I don?t see any problem with Aquafire?s posts here.
Over the last few hundred years, some have seen science as lifting the veil on, what they view as, false religious theory and as fundamentally replacing it. And certainly the church has had to adjust to scientific discoveries. This does not disprove the existence of God, however. It only proves that our understanding of God and his rules has been incomplete. Most churches today have no problem accommodating science, even on issues such as evolution.
On the flip side of the question, as scientific discoveries advance, we are becoming aware of areas that are, and may always remain, unpredictable and mysterious. While this may not prove the existence of God ? something that is, in any case, a matter of faith, not proof ? it does fill some of us with the wonder of God?s creation. Allow us that.
Thank-you Chinney. Eloquent as ever.
So Foxy, If you don't mind my borrowing Chinney's statements...
It turns out from the Quantum perspective that the universe & everything in it is profoundly mysterious in that the sum is greater than the number of its parts.
Or if you will allow me another phrase..
The universe is an enigma, wrapped in a riddle, folded into a puzzle and open to mystery..
That's what is so awesome & beautifully intoxicating..
I think some of us feel the world we live in and the people who live on it... are amazing things to behold as they are. Not as some grand creation.
Giving a god credit for something that is truly amazing seems to do a disservice to nature and the universe itself.
That's the point. How do you personify nature and the universe? Why give 'nature' and the 'universe' credit? Credit for what? Putting a face, so to speak, on the physical world is basically a belief in a super-being beyond our scope of understanding, i.e. God?.
Comments
Originally posted by Chinney
I don?t see any problem with Aquafire?s posts here.
Over the last few hundred years, some have seen science as lifting the veil on, what they view as, false religious theory and as fundamentally replacing it. And certainly the church has had to adjust to scientific discoveries. This does not disprove the existence of God, however. It only proves that our understanding of God and his rules has been incomplete. Most churches today have no problem accommodating science, even on issues such as evolution.
On the flip side of the question, as scientific discoveries advance, we are becoming aware of areas that are, and may always remain, unpredictable and mysterious. While this may not prove the existence of God ? something that is, in any case, a matter of faith, not proof ? it does fill some of us with the wonder of God?s creation. Allow us that.
Thank-you Chinney. Eloquent as ever.
So Foxy, If you don't mind my borrowing Chinney's statements...
It turns out from the Quantum perspective that the universe & everything in it is profoundly mysterious in that the sum is greater than the number of its parts.
Or if you will allow me another phrase..
The universe is an enigma, wrapped in a riddle, folded into a puzzle and open to mystery..
That's what is so awesome & beautifully intoxicating..
& sublime...
cheers.
Originally posted by chu_bakka
I think some of us feel the world we live in and the people who live on it... are amazing things to behold as they are. Not as some grand creation.
Giving a god credit for something that is truly amazing seems to do a disservice to nature and the universe itself.
That's the point. How do you personify nature and the universe? Why give 'nature' and the 'universe' credit? Credit for what? Putting a face, so to speak, on the physical world is basically a belief in a super-being beyond our scope of understanding, i.e. God?.