Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Science and faith: the conflict
Telegraph.co.uk ^ | 12:12PM GMT 16 Mar 2009 | Richard Gray

Posted on 04/04/2009 11:41:33 AM PDT by Cvengr

Brain-scanning experiments carried out by scientists last week revealed that religious faith is embedded deep within key parts of the brain. This suggests that belief in a higher power evolved at some early point in human history.

Scientists argued that it explained the widespread nature of religion among human cultures, but the findings also highlighted a growing tendency for science to be used as a way of attacking religion.

It comes at a time when the gulf between science and religion could not seem any wider.

...The mounting debate over evolution and creationism has now left many people asking whether science and religion can ever coexist, or even if scientific research will eventually bring an end to religious belief entirely. ...

(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Current Events; Religion & Culture; Religion & Science; Theology
KEYWORDS: faith; genome; science
Dr Francis Collins, former director of the Human Genome Project and a Christian, said he found no conflict between his work on genetics and the fact it helped prove Darwin's theories. He said: "Once you set aside an insistence on an ultra-literal interpretation of Genesis, you can arrive at a conclusion which is quite comfortable for me as a believer and as a scientist, that yes Darwin was right."

Be very cautious when people seek to counterfeit relationship with God, now on physical, soulish, and spiritual levels on their terms, instead of God's terms.

Conspiracy theorists have long accused the Human Genome Project as closely associated with demonic attempts to counterfeit the human for demonic habitation. While easily dismissed as lunatic fringe, every once in a while those at the heart of the Project tip their hand as to their intentions and modus operendi.

This area of research is likely to be aggressively pursued by anybody falling into the category of 'antichrist'.

If one believes atheistic socialism and totalitarian tyranny jeopardizes our physical and rational freedom, just wait until the same megalomaniacs seek control over the human spirit.

1 posted on 04/04/2009 11:41:34 AM PDT by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Quix

Ping


2 posted on 04/04/2009 11:41:54 AM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

Rubbish & lies. Just more premise-based “research” with unsupported assumption after assumption attempting to reduce people to little more than pondscum in their eyes. It’s fully intentional, and they have been pulling this kind of stunt for years. This is NOT what the experiment really showed, this is their narrow interpretation of it.


3 posted on 04/04/2009 11:44:25 AM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out (click my name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

I haven’t read their study, but finding a region of the brain generating feelings of faith no more disproves God’s existence than finding a region of the brain generating the sensation of purpleness proves rainbows don’t exist.


4 posted on 04/04/2009 11:48:31 AM PDT by TennesseeProfessor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out

I didn’t grasp all the details of the experiment, nor the testing performed. Is there a publicly available publication of their efforts?


5 posted on 04/04/2009 11:58:56 AM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out

Then why don’t you write a paper refuting this interpretation, and submit it for peer-review?

I am sure you have all the falsifiable evidence to support your assertion.


6 posted on 04/04/2009 12:00:05 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

“For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark age and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Therefore, put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand.” Ephesians 6:12,13.

The coming onslaught against Jesus and His Gospel message will hopefully be the last one which Christians must endure before He returns to judge the world.
Come quickly, Lord Jesus!


7 posted on 04/04/2009 12:01:33 PM PDT by kittymyrib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

if you knew how much stuff I have to do right now!


8 posted on 04/04/2009 12:05:51 PM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out (click my name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

“the findings also highlighted a growing tendency for science to be used as a way of attacking religion”

it’s right there in the article anyway


9 posted on 04/04/2009 12:06:43 PM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out (click my name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

They are different things.

This whole discussion is covered very well by A. S. Eddington in his essay “The Domain of Physical Science”.

Science does one thing: it measures pointer readings. Is the light on or off? How far did the ball fall?

That sort of stuff.

Religion and faith, on the other hand, talks about things science can’t measure. Truth. Beauty. Love. Hope.

Physical science looks at the bricks the building is made of. Mysticism and religion are about the patterns, the final architecture of the building.
Different things.


10 posted on 04/04/2009 12:13:03 PM PDT by djf (If Congress was a business, they'd all be in jail by now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out

And exactly what evidence do they have for this assertion?

And if they can refute the findings in this study why did they not submit that for peer-review?

That is how real science works.


11 posted on 04/04/2009 12:20:10 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

I don’t put my faith in science anymore. The things that’s I’ve read in the news papers or seen on TV that was supposed to be based on good science, only to be proven wrong years later are too numerous to count or remember.

Science seems to be like water. It’s liquid, ever changing. Or maybe much of it has to do with one’s political goals as to the outcome of one’s study. I don’t know.


12 posted on 04/04/2009 12:33:16 PM PDT by GloriaJane (http://www.last.fm/music/Gloria+Jane/_/Baseball+Apple+Pie+And+Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

it is WRONG.

