“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.
Another person who also criticized some of the religious views was Pierre Bayle. Bayle argued that religion and morality were not necessarily linked. The Enlightenment also developed around the belief that scientific thought and expression should be free from religious interference and that the foundations of society should be human reason and logic. The Enlightenment’s relationship with God and the individual was more rational and distant leading to the idea of Deism. Deism became very popular in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries during the Enlightenment.
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.
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.
From the evidence provided earlier, it can be seen that in fact, religion and science are not two opposing powers offering different explanations for the same events, but merely two entities asking entirely different questions(The Godless Paladin 2009). Science seeks to answer objective ‘how’ questions, and uses public, repeatable data in order to explain exactly how we came to be. Instead, religion asks personal ‘why’ questions about the meaning and purpose of our lives and about our ultimate origin and destiny. It explores the existence of beauty and the experiences of our soul, including the emotions humankind feels(Barbour 1990). Therefore, it can be seen that a contextual interpretation of the Judeo-Christian creation story, which seeks to uncover the religious truth contained within, is compatible with modern scientific theory, as it asks a different question to the one science
One might say that Dawkins’s view of Darwinism is a strict set of basic ideas and principles, embodying the definition of fundamentalism. While neither Graffin nor Dawkins deliver a completely consistent worldview, Graffin’s worldview seems to contain fewer fundamentalism characteristics than Dawkins’s. Dawkins’s view resembles the view of fundamentalist scientists and Darwinists. Although he claims he would change his views if evidence were to appear that God did exists, he seems set in his ways and resistant to other worldviews, which makes his claim hard to believe. Graffin does a better, though imperfect, job of embracing other
Therefore, it supports a focus for fair science project questions, hypothesis, and designs that perform and assess the experiment. It is unfortunate that from a Christian worldview perspective, many Christians accept that Christianity is non-scientific. Why? They stand on the biblical principle that “all truth is Gods’ truth.” This researcher finds this statement to true and accurate as a fellow Christian, although some Christians stand by it without thoroughly researching the
The counter argument to this though, is that animals do not fall under his jurisdiction and so the brutality that is nature is out of his control. God can only then make humans all good; which is apparent to be untrue (war, rape, murder.) In effect, Gould has showed that there could very validly be no active god. Whichever way a person’s belief systems lean, this paper by Stephen Jay Gould is a very insightful read into one way of thinking. Whether that means it solely educates those who firmly believe in god that there are other views, or it converts a person to non religious views, it is a worthwhile read.
Religious experience The key issues: ← Are religious experiences veridical, i.e., of something transcendent/supernatural? ← Are religious experiences different from other (sense) experiences? ← Can religious experience be verified/checked? ← Are religious experiences too diverse to be judged reliably? ← Can religious experiences be “explained away” by science?
“It would be misleading to think that all these factors influenced all scientists to the same degree. However, a major component of anyone’s theoretical outlook is his religious worldview (which could be atheism or agnosticism, as well as a traditional religion). Worldview had a far more significant influence on the origin of old-earth geology than has often been perceived or acknowledged. A person’s worldview not only affects the interpretation of the facts but even the observation of the facts. Another prominent historian of science rightly comments about scientists and non-scientists: ‘men often perceive what they expect, and overlook what they do not wish to