It is not a reliable way. This includes reasoning and making predictions without further testing. Faith is another way that a lot of Christian believers us to seek the truth. The faith based way of seeking the truth is different from the scientific method in that it can answer a lot of questions about the most important truths. (Religious-Science.com 2008) The truths about the purpose of life and that our creator, God wants us to be happy and that he has a plan for each one of us.
In a more simple way of putting it, they are both based off different aspects of human experience. Science explanations need to be based on evidence from examining the natural world. It is based on observations and experiments that are exinmed into further development or are abandoned completely for better experiments. Religion doesn't need to depend on the basis of evidence. Instead, it is involved on supernatural entities which cannot be explained by science.
Aquinas argued that the definition of God cannot be comprehended by humans. As humans are finite, and God is infinite, it is impossible for humans to make an accurate definition of God. Another issue with the ontological argument is its problems with proving existence just from a description. David Hume claimed that it was impossible to derive existence from a definition. Hume was an empiricist, and therefore believes that for something to exist, there must be evidence that can be accessed by the senses.
Christian Worldview Paper I Abstract It is true, knowledge and truth can in fact be sought out in different ways. The ways in which one may seek knowledge has a lot to do with their background or worldview. We all have opinions and biases based on what we have been taught or experienced A scientist will seek knowledge and base truth only on things that can be proven, by use of the scientific method. On the other hand Christians see truth as being what is God's word. There are people that feel the two can be integrated, but there are others that feel Christianity and science are not at all compatible.
They say that God does not exist in an objective and real sense; they do not think he is a real human entity existing in the world. For the Deist, God is the creator of the universe. God really exists but he does not and cannot intervene within the world. And lastly, for the Atheist, there is no God to bring about any kind of miracle. I myself am an Atheist, and therefore in my opinion believe miracles are impossible as all miracles are by, definition impossible if they claim to be the action of a deity.
Religion and science contribute to the world in many different ways. In the essay “In the Forest of Gombe” by Jane Goodall, Goodall discusses her insights on these two disparate beliefs through her experiences. Religion and science are sought to be “mutually exclusive” (Goodall 148); however, Goodall believes, as a scientist, you must think logically and empirically and, as a religious believer, you have to think intuitively or spiritually. Despite their differences, they are simply ways in looking at the world through different windows. Many scientists believe that science and religion should not entwine.
Stacey Snyder Professor McMichael Introduction to Philosophy April 08, 2014 Paley’s Teleological Argument In this paper, I will be discussing Paley’s teleological argument for the existence of God. This is a valid argument but in my opinion it is not enough to prove the existence of God. I believe that even if all the premises are true and they relate to the conclusion, which they do, that the argument can still be proven wrong by other theories. Paley’s teleological arguments, also called the design argument, attempts to prove that God exists by proving that God created the earth and created humans. Paley’s version of the argument is commonly recognized by the “watchmaker” analogy which is as follows.
Christ does not give us love, joy, peace, patience, and so forth. Christ is the gift and the giver! Nee also mentions that many Christians come to the “ Christ of the Scriptures for salvation and then they are bombarded with "things!" We have all these "spiritual things" we believe and do and the sum of them is our spiritual life. Nee expresses that we don't need more "spiritual things" we need Christ.
“Visions and voices are not caused by God but can be explained through science” Discuss. (35) A vision can be termed as an experience of seeing something or someone in a trance like state or as a supernatural apparition. When complimented by voices from religious figures it can be said to evoke an even deeper religious experience for believers. However, there exists much debate on what the catalyst is for these experiences; some would argue for God attempting to communicate through his creation, whereas others believe the answer lies in science. A vision and auditory related religious experience can occur in a person consciously or unconsciously.
I am not saying this because of the importance of Christianity, I am simply pointing out a fact of the difference in the two. I have never been asked this question before nor have I thought about a possible argument to back up the theory. On studying and researching into this question I would have to say I am leaning toward the fact that Christ resurrection is not a sign or miracle base on specific verses in the Bible itself. Not to say that right because it is an opinion, however as I stated above, Christ didn’t rise again as a sign to help those who did not believe. I have read that the eighth sign was called the “book of glory” being the resurrection of Christ [2] instead of the miraculous catch of the fish.