# Science v. Religion **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 28, 2005, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243 "2005-02-28T03:45:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2005, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/61 "2005-03-02T21:37:40Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > And even if it were, that would only demonstrate that a particular prophecy from a particular religious prediction did not occur. It would say absolutely nothing about other prophecies, or about religion in general. > [@Me](#): > > I don’t not have the two hours it would take to disprove every prophecy in every religion, so I will mention a few. > [@JThunder](#): > > Which particular passage are you describing? To the best of my knowledge, there are no Scriptural statements which say that there will never be any barren whatsoever women among the Jews. Deut, short for Deuteronomy. 7:14 Thou shalt be blessed above all people: there shall not be male or female barren among you, or among your cattle. > [@JThunder](#): > > Not at all. There is good reason to believe that your grandfather isn’t 900 years old. It is not so clear that there have been absolutely no religious prophecies that have come true. Yes, there is good reason to believe my pop-pop isn’t 900 years old. But I am free to argue that he is. He doesn’t believe he is, you say? He just doesn’t remember. He doesn’t look it? He’s exercises regularly. Now, I can catalog every prophecy that has ever been made, there being a finite number. It is not how I would want to spend my days. That is, unless any of the people here arguing for at least one prophecy been a real one would be willing to provide a generous salary. Otherwise, saying something as silly as “prophecy has come true” is like saying my Grandpa is 900+ years old. Oh, and I can defend anything I want. ---
**Author:** ![Onesimus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/edb3f5/32.png) [@Onesimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Onesimus)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2005, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/62 "2005-03-02T22:29:40Z")
**Scott Plaid:** When you are reading the bible it helps if you read things in their context, and not just pull verses out randomly from places. In the Genesis passage you quoted, it is true to say that on the day Adam ate the fruit he died in two ways: 1. On that day he was cut off from the tree of life, therefore putting him on an irreversable trajectory to his death. In a God acted to kill him on that day but the effects were not felt for some years. 2. On that day his relationship with God was also destroyed, and since God is life, then Adam, while he lived physically was spiritually dead. The Deutoronomy passage you just have to read in context. It is part of a conditional statement that essentially says that IF the nation of Israel follows God, then he will bless them. The fuller passage is > [@](#): > > "And because you listen to these rules and keep and do them, the LORD your God will keep with you the covenant and the steadfast love that he swore to your fathers. He will love you, bless you, and multiply you. He will also bless the fruit of your womb and the fruit of your ground, your grain and your wine and your oil, the increase of your herds and the young of your flock, in the land that he swore to your fathers to give you. You shall be blessed above all peoples. There shall not be male or female barren among you or among your livestock. (Deu7:12-14) Israel has never really fully followed the commands of God nor has any other nation. But anyway as an example of prophecy that has come true, I present Deutoronomy 28. Here God is telling the Israelites about what will happen if they obey the him, and what will happen if they disobey. Coming from the part about what will happen if they disobey comes this passage. > [@](#): > > Because you did not serve the LORD your God with joyfulness and gladness of heart, because of the abundance of all things, therefore you shall serve your enemies whom the LORD will send against you, in hunger and thirst, in nakedness, and lacking everything. And he will put a yoke of iron on your neck until he has destroyed you. The LORD will bring a nation against you from far away, from the end of the earth, swooping down like the eagle, a nation whose language you do not understand, a hard-faced nation who shall not respect the old or show mercy to the young. It shall eat the offspring of your cattle and the fruit of your ground, until you are destroyed; it also shall not leave you grain, wine, or oil, the increase of your herds or the young of your flock, until they have caused you to perish. "They shall besiege you in all your towns, until your high and fortified walls, in which you trusted, come down throughout all your land. And they shall besiege you in all your towns throughout all your land, which the LORD your God has given you. And you shall eat the fruit of your womb, the flesh of your sons and daughters, whom the LORD your God has given you, in the siege and in the distress with which your enemies shall distress you. The man who is the most tender and refined among you will begrudge food to his brother, to the wife he embraces, and to the last of the children whom he has left, so that he will not give to any of them any of the flesh of his children whom he is eating, because he has nothing else left, in the siege and in the distress with