Will you please get off the religious kick? There is enough real science out there to deal with rather than pandering to the fantasy crowd.

Assuming God is the creator of all science.. assuming we do ever get bright enough to get down to the deepest universal truths.. I have a sneaking suspicion all will find that the two are one. At least, according to the Christian incarnation of Faith, God is the origin of all knowledge.

Just got into a little religious chat with my evangelical Christian family.  I don't think science can ever really say that no universal power exists, but beyond that I have a hard time reconciling the idea that a creator simply existed, from all time, and created everything on a whim.  Never mind a good, just, male God who is all powerful, yet tolerates the devil and hates gays.  To choose a specific set of beliefs that cannot be proved, yet call others wrong, seems to me a ridiculous course.  Confirmed atheists included.

I think, God or no God, there is a compulsion towards the spiritual that resides in many people.  I think many of the extremes of belief arise because there's an all or nothing view of these "ultimate questions".    Strangely enough, the religious see society becoming rapidly more secular, and the secular see quite the opposite (come on, people.  I don't care who you are.  Just go with evolution).  I tend to agree with Sam Harris, that it should be ok to question belief, as it stifles a lot of progress and peace in the world.  However, I don't think Paris Hilton should be a role model.  In between there is a happy medium.

Some form of spirituality may not be a bad thing, even if it only fulfils an aquired desire, but any faith that excludes other is on the whole self-serving and dangerous.

Hi Alan

God's fortunes as a subject of serious discussion would seriously improve if some decent evidence appeared for His/Her existence. Perhaps a new carbon-dating of Turin Shroud material might show it to be much older than the late Middle Ages - there's good evidence which indicates the region sampled for the 1988 testing was actually an "invisible patchwork" repair performed in the 14th century. Chemically and optically that patch is foreign to the rest of the Shroud.

Thus we might have a decent piece of evidence for the historical Jesus, his burial and his mysterious disinternment. But we'd need something more to believe that he was born of a Virgin, was the Incarnate God and that he rose bodily from the dead. The four Orthodox Gospels conflict on the details - was he seen after death in Galilee (Mark, Matthew), in Jerusalem (Luke) or in both (John)? And why is it that 'Matthew' tells us that the disciples saw him on a mountain in Galilee "but some doubted"?

Personally I can believe all the odd stories about his birth, having seen angels like the shepherds, and the morbidly paranoid nature of King Herod. I think both John and his cousion Jesus were marked from birth as special people - thus Mary could be called the "Mother of God" for her sheer determination -, but the crux of the matter is whether he walked or teleported out of that grave in 33 CE, or whether he was reburied and forgotten by the authorities the day before the Magdalene visited her Teacher's tomb. Paul the Apostle tells us in "Acts 13" that Jesus was buried by his enemies, and not the pious Joseph.

Unless some amazing evidence arises we may never know for sure and will have to settle for faith. Or otherwise, if you're a sceptic.

Science cannot provide what man most wants,hope. He says he wants truth, but that is not true.

Alan, I love the use of "God of the Gaps". Flip the same coin and you get "Science of the Gaps", which roughly translated is simply this: "We don't have an explanation yet, but give us 150 years and a billion dollars in research funds and maybe we'll find one".

Then again, maybe they won't. Logically there can be no real conflict between science and the Christian faith because one realm deals with the "How?" of a matter whilst the other tackles the "Why?" of it.

If the Christian story is true, and having researched it thoroughly from both sides as a journalist I'm now utterly convinced it is, then science will eventually come to realise that only religion can really answer the "Why?" question.

The evidence against life spontaneously arising on earth is now so overwhelming that avowed atheist scientists like Francis Crick are already invoking "science of the gaps" in the form of panspermia (some are even invoking aliens as a causative factor).

So yeah, this Christmas I'll raise a toast to the Dawkins and Cricks of this world and pray that, for 48 hours at least, they cease tilting at windmills and enjoy a little more Christmas spirit and a little less humbug.

Sorry, Rod ... I do get on this kick sometimes, mostly twice a year (Christmas/Hanukkah and Easter/Passover). As they say, 'tis the season. We'll soon return to our regular programming. Thanks for hanging with it. By the way, I'm even now watching "Cosmos" on the Science Channel and really grooving on it.

Another great post, Alan. You haven't heard of me, I've been a silent surfer for a long time.

I also like the word "God of the gaps", never really thought of it that way. Now that I think about it, even the smallest scientific advancements these days come hand-in-hand with a religious excuse.

So considering evolution exists, the more we think the smarter (in general) we get. Right? Makes sense to me. Time happens, we think, we get smarter. Scientific proof even backs it up a little. SO..., maybe in, say, 1960, when our world is overcome by nano-robots and knowledgeable people who have had a bad day and like to make nano-viruses to give Symantec a hard time (totally irrelevant), do you think our brains would have "evolved" (there, I said it) enough to comprehend the soul we now know is a mere word to express our brain itself? Maybe possibly enough to realize that religion itself could have been formed in a joint effort from a chemical in one's brain and a knack for writing?

