This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: "https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr"

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
jump to last post 1-10 of 10 discussions (54 posts)

Religion should accept all truthful laws discovered by science

  1. profile image60
    paarsurreyposted 7 years ago

    All scientific truthful laws discovered by science are to be accepted by Religion as they are derived from the nature or the universe- the Work of the Creator-God; it is not that nature is run by the science or scientific laws; but that the science has attuned with nature- the Work of the Creator-God.

    1. goldenpath profile image70
      goldenpathposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Negative.  An observer of science would know that even scientific breakthroughs and discoveries are always changing and being modified.  New theories are developed which lead to further truths.  Most all science is a matter of personal interpretation just like religious beliefs.  To be at peace one must foster the foundation of faith right along with the open mind to new science information.

      1. Cagsil profile image81
        Cagsilposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        The reason for new theories is because objectivity testing is done, so as to ensure consistency. This opens new discoveries.
        This is inaccurate. Science is not open to subjectivity, because it requires objectivity. It isn't a belief, it is a test idea that is formulated and confirmed to be true. Beliefs are not confirmed in any manner of speaking.
        This I would agree with, because faith is a requirement for living.

        1. goldenpath profile image70
          goldenpathposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Well, that's one point then that we can agree on.  Cheers for New Year's! smile  I see your point though.  We just approach it differently.  For instance there are some scientific facts that I am able to justify with my faith though common Christianity won't advocate it.  It takes a broader view of both science and faith in order to see how the two work in concert.  This would include the science realms of carbon dating, antimatter and many other areas.

          1. Cagsil profile image81
            Cagsilposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            I'm sure my version of "faith" is probably not yours, But I'll leave it at that. Have a good holidays and be safe Goldenpath. smile

            1. goldenpath profile image70
              goldenpathposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              You to!  I'll tone down on the egg nogg.  After all, someone's got to drive.. smile

          2. profile image60
            paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            I agree with your above words.

        2. profile image60
          paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          I also agree with it.

        3. profile image60
          paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Yes; but my point is that the results of the tests of science are ultimately verified with the laws of nature already in existence; so the nature is ultimate master of the science as it is set on a system by the Creator-God Allah YHWH.

          1. Cagsil profile image81
            Cagsilposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Nice conjecture Paar.

      2. profile image60
        paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        What is negative in my post? Please elaborate.

        1. pennyofheaven profile image80
          pennyofheavenposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          I think he meant no when he said negative? I could be wrong?

      3. profile image60
        paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        I agree with it.

    2. Greek One profile image77
      Greek Oneposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Exactly!!  Good point Paar!

    3. Joy56 profile image78
      Joy56posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      As far as I know they do

  2. hanging out profile image56
    hanging outposted 7 years ago

    what i love about this question is that it allows me to share this.

    the laws of motion.
    we all know the laws of motion are dependant upon another law of motion. The billiard ball effect. The amount of speed and distance a billiard ball will roll depends on the force behind the billiard ball.
    But what caused the billiard ball to move at all?

    The laws of motion tell us what will happen AFTER the billiard ball is stricken but the laws of motion will not move an inert anything at anytime because they are powerless to do so.

    If we consider the universe to have fumbled itself into place because of the big bang THEORY and everything settled according to the gravity that grabbed it first that is fine, but with everything there is eventually a settling activity where the motion or force runs out of steam and things stop.
    Has the universe stopped? No. Does it all follow the same motion? NO.

    hence, my toilet will not flush itself i have to push the lever

    1. pennyofheaven profile image80
      pennyofheavenposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Not sure what your point is? How do you mean stop? Because it appears to not be moving? Apparently the expanding universe expands because of the empty space. So with regards to the empty space is that stopped or.. just appears that way?

      1. profile image60
        paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        What I have understood from hanging out is that in the empty space there will be no friction; so the things one started moving should be moving with the same speed as it started with the Big Bang; while the things have to settle down at some point in time; but why?

        I am an ordinary man; I will request those who are science people to explain it in a very simple and natural way; the nature is very simple and beautiful!

        1. pennyofheaven profile image80
          pennyofheavenposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Perhaps with our limited perception it only appears to have settled down. Empty looks empty to us but it might just be actually full.

          1. profile image60
            paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Full of what?

            1. pennyofheaven profile image80
              pennyofheavenposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              Everything and nothing. Pure potential.

        2. Paraglider profile image94
          Paragliderposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          The Universe is still expanding from the big bang, but not at its original speed, because there is a retarding force of gravity trying to pull everything back to the gravitational centre of mass of the Universe, (which is the site of the original big bang).

          Hope that helps?

          1. profile image60
            paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            You mean all the mass did not explode and spread outward; most of it is still in the cente of the Big Bang pulling the expanding universe backward?

            Thanks and regards

            1. Paraglider profile image94
              Paragliderposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              No. The centre of mass of a football is right at the centre of the ball, even though there's nothing there but air. The mass is all in the plastic.

              When something explodes, the mass flies in all directions equally, so the centre of mass doesn't move.

              1. profile image60
                paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                Is the gravitational pull of the mass or not? If it is of the mass, then it should spread with the mass when exploded; and if the centre is empty after the explosion, it should have no more any gravitational pull.

                Thanks and regards

                1. Paraglider profile image94
                  Paragliderposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Think of it this way. Every piece of matter in the universe is attracted to every other piece, by gravity. If I am somewhere near the edge of the universe, I'm being 'pulled' in every direction by the gravitational attraction of everything else in the universe. But the net resultant of these billions of attractive forces is always towards the centre of mass of the whole universe. This is easily proved by calculus, but not quite so easy to prove in simple words.

                  1. profile image60
                    paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                    Thanks

            2. Beelzedad profile image55
              Beelzedadposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              There is no such thing as the "center of the Big Bang" - every point in the universe can be considered the center if you wish, but this holds no meaning whatsoever, obviously. smile

              1. profile image60
                paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                Thanks

    2. profile image60
      paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with it.

      What do the Scientists tell us about this phenomenon? Please

    3. profile image60
      paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with you.
      Here comes in the religion;and tells us that the Big Bang started by the words "to be" from the Creator-God Allah YHWH and the universe and the life started evolving.
      Science does not explain it, exactly.

    4. profile image60
      paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      How would the Atheists explain this phenomenon? Please

    5. ediggity profile image60
      ediggityposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The Force from whatever struck the billiard ball caused it to roll in motion.  The Laws of Motion Specifically state that there is no Force required to keep that ball in motion. The Laws of motion absolutely tell you what will happen to the ball before it is struck, because the ball has mass, and so does whatever struck it.  What you are referring to is an elastic collision.  We can predict what will happen to that billiard ball based on whatever we decide to hit it with.

      An object at rest will remain at rest unless acted upon by an outside unbalanced force.

      http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/elacol.html

      1. pennyofheaven profile image80
        pennyofheavenposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Predicted only if your aim is correct!

        1. ediggity profile image60
          ediggityposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          I guess I should have mentioned the angle of incidence plays a big part also, provided you put no "English" or hop on the ball.

  3. kess profile image60
    kessposted 7 years ago

    The truth is neither of the two understands Truth, if they did they would not exist.

    So how can they reconcile their differences

  4. Cagsil profile image81
    Cagsilposted 7 years ago

    Religion, mysticism should just simply die out. No need for it to accept science.

    Science is the exploration of reality. It discovers different things of reality, so people can learn what's real and what's not, and understand the difference.

    Just a thought.

    1. profile image60
      paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with your above words.

  5. profile image54
    exorterposted 7 years ago

    I have never seen religion not believe scientific facts, religion does not argue, people do

  6. profile image60
    paarsurreyposted 7 years ago

    OK; the Religious people should accept all truthful laws discovered by science as they only tend to repeat what the nature is already working on since the Creator-God commanded the Universe and the life in it with the words "to be" and it started evolving.