which your enemy shall distress you in all your towns. The most tender and refined woman among you, who would not venture to set the sole of her foot on the ground because she is so delicate and tender, will begrudge to the husband she embraces, to her son and to her daughter, her afterbirth that comes out from between her feet and her children whom she bears, because lacking everything she will eat them secretly, in the siege and in the distress with which your enemy shall distress you in your towns. "If you are not careful to do all the words of this law that are written in this book, that you may fear this glorious and awesome name, the LORD your God (Deu 28:47-58) If you then read ahead into the history of the nation of Israel, this is exactly what happens. Israel turns from God, and so God brings the Babylonians to Judea, who beseige Jerusalem, cause a huge famine in hte city, kill most of the inhabitants, and then cart the rest off captivity in Babylon. Needless to say the Babylonians were not nice people. That is just the first example of prophecy that came to mind. Onesimus. ---
**Author:** ![Lilairen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8491ac/32.png) [@Lilairen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lilairen)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2005, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/63 "2005-03-02T22:35:37Z")
My religion predicts things like, “Performing this ritual will bring a follower into a state of proper calm and balance.” (I’m trying to translate out of jargon language here.) I test this by performing the ritual. When I find that I am no longer off-balance and stressed, and in fact that this is reproducible and lasts for some time after performance of said ritual, I deem that prediction accurate. I’m not interested in grand cosmic predictions; they’re up there with questions like “Why are we here?” and “What happens after death?” for usefulness. (I acknowledge that some people find arguing or speculating about such things to be an entertaining hobby; I don’t find either to be useful, practical, or even remotely interesting.) ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2005, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/64 "2005-03-02T22:38:21Z")
> [@Onesimus](#): > > \*\*Scott Plaid:\*\*If you then read ahead into the history of the nation of Israel, this is exactly what happens. Israel turns from God, and so God brings the Babylonians to Judea, who beseige Jerusalem, cause a huge famine in hte city, kill most of the inhabitants, and then cart the rest off captivity in Babylon. Needless to say the Babylonians were not nice people. > > That is just the first example of prophecy that came to mind. > > Onesimus. You know, I have always read, that “in the day” as in the day. But I guess that’s just me. Anyway, what you have quoted is not only proof of a horrible “god”, it is also as much a prophecy, as me saying I will take out the trash. And then doing it. “god” says he will do something, then he does it. Wuh-hoo. Look, I can do it. In three minutes, a rock will fall from the sky and hit that spot. Right there. : shortly before three minutes later.: I toss a rock into the air. Since I aimed it, it falls on that spot, at exactly three minutes after I last spoke. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2005, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/65 "2005-03-02T22:45:28Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > Again, bring it up with **glee**. He’s the one who made that claim. Are you saying that the accuracy of his claim cannot be demonstrated? > > Remember, citing some examples of unfulfilled predictions doesn’t cut it – not if he claims that religion has NEVER successfully predicted anything. There are a great many religions, after all. Remember the adage about broad brushes? Each prophesy he lists that does not come true further supports his claim, but does not prove it. This works both in breadth, if we finds lots of religions with at least one prophesy we can show did not happen, and in depth - the more prophesies from one religion shown not to have happened weakens the claims of that religion more. However to disprove his claim, you need to show only one prophesy that did happen. (Subject to the limits I gave earlier.) It also needs to be of sufficient improbability to be interesting - if I say God told me I’ll get a head when I flip this quarter, getting it is not much of a sign from heaven. Similarly, if I show the claims of a particular god don’t pan out, I don’t prove there are none - but if no one can show me any, my confidence in there being one decreases. If you want to fund my searching through all prophesies, however, I will be happy to take your money. I have to warn you that my hourly rate is pretty high. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Onesimus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/edb3f5/32.png) [@Onesimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Onesimus)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2005, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/66 "2005-03-02T22:50:42Z")