I don't know. The "God of the gaps" word will definitely be added to my dictionary. Looking forward to more posts.

Dear Ian Wishart,

Loved what you had to say.

EP

Science cannot co-exist with religion by its very nature.  Science is the act of hypothesis, testing, and more hypothesis until an acceptable probability of certainty is acheived, regardless of what those conclusions may portend.  Faith (religion) is the pre-acceptance of something with no proof or testing whatsoever.  In today's political climate, anything not conforming to that pre-accepted belief is either fallaciously torn apart by psuedoscientific apologists or simply swept away by the evangelical executive/judicial/legislative branches of the government.  This is oil and water. people.  For those of you that did not get the gist, it means they cannot mix.

 The President literally believes in, and looks forward to, the Rapture (a 19th century construct, not mentioned in the Bible) and the fulfillment of temple rebuilding in Jerusalem as signs of the apocalypse.  And he appoints (anoints) like minded individuals to all seats of power where he can to hasten these events.  And worse, sets official United States policy (foreign and domestic) based on his beliefs.  The Christian faith has at its core a mantra of love for one's fellow man above all else.  Period.  Jesus said unto His disciples - I bring unto you a new commandment.  Love your fellow man as I have loved you.  No asterisks or provisions.  Everything else should flow from this point of view.

I put it to you all that this current reign of evangelical nitwits have failed BOTH science and religion in the worst ways, and have brought this mighty nation down a notch or two in the process.  I do not give them credit enough to say that they've destroyed this nation, for the system of our founders is far more robust than any one man-child's attempt at destroying it.

I pray for Peace for all Mankind, and the fulfillment of Jesus' real commandment, regardless of how it is mis-interpreted.

Merry Christmas to all, and may 2007 bring about truth and Peace.

In Author Tom Brown’s Native American school, I’ve ‘skeptically’ experienced some pretty strange stuff.  I do feel (even from everyday experiences of dogs intuitively knowing when their master is coming home or from our own gut feelings we have) that there are things that science can’t explain.  Even in science there are realms of supernatural-like concepts (the Hiesenburg principal of how conscious observation literally effects reality or the “instantaneous” knowing when another tied electron had been “viewed”) all seem to point to a much more tied and diverse reality than we are currently aware of.  Are there future scientific explanations for such happenings?  I’d certainly think so.  Recent investigations into as many as 11 dimensions seem to hint that everything might actually be one in the same even though they appear as distance and substance none the less.  In such a universe it would seem that our “intent” becomes the catalyst for certain events and that nothing happens by chance.  I could even (just now) see how Karma might be a fundamental law in such a universe.  In all, I think spiritual is a good term to label those of us who believe in something more than ‘current’ science understands, yet, who do not advocate the idea of a god directing all events.  The idea that all living things have an “equal right” to be here (from an insect to man to a bear or whale) seems to be apropos as well.

Overall, I do see religion on the incline but not because of “intelligent design.”  I think it’s actually being fueled by abortion and I can’t say I blame them.  A late- or even mid-term abortion is just plain wrong.  Such things have caused people to join organizations to try to stop this and ultimately this becomes the feeding spring for the right wing.  

In the age of such international turmoil, I don’t see fundamentalism as the answer.  Quite the opposite I’d think that it is incumbent upon the most spiritual people to give the most ground in order to bring some civility to the table.  

Alan,instead of the term "god of the gaps", I refer to it as the "shrinking god". A quick check of historical beliefs reveals how mankind has reduced the powers of "god" through time. Not so long ago we all prayed to the "volcano god" or the "flood god" when natural disasters hit. Now we wisely dismiss them as random occurring natural events. Not so long ago we all believed the cure for all illnesses where in the hands of "god" and that transplants and blood transfusions to name a few where sacrilege. Now we rightly prosecute parents who refuse medical treatment for children for religious reasons. Not so long ago we all believed that life on this planet was created 6000 years ago in a single poof. Now evolution is required teaching in all schools. The human intelligence has shrunk "god" back to the only remaining mysteries, how did the universe start and what happens when we die. Science is well on its way to solving these as well. I see a future without religion and I am thinking that may be a good thing.

Here is another question, why mix the two? People will always look for answers to those questions of life. Faith and science are different sides of the same coin. In one hand you have people looking for answers that fill the heart, and in the other you have people looking to fill that "gap" in their mind. Everyone needs that filling that what they believe is true, and they will do what they can just to verify that it is so. So then it goes back to the question of "why”.

Did God really impregnate Mary? Or did Mary play on Joseph's beliefs just so she wouldn’t get caught cheating? We don't know what really happened. People have proven that over the years that we lie. Humanity lies to itself just to make it feel better, safe in knowing that we are better then animals. But are we better then them? If you look into they way animals interact with each other, you can see the same patterns in us, just in a more "intelligent" way.

