Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Science and Religion Have Never Been Enemies

williampoulos.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 77 posts

Re: Science and Religion Have Never Been Enemies

#61

Post by andrewmcwatters »

dragonwriter wrote: post #56
andrewmcwatters wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but the Trinity isn’t multiple gods.

Well, yeah, that's what Christians claiming to be Abrahamic monotheists claim. Non-Christian Abrahamic monotheists often strenuously disagree. EDIT: to be clear, I am a Christian and believe the Trinity isn't multiple Gods (and neither is, say, the veneration of saints.) But I am also not gatekeeping clearly Abrahamic-in-descent faiths from the Abrahamic family tree on the basis of whether or not they posit the exist…

We disagree on what is “clearly Abrahamic[…].”

There is still no Jewish faith to my knowledge that is polytheistic. If you have material to share that provides evidence otherwise, I’d be interested in reading it, but Judaism isn’t Yahwism. That’s not gatekeeping, that’s… reading.

Mono- and polytheism isn’t slippery. You either believe in one god or multiple gods. There’s little to dissect there.

Re: Science and Religion Have Never Been Enemies

#62

Post by rockemsockem »

jononomo wrote: post #28
rockemsockem wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't exactly sound like the type of person who would have needed convincing that atheism is not "a serious hypothesis". So are you really someone who can declare that with any credibility? This also feels like terminology nitpicking. Plenty of scientists are agnostic instead of explicitly atheists, but they tend to be just as unreligious.

The existence of life is a straightforward and definitive proof for the existence of God.

If that's your argument, then we have nothing to discuss. Go on thinking that. I will go on not thinking that.

Re: Science and Religion Have Never Been Enemies

#63

Post by rockemsockem »

jononomo wrote: post #48
kbrkbr wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A proof is usually some premises together with a conclusion, such that the premises are true or accepted, and it is not possible that the premises are true while the conclusion is not - usually for formal reasons. I don't see why "life exists and no god exists" should be a contradiction for formal or other reasons. Furthermore: the existence of which god? As you know there and have been many religions with different…

Thank you. The fact that it cannot be true that "life exists and no god exists" sums up the situation perfectly. We can determine the truth of this statement empirically due to our understanding of information science, entropy, chemistry, and physics.

I think you misread the comment you replied to.

Re: Science and Religion Have Never Been Enemies

#64

Post by NoZebra120vClip »

lgvln wrote: post #59
lgvln wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider me ignorant, how would you "interpret" the narrative in a way that is compatible with modern science?

> That's not a goal of interpretation. You don't start by saying "let me make this compatible with 'modern science', whatever that is." Its chief literary genre is allegory, if that helps. Perfect. To summarise: the genesis creation narrative can never be wrong. It is an allegorical narrative with no factual value. Despite having no factual value, one can be mistaken about it. The burden of proof lies not with the cl…

> allegorical narrative with no factual value

I wrote that your so-called facts have no value in regards to Genesis. Genesis is quite factual--that's why it can never be wrong.

Re: Science and Religion Have Never Been Enemies

#65

Post by QuadmasterXLII »

mrguyorama wrote: post #46
QuadmasterXLII wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its basic deductive logic, i have no idea how atheists don’t see it

Do you regularly provide commentary to your own arguments with strangers?

The purpose of the comment break was to add comedic timing, but I see how it could look like fake additional support for my view. I will stick to one comment going forward.

Re: Science and Religion Have Never Been Enemies

#66

Post by defrost »

m-theory wrote: post #27
defrost wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ones that crowd source funds to build rockets to 'disprove' the round earth belief? Genius spruikers, exuberant showmen, I-can't-believe-you-fell-for-their-spiel operators. For the most part. The remainder are just plain crazy of the kind that can rote learn and regurgitate a four year ritual incantation exam course without deviation into critical thinking.

Surely you've met people who were genuinely intelligent and accomplished who still held on to dumb beliefs?

Sure.

However you specifically asked about Flat Earthers .. and while I won't deny there are some genuine believers in a flat earth out there my experience is that most self described flat earthers with actual university engineering degrees from modern western culture are glorious LARP'ers keeping a straight face and pulling legs.