> [@Scott\_plaid](#): > > You know, I have always read, that “in the day” as in the day. But I guess that’s just me. > > Anyway, what you have quoted is not only proof of a horrible “god”, it is also as much a prophecy, as me saying I will take out the trash. And then doing it. “god” says he will do something, then he does it. Wuh-hoo. Look, I can do it. In three minutes, a rock will fall from the sky and hit that spot. Right there. > > : shortly before three minutes later.: > > I toss a rock into the air. Since I aimed it, it falls on that spot, at exactly three minutes after I last spoke. Isn’t that the point though? To say that “God did it” implies that you believe that God exists. Isn’t that what we are discussing really? I mean if someone tells me that you are going to take the trash out, then I would probably believe them because I know you exist. If someone tells me God is going to do something, and I don’t believe in God I wouldn’t expect it to happen, because God doesn’t exist to actually do what is claimed of him. Onesimus. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2005, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/67 "2005-03-02T22:53:57Z")
Voyager, your answer is a lot clearer cut than mine. I would like to see how this goes but I must log off. Good luck fighting the good fight. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2005, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/68 "2005-03-02T22:56:17Z")
Argh! I didn’t say God did it, I said “god”. If I was speaking out loud I would be using my fingers to make exclamation points in midair. ---
**Author:** ![Onesimus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/edb3f5/32.png) [@Onesimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Onesimus)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2005, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/69 "2005-03-02T23:09:43Z")
> [@Scott\_plaid](#): > > Argh! I didn’t say God did it, I said “god”. If I was speaking out loud I would be using my fingers to make exclamation points in midair. And the difference is… 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2005, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/70 "2005-03-02T23:22:07Z")
> [@Onesimus](#): > > **Scott Plaid:** > When you are reading the bible it helps if you read things in their context, and not just pull verses out randomly from places. > > In the Genesis passage you quoted, it is true to say that on the day Adam ate the fruit he died in two ways: > > 1. On that day he was cut off from the tree of life, therefore putting him on an irreversable trajectory to his death. In a God acted to kill him on that day but the effects were not felt for some years. > 2. On that day his relationship with God was also destroyed, and since God is life, then Adam, while he lived physically was spiritually dead. If the claim was that no apologist had ever distorted and reworded a prophesy to make it seem true, then I would agree the claim was fallacious. However spiritual death is a concept quite distant from the writers of Genesis, so this is a hard one to believe. In any case, it fails the requirement that it be made before the event! Even if you believe that Moses wrote Genesis, he wrote it a long time after the Fall. God isn’t really prophesying here, he is threatening. Every parent has done the same thing from time to time. > [@](#): > > The Deutoronomy passage you just have to read in context. It is part of a conditional statement that essentially says that IF the nation of Israel follows God, then he will bless them. The fuller passage is > > Israel has never really fully followed the commands of God nor has any other nation. So, it didn’t happen. Evidence that it ever happened even for a year? > [@](#): > > But anyway as an example of prophecy that has come true, I present Deutoronomy 28. > > Here God is telling the Israelites about what will happen if they obey the him, and what will happen if they disobey. Coming from the part about what will happen if they disobey comes this passage. > > If you then read ahead into the history of the nation of Israel, this is exactly what happens. Israel turns from God, and so God brings the Babylonians to Judea, who beseige Jerusalem, cause a huge famine in hte city, kill most of the inhabitants, and then cart the rest off captivity in Babylon. Needless to say the Babylonians were not nice people. > > That is just the first example of prophecy that came to mind. > > Onesimus. Well, now we have to ask when this was written. If it was written after the Babylonian exile, as we think, then it hardly counts as a prophesy, does it? In fact, it would have to be written before Israel or Judah had ever been conquered. Considering that they were small, weak state smack between Egypt and Babylonia, that ain’t too likely. If I write the story of a deity named Fred who predicts the Civil War to my prophet Seymour living in 1830, I trust you would not become a convert to Fredism unless I gave you really good evidence this was written down in 1830 or so, not last week. You might want to try again. Oh, and when is Jesus coming back again? Yeah no one knows, so we can’t say the prophesy failed. And I know how you get around the part where he says no one here has tasted death. ---
