Should We Thank God For Scientific Discoveries?

(173 Posts)
headinhands Mon 12-Aug-13 22:12:24

Hello Daftme

You say we should thank god for scientific advancements. I say what makes you think they have anything to do with god?

daftdame Tue 13-Aug-13 16:24:32

The interrelation between psychological state and physiological brain development, also epigenetic changes would illustrate the complex nature in causality between physiology, thought (belief), and behaviour.

curlew Tue 13-Aug-13 16:24:37

"curlew I have not pursued this scientifically, as I have said I am content with my faith.

Miracles are, by definition, supernatural. However all that means is that they do not conform to the 'laws of nature' which we don't fully understand yet.

How can we prove or disprove something we don't understand? We can only believe or deny it has happened."

So what constitutes a miracle then?

austenozzy Tue 13-Aug-13 16:25:52

Riiight. So we should discount all of the discoveries and studies mentioned in the article because you're concerned that the data-sets used therein might not be large enough to yield statistics that are reliably representative? Next stop: god did it.

You're claiming the spiritual cause of these things. You made the claim, the burden of evidence is upon you, not me. Still waiting.

austenozzy Tue 13-Aug-13 16:28:18

curlew - here's a miracle for you. Can't be explained, so we can guess who created this!

www.bestweekever.tv/bwe/images/2008/10/CARROT%20PEEN.jpg

daftdame Tue 13-Aug-13 16:31:28

The general definition of miracle is an event that is supernatural, it surpasses all known human knowledge.

austenozzy Tue 13-Aug-13 16:34:10

So is it a known unknown, or an unknown unknown, seeing as it's not a known known? ;-)

(Who was the american politician who came out with all that?)

daftdame Tue 13-Aug-13 16:35:58

austen I carry no burden.

I speak about my belief concerning my Faith, which is faith that is, believed but not proven...

daftdame Tue 13-Aug-13 16:39:00

austen The answer to your question is it could be both.

curlew Tue 13-Aug-13 16:42:38

Daftdame- tell me about a miracle that's happened in the last 50 years.

austenozzy Tue 13-Aug-13 16:46:24

Has the last-but-one Pope been made a saint yet? Here are the miracles he performed - after death, so he must've been a good un - in order to be made a saint:

news.sky.com/story/1110665/pope-john-paul-ii-to-become-a-saint

daftdame Tue 13-Aug-13 17:00:29

Miracles have to be believed really...they are a mystery, what proof would you require?

austenozzy Tue 13-Aug-13 17:13:48

Well, in the case of the nun that was 'cured' by a dead pope, I would like to see evidence that she was actually sick in the first place (currently not the case, it seems). If it then can be shown that she had been cured (and not spontaneously free of the disease as can happen with cancer and AIDS, for example), then that's a strong contender!

daftdame Tue 13-Aug-13 17:20:34

austenozzzy How do you show someone is cured and not spontaneously free of disease?

headinhands Tue 13-Aug-13 17:44:51

It's an oldie but a goody but how come you never hear of amputees having their limbs spontaneously regrow? In the future, if and when science makes this possible, that's when god will start doing it I guess.

curlew Tue 13-Aug-13 17:59:56

"austenozzzy How do you show someone is cured and not spontaneously free of disease?"

Well, being cured of a disease that doesn't have a history of spontaneous remissions would be a good start.........

headinhands Tue 13-Aug-13 18:06:08

daftdame. So when a baby dies that's been prayed for its because the baby didn't have sufficient faith? confused

daftdame Tue 13-Aug-13 18:07:57

I bet the people with the disease would be very thankful to be cured, whether the disease had a history of spontaneous remissions or not!

daftdame Tue 13-Aug-13 18:12:59

headinhands As I said before death can be merciful if someone is suffering.

curlew Tue 13-Aug-13 18:18:57

Ah. No prospect of any serious conversation or debate here. What a shame.

headinhands Tue 13-Aug-13 18:20:42

As I said before death can be merciful if someone is suffering.

Wouldn't healing them be more merciful?

You're in front of a dying person, they are riddled with cancer. You have a cure that can restore them to full health. Give me scenarios where it's more merciful to not give them the cure.

daftdame Tue 13-Aug-13 18:26:02

Hey, what can I say? Christianity involves faith it not about debating.

I came onto the thread because headinhands said she'd love to discuss the Bible with me on a new thread. I have spoken about the Bible and my faith.

HTH.

curlew Tue 13-Aug-13 18:29:22

"Hey, what can I say? Christianity involves faith it not about debating."

Jesus seemed up for a good debate........

curlew Tue 13-Aug-13 18:30:12

And He wasn't all that keen on blind faith either.

daftdame Tue 13-Aug-13 18:34:47

headinhands If a person is 'weak in faith', not used to exercising their faith muscle if you like, fear could get the better of them, especially if they are in pain or very weak. They might not even know God is willing to heal them, I believe He is. There is not always someone with powerful enough faith, to enable them to use the faith they have, to receive healing. I do not believe God wants us to suffer.

daftdame Tue 13-Aug-13 18:36:01

curlew But I suspect you do not agree with Jesus either...please correct me if I'm wrong.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now