Much as I believe in a hyperbolic inverted universe within a hollow earth.

I mean, the math checks out, right?

https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:14770298

( Christian engineers are a whole other ball of wax .. but flat earthers that passed kinematics with varying mass from fuel loss to achieve escape velocity ... c'mon now )

Re: Science and Religion Have Never Been Enemies

#67

Post by m-theory »

defrost wrote: post #66
m-theory wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely you've met people who were genuinely intelligent and accomplished who still held on to dumb beliefs?

Sure. However you specifically asked about Flat Earthers .. and while I won't deny there are some genuine believers in a flat earth out there my experience is that most self described flat earthers with actual university engineering degrees from modern western culture are glorious LARP'ers keeping a straight face and pulling legs. Much as I believe in a hyperbolic inverted universe within a hollow earth. I mean, the…

Maybe I should have used a better example then. Like Newton and alchemy maybe? My point was more you can be intelligent, educated, etc. and still have dumb beliefs. I agree with you about the flat earther stuff.

Funnily enough, I used to work on a project called Hollow Earth. That team loved to joke around with conspiracy theories.

Re: Science and Religion Have Never Been Enemies

#68

Post by NoZebra120vClip »

andrewmcwatters wrote: post #61
dragonwriter wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, yeah, that's what Christians claiming to be Abrahamic monotheists claim. Non-Christian Abrahamic monotheists often strenuously disagree. EDIT: to be clear, I am a Christian and believe the Trinity isn't multiple Gods (and neither is, say, the veneration of saints.) But I am also not gatekeeping clearly Abrahamic-in-descent faiths from the Abrahamic family tree on the basis of whether or not they posit the exist…

We disagree on what is “clearly Abrahamic[…].” There is still no Jewish faith to my knowledge that is polytheistic. If you have material to share that provides evidence otherwise, I’d be interested in reading it, but Judaism isn’t Yahwism. That’s not gatekeeping, that’s… reading. Mono- and polytheism isn’t slippery. You either believe in one god or multiple gods. There’s little to dissect there.

Well, someone's already brought up the Latter-Day Saint movement, which has interesting features:

  - LDS claim to be Christian
  - LDS claim to believe in the Trinity
  - LDS have added to Sacred Scripture and claim that Divine Revelation is ongoing
  - LDS are, in fact, henotheistic, which is a little bit of slip between mono- and poly-. LDS believe that God the Father, and Jesus as well, were once mortal beings who achieved *theosis*, becoming gods, and ruling their own planets, which is the same that LDS men can aspire to: becoming gods and rulers of planets in their own right, in the celestial kingdom, with their wives by their side.
  - LDS use a lot of the same words but with significantly different meanings. It is for this reason that Christians have judged the LDS baptism "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit", as a non-Christian, non-Trinitarian ceremony without effect, because even when using the same words, LDS are *saying and believing something entirely different*.
  - Joseph Smith established an interesting syncretism among Second Temple Judaism (as he understood it), Restorationist Christianity in the USA, and Freemasonry. Mormonism is Abrahamic, insofar as all those influences are Abrahamic as well, but nobody can rightly call Mormonism "monotheistic", given their doctrine of mortal men becoming gods.

Re: Science and Religion Have Never Been Enemies

#69

Post by NoZebra120vClip »

tnecniv wrote: post #51
jjaken wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on the dogma. For some christian sects the old testament is genuinely a fable. It isn’t necessarily the religion, or spirituality more generally, that is opposed to science or rationality, but the dogma and way the spirituality/religion is taught/practiced.

That’s what they taught us in Catholic school as a kid. The Old Testament was a combination of parables and oral history before eventually being recorded. Moreover, we were taught that part of the significance of the Crucifixion was that it was to establish a new pact between humans and God, hence Jesus doing away with the old rules and commandments and Jesus commanding that the faith be spread beyond ethnic Jews.

That's very sad, but not so surprising, that Catholic schools would teach things that the Catholic Church has never taught. That's usually one more brick in the wall for kids who leave the faith, because their illusions are shattered by teachers and clergy who don't really believe in Church doctrines, and couldn't be bothered to pass down the Truth to children who are eager to know it.
Post reply on HN