Scientists keep changing their minds. What they say is True one day is not the next because they discover something new the next day. Therefore they might never find the Truth. However Jehovah is the Truth and has and always will be the same Truth. Therefore we have Faith in god and not in Science.

At least that’s what any Theist will argue in a debate on the subject. The essence of it is that Theists misunderstand what Science is about. Scientists search for answers to the unknown. They do not do this to find an “Ultimate Truth” but rather to increase our Understanding. It is a search for knowledge – the How and Why something behaves or works as it does. After it has been peer reviewed and a consensus is reached this information can become mainstream accepted knowledge. The Consensus remains until new evidence is discovered which improves our knowledge. This process of introducing and accepting new ideas and improving our knowledge is the Evolution in our Understanding.

Our understanding of Evolution has changed of the years. I no longer need a “missing link” for it to be completely plausible. DNA has improved on the Theory. Theists don’t see this. They think we have a brand new theory and will have another one tomorrow when we get more scientific answers. A theist once mentioned the “goldilocks theory” to me as if it was special revealed knowledge. Our planets is just the right distance from the sun, is tilted at the just the right angle and has the exact amount of oxygen, etc therefore there must be a god because it is so perfect for life. When I asked him “who discovered these facts” he said scientists did but then used the “goddidit” argument when he realised he had made a concession to Science. No, the bible is not a science book.

Theists claim to have the one and only Truth. The only thing required of them then is to improve their understanding of whatever god the belief is this Truth. If you already have the answer and it is the only answer then your truth will always be the same. This dissonance is not understood by Theists. This is why they like Theology – so they give themselves the impression they are asking really serious questions like “did Adam and Eve have navels”? They are brainwashed (that term again) into not acknowledging and suppressing any doubts that might arise in their mind.

Theists don’t need Science as they have a god and that is the only answer they require. Atheists don’t need a god and use the Sciences to increase their understanding of the world because we don’t have all the answers.

Views: 189

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I am generally referring to Fundamentalists in the above when I mention Theists and I am not implying all Scientists are Atheists – only the clever ones.

Yes the Goldilocks zone is expanding all the time :-)

Truth, just as anything else does not mean much to theists.

Most important thing for them is continue believing in the fairy tale at all costs: being illogical, choosing which parts of their holy books to follow and which to reject, denying scientifically proven facts, or trying to explain them when cornered with something like 'god put dinosaur bones here to test our faith'.

For them, nothing is more important than believing in god, not even truth.

Carl Sagan said it all with the phrase 'You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe.'
@ Irina - Yes, anything that causes Doubt is not allowed to be discussed. The initial doubts can be scary so they are told by the elders to listen to Jesus and not the “outsiders”. They are told that faith in god is all that is required because it is the Truth. Therefore a mistrust of Science is allow to grow based on a foundation of misunderstanding it in the first place. I would also suggest that it is not just based on a deep seated need to believe. There is also a fear generated at the prospect of not believing. The obvious one is no afterlife, the promise of which is the main “Truth” that religion is based on.
Just like to start with saying this is a really good article.  My reluctance to religion has always been countered by the fact that science is really no different; they are both looking for answers that seem (at least at this point) unanswerable.  Not to say that i think along the lines of, for example, "evolution is just a THEORY, not a fact," blah blah blah.  I'm not sure if this was your intention, but what I got from this article is that the argument of religion vs. science is a completely mute point, they are two different quests attempting to achieve two different goals.  For example, people who tote the "science is the answer, and if you believe in a god/gods, you are moron," moniker are going against the very principles of the scientific method.  It is impossible to prove or disprove the existence of a deity/deities, and no TRUE scientist would make a statement for or against something without any proof whatsoever.  And I'm not taking a dig at athiests here, either, I'm just not bothering to mention nut job religious zealots, they aren't worth my time.  I'm just saying this article made me realize that science and religion are two completely different subjects that really can't be compared.  It's like apples vs. oranges.  Maybe "God" is the mathematical equation (that we have yet to find) that created everything we know and see/can't know and can't see...maybe God and science are the same thing.  Maybe its an oranpple. At least it seems that way to me.
While a scientist (or anyone else) shouldn't make a statement without evidence to back it up, it is quite reasonable to state that if a person believes something with supporting evidence, then that person is being irrational in that instance. Not that the person is necessarily irrational in all cases, for they may be perfectly rational on some subjects, but on that on subject irrationality is holding sway. And this does not just apply to religious beliefs, but to other evidence-less beliefs like crystal healing, homeopathy, and Bush being an alien lizard member of the Illuminati.
I completely agree, one hundred percent.  But wouldn't the same thing hold for those who say science explains everything?  It explains almost everything; how our universe works, how we evolved, etc, but it still doesn't answer where our universe came from and how it did, which is what religion tries to explain, even if it is fairytale-ish.  No matter how advanced our technology becomes, we can't know the conditions of whatever it is our universe came from, whether it was nothingness, an older universe that collapsed in on itself and created ours, etc. because we can't measure that far, we can really only theorize.  I think the only way we possibly could figure out how everything came to be is by actually creating a universe ourselves, and once you get to that level, i feel the debate opens back up to god.  If a person can create a universe, they would essential be God by the standards we have set; the creator.  To me it seems that science and religion are different sides of the same coin; they are trying to explain how we got here.  And by the way, I have definite proof that George W Bush is an alien lizard member of the Illuminati.  L. Ron Hubbard told me ;)
Man I love these kinds of discussions, i love getting a look at how other peoples minds work.  It's the best way to learn and broaden your horizons; thanks Dave G :)
Hi Joe, The people who “say science explains everything” are not the Atheists or the scientists. “Religion tries to explain” is not quite right. Religions claim to know the answers already, to hold the keys to the one and only truth. Glad you like the topic.
Absolutely, it was a well written article.  I would say a lot of those people are athiests, however, not scientists though, you are right on that one.  and it is true that religions claim to hold the answers, but they were created in an attempt to explain where we come from.  And Hinduism, for example, believes that all paths lead to god, including atheism and science; it doesn't matter if you believe or not.  If God created everything, than how can there be a wrong path to him, right?  It's people (the western Judeo-Christian monotheistic followers in particular) who claim they offer the one and only truth.  To be completely honest, I feel like if the Chrsitian Jesus came back today and saw all this bickering he'd probably be pissed he "died for our sins."  I know I would if it was me.  I feel like a guy who washed peoples feet and chilled with lepers wouldn't really care about science vs religion, but PEOPLE make MONEY off it, so according to the Vatican, Jesus does care :/
Jesus would be turning in his grave if he could see the bickering in his name :-)
Hi Joe -

"My reluctance to religion has always been countered by the fact that science is really no different; they are both looking for answers that seem (at least at this point) unanswerable."


Science is a search for knowledge and understanding. It does not claim infallibility with what it finds. Religion has the answers from the start and then asks the questions.


"It is impossible to prove or disprove the existence of a deity/deities, and no TRUE scientist would make a statement for or against something without any proof whatsoever."


I agree it is impossible. But I am not making the assertion that any deity exists so there is no onus on me to disprove it. It is the fundamentalists who and theists in general who make statements without evidence. It is also they who quote scientists out of context in their publications. I have recently debunked a Watchtower publication where 28 scientists were misquoted or what they said was taken out of context. The essence of the article was to suggest that many Scientists supported creationism or saw faults with Evolution theory. They are all however openly Evolutionists. The Watchtower is quite happy to feed the flock this rubbish because Jehovah is the truth no matter what science says.


© 2019   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service