But the future of Faith? Who’s to say what tomorrow will bring. For all we know, will God send his son back to us to help us again? Who's to say that tomorrow we will discover intelligent life, and that we are not the only intelligent creature in this universe? But no matter what, people will always hold on to a belief. No matter how radical that belief may be to others. It will bring that person some type of hope, and that what faith is: a hope; to have a feeling of peace. Science is the same way, a hope. A hope to discover what is out there to see, and to experience; ultimately, to be at peace with knowing the facts of either faith or science.

  Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. This is what the ancients were commended for.

  By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible. Hebrews 11:1-3

   Most are thinking in a flat world perspective, sometimes even the scientists who are very much valued by Christians that I know. There really is no divide except the ones created by modern devices of communication. Stop thinking God is some "guy" in the sky. The only way we can describe it is spirit. If you accept an absolute then there is only "one" God whice means "one" Holy Spirit. The vastness of creation spins expands and contracts , the scriptures merely help narrow your thoughts to the one true love , offers forgiveness for man's failures so generations can continue to seek answers and explore the ever creative caverns of our being.

They also verify that things of nature can be bad and dangerous , that when the celestial world was made (first) some of those creatures rebeled and became rulers of the earth. The ancients summed them up with one word or sound , translated we know it as satan. The darkness and the death which we all inherited from our ancestors is not of the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is not punishing of anyone. Created beings or things are given over to their free will. Your existence is enough evidence. And if you give in to darkness or temptations or experimenting with right and wrong, whether in thought or in the physical world you are given over to your desires.

Some complain about sin and question truth but the results are clear. You smoke you get sick, you cheat on your wife , you'll probably lose her, you put money before people well it will consume you. The church is quite unorganised so the media spatter out whatever its perspective is and tries to make it in a nutshell, but really the true freedom of God through the Holy Spirit is, is that selfishness cannot keep you down.

The result of sin was death. Eventually God with His ever natural compassion and love said "man, they still do not get it." He came down manifested and gave of us even more freedom from death, rose from the grave ,killed the tradition of sacrifice that was becoming an outer ritual instead of one from the heart so we would no longer die. God became the lamb, as an example in the smallest country on earth in its day, to prove His love , that is the final sign , so be free and seek the heavens and progress but also acknowledge and know the true God and stop listening to the tunnel vision entertainment media and know God can only speak to you the way He knows how because He did make all things and in great variety, and why would He not have made you so unique as to not be swayed so much by others , that protects your self worth and helps keep your freedom to decide on your matters in tact, consult the Great Commandments and fail without guilt, it is OK.

The others and their opinions are not what is important to how God uses human beings to transform and influence the world. When you dig deep into the history and the roots of the Jews and how it transforms into Christianity you will see that all the battles in the Middle East and the disagreements over religion have real differences, all religions are not the same and to me Christ is the only explanation of whjat inspires freedom and the continuation to discover and to not let a ritual keep us down and to not let man be subservient to other men who claim to know more about God than others.

Christ also protects our life and the unseen kingdom of purity and Christ protects us from putting God almighty on levels that we feel so not wothy that we do not look to help the societies and cultures we live in. Christians who surrender to Christ begin to live differently with more concern for people and individuals and less of the "system" and they begin to know that what is important is the heart and spending time with the matters of truth and they withdraw more and more from a world that takes away from them.

Satan or the world is the part of the weave of man that pulls us away from the beauty and sells us out to the temporary. What happens when large groups of people beleive in in only the world is emptiness and moral decay , which immediatly cannot be seen as a horrible thing, but over time it makes popualtions sick. The more satan breaks down, divide and conquers the compulsions to faith the more people that will not submit to the greater good of man.

I envy scientists because they choose an uncharted road and sacrifice a lot for it, i wish they knew it was not anti-God and just realized they may expose some wonderful new discoveries , yet they will discover what has already been there but many failed to look or were not capable of that oppurtunity.

It appears to me that science and most religions (especially mono-thesim) are directly opposed since religious beliefs require faith (and generally do not tolerate dissention) and science requires the use of the scientific method (requiring rigorous testing) . A logical mind could say that there are things which cannot yet be described . This does not preclude the existance of a 'God' or 'Gods' but recognizes that we do not yet understand all that exists . Religion does play a beneficial role in many societies . It can be a stablizing force that allows people to manifest the qualities of compassion and helpfulness among the individuals in any culture . However , only the most naive person fails to recognize that religion is also corrupted on a regular basis with the result being persecution and violence . Science also has been beneficial to mankind in general , but is often corrupted , resulting in violence and persecution . The commonality here is that both are used by maniacal people hell-bent on domination of others by any and all means . Hopefully , one day science or religion will erradicate these violent tendancies of domination exhibited by a small sub-group of the population .