If a scientists came & told me the sky was red, I would still know he was WRONG. I wouldn’t care if a million scientists all said the same thing. They would be WRONG, because I have a personal understanding that the sky is blue.


13 posted on 04/04/2009 12:33:45 PM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out (click my name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out

You failed to answer my question.

What evidence do you have to that it is wrong?


14 posted on 04/04/2009 12:52:33 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

Science and Faith are by definition at odds with each other.

Science means, don’t believe it if you can’t prove it.

Faith is about believing without proof or even in spite of proof.

Nevertheless, each human must believe in both science and faith, depending on the circumstances, to be an effective person today.


15 posted on 04/04/2009 1:05:56 PM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

Faith and Reason are complementary, not incompatible.


16 posted on 04/04/2009 1:08:44 PM PDT by MantillaMilitant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GloriaJane

I hope this information is helpful

“Science investigates difficult questions about unknown fields, and scientists are human, so it is inevitable that scientific findings will not be perfect. However, science works by investigating more and more, which means results get checked and rechecked with further findings. The reason some findings change is because they get corrected. This process of correction helps make science one of the most successful areas of human endeavor. The people who cannot be trusted are those who are always right.”

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA250.html

That is the beauty of science. If you think that you have a better explanation for a theory then you simply gather your evidence and submit a paper for peer-review.

If it withstands that review, and is published then the scientific community, as a whole will try to repeat your experiment and verify your findings.

If you show that your paper provides a better explanation, then it replaces the old one.

Science is not a stagnate thing it is a search for knowledge.

Here is a brief explanation of the peer-review process:

“What is peer review?

Science and engineering journals are a primary means by which engineers and scientists present their work. Before their work appears in a journal, experienced writers and reviewers know that a solo draft is only a draft and that the purpose of peer review is to stimulate the writer to rethink the entire document.

Definitions

Peer review is:

· the process scientists use to examine the work of fellow scientists before it is published or accepted within the scientific community.

· the process used by the scientific community to assess a scientific paper, report, project, or proposal by seeking comments on it from independent assessors (”peers”) working in the same field.

· the process by which manuscripts submitted to health, biomedical, and other scientifically oriented journals and other publications are evaluated by experts in appropriate fields (usually anonymous to the authors) to determine if the manuscripts are of adequate quality for publication.

· the procedure by which academic journal articles are reviewed by other researchers before being accepted for publication.

· written, critical response to a study, data, or report provided by scientists and other technically-qualified professionals.

http://astep.altarum.org/peer.html


17 posted on 04/04/2009 1:39:24 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

And what you posted to me all brakes down to just what I said.

Science seems to be like water. It’s liquid, ever changing.

Have a good one!


18 posted on 04/04/2009 2:48:02 PM PDT by GloriaJane (http://www.last.fm/music/Gloria+Jane/_/Baseball+Apple+Pie+And+Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GloriaJane

Yes it is, and that is a very good thing.

Nothing to fear, or mistrust scientific advancements helps make this a better world for all of us.

It would be very detrimental if science was unchanging, and stagnate.

Do you not agree?


19 posted on 04/04/2009 3:17:14 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: staytrue

The words faith and believe in the Greek as used in Scripture describing the essential element for eternal life through Christ, are from the same root.

Epistemologically, faith is not synonymous with divorcement from logic, truth, or rationality.

Science is hinged upon the reproducibility of conclusions of its hypotheses by empirical observation. If reproducible, some are tempted to substitute those conclusions as objects of faith. In many cases, perhaps temporally over years, decades, centuries, millennia, such assumptions never meet with contradiction in empirical observation. They then have utility as hasty solutions to managing empirical resources, but the scientific method fails to provide absolute truth, justice or righteousness in its assessments of all rational and spiritual phenomena.

It isn’t accurate to state faith is about believing without proof or even in spite of proof. That issue touches upon justification. In rationalism, a logical proof is used to justify the conclusions based upon logical rules of inference.

In regards to the human spirit, we are justified by faith alone in Christ alone.

This may appear to be an empty argument without an object of substance to the unbelieving mind, and frequently to the believer who has not yet grasped the significance of the spirit, until one is exposed to the spiritual domain where very real persons exist, including angels, both fallen and elect, as well as principalities, authorities, thrones, dominions, and other powers.

Faith is also not to be confused with psychological certainty, nor is belief, although when faith is coupled with volition, psychological certainty frequently accompanies its expression.


20 posted on 04/04/2009 3:28:37 PM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

...and if you have no peers other than God, of what use is science?


21 posted on 04/04/2009 3:29:52 PM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin
"Yes it is, and that is a very good thing."

Nothing to fear, or mistrust scientific advancements helps make this a better world for all of us.

It would be very detrimental if science was unchanging, and stagnate.

Do you not agree?"