**Author:** ![Onesimus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/edb3f5/32.png) [@Onesimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Onesimus)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/71 "2005-03-03T00:10:18Z")
Well, now we have to ask when this was written. If it was written after the Babylonian exile, as we think, then it hardly counts as a prophesy, does it? In fact, it would have to be written before Israel or Judah had ever been conquered. Considering that they were small, weak state smack between Egypt and Babylonia, that ain’t too likely. If I write the story of a deity named Fred who predicts the Civil War to my prophet Seymour living in 1830, I trust you would not become a convert to Fredism unless I gave you really good evidence this was written down in 1830 or so, not last week. You might want to try again. [/QUOTE] And here we come to the REAL reason why some people believe that the bible doesn’t contain accurate prophecy. No matter what anyone presents there is always one of three things that can be said to discredit it. 1. The prophecy was recorded after it happened 2. The prophecy was knowingly fulfilled by someone 3. It was a lucky guess The first one comes in with the secualr dating of biblical books. Since secular scholars have an a priori belief in the non-existence of prophecy they naturally date books to be written after the prophecy occured. Having then dated the books they then use these dates to show that there is no legitimate prophecy. The book of Daniel, which contains quite specific predictions of the Medo-Persian, Greek and Roman empires. The context within Daniel itself places it in the Babylonian/Medo-Persian period, which is where most Christian scholars date it. Secular scholars however date it in the Maccabbean period (some 500 years later) . As far as I can tell the only real reason for this is that Daniel MUST have been written after the prophecy came to pass. The second one comes in a lot with the events of Jesus life. For some reason prophecy is only valid if someone fulfills it without knowing. I agree that if I prophecy that I will do something, then that is not terribly impressive. But if I prophecy that someone in 600 years time will do something (as is the case with Jesus and the prophets), then that is a bit harder to predict, and certainly happens outside of my control. The third one is the failsafe position, simply because you can’t prove that a prophecy was not just a lucky guess. So if the first two fail, this will just about always work. In terms of the Deuteronomy prophecy, I think it has several things going for it. 1. Firstly I can see no good reason why Deuteronomy must have been written during the Babylonian exile, apart from prophecies like this one. The context of Deuteronomy itself is that of Moses telling his people how to live in the promised land that they are about to enter. Such a writing makes little sense in the context of exile outside of Israeil in Babylon. Besides even amoung those that believe that Deuteronomy was written in exile there is still the belief that source documents (the J/P/E/? theory) were used in its compilation which predated the exile. 2. This is a prophecy that no Israelite would want to see fulfilled. It therefore cannot be argued that they made this happen. 3. While it is likely that Israel as a nation would be taken over given the Egyptian, Assyrian and Babylonian empires, the actual seige of Jerusalem no-where near as likely. Jerusalem was a virtual fortress, with its own internal water supply, making it nearly impervious to seige. When the Israelites originally came into the land, the original inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Jebusites, were not thrown out unitl King David. During both the Joshua and Judges periods the bible specifically says that the Jebusites were still in Jerusalem. In fact David only got control of the city by getting in through the water system. He didn’t get in by seige. When the Babylonians besieged Jerusalem they did it more out of spite then out of military necessity. Jerusalem at the time was a vassel state of Babylon, but had rebelled against them. So the Babylonians were not merely taking over Jerusalem, they had done that. What they were doing was teaching the Israelites a lesson not to rebel against them. They ended up besieging Jerusalem for over a year, a length of time that wa unheard of in the ancient world, until eventually the Jerusalemites cracked because of starvation. Because of the difficulty in laying seige on Jerusalem it is far from clear that it is something that could be expected or could be predicted easily. If it was just a case of one nation taking Israel over that would be one thing. What I find compelling is the accuracy in predicting the way it was taken over. Onesimus. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/72 "2005-03-03T02:23:56Z")
> [@](#): > > On the other hand, it is not just soul. I know nothing about music, but my father in law is a very successful composer, and he has all sorts of books on composition. Even Beethoven studies composition. So composing doesn’t seem to be totally random. The technical portion of art and music can be studied and help us aquire better tools. The inspirational portion of art and compostion that put those tools to their best use, is soul. I know technical musicians who can preform complicated pieces flawlessly but couldn’t improvise three notes in a row. The thing that seperates one concert pianist from another playing the same piece is his or her interpertation . Thats soul. Ask your father in law. He may not use the same term but he’ll know what I’m taling about. > [@](#): > > And may determine there is actually no such thing as “spiritual reality.” ``` I may agree with you here. I used an incorrect term. There is no spiritual reality that is seperate from reality in general. There are the spiritual aspects of our reality and the truth or misconceptions about those aspects. ``` > [@](#): > > Philosophy is a way of studying things for which there is no clear answer - like why. (I agree with Lissa there is no why, This is one theory which my experience tells me is not the way things are. There are clear answers available and there is a why. These require commitment, effort and some faith. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/73 "2005-03-03T03:00:27Z")
> [@Onesimus](#): > > The context within Daniel itself places it in the Babylonian/Medo-Persian period, which is where most Christian scholars date it. Secular scholars however date it in the Maccabbean period (some 500 years later) . As far as I can tell the only real reason for this is that Daniel MUST have been written after the prophecy came to pass. Well, aside from the differences in language and errors in history that can be best attributed to a work written with a 500 year “retrospective.” There are numerous issues with a Babylonian authorship: the author mistakenly makes Balthazzar the son of Nebuchadnezzar when any contemporary would have known that he was the son of Nabonid. The author alsp makes Balthazzar king, when a contemporary would have known he was never king. Darius the Mede is a fictional creation–and we know who would have preceded him and succeeded him, so he is not siply "forgotten: by history. The descriptions of Babylon use Persian terms when a contemporary should have used Chaldean words (especially since the Persians would have been the distant enemies who would eventually conquer the Chaldean Babylonians). The musical instruments mentioned in the orchestra of Nebuchadnezzar are simply transliterated versions of the Greek instruments rather than the Chaldean names for the instruments that would actually have been present. Dates are stewn through the narrative that are known to be very much out of chronological order–much as might happen if a person without a firm grasp of 500 year old historical events was simply stringing together a narrative to make a point. I also reject the notion that “most Christian scholars” date Daniel to the exilic period. There are probably a number of Christian authors strongly influenced by such school as the Moody Bible Institute who hold this to be true, but a _majority_ of Christian scholars are quite willing to look at the evidence and put the date for Daniel in the second centure B.C.E. OTOH: > [@Scott\_plaid](#): > > Oh, and science doesn’t predict anything. Yes it does. The essence of much science is predicting things so that they may be falsified. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/74 "2005-03-03T03:01:15Z")
> [@](#): > > The ant can look at the Moon in a puddle, but the journey is still beyond him. > > Or to put it another way, why do you think your hopeful remarks will come true? Interesting. It was once believed that the journey to the moon was beyond man. That must be why I think the way I do. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/75 "2005-03-03T04:49:48Z")
[QUOTE=Voyager] > [@](#): > > Gandhi was a lawyer, wasn’t he? He was > [@](#): > > In any case, you are incorrect. An experiment must be set up to be able to disprove a hypothesis. In fact, the hypothesis cannot be proven, it can only get more evidence (and not get disproven) and make correct predictions. Any idiot can set up an experiment to prove something. A classic example is the Michelson-Morley experiment. The experiment was set up to determine if the speed of light was different depending on the flow of the ether, but was set up so this could be disproven - and it was, of course. INteresting. That must be why I’m not a scientist. Does that mean the things we accept as fact are just not disproven yet? I suppose I phrased it badly. The hypothesis is assumed to be true without a lot of verification at first. Correct? We make a judgement call by reduceing the number of possible conclusions based on accumulated evidence . Correct? It would be inconclusive to set up experiments to prove something true, unless those experimments reduced the number of possible conclusions. We ask, do our conclusions and the evidence line up in a logical and reasonable manner based on the evidence. Even then, given our limited understanding, our conclusions may be incorrect, yet that doesn’t stop us from continueing our search for knowledge and understanding. > [@](#): > > If you hypothesize solar energy, and do an experiment to see if it is real, you don’t turn off your collector at night. You need to keep it on at night, and measure the power output against the appearance of the sun. If you start getting power in the middle of the night, the hypothesis that the power comes from the sun would be disproven or at least shaken. Sorry, I don’t get your point here. > [@](#): > > And why not? Well, religions can’t but God can. Read Exodus. If we had several independent sources from the time that verified that story, perhaps from Egypt, from the tribes the Israelites met, and archeological findings in the Sinai, God, while not proven, would be a good hypothesis, or even a theory. No evidence at all that it happened is good evidence in this case that it didn’t - not finding one piece of petrified poop from 100,000 or more people is evidence of absence. Many god stories involve interaction with humans ans some interventions of the deity. Interestingly, no evidence that any of these ever happened. The search for truth requires that we seperate tradition and myth. Would you say that the fact that after all our scientific knowledge and all the myths dispelled , belief in God persists, constitutes