I think it would be beneficial at this time of year to disuss the real origins of not just Christianity but of all mythologies.  Since ALL religions, mythologies and even folklore spring from the same human psychological needs wouldn't it help if we were able to identify those needs and address them with some type of framework that was actually relevant to our culture and new understanding of our universe.  It is high time that we create a new paradigm on dealing with each other and our environment that is not based on 5,000 year old thoughts and understandings of the way things work.
I have faith in humanity.  I have faith that man will be able to answer the deeper questions of existance. Both those that can be answered with science and those that cannot.  We simply have to understand that the seeds of that understanding exist in ourselves and to stop looking outside for the answers.  For anyone interested a good place to start would be anything written or any interview with Joseph Campbell.

A Festivus for the rest of us!!!! Happy Holidays!

I like the discussions, I have no opinion on it, or should I say any answers. Sure I have thoughts but they are like a roller coaster ride.

This material was of no significance to me for many years, I am a degreed Engineer so evidence and proof are always a concern. It is difficult to make simple things work or behave properly day in and day out, so how could the sweep of God’s hand make all things so good, complicated and perfect – he or she seldom gets credit for any of the bad or evil in the world.

Then my wife of almost 28 years got unexpectedly ill, ended up on life support and later a feeding tube and I had to make that decision of living or dying. This was the person I loved so much , the mother of my kids, the young grandma of the grandchildren. I did all I could and extended her life for months. Was it for her or me? Finally I had to make the decision to let her go, each week she was worse and worse and any recovery was out of the question. Medical care really sucks, even the best of it, if you don’t believe me wait till your turn comes.

I was all alone, no one to turn to and I was the guy who decided whether she lives or dies. Losing your mate is pretty bad.  I let her die rather than taking her to the ER to fight the infection, get transfusions which lasted a few weeks and all the pain she goes through with each trip to the ER.

Did I pray – hell yes? Did I think it would do any good? Well I thought it might not hurt. I feel people with faith use it like putty, it fills in the cracks of what they can’t explain. I let my wife die, I feel the pain every day. A person of faith can just pin the blame on God, “it was her time”.  I feel faith is a means of shifting responsibility from your own self to this “God” so you can feel better about things.

You can justify anything if you can convince people it is God’s Will – look what Bush did.  I feel faith and religion are like Santa Claus, “if you believe in him then he exists for you”!

When she died she took so much joy and happiness with her, everything from both of our lives. My life now hobbles along, it is s***. It puts new meaning to ‘Monk’ and ‘About Schmidt’ – two shows I enjoyed before her death and how I have a totally different view of after her death.

My friends have called me a “broken man”, they may be right, I don’t give a s***. I think about death  a lot, I wonder how she felt at the end, was she warm, did she go somewhere  where she feels my love every day? Does she know I did not want to harm her? Is all my suffering and pain mean she isn’t suffering any longer?

If I was religious I could just shift the burden on God and everyone in church would pat me on the back and tell me she is in a better place, I have experienced that. I must believe in religion somewhat – I struggle every day with “Thou shall not kill”! I live with that every day, 24 hours a day, every week, month and year.  I want to believe she is better off.

The fact is this, science cannot disprove the existence of a god any more than religion can prove it. Personally I believe in evolution, but im not an atheist. Since science cannot disprove god, then I cannot reject the possibility of his/her existence. However, in my opinion the "true" god cannot be defined by any one religion on this planet. Putting all the fantastic miraculous claims of christianity aside, Jesus had the right idea and probobly represents the closest image of god. A god of love, peace, and hope. Thats what I want to believe in today and tomorrow for all of humanity.

Faith and science are defintion about as opposite as two terms can get. Faith is belief without question. Science is a mechanism for posing and evaluating questions.

When is everyone going to realize there is nothing to discuss on this topic?

Dismiss the specifics of ID arguments if you like...but eventually...and I suspect within my lifetime...something will need to emerge to replace the carcass of grand neo-Darwinian story telling. Just as chemical evolution and spontaneous generation have failed so will the idea that time+rocks=intelligence. The logic assault on Dawkins-like strong materialism has only just begun (disagree? check out the virulent push-back of the scientific atheist crowd). That is not to say there are not elegant material explanations waiting to be uncovered...but unfortunately even that will not be allowed to happen till we ditch the untenable we've got.

I see no reason why it should be science vs. religion. It is said that we were never to know what God knows, but we were given the gift of curiosity and the ability to learn and discover. These gifts allow us to save lives, discover better ways to grow food and make our lives more comfortable and productive. As long as we use these gifts for good, then why should people go around trying to dispel other people's belief in God. Science is not God's enemy. Hate, bigotry and violence are. I know it sounds simple, but why can't we just enjoy the company of others, learn to accept people's shortcomings, embrace their greatness, punish their malevolence, forgive them of their mistakes and just have fun? Human beings tend to complicate their lives in the attempt to simplify it...

Science and religion are antithetical epistemological foundations. Any attempts to reconcile the two can only end in futility. Perhaps one day we'll shake off the superstitious vestiges of our early ancestors and learn to open our mind and truly explore the universe around us, but until then people like Sagan will be a marvelous anomaly in a sea of ignorance and fantasy seeking. Faith in a nuclear world is too dangerous to let pass without question and examination.