No! I sure don't agree! There "is" something to fear when there is political motivation or monetary motivation driving some of the outcomes. I'd be a fool not to mistrust and take everything that is presented before me with a great big grain of salt. And I'm no fool.

Science is only as honest and trustworthy as those who present it to us.

22 posted on 04/04/2009 3:38:33 PM PDT by GloriaJane (http://www.last.fm/music/Gloria+Jane/_/Baseball+Apple+Pie+And+Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GloriaJane

And what examples do you have for the political, or monetary motivation?

That is why there is peer-review, that process will weed out any ulterior motives.

If you do not have the evidence to back up your hypothesis then it will not make it thru the peer-review process.


23 posted on 04/04/2009 5:25:27 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

So you are saying that science has been of no use to mankind?


24 posted on 04/04/2009 5:26:34 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

Nothing of the sort. Science has provided considerable good. But it’s good has already been played. It isn’t eternal.


25 posted on 04/04/2009 8:48:57 PM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

So there are no more scientific advances left to me made?

The advances in DNA do not continue to benefit us in the apprehension of criminals?

The updating of vaccines, and antibiotics are of no benefit?


26 posted on 04/05/2009 12:01:20 AM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin
So there are no more scientific advances left to me made?

Probably are.

The advances in DNA do not continue to benefit us in the apprehension of criminals?

Minimally. Which is more threatening, the use of tools of physical force to apprehend a criminal, or the use of genetic research to attempt to control thinking to prevent criminality?

The updating of vaccines, and antibiotics are of no benefit?

Sure it is, but independent of faith, such good works have already received their reward and are parlayed into evil by the Adversary.

27 posted on 04/05/2009 4:40:30 AM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

What examples do you have of this type of genetic research?

What do you mean, who is the adversary, and what is the evil?


28 posted on 04/05/2009 8:10:11 AM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

Torah and physics. No conflict here, or there, at all.


29 posted on 04/05/2009 8:50:39 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

“Brain-scanning experiments carried out by scientists last week revealed that religious faith is embedded deep within key parts of the brain. This suggests that belief in a higher power evolved at some early point in human history.” ... Sounds eerily like “Opening the box, we found an array of tubes and circuits which suggest that such items were developed early on in the evolution of communication.’ It never occurs to these types to wonder at the meaning of a specific physiological structure which just may be the spacetime receiver for ‘other’ messaging.


30 posted on 04/05/2009 9:03:34 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MantillaMilitant

Well stated, although perhaps not the dual of one another.


31 posted on 04/05/2009 4:53:55 PM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin
That is why there is peer-review, that process will weed out any ulterior motives.

Doesn't seem to work very well with global warming theories.

32 posted on 04/05/2009 4:56:00 PM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

Honestly, I am not as familiar with that subject as I should be.

What examples do you have that I can take a look at?


33 posted on 04/05/2009 6:44:01 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr
Doesn't seem to work very well with global warming theories.

But haven't they passed the 'peer review'?

34 posted on 04/05/2009 6:54:04 PM PDT by Just mythoughts (Bama and Company are reenacting the Pharaoh as told by Moses in Genesis!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

My first thought is, what a load of cr..!

I’ve seen that show me prof game so many times from democrats that it’s become a dead giveaway. And you know what? I don’t let democrats play silly head games with me.

It’s always the same. The dim bulbs try to show everyone, what they erroneously believe is their superior intelligence, by singling out a poster who disagrees with their point of view. Then they follow you around, ask for examples, they want you to give them articles, statistics, prof! of why you feel the way you feel, so they can try to make themselves feel superior to you.

I wont play that game. I will tell you though that I’ve seen science flip flop on so many issues over my life time that it’s a joke. But I don’t need to show you or any one else prof, or list statistics of all the examples that over the many years of my life have formed the belief system that I have.

A little piece of advice to all democrats. If you feel the need to try to prove your intelligence? Then it’s “YOU” that you are really trying to prove it to.


35 posted on 04/05/2009 8:00:18 PM PDT by GloriaJane (http://www.last.fm/music/Gloria+Jane/_/Baseball+Apple+Pie+And+Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GloriaJane

I do apologize if my post was taken the wrong way. I possibly could have worded it in a different manner

Believe me I am superior to no one. I am just trying to understand the basis you used to form your opinion.

I fully understand that this is a conservative form, and many of my personal views are very conservative.

I was raised in a very conservative republican household and still hold many of those beliefs

I guess we can just agree to disagree.

Thank you for your time, and Gold Bless America.


36 posted on 04/05/2009 8:24:44 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out
If a scientists came & told me the sky was red, I would still know he was WRONG. I wouldn’t care if a million scientists all said the same thing. They would be WRONG, because I have a personal understanding that the sky is blue.

I'm color blind, and I have a "personal understanding" about what color things are that other people assure me is quite wrong.

37 posted on 04/05/2009 8:31:39 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson