quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

it's contradictory to believe in both free will and an omniscient, omnipresent God

There is no ocntradiction what so ever, I suggest you look up the meaning of the words you use, as you are applying them incorrectly.

Why don't you just tell me why you think there isn't a contradiction?

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
There is no ocntradiction what so ever, I suggest you look up the meaning of the words you use, as you are applying them incorrectly.

Why don't you just tell me why you think there isn't a contradiction?

quote:


I'd feel safer if you could present a cogent explanation for why you think the Theological problem of evil is germane to the issue of whether Science and Religion are incompatible. It seems to me an exceedingly peculiar notion on its face, and all the more so because the so-called "problem of evil" isn't even a problem for religion generally anyway. Perhaps you might be willing to enlighten us?

quote:


I asked you to present a cogent explanation for why you think the Theological problem of evil is germane to the issue of whether Science and Religion are incompatible. Am I to understand that your answer is, "because Young Earthers think so"? And, for that matter, where did you get the peculiar idea that "Young Earthers" believe the age of the Earth has something to do with the Theological problem of evil?

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

if this hasn't already been brought up its worth noting, throughout history, scientists across a variety of disciplines saw their study of nature as a way of seeking to understand god.

but then, god is not synonymous with religion (at least in the formal, practicable sense) the latter of which, in terms of compatibility might be worth its own consideration.

if throughout history, not counting modern times, there have been scientists who have balked at the idea of god due to their study of nature, their voices saying so haven't been very loud. or at least loud enough to reach the common man.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
There is no ocntradiction what so ever, I suggest you look up the meaning of the words you use, as you are applying them incorrectly.

Why don't you just tell me why you think there isn't a contradiction?

yes, that's a legitimate thing to ask but at the same time, you keep bringing up things that are answered, or at least addressed, in lewis' the problem of pain.

if you are genuinely seeking answers to the questions you are posing, its a worthwhile read.

quote:

Your agency position has no standing based the reasons you have given us since you have not shown free will is 'not' involved in each and every case, thus you cannot elimiate it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

So I presume you have given up, hence conceded your position that God is a criminal simply because God is the creator.

quote:

"It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity." [bacon]

Kepler was an extremely sincere and pious Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the heavenly bodies represent the Trinity.

His (Descartes) system began by asking what could be known if all else were doubted - suggesting the famous "I think therefore I am". Actually, it is often forgotten that the next step for Descartes was to establish the near certainty of the existence of God - for only if God both exists and would not want us to be deceived by our experiences - can we trust our senses and logical thought processes. God is, therefore, central to his whole philosophy. What he really wanted to see was that his philosophy be adopted as standard Roman Catholic teaching.

Pascal invented a mechanical calculator, and established the principles of vacuums and the pressure of air. He was raised a Roman Catholic, but in 1654 had a religious vision of God, which turned the direction of his study from science to theology.

In Principia (newton) he stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being."

As a devout Protestant, Boyle took a special interest in promoting the Christian religion abroad, giving money to translate and publish the New Testament into Irish and Turkish. In 1690 he developed his theological views in The Christian Virtuoso, which he wrote to show that the study of nature was a central religious duty."

Planck made many contributions to physics, but is best known for quantum theory, which revolutionized our understanding of the atomic and sub-atomic worlds. In his 1937 lecture "Religion and Naturwissenschaft," Planck expressed the view that God is everywhere present, and held that "the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is conveyed by the holiness of symbols."... Both science and religion wage a "tireless battle against skepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition" with the goal "toward God!"

(Einstein) "I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."

quote:

An interesting point is that the 1860's was notable for formation of the X-Club, which was dedicated to lessening religious influences and propagating an image of "conflict" between science and religion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

in a study prior to the end of the '90s only 7% of elite research scientists (members of the NAS) believed in a personal god.

According to a 2009 Pew Research Center study, 51% of scientists believe either in God, or in a universal spirit or higher power.

The Pew Research Center poll of scientists also found that levels of religious faith vary according to scientific specialty and age. For instance, chemists are more likely to believe in God (41%) than those who work in the other major scientific fields. Meanwhile, younger scientists (ages 18-34) are more likely to believe in God or a higher power than those who are older. ~Source

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Creationism that produces and promotes accounts of natural history that differ radically from conventional accounts—made up of so-called ‘biblical’ or ‘young-Earth’ creationists, ‘anti-evolutionists’ and ‘Flood geologists’—is herein called ‘theodicic creationism’.

As I said, a massive incompatibility.

But not with religion generally, just some odd types within a religion. Moreover, I fail to see a connection between any form of Creationism and the Theological problem of evil. But if you think you've got one, trot it out. Posting unsourced quotes won't do.

K.

quote:

Thomas Aquinas made a grave mistake that led to today’s great divide between science and religion, according to Francis Schaeffer in his book Escape from Reason. He assumed that the spirit of a man is fallen into sin, but his mind is not. This implied that unregenerate man could gain reliable truth about the universe apart from Divine revelation. This led to a false dichotomy between natural knowledge and spiritual knowledge. The result was that science was viewed as a path to ultimate truth, independent of God’s grace, and worse, that issues of faith and spirit became utterly detached from nature, history, the tangible and the rational. Increasingly, nature was seen as superior to grace; as Schaeffer says, nature devoured grace. Christianity in many circles has become other-worldly to the extreme, having nothing to say or to do with the natural world, while unregenerate science increasingly asserts supremacy in all matters of natural knowledge. The end result is becoming apparent in our time: science has become a religion, and assumes near divine attributes in its quest to explain everything, even the evolution of religion. To see how extreme it has become, consider that social scientists today routinely describe rape and infanticide not as moral evils but as Darwinian survival mechanisms. Christians need to recognize that the mind of man is as fallen as his spirit, and that though natural man can collect facts through his senses, to understand them in their context and assimilate them into their relationship to ultimate reality, we need regenerate minds that build on the foundation of God’s natural and special revelation.