  7. SpanStar profile image61
    SpanStarposted 7 years ago

    Can't go along with this ideology.  It would be foolish indeed to blindly accept that which has been discovered by mankind.  The discoveries are interpretations by people and I can't tell you how many times mankind has gotten them wrong before they get it right.

    The people years ago in the Salem Witch hunts actually believed they were correct in torturing innocent people because they truly believe in things like witches and in more modern times people believed that people were superior and inferior based on their brain size.

    No.. you won't find me believing in the discovery of mankind simple because they say this is the way it has to be.

  8. ahorseback profile image79
    ahorsebackposted 7 years ago

    Why is it that there lies an uncanny agenda by non-believers to not only disprove christianity to themselves but also to those who do believe. If you don't want to believe in a god........fine! don't!  But it interests me that you don't want others to believe ! And that for some unknown reason , you have to state you're disapproal of others. ? Any Answers for  this? Or is it plain and simple envy .

    1. Cagsil profile image81
      Cagsilposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I would have to say that it stems from the selfish position of believing in a god. Christianity doctrine tells one to be selfless and since it isn't defined on "how"- it turns people selfish. It's an automatic process dictated by human nature.

      If there are more selfish people in the world then the world will not improve, but only get worse. wink

      1. ahorseback profile image79
        ahorsebackposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        That sounds kind of lame , I'll have to read it again.

        1. Cagsil profile image81
          Cagsilposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          It sounds lame? Selfish people destroy things more than anything else. How is this lame? It's proven that selfish people do in fact ruin their own life. And, it's unfortunate when that happens, because then it hurts those who are connected to them as well.

    2. pennyofheaven profile image80
      pennyofheavenposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Perhaps one believes it is their duty to inform the (in their eyes) uninformed. It is human conditioning to believe "my" way is the "right" way and any other way is wrong.

      We all see and understand things differently. Having an open mind and realizing that we actually do no know a lot might prevent us from trying to disprove anothers belief and look more to understanding them.

      1. profile image60
        paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Like the religionists the Atheists also want as pennyofheaven has rightly pointed out "my" way is the "right" way and any other way is wrong.

        Man being social; even the Atheists think it is their moral duty not only to inform the "uninformed", in their eyes, but to insist to join their band wagon, very religiously.

        The Atheists, please!

    3. SpanStar profile image61
      SpanStarposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Ahorseback,

         I'm sure if your comments are directed to me but if they are then let me say my comments are not that of a non-believer but in fact a believer.  The question presented ask about believers believing in things of science and my position is that science is the interpretation of man who doesn't always get things right.

      1. profile image60
        paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this



        I agree with you.

        One may interpret the things incorrectly; an individual could make mistakes; so can men collectively make mistakes.

    4. profile image60
      paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      They have a free will; don't they?

  9. ahorseback profile image79
    ahorsebackposted 7 years ago

    Uhh , so you're saying believing in god is selfish , No I don't think this is lame  , I think its the ultimate non-answer to my question.

  10. ahorseback profile image79
    ahorsebackposted 7 years ago

    Its just that your equating selfishness and Christianity? That makes no sense , Even "evolution" is in  limbo right now as to the lineage of man , turns out its not such a sraight line. And that possibly  the evolution of man isn' so securely defined.? So , My question still......why is it not ok to just let believers be ?  And why such a mission to "dis-prove" believers.

    1. fits3x100 profile image53
      fits3x100posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      God Bless you ahorseback!!! Why indeed. What's the worst thing that could happen? You'd have neighbors that believe that they need to love you as they love themselves? Lock the house honey!!!

    2. profile image60
      paarsurreyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      There is no harm in having a little tolerance and equipping with the reasonable arguments to defend one's faith. After all it were the Christians who started with the missions; now if they have been countered, they should not mind. Human beings are social; they should not be denied this faculty. Have a heart; please.

 
working