evidence? > [@](#): > > Want to buy a bridge? Start on the assumption that I own the rights to it, and try to find evidence that I do. Don’t go looking for any that I don’t. Or, assume that all those claims in the spam you get are true. Why not be as skeptical about the claims of a religion as you are about the claims of the guy selling that Rolex for $10 on the street corner? I was talking about skepticism. A guy with no experience might get burned by the guy selling the rolex. Experience is evidence that it probably isn’t true. Personnel experience is a type of evidence we use to make judgement calls about the truth. It is not evidence to someone else. They need their own experience. I might give you the benifit of the doubt on the bridge issue and look for evidence both for and against. At some point I make a judgement call and act. Time will reveal whether I made a good call or not. > [@](#): > > Many of us started with a god belief, being indoctrinated in our culture. But the more I read, the less likely it seemed. How many times are your assumptions going to get dashed before you stop accepting them? Again, be like a scientist. Say, what would the world be like if my assumptions are true, and what would it be like if they aren’t, open your eyes, look at the world, and see what is closer to reality. This doesn’t mean you have to be an atheist. The world under deism looks the same as the world under atheism, so take your pick. Evolution with God loading the dice looks the same as evolution without god. If you want to believe that God set the initial conditions of the solar system such that the asteroid would wipe out the dinosaurs, be my guest. As for me, I’ll assume no god unless I see evidence to the contrary. Exactly right. If God is and I observe the world as it is, then what does that mean about the nature of God and man’s relationship to him. What does that mean about our potential to make things better? What do my own experiences tell me about reality? > [@](#): > > God, maybe, but not the impact of God on the real world. We can’t measure the one who made the flood, but we can measure the results of it. If we cannot find a trace of any of the measurable things god did, isn’t it time to give up on him? Or should I have believed in my daughter’s invisible friend Augie? The impact God has on the world is through us. What we percieve as truth and how that influences our choices and how our choices influence others. Was it Gandhi’s impact on the world or God’s? Buddha’s or God’s? Do the beliefs that motivate our choices matter? Do our choices have a measureable impact on the world? ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 7:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/76 "2005-03-03T07:48:25Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > He was > INteresting. That must be why I’m not a scientist. Does that mean the things we accept as fact are just not disproven yet? I suppose I phrased it badly. The hypothesis is assumed to be true without a lot of verification at first. Correct? > We make a judgement call by reduceing the number of possible conclusions based on accumulated evidence . Correct? It would be inconclusive to set up experiments to prove something true, unless those experimments reduced the number of possible conclusions. We ask, do our conclusions and the evidence line up in a logical and reasonable manner based on the evidence. Even then, given our limited understanding, our conclusions may be incorrect, yet that doesn’t stop us from continueing our search for knowledge and understanding. The difference between a hypothesis and theory is that a hypothesis is a suggested explanation for something without a lot of evidence for or against, while a theory has at least not been falsified, has made good predictions, and thus has evidence for it. (The purpose of an experiment is to verify that the predictions of a hypothesis actually happen.) So, if your hypothesis is that solar radiation has power, and a solar cell is powered by the sun and not some sort of free floating energy, you would conduct an experiment measuring the output of the collector at daytime and nighttime. You predict the power at night is much less than during the day. If it isn’t, your hpothesis has probably been falsified (but you need to check if someone has shone a spotlight on your solar cells!) > [@](#): > > The search for truth requires that we seperate tradition and myth. > Would you say that the fact that after all our scientific knowledge and all the myths dispelled , belief in God persists, constitutes evidence? Only if you believe that the continued belief in astrology is evidence for that being true. It is evidence that there is a human need to believe, not that there is something to believe in - especially because we believe in so many things. > [@](#): > > Exactly right. If God is and I observe the world as it is, then what does that mean about the nature of God and man’s relationship to him. What does that mean about our potential to make things better? What do my own experiences tell me about reality? If God is not, the world is the same - and we have to make things better. Some fundamentalist politicians think the rapture is coming soon, so we don’t have to worry about global warming or nature. How does that make the world better? > [@](#): > > The impact God has on the world is through us. What we percieve as truth and how that influences our choices and how our choices influence others. > Was it Gandhi’s impact on the world or God’s? Buddha’s or God’s? > Do the beliefs that motivate our choices matter? Do our choices have a measureable impact on the world? That is your hypothesis of god. Others think God has had a direct impact. If your definition of god is non-falsifiable, that is, the world looks the same god or no god (since these people could have done it for non-God related reasons) then it is pointless to look for evidence for or against. Fine with me - I think that is a more reasonable position than those who claim there is evidence, look at counter-evidence, and refuse to accept it. For an example, look at the evolution thread. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 8:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/77 "2005-03-03T08:29:42Z")
