Obviously you can see molecules using an electronic microscope and there is enough evidence proving that atoms exist, but certain things about their function remain as theories and postulates that we presently study.
Don't you find it mysterious that we are formed of these atoms that even though we cant see with the naked eye, are there?
Isn't that faith similar to believing in God?
Atheists will claim that no because they need substantial evidence proved by the scientific method. But I believe they are using the incorrect method of proving the validity of the existence of God. Science is limited and doesn't give all the answers.
A Christian on the other hand will say he has proof. Like spiritual proof for example.
Darwin may have made experiments to prove why certain species had more advantages than other, or that they are genetically similar and humans came from a series of evolutionary changes, but the guy still got that from a idea who started to look absurd, same as
2006-09-05 07:13:53 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
any fiction author when he creates ideas to write a novel. That guy created those ideas, that's why it's still a theory. Scientists have followed his trance and have tried to prove that his theory is correct, which is fine with me.
It doesn't offend me that scientists want to know these things, which I find interesting and nice to know.
But in the end believing in this also requires faith, just as believing in the Bible and God.
2006-09-05 07:14:21 · update #1
trace not trance
2006-09-05 07:15:35 · update #2
I am not looking like an idiot. I am just giving my own personal opinion. Many people here post questions about the Bible which I consider idiotic.
2006-09-05 07:29:07 · update #3
We all believe in something, and we did not come up with it on our own. Even the most honest athiest believes in things that were handed down to them. Most of them haven't observed 90% of what they believe to be fact. Most of science is theory. Theory isn't fact.
2006-09-05 07:24:00 · answer #1 · answered by luvwinz 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is a very important difference between "spiritual evidence" and "scientific evidence". Spiritual evidence is unique to the person, or small group of people, who experienced it. If you weren't there for the vision or the visitation or teh revelation, you will have to take someone else's word for it. This is why there are thousands of religious beliefs. God apparently does a very bad job at being consistent.
Scientific evience, on the other hand, is infinitely repeatable. Credible scientists publish their work, methods, and conclusions. Any scientist who wants can duplicate another's experiment to see if he has made any errors. Or can think of ways to expand by doing further experiments.
The point being that there is no reliance upon faith because all the facts are available to be checked by anyone. You can perform the oil-drop experiment in your own garage if you so wish. A scientist may disagree with another over how to interpret an experiment, but at least they agree upon the evidence. Religions don't.
2006-09-05 07:32:09 · answer #2 · answered by Steven S 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, it's the not the same thing. First, I don't have the scientific knowledge to say whether or not what you've said about atoms is correct. So for the sake of argument, I'll assume it is - that there are theories about atoms, and that we don't know everything about them.
The theories about atoms are nothing like the theories about god. We don't claim that atoms created everything; that they want us to behave in a certain way, and we don't give them personality traits.
Short answer, but you get the idea.
2006-09-05 07:36:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes it is very mysterious. It's also funny how no one in the religious world knew that they exist before some guy discovered them with a microscope. I think God at some point would have said. "Hey, guess what, you're made out of billions and billions of little things I would like to call atoms and other things called deoxyribose nucleic acid. Write that down in the Bible"
2006-09-05 07:18:43 · answer #4 · answered by Southpaw 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You are missing one key point. It is a scientific theory because it has substantial evidence to back it up, if it had no evidence it would just be considered hogwash. I mean look at the theory of gravity. You did indeed answer your own question about the atoms, we can see them, we know they are there so why does it take faith?
2006-09-05 07:31:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Faith is believing in something without proof. (Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.) i.e. If someone tells you something, you may have faith in it's truth or untruth. So you may take this person at his word for the faith of truth, or you may search elsewhere because you also have a