The Great Debate: "Has Science Refuted Religion?

by dark angle 239 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • tec

    For you maybe, but some of us use science to investigate all things. But I can see how not considering science makes certain things easier to believe---which is why a person may see a need for separation.

    I'm not sure who you are responding to here, but I (and I thought Burns above) was not suggesting a need for a separation. I have no need for a separation at all. Science does not refute God. Science does not have the tools to measure God, so science makes no statement as TO God, in the first place. Science can, however, refute some things taught about God.

    The only conflict between science and God is our misunderstandings of one or both.

    After all, a "thousand years from now", no-one is going to attempt to claim that the earth is at the center of the universe or solar system, or that the earth is flat, or that we remain on the planet due to some "magical" force....

    No. Our tools and knowledge will grow. (which is also what you were said above) What is immeasurable now, might not immeasurable then. The spiritual might well be accepted, proven, or at least theorized such as evolution... and the 'tools' might even be within us. We might look back and smile that some thought to deny it in the first place.



  • ziddina
    "The spiritual might well be accepted, proven, or at least theorized such as evolution..." tec, bottom of page 3

    No. Research of the "spiritual" is already being analyzed by scientific methods, as published in the book by Dr. Andy Thomson, described in that video I posted earlier... But such research is showing something very different from your expectations.

    Did you watch that video?

    Right here at he bottom of page 2...


    Also, James B. Harrod, Ph.D. specializing in prehistoric art, religion and semiotics, has an entire website dedicated to the evolution of religion, including two interesting papers positing the existence of a form of "religion" amongst chimpanzees...

    The facts are leading in a totally different direction - away from "proving" spirituality as "real", as the evidence indicates "spirituality" to be a result of the way the human mind evolved...

  • NewChapter

    two interesting papers positing the existence of a form of "religion" amongst chimpanzees...

    We touched on this in an anthropology class. It was short but fascinating---but the more we learn about chimps the more disturbing it becomes to treat them just as animals. They are capable of symbolic thought and culture---just not to the degree that we are---but still it is there and there is emerging evidence that they remember their dead.


  • designs

    AGORA, the film is worth watching. The life and death of the scientist Hypatia, 370AD, would died because of the Christian Bishop Cyril reading St. Paul and the Geo-centric Bible inciting the disciples to kill the witch. It would be 1200 years before her studies on obits would be confirmed by astronomers.

    Our public education is under siege with the Christians who hold to the ancient myths of Genesis.

  • NewChapter

    I think I saw parts of that movie Designs! I didn't realize it was based in truth. Geez----how far could we be today if god belief didn't cut so much off at the bud? And right----they still want to do it by pushing their ignorance into the science classes. We just have to be vigilant.

    disclaimer: I realize that it is the fundies behind the movement, and many believers are not actively trying to get into the classroom---please don't defend yourself, it is not needed. It does not mean that I consider some belief benign, only that I acknowledge that not all are actively forcing themselves into the schools.

    Geez I get tired of saying the above.

  • sizemik

    IF . . .

    Science = the scientific method.

    Religion = all manifestations of organised religion past and present.

    . . . then I believe it has to a more than reasonable degree.

    The reasons religion is so vehemently defended is precisely as Terry posted . . . fear borne from death awareness. Even the most articulate of religious defenders seem to consider the existence of their God as the "default position" ie; "science can't disprove it so it must be true" This trumping using the percieved status quo as the default position is unbelievably childlike reasoning for adults . . . which underscores the power of the fear.

    Let's be honest . . . if Noah didn't build an ark in a global flood . . . then Jesus wasn't the son of God, didn't walk on water, and didn't come back from the dead. These things are scientifically (method) impossible, and need more than heresay before they can be touted as fact and foistered on others.

  • designs

    Think of how far medicine would have advanced if humans had not been trying to exorcise demons they thought caused illness.

  • OldGenerationDude

    Theists, if you don’t like what the atheists are saying, stop trying to change them.

    Atheists, if you don’t like it when the theists try to convert you, stop trying to change their beliefs.

    Do any of you know what changes all the time about Jehovah’s Witnesses? Their beliefs. The personal convictions of JWs change all the time with “new light” that the Governing Body has to spin in order to keep itself from looking like its lead others astray.

    Do you know what never changes about Jehovah’s Witnesses? Their attitude. They go on believing that they have sufficient education in the matters of which they speak, when in reality they’ve nothing of the sort. And they judge others and the convictions of others, labeling them as ignorant and demonizing them in spite of this.

    I don’t believe that many of us are willing to admit that we still have not made much progress detaching from the “I’m right/you’re wrong” scenario we proudly fed off of in Kingdom Halls. When we start demonizing each other’s viewpoints (calling the beliefs of others ignorance, for example) then we have moved from discussing the subject at hand to making ourselves feel good for the choices we have made and the new set of convictions we have adopted, all the while forgetting what we've come from.

    If we’re going to do that, I suggest we dress up in our Kingdom Hall finest, make up some tracts and magazines (some for the “science proves God false side” and some for the “Science is wrong, God is right side”) and stop pretending we are not Jehovah’s Witnesses anymore. Remember they always change from believing one thing to adopting something new while keeping the attitude.

    If we think we have had sufficient academic instruction to speak as we do, to judge like a Jehovah’s Witness and demonize the beliefs and convictions of others like a Jehovah’s Witness does, then guess what? If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck…

  • NewChapter


    There are many lurkers here. Some are still stuck in the cult, some are redefining themselves and their beliefs. I feel it is important for them to see these debates---to hear many points-of-view---and if they are leaning toward atheism, I feel it is important for them to see us supporting our stand without backing down to the notion that one should not discuss religion.

    I don't know where they will end up, but will not allow them to be presented with only half the story. If a believer makes a statement, I will challenge it. They don't get to offer these things unchecked. And I am sure they feel the same about me.

    When I came here, I was a very timid atheist. I was uncomfortable in my own skin. Then I read these debates and saw people like me acting without fear and with strong conviction, and they taught me I could hold my head up and embrace my new self instead of offering apology. Nobody enters these debates unless they want to. Although I do get irritated when someone comes along and chides us for debating at all. And many of us get ESPECIALLY irritated when someone compares people on this board to JW's--it's a cheap shot---and we have named it----Cofty's Law. This is the JWN version of Godwin's Law---which can be googled.

    You will not invalidate all that I have done and all that I stand for by calling me a de facto JW.

    Welcome to the board!

  • mrsjones5

    I'm with you OldG. The more I see this back and forth, the more I don't care. And I don't care if others don't agree with my feelings about this. I see entrenchment. But I suppose it's good for the lurkers who aren't used to the back and forth. This is what happens in the real world, people do a lot of talking to walls and don't always agree.

Share this