> [@Onesimus](#): > > And here we come to the REAL reason why some people believe that the bible doesn’t contain accurate prophecy. No matter what anyone presents there is always one of three things that can be said to discredit it. > > 1. The prophecy was recorded after it happened > 2. The prophecy was knowingly fulfilled by someone > 3. It was a lucky guess > > The first one comes in with the secualr dating of biblical books. Since secular scholars have an a priori belief in the non-existence of prophecy they naturally date books to be written after the prophecy occured. Having then dated the books they then use these dates to show that there is no legitimate prophecy. The book of Daniel, which contains quite specific predictions of the Medo-Persian, Greek and Roman empires. The context within Daniel itself places it in the Babylonian/Medo-Persian period, which is where most Christian scholars date it. Secular scholars however date it in the Maccabbean period (some 500 years later) . As far as I can tell the only real reason for this is that Daniel MUST have been written after the prophecy came to pass. It is inaccurate to say the higher criticism is purely the work of secular scholars. It began in the 16th century, and was espoused by men like Hobbes. Even Paine, while not Christian, was not secular - _The Age of Reason_ contains a section “proving” the existence of a deistic god from the design of the solar system. He might be an atheist if he lived today. See this [cite](http://www.xmission.com/~fidelis/volume1/chapter1/hague.html) by a Christian. Certainly some of the higher critics were secular, but some believe that the Bible was revealed truth, though not written by Moses. Plus, one cannot validly reject criticism from people just because they are secular. There are many anachronisms and errors in the Bible. My favorite is that camels were not domesticated until 1,000 BCE, so Abraham could not have had herds of them. > [@](#): > > The second one comes in a lot with the events of Jesus life. For some reason prophecy is only valid if someone fulfills it without knowing. I agree that if I prophecy that I will do something, then that is not terribly impressive. But if I prophecy that someone in 600 years time will do something (as is the case with Jesus and the prophets), then that is a bit harder to predict, and certainly happens outside of my control. You don’t quite get it. If Jesus knew that the prophesy was that the Messiah would ride an ass, (one 600 years before) and he rode one, then you can’t judge it a fulfilled prophecy. Many of the supposed events of Jesus’ life (such as his birth in Bethlehem) was almost certainly written that way to explain the inconvenient fact that he did not come from where the Messiah was supposed to. Remember, he fled to Egypt but also went directly to the Temple. Being Jewish, and having read undistorted translations, I can assure you that the Messianic prophecies do not pedict him at all - and he did not fulfill what the Messiah was supposed to do. Yes, the real kingship he was supposed to win became a spiritual one, but that’s just cheating. Is it any wonder the Jews who knew what the prophecies really said were not interested? > [@](#): > > The third one is the failsafe position, simply because you can’t prove that a prophecy was not just a lucky guess. So if the first two fail, this will just about always work. No, if there were enough very specific prophecies, fulfilling all would be hard to explain as a lucky guess. I don’t even include that as an out. One out of hundreds yes, but would you believe someone who only hit one prophecy out of a hundred? > [@](#): > > In terms of the Deuteronomy prophecy, I think it has several things going for it. > > 1. Firstly I can see no good reason why Deuteronomy must have been written during the Babylonian exile, apart from prophecies like this one. The context of Deuteronomy itself is that of Moses telling his people how to live in the promised land that they are about to enter. Such a writing makes little sense in the context of exile outside of Israeil in Babylon. Besides even amoung those that believe that Deuteronomy was written in exile there is still the belief that source documents (the J/P/E/? theory) were used in its compilation which predated the exile. Remember it was “found” during the reign of King Josiah. If it had been extant long before that, where was it? Why don’t Chronicles and Prophets mention the Torah? The Ark gets mentioned all the time, but as far as we can tell, there was no reading of the Torah. > [@](#): > > 1. This is a prophecy that no Israelite would want to see fulfilled. It therefore cannot be argued that they made this happen. Oh come now. It is a warning, especially