Should We Thank God For Scientific Discoveries?

[headinhands]

Hello Daftme

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

headinhands I would personally would persist a bit more with the medicine, have done in real life (though only with a course of antibiotics, involving jam!). As I said the body, and indeed the mind can protest but the spirit be willing.

and to say viruses and bacteria are in and of themselves 'bad' is egocentric in the extreme. the world and everything in it wasn't created for us, you know. they're simply passing on dna just like us.

austenozzy We don't have corporeal bodies in Heaven.

austenozzy What can I say? We have different belief systems..Jesus cursed a tree.

Daftdame- I have to ask this. Please don't be offended, but you have to understand how what you say sounds, and there are some strange people on Mumsnet at the moment. Are you genuine? Because it almost sounds as if you are trying to put people off Christianity rather than the other way round.

Oh, yes I am.

So even you as a flawed human would see it as morally wrong to not over-ride the baby's free will. But it's okay for god to back off and go 'whoa whoa whoa. This 4 week old baby doesn't want to get better. I'm not healing him'. How does that make sense? Would god hold that dr accountable for letting the baby die even of he does the same?

God forgives and this subject matter is too emotive for me to pursue a conversation about it at this time for any longer.

also quite convenient.

Absolutely not.

Even if god exists, as I understand it we're pretty much on our own aren't we? After all, apparently we can't blame god for all the bad things that happen so why should he get the credit for the good stuff?

No problem Dame.

What is spontaneous remission?

It's when people get better when they were ill. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_remission

So it could be a miracle?

Do you mean a miracle as in god intervening on earth as opposed to a miracle as in a rare event?

What would be a good way of deciding it was an actual act of god?

The first problem I can see with someone trying to see spontaneous remissions as acts of god is that there are different statistics for certain types of cancers. It would seem that god is more likely to heal one type over another? That would be difficult to explain without doing some 'in reverse' thinking to get it to fit.

The god one.

What would be a good way of deciding it wasn't an actual act of god?

It's for you to bring the goods to the table. You're the one making the spectacular claim which has no evidence. If I told you that I posses the ability to fly unaided would it be for me to prove it or for you to disprove it?

Well, if they are miracles I don't think much of God, frankly. Why would he only cure a very specific and limited range of illnesses?

I have a sensible, ratio al explanation that fits the scientific knowledge e have at the moment. I don't have to prove anything. It's for the people putting forward the supernatural explanations who have something to prove.

I have made no claims of miracles. What I am saying is that in face of the unknown, you are automatically ruling something out based on your belief, not knowledge, that there is no such thing as god.

There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of a God. There is lots of evidence that ther isn't. I can't obviously say for absolutely certain that there is no god- in th same way I can't say for absolutely certain that the sun will rise tomorrow. But I am asu sure as it is possible to be that there and it will. Because that is the logical and rational position to take. The onus of proof is on the person putting forward the fantastical, supernatural solution.

Curlew what evidence do you have that god doesn't exist?

Do you believe in a specific god Dion?

In the face of the unknown wouldn't it be logical to say we don't know instead of making stuff up.