RE: Science, Jesus Christ, and A New Purpose for 2018!
We are also taught we cannot know God in [his] entirety. Not so different from the Universe we live in. God has a reason for all things. The law of physics and math require reason for anything to exist at any point in space and time.
The science community might have a strong atheist community, but these people by in large just do not believe in the literal interpretation of any of the major religions for describing the Universe and the laws we derive through experience. The debate & conflict really comes down to what set of language modalities are we to describe the universe we live in as we come to know it with more certainty?
Religious founders did not live in a world of generally well known mathematical treatise. They lived in a world of families and clans with social histories. Religion addresses being human among other humans in a world that is unknowable in its entirety. Science is a method that addresses overcoming human mental biases to understand the world in reliable ways. People might proclaim; "Science changes, but the word of God never does". As true as this might be, science is still just a method to over-come previously held notions of the world we live in (even if garnered by science) and describe the world we live in ways to make actions repeatable and reliable, so the end-game for science is not to know the world statically, but to continuously refine a reliable understanding of the world we live in all the scopes of observation available to the human mind.
I think it is more likely the evil one(s), who plays the trick on people to sing and dance the tunes that science and religion are not rectifiable. To err is human, to arrive at truth [forgive] is divine.
Very accurate, one of the biggest barriers for scientists is the predetermined attributes that come with a concept such as God, Jesus or central figures in other faiths such as Allah or Buddha. Like you hit on science focuses on mental biases, and for many, a large bias is an unreliable 4 millennia old text and the interpretations of God which are drawn from it.
I also hint that biases (or what prevents scientific understanding) is the scope of observation. 1 meter way, the observable truths of a wooded table are unreliable at 1 micron away from the molecular wood of the table. Many people unable to observe at the 1 micron level would fall back to faith in their scientific observations that a wooden table has three to four legs and is level. A person who only has the 1 micron experience in observation has is likely to have faith that a wooden table is an unfathomable work, they might even doubt in a creator of any kind.
To have faith in science is to have faith in the method of describing the material world accurately... many people fall victim to the fallacy of authority and end up having the same kind of faith in science related things as much as the people who they might criticize for having Faith in Allah , God, or another religions description of the spiritual life.
Very well said. It could almost be said maybe we really do look at the world synonymously to from a micron away. That is to say, we aren't getting the full picture of our reality either, if we could see the metaphorical "three to four legs and level" of the universe, we might have a very different outlook.
Hopefully you get what I'm trying to suggest there, however I also agree that scientific theory can sometimes become similar to the tenants of a faith. To give an unequivocal status of truth to a concept, such as the speed of light as a limit, requires a faith in research and observations likely not made by the chemist who employs them in the lab. Those who operate to enforce such a mindset can limit their ability to see things outside of their belief system and blind themselves to new discoveries beyond their realm.
@adsactly
https://steemit.com/dlive/@maykocan/an-interesting-comment-but-it-is-more-profitable-to-start-a-new-day-every-day