You will never catch me saying "I know" God exists, or "I know" Christ was raised from the dead. Now ask me if I believe these claims. If I "knew" it wouldn't be faith, now would it? As far as science and religion goes, I can live joyfully with both. My goodness, if you think some relgious claims are wonderful and awe inspiring, start looking into quantum physics. I mean wow! All in all both science and spirituality are very cool stuff, so why not just sit back and enjoy.

Thoughts and ramblings.

Yes, it is cyclical.  The concertive religous right seems to have peeked about 2 - 5 years ago.  This cycle seems to play every 40 - 60 years approximately.  The difference now is the intensity of this episode and the greater inclusion of politics both here and through out the world.  It is also interesting that it does not limit itself to any one religion or political group but flows internationally across all borders.

My prediction - science will provide a way for religion to compromise on many issues (stem cell, use of embryos, definition of life to name a few) facing us today. Religion will encompass and allow scientific fact (good example was the earth being the center of the universe) and be able to point to specific chapter and verse in the various religious books and thought to justify their positions.

Further, we will be asking the same questions 60 years from now, but from the opposite point of view, but this is how we as a species progress over time.

Humanity’s religious fervor has always been cyclical. But in the past 400 years, at least in Western culture, religion has steadily faded as scientific knowledge has increased. Even most of the so-called religious right would be considered heretics by 17th century standards. I don’t think that mankind is going to give up religion, even fundamentalism, anytime in the foreseeable future. For one thing, to really understand science and the way the universe works requires knowledge in math, physics, chemistry, biology, and other fields. And most devout people are unwilling and/or unable to exert the effort to acquire that knowledge. And given the poor quality of most public schools and the mind-rotting content of most mass media, I don’t think that is going to change. So while mankind’s knowledge of science will continue to expand, the percentage of the population who understand that science will continue to shrink. And that means that religion, and especially fundamentalism, will continue to thrive. Somebody once commented that if one doesn’t have faith, no proof of god is sufficient. If one does have faith, no proof is necessary. But I think Mark Twain made the best comment on religion when he said, “Man is the only animal with the one, true religion. Several of them.”

Somebody should tell Ian that Francis Crick died in 2004.

Faith ought to have quite a future in physics. Here is a thought from the article, One Christian's Perspective on Quantum Mechanics

(http://www.geocities.com/thirdgenerationphysics/):

***

Physicist Feynman says that we have to learn about the behavior of atoms "in a sort of abstract or imaginative fashion and not by connection with our direct experience." Christians have the same sort of problem when learning about God. Fortunately, the Bible offers an important principle about perceiving the invisible:

"Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. . . . The things which are seen were not made of things which are visible." (Hebrews 11:1-3, NKJ)

Biblically defined faith is clearly not just a belief based on blind credulity or trust in authority. It is based on evidence from actual, observable facts. The methodology used by Christians is thus very similar to that used by physicists.

***

Another site that will keep some of your readers awake at night in a hunt for practical applications is "Scriptural Physics" at:

http://members.andiamo-tel.com/~bfraser

As science progresses, we'll start needing to make the distinction between "supernatural" and "superscience": that is, we will find (as we are already starting to find) that there are plenty of natural phenomena that are actually beyond the power of the human mind to comprehend. Examples: what makes us human, meaning, language -- in short, everything that requires another level of recursion to "explain". This represents an insurmountable "gap" for science to fill. The fact that God will continue to invoked in this domain will be intolerable to some, justification to others, and truly amusing to yours truly.

Unless and until human nature changes, I'm not sure that our relationship with faith will change.

I read various bits of the discussion that ensued a week or so ago, when the issue of faith vs. science was raised. And quite frankly, I'm not sure that the level of discourse was much elevated over when Galileo was excommunicated for daring to theorize that the world was round rather than flat.

Now, as then, there are those who believe that science explains everything, those who put their fingers in their ears and sing "lalala" to keep from hearing any evidence that might contradict what they "know" is true because it's a tenet of their faith, and those who somehow manage to keep their eyes and ears open to new evidence that might change what they believe.

And just as the Pope was willing to excommunicate Galileo and as others were willing to put unbelievers to the sword or the fire, some folks are still willing to use force to coerce or eliminate the "unfaithful."

Given those data points, my theory is that we'll still be squabbling over the same types of issues, in many of the same ways, five hundred or a thousand years from now. Assuming our species is still around to do so.

Excellent topic of coverage. I think the real division isn't science v. religion, it's religion v. dogma. Religion's job is to force us to meditate and find our own explanations for the things that can never be explained. Why do I love my wife? What is this unbelievable sense of wonder I'm filled with at times? Why is there good and evil, and how do I tell which is which? When religious organizations force spiritual questions into testable hypotheses through obtuse reasoning and shortsighted heresay, they set themselves up for embarrassment and contradiction. Religious leaders would do well to remember that they are just as fallible as the rest of us.