dealing with a kingdom where religion was just being centralized. If you only can imagine prophecies happening that people want, you haven’t read much of them. > [@](#): > > 1. While it is likely that Israel as a nation would be taken over given the Egyptian, Assyrian and Babylonian empires, the actual seige of Jerusalem no-where near as likely. Jerusalem was a virtual fortress, with its own internal water supply, making it nearly impervious to seige. > > When the Israelites originally came into the land, the original inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Jebusites, were not thrown out unitl King David. During both the Joshua and Judges periods the bible specifically says that the Jebusites were still in Jerusalem. In fact David only got control of the city by getting in through the water system. He didn’t get in by seige. > > When the Babylonians besieged Jerusalem they did it more out of spite then out of military necessity. Jerusalem at the time was a vassel state of Babylon, but had rebelled against them. So the Babylonians were not merely taking over Jerusalem, they had done that. What they were doing was teaching the Israelites a lesson not to rebel against them. They ended up besieging Jerusalem for over a year, a length of time that wa unheard of in the ancient world, until eventually the Jerusalemites cracked because of starvation. > > Because of the difficulty in laying seige on Jerusalem it is far from clear that it is something that could be expected or could be predicted easily. If it was just a case of one nation taking Israel over that would be one thing. What I find compelling is the accuracy in predicting the way it was taken over. > > Onesimus. There is no archeological evidence for the Davidic empire, and much against it. Even Reform Judaism is now correcting Biblical commentaries about it. Revenge against holdouts was very common at the time - Alexander the Great did similar things. And Empire could hardly afford a vassal rebelling and getting away with it. Evidence that a yearlong siege was unknown? The Iliad talks about 10 - though it is a myth, it is clearly not something the listeners thought to be totally absurd. There is also precious little evidence of what really happened. It would be of benefit to the writers of the Bible to have Jerusalem hold out longer. Our oldest extant copies of the entire thing is from much later than this, so it is hard to say what was in these books, and when they were edited last. Some think Jeremiah himself was the redactor, and he saw it happen and could have easily put in the prophesy. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 11:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/78 "2005-03-03T11:21:52Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > There is no archeological evidence for the Davidic empire, and much against it. I don’t know where you got that information from, but it is either outdated or untrustworthy. In 1993, archeologist [Avraham Biran](http://www.huc.edu/faculty/faculty/biran.shtml), uncovered the [Tel Dan](http://www.kchanson.com/ANCDOCS/westsem/teldan.html). There are [fourteen incomplete lines of text](http://dialogue.adventist.org/articles/09_3_gregor_e.htm), written in paleo-Hebrew (script that was used before the exile in 586 BC). Line 8 says: “the king of Israel. And slew (…the kin)”. Line 9 says: “g of the House of David. And I put…”. If you did not know of this before, you can be forgiven simply not knowing. But if you know of this, and you consider it to be “no archeological evidence for the Davidic empire”, then I submit that your demands for evidence exceed reasonable thresholds. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/79 "2005-03-03T12:04:02Z")
I’m not sure that over 12 months was unheard of at the time. Tutmoses besieged Megiddo for 7 months and that was some centuries earlier and the siege of Hermopolis lasted an unspecified number of months. The problem is that we have few records of most ancient sieges. In most cases we know they occurred but only rarely do we know how long they lasted because records are destroyed. However the fact that Megiddo was besieged for over half a year suggests that at some time within the next 800 years or so there were almost certainly sieges that lasted over a year. Megiddo like Jerusalem and many other fortified cities had an internal water supply. It’s probably correct to say that no other year-long sieges are specifically recorded prior to the first siege of Jerusalem, however it’s not entirely correct to say that such a timespan was unheard of. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243/80 "2005-03-03T13:23:16Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > In 1993, archeologist [Avraham Biran](http://www.huc.edu/faculty/faculty/biran.shtml), uncovered the [Tel Dan](http://www.kchanson.com/ANCDOCS/westsem/teldan.html). There are [fourteen incomplete lines of text](http://dialogue.adventist.org/articles/09_3_gregor_e.htm),Line 9 says: “g of the House of David. And I put…”. h(y)dbt dwt Not only is it not clear that it is not a forgery, much resurch now suggests that “david” may have been a “god”, and not the same david you are refering to, much like how many scholars now believe that “John The Baptist” was adopted from the story of a river “god”. [http://essenes.net/m44.htm#Was%20Solomon%20a%20God](http://essenes.net/m44.htm#Was%20Solomon%20a%20God)? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-v-religion/292243.md?page=5)