Amen! Politics are not primarily about pursuits of truth----but have historically influenced science, religion, and philosophy pursuant their sociopolitical controls. Not to confuse politics with the closely interrelated concepts of leadership and government.DreamStalker wrote:... and you left out politics.
Remind me not to think out loud in public.jnk typing on his phone wrote:Remind me never to quote Pontius Pilate again!
(Thanks to D'Souza!)Here is a partial list of leading scientists who were Christian: Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Brahe, Descartes, Boyle, Newton, Leibniz, Gassendi, Pascal, mersenne, Cuvier, Harvey, Dalton, Faraday, Herschel, Joule, Lyell, Lavoisier, Priestley, Kelvin, Ohm, Ampere, Steno, Pasteur, Maxwell, Planck, Mendel. A good number of these scientists were clergymen. Gassendi and Mersenne were priests. So was Georges Lemaitre, The Belgian astronomer who first proposed the "big bang" theory for the origin of the universe. Mendel, whose discovery of the principles of heredity would provide vital support for the theory of evolution, spent his entire adult life as a monk in an Augustinian monastery. Where would modern science be without these men of the last millenia? Some were Protestant and some were Catholic, but all saw their scientific vocation in distinctively Christian terms.
Copernicus, who was a canon in the cathedral of Krakow, celebrated astronomy as a "science more divine than human" and viewed his heliocentric theory as revealing God's grand scheme for the cosmos. Boyle was a pious Anglican who declared scientists to be on a divinely appointed mission to serve as "priests of the book of nature." .......... Perhaps the greatest scientist of all time, Newton viewed his discoveries as showing the creative genius of God's handiwork in nature. "This most beautiful system of sun, planets, and comets," he wrote, "could only proceed from the counsel and domination of an intelligent and powerful being."
Kepler wrote, " ..behold how through my effort God is being celebrated through astronomy." ..... Kepler implored God "graciously to cause that these demonstrations may lead to thy glory and to the salvation of souls."
Scientists (today) commonly search for new patterns and order in nature, and they use what may appear to be pecululiar criteria to determine if they are on the right path. They often ask whether a relationship is "simple" or whether it is "beautiful". Patterns that are overly cumbersome or "ugly" are often rejected on those grounds alone.
Why? Because even the most secular scientist presumes that nature embodies not only order but simplicity and beauty. This, I would argue, is the Christian residue of modern science. ..... Even secular scientists cannot get away from these Christian assumptions, and some of the most perceptive of them have recognized this. Einstein confessed that "in every true searcher of nature there is a kind of religious reverence." Biologist Joshua Lederberg told Science magazine, "What is incontrovertible is that a religious impulse guides our motive in sustaining scientific inquiry." That impulse came originally from Christianity.
Jeff,jnk phone wrote:........The bottom line is that there is now a consensus that there is some difference in modern scientific approach and modern religious approach to some questions. ...........jeff
Well, of course the conflicts don't exist in your circles, Rooster. Rather solemn socioreligious conflicts existed in the circles of many of those scientists you referred to who were brave enough to redefine the paradigms of their respective eras. If we simply point out the various religions that scientists happened to subscribe to, we do not sufficiently point out that their contributions were without socioreligious repercussions at a personal level. Nor do we point out when those scientific contributions finally became embraced by their respective social and religious circles.(Thanks to D'Souza!)
Conflict between science and Christianity? Not in my circles!
| Machine: ResMed AirSense™ 10 AutoSet™ CPAP Machine with HumidAir™ Heated Humidifier |
| Mask: Mirage Activa™ LT Nasal CPAP Mask with Headgear |
I have no problem with Darwin. The problem is with atheistic Darwinism. Darwin has been hijacked! Name one other scientist who has been made into an 'ism'. There is not one and Darwin would be very much amused (if not quite perturbed) to find what the atheists have done!DreamStalker wrote:You left out Darwin damm it! ... .......
rooster wrote:BTW, Darwin is best known for describing how species mutated over time. Darwin's most famous work was titled On the Origin of Species. This seems to be a strange title for a tome that has not one bit of evidence or even a discussion of the origin of anything. What say ye, Circle?
rooster wrote:I have no problem with Darwin. The problem is with atheistic Darwinism. Darwin has been hijacked! Name one other scientist who has been made into an 'ism'. There is not one and Darwin would be very much amused (if not quite perturbed) to find what the atheists have done!DreamStalker wrote:You left out Darwin damm it! ... .......
BTW, for the youtube generation, you can find the first scientific proof that there is a creator at http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=81XolzElwR4&feature=user. Don't let the 8:14 scare you off, 2.5 minutes will show you the proof.
G'night circle.
Do you want my scientific answer or my religious one?rooster wrote:Jeff,jnk phone wrote:........The bottom line is that there is now a consensus that there is some difference in modern scientific approach and modern religious approach to some questions. ...........jeff
You use the word "some". Would you please specify just one itty bitty question where the approaches are different by consensus?
If you are driving while typing on that phone please stop. I will mostly be away the next three days and we have plenty of time to discuss this if you keep yourself alive.
Man, my spelling and grammar have always been bad, but I can't believe how bad it is on that little keyboard on my phone. What a messy post that I can't even clean up now!"You just can't believe in anything anymore. I mean, religion is so arbitrary and mythological. And science is just pure empiricism and by virtue of its methods it excludes metaphysics. I guess I wouldn't believe in anything anymore if it weren't for my lucky-astrology-mood-watch!"--Steve Martin.
I suspected you and I agree on much more than we disagree on and now I am sure of it.jnk wrote: ........... And, similarly, I don't mind if my doctor is religious, I think it is kind of nice if he is. ..............