There is a spirit of deception in our midst. Nothing new under the sun, just stronger in these times. Those who are deceived do not know they are deceived, that's why they call it deception. The Word of God says "an evil and adultress generation seeks after a sign, and none shall be given it, except the sign of Jonah, etc". Matthew 12:38-41. He also said He chooses us, we don't choose Him. There's the seed of satan and the seed of God. He's the one that gives any one of us any understanding regarding Himself. You must be born again of His spirit to know Him, understand the things of Him, to enter the Kingdom or see It. He through His disciple, also said "they will heap up teachers for themselves, they will have itching ears" mankind will also twist His Words to their own destruction." He said the whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one. Our wisdom is nothing. He said man would consider themselves little gods. A hardened heart doesn't listen. Humble our hearts, seek truth, from the one and only living God.

While looking at a picture of the Eagle nebula on 'Astronomy Picture of the day' the idea came that maybe the stars breaking away from the frozen hydrogen dust cloud have something in common with the unproven cold fusion theory. And as far as wasting time debating the existence of extraterrestrial gods, lets leave that in the dust bin of history.

I loved every one of these posts! How refreshing to see I'm not alone in the world with my thoughts and beliefs.  That said, I 've pondered the debates between religion and science for a long time.  I realized that, personally, I cannot and have never been able to accept "blind faith".  I was not raised in a religious home, and I read and learned, went to college, and came to agree with most science based theories that were posed to me; therefore, I claimed myself an "evolutionist" while all my peers sported some other religious title behind their names.  I often asked my religious friends about how they acquired their faith...was it reading the books associated with their religion? Learning from their home environment?     Most faith-based believers said they don't question...it just is.  At heart, I'm a skeptic...I cannot not believe blindly...I need data...research...proof. It was a confusing time for me spiritually as my husband was born and raised in a religious home--I wanted to share his "faith", but I felt I was untrue to myself, a hypocrite, to pretend and go through the motions of church. 

A year ago, I came upon a new friend who had born and raised in a christian home her whole life.  She has a Masters in Zoology and loves to talk about anything scientific.  She left her church when she was just out of high school.  When I asked her about her faith, she told me she never felt she acquired true faith like they wanted her to because she always questioned everything that she was told.  She's an explorer, she has to find out the answers for herself with much time, research, and soul searching.    Since then, she and I have had wonderful spiritual and scientific (among other intellectual) conversations, and I've come to realize that there are those who ask "why" and must have proof--and there are others satisfied with having one source to live by all their lives (and I'm sure there are all of those people in between shades of gray).

 Geographically, I live in a very devout part of the country, and  I have a few friends who think as I do; it is difficult to see how many of us there really are in the world.  Traditionally, this has always been a difficult time of year for me.  Thanks to all of you for sharing your messages during this holiday time;  I feel as if I do belong somewhere in the universe  :)

I find evidence of God all around me. From the wind blowing in my face to the smile of my baby nephew. I also saw evidence in the closed eyes of my grandpa as his casket was closed in the funeral home.

I feel pity for those who don't believe in a higher power, how empty your lives must be.

What I hate is when people say they know the truth and only their interpretation of the truth is correct.

As for taking God out of school and government, I support that. This is something parents and churches should teach. They have alot more influence on kids then teachers.

Also, I saw too many Hindus and Jews being teased and bullied and bing told they would go to Hell if they did not find Jesus.

So don't reject the majority of americans who are believers, and believers--don't claim that you know the truth.

We will all see who is right once we die.

i saw a religious special that told a little about mary and that as was the times she was sold to her husband in an arranged marriage. her husband was about 25 and mary was very young early teens probably. my question is is this info accurate and if so what is the religious significance of impregnating(divine conception) a 13 or 14 year old slave?

I really feel a need to respond to Jim C., to say that there was clearly a bond of love there and that the angst and suffering you feel now are surely a natural follow-on. I'm glad to hear your friends are concerned about you and your brokenness, and I'm glad to hear that there are children and grandchildren who are part of your wife's legacy. ... I've not been in your position, but I think this is a pain that is perhaps dulled by throwing yourself into new pursuits but never goes away. I guess I'm on a strange Carl Sagan kick this week, but I'll just quote from "Carl Sagan: A Life" ... actually what Ann Druyan said about how she felt after her husband's death:

"I felt like I could hear the Furies calling in my ears. I felt I was participating in some Aztec ceremony in which my chest was being opened and my beating heart was being ripped out of my chest. And for weeks I could feel and hear this physiological thing, literally like the Furies 'calling' - I'm sure it was completely psychological or biological - this amazing sound I heard in my head. ... Since June 1, 1977, from that very moment that we told each other that we loved each other, I had been thinking about how the piper would have to be paid. I don't think you can be that lucky and that happy without paying a huge price for it."

Jim, know that my thoughts and prayers go out to you.

