is the center of the universe & everything revolves around it, astronomy just interested him. People research because a) they are curious b) want the fame & fortune from any breakthrough they make c) its a job or d) a combination of a, b and/or c.
any speculations as to what can be inferred by scientific studies moves out of the realm of science per se, and into the realm of philosophy.
erm, no. With all the advancements made in physics in particle physics, quantum physics, string theory etc can you really say that it won't fall in the realm of science?
Widespread belief in God or an ontologically ultimate being.
People needed something to explain things they couldn't understand. Religion/god did that & the belief was passed down to future generations as tradition.
An enduring "religious" interest and nature innate in every culture.
Aren't you forgetting how religion has evolved through time? From being multi-theistic with a god for pretty much everything to being mono-theistic with one supreme god. Now the newer religions(mormonism & scientology) have incorporated some science fiction in them. Also, religions evolve to fit the moral values of the time. Its no longer okay to beat your kids. Sati(hinduism), the practice of burning a widow alive, in her husbands pyre during cremation is no longer okay. Human sacrifice would get you corporal punishment or a padded cell. Even animal sacrifice is frowned upon. Other religions are respected more. I could go on.
Widespread belief in objective moral values and duties.
Science can define human values. Read "The Moral Landscape" by Sam Harris.
Archeological discoveries of sites and artifacts crucial to the claims of Christianity.
Archeological evidence doesn't prove much. Claims could have been doctored around already existing landscapes, cities etc. Take for example The Ramayana. It says Ram & his ape army crossed from India to Sri Lanka by building a bridge with stones blessed by one of the apes who had the gift to make stones float on water. Now archeological evidence for that would be the Adam's Bridge. But what it is, according to NASA, is just naturally occurring chain of sandbanks. But that didn't stop the religious crazies to claim it as 'scientific evidence' supporting the events in the ramayana.
Historical confirmations and indications of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.
Similar to the last explanation.
Continual confirmation of cosmological models that require an absolute beginning (even in the case of multi-verses or oscillation).
That doesn't have anything to do with the existence of god.
No discoveries will conclusively overturn the historical and archeological confirmations supporting the origins of Christianity, but will continue to affirm it.
Earlier you said "even if certain scientific discoveries lead to considerations that God exists, it requires further philosophical/theological speculation as to which of the World Religions has the best candidate for God." and now you say that Christianity will be given the scientific seal of approval. Hey, not only does your bible contradict itself, you do contradict yourself too :P
-
Permalink Reply by Heather Spoonheim on -
[like]
-
Permalink Reply by Kenneth Montville D.D. on -
Great comment. But I am afraid that our dear OP will not address this similarly to how he didn't address my rebuttal which went point by point.
-
Permalink Reply by Heather Spoonheim on
-
He kind of disappeared shortly after that so maybe you actually got him thinking. Crazier things have happened - although I would be hard pressed to name any.
-
Permalink Reply by Kenneth Montville D.D. on
-
If only it were that easy all the time, right?
-
Permalink Reply by Heather Spoonheim on
-
Indeed.
-
Permalink Reply by Akshay Bist on
-
Thanks.
That is the annoying thing about arguing with these people. You think you have 'em but they either avoid getting into that or skirt around the issue with circular answers. Its a big let down.
-
Permalink Reply by Skycomet the Fallen Angel on -
God in the most raw sense [no attributes attached] is a word. And unfalsifiable statement, therefore, it is not science. There are many other unfalsifiable statements but what makes the unfalsifiable agnostic god so unique is that it is unfalsifiable because, if examined closely, the agnostic god is a non-concept. In this sense, the word "god" [devoid of any attributes or specific religious claims] is a meaningless word. To demonstrate... in the environment of God devoid of religious presumptions you could say "God" and I could say "Kathugala" and we would both be understandable on the same level... that is... not at all. In order for "God" to have any meaning, the religious must attach attributes to God specific to their interpretation... and... when that happens...
then God IS FALSIFIABLE and science can, and does, falsify it.
Why do you think that the religious retreat into the unfalsifiable safeholds of "it's a faith thing" or the agnostic God? They are using Ad Hoc Immunization fallacy techniques to make God untouchable when he seems in danger of being falsified.
-
Permalink Reply by Marshall on -
I am not failure with any historical and archeological confirmations of Christianity. Can you provide some examples? I'm not looking for known historical locations and events mentioned in the bible, but events and archeology that specifically confirms Christianity. Keep in mind that a typical Tom Clancy novel is admittedly a piece of fiction while at same time mentions real-life events and locations. I'm also not looking for examples that would affirm any particular religion, but rather confirmation that Jesus had himself tortured and killed to allow the forgiveness of sins.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- …
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
What's new today
Forum
Why do atheists ask for so much proof to believe in God?
Started by Mercedes in Welcome to Think Atheist. Last reply by archaeopteryx 29 minutes ago. 300 Replies 0 Likes
Blog Posts
How Jesus' Views on Marriage Proves Yahweh's Laws are NOT Absolute OR Jesus is Mistaken
Posted by Cathy Cooper on May 17, 2013 at 10:00am 3 Comments 0 Likes
Events
Services we love
Check out our new mobile/tablet version of Think Atheist! www.ThinkAtheist.com/m
© 2013 Created by Morgan Matthew.