Promoters of the existence of god cannot effectively use logic or even effective analogy to prove or demonstrate their point of view.  The reason is they have no objective evidence of god.   To claim god exists is inherently an act of what they call faith.

“Faith” is a euphemism for hubris and fantasy and the abnegation of logic.  The hubris is to imagine that we are important to, or have a connection with “the almighty”.  It makes some folks feel good not to have to acknowledge our triviality in the vastness of the universe.  The universe doesn’t care about us and that scares folks.  So if they imagine they have a relation to the creator of the universe they feel (without reason of course) more important. 

The fantasy is to imagine the universe as the creation of a supernatural entity.  This is the typical meaning of god that is objectionable.  The other versions of god as being the magnificence of everything tries to duck the issue with slippery semantics effectively denying the first typical meaning.   Everyone can be awed at the almost everything in the universe: even more so as we gain understanding.  That awe doesn’t count as god.

The abnegation of logic occurs when folks can’t accept that there is not a satisfactory explanation for all that happens in the world and the universe.  Folks need a meta-explanation to blot out the fact that they (we all) don’t know all that much.  It is simply not logical to insist something is true with absolutely no evidence of it.  To base ones behavior on faith and worse, on texts that profess to be the word of god is dangerously illogical.  People consistently misinterpret, and mis-translate those texts.  Many folks are vulnerable to charlatan demagogues masquerading as interpreters of the word of god.  The congregation may be sheep but the preachers are the wolves.

Some folks do feel “spiritual”.  We may find out what that feeling actually means someday.  In the mean time, those of faith would do well to drop the hubris, and do good works because it is good for humanity.  That, by itself, is a good enough reason to behave decently.

At loss with loss sense of direction on the purpose of life in planet of apes.
At loss with the secrets of the pyramids in Egypt.
Try and read Nostradamus - THe final reckoning.
By Peter Lemesurier, Piatkus Book, 1995 Edition.
See the summary chart on page 13.
The secrets of the pyramids expose the purpose of life in planet of apes.
At loss on what the liberation of freedom back from world war two is all about in planet of apes.
At loss with the true meaning of X'mas in making a monkey out of ourselves in planet of apes.
Merry X'mas and a Happy New Year to all living human kind in planet of apes.
With the best is yet to come.
Once we hit the home-run in solving the misery of living human kind in planet of apes.

An earlier poster said:

"Science cannot provide what man most wants, hope."

It is not science's purpose to offer hope.

Men and women provide hope and support to each other.

We sell ourselves short when we give the decent attributes human kind has developed for millennia to an invisible god.

I was baptized a Catholic, but then never forced to go to church after that. My mom used to read the Bible to me, and even at the age of 7, I would ask questions like, "How could they fit two of every animal on a single ark?" or, "How could Jesus raise people from the dead?", and she would respond, "It's just a miracle!" So I would counter, "How come these 'miracles' don't happen today?" No response. Now I know the answer-- Because they never did happen in the first place. Some clever folks put together a wonderful collection of literature about men who lived for 500 years and people parting seas, and used it to exploit groups of people. It doesn't surprise me that it worked then, but now-- in 2006 -- I can't believe people still believe this stuff! lol

I'm a non-believer so I am surely going to hell?  I am a good person-- I am a teacher and enjoy helping people-- it just seems right!  I don't need to give people money and dress up on Sunday mornings to feel good about myself!   It's so much easier to just accept what they throw at you in the Bible to explain things -- no thinking=no headache.  You get a headache when you try to imagine how this wonderful universe came into being 14.7 billion years ago and how human life forms evolved from elements that started in stars!  That is truly amazing-- but it will give you a headache!  Easy way out- just accept the Bible!

Carl Jung wrote an interesting book titled "Synchronicity".  The fundamental idea of the book evolved from conversations Jung had with Albert Einstein while Einstein was developing the theory of relativity.

In the book, Jung refers to experiments in ESP conducted by J.B. Rhine.  The experiments appear to show that people possess perceptive powers that are not bounded by the restraints of space or time.  One young man actually managed to "guess" all the cards in a 25 card deck (Jung cites a probability of the happening at 1 : 298,023,223,876,953,125).

Whatever a person may think or feel about organized (or disorganized) religion, it might be well to keep an open mind about the question of whether we possess a spirit/soul which exists beyond the limitations of matter.

I like the attitude taken on the Stanford website in regards to "Conservation Laws" - "The risk in setting these laws is that there may be some very rare processes that we have not yet observed that may not respect the laws we state them today."

A person like Jesus might exemplify those "very rare processes" and be a sign pointing to possibilities we are too quick to dismiss.

TO MIKEEG, ABDN, WA:  THIS IS WHAT YOU WROTE/ASKED:

i saw a religious special that told a little about mary and that as was the times she was sold to her husband in an arranged marriage. her husband was about 25 and mary was very young early teens probably. my question is is this info accurate and if so what is the religious significance of impregnating(divine conception) a 13 or 14 year old slave?

IF YOU DON'T HAVE ONE, BUY A NEW KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE (MY FAVORITE) AND READ THE BEGINNING OF THE BOOK OF MATTHEW OR THE BOOK OF LUKE.  BOTH OF THESE PERSONS WERE ACTUALLY DISCIPLES OR FOLLOWERS OF JESUS. WHAT THIS "SPECIAL" PORTRAYED IS NOT WHAT THE WORD OF GOD SAYS.  SHE WAS NOT A SLAVE NOR SOLD (IT DOESN'T SAY THAT).  GOD IS HOLY AND PURE, THEREFORE THE VESSEL HE CHOSE TO BRING FORTH HIS SON WAS A VIRGIN, NEVER TOUCHED BY A MAN.  IT DOESN'T SAY HOW OLD ANYONE WAS.  THAT WASN'T LEFT FOR US.  IT SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT FOR US WHAT WAS LEFT FOR US IN THE WORD OF GOD.  SEEK, DESIRE TRUTH. OPEN YOUR HEART TO TRUTH AND UNDERSTANDING.  ASK GOD FOR UNDERSTANDING WHEN YOU READ IT (IF YOU DO).  HE'S THE ONE THAT GIVES ANY ONE OF US ANY UNDERSTANDING OF THE THINGS OF HIM.  HE CREATED US, WE DIDN'T CREATE HIM.  

There are fireworks aplenty in the collision between religion and science, but like those fireworks, they are mostly sound and light, disappearing into the darkness surrounding them.  Science is so busy searching for reasons that it has no time for the "unexplainable" and reliigion is so self-absorbed in "saving souls" that it never looks beyond (or behind) the Bible.

But evolution is as real as dinosaurs and as a "theory" it applies both the evolution itself and to religion and "the ties that bind" equally.  We mustn't ever forget that it was science that could prove Earth was flat, though not supported on the shoulders of Atlas, and religion (Christianity, specifically the neo-conservative variation) is mostly founded on the King James version of the Bible with its many errors of translation, omission and commission, outdated language, and sponsored by an institution, Royalty,utterly rejected by the American peoples otherwise.

The fireworks fade out, lost in translation, the confusion of words, and the preferential selections of memory.

Would there be religion(s) if average humans were willing to think of death as -- the end?

Why do people have this need to have a God, faith and religion? Science is tangible. God is not. Humanity created God and Gods out of some imagined need. The whole of religion (and faith) revolves around and is summed up by an idea of eternal life. I profess that if not for this, religion would have died out long ago. The more we come to terms with the fact that eternal life, while a fantastic notion, just isn't the case, the future of faith is dismal.

If something remotely resembling a "God" indeed does exist, this God can't be anything like we humans want it to be.  

Us Latter Day Saints (mormons) have far fewer problems with science. When you have 4 books (Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price), you have a scripture to cover nearly everything! Relativity? Book of Abraham. Quantum and particle physics? Doctrine and Covenants section 88. The purpose of and nature of our lives and existance? Moses chapters 1 and 5 (throw in the beginning of ch 3 too), as well as Alma 42 in the Book of Mormon.

(lds.org or mormon.com have them under "scriptures.")

Why do science and religion clash? Because information is missing, and in that unfortunate knowledge vacuum, theories and opinions are used to fill in the gaps. This is why there are so many different religons. This is also why there are different scientific theories.

By understanding that we are all missing information, and that most folks simply want to discover that missing knowledge, we can learn to  become more patient with each other. Less contention and more progress can be made.

This 'gap' people speak of between what can be scientifically verified and what must be ascribed to faith is a misnomer. Everything is known, just not to us at the present time. That being said, those who choose to exploit fears arising from this 'gap' are neither scientists nor holy men. They are charlatans with their own agendas of how to control people unto their own ends. Beware of them. Shun them. Vote them into office not!! Peace out!

"Truth is one and the sages call it by different names."  -- the Rig Veda (book 1, chapter 164, verse 46)

Science and religion are two different inquiries into the same truth.  Science proceeds by reason, which is useful but limited, as illustrated by the liar's paradox and as demonstrated by Alan Turing.  Religion proceeds by faith, which is also useful but limited, as demonstrated by many examples from life.  Both lines of inquiry lead to direct personal experience of reality and lead to questions about its ultimate nature.

 Whether this is just phenomenology or a door to reality itself is a decision that we all must make: directly and in our dealings with others.

Christ is born.  May He lead us all to the knowledge of the Truth.

naneki nice story but seriously what is the religious significance of impregnating a young teenage slave, she was sold in an arranged marriage that makes her a slave. the bible also does not say what the weather was but i belive there was stll weather, so just becaus the bible does not give her age or status as a slave does not mean that she was not a slave or 13 or 14 year old. why not a 30 year old virgin?

I think I'll pray for all of you that have doubts. And I'll pray for God to resolve those through his own plan and time so that He alone gets the glory. Some things that many of us don't "understand" may never be understood this side of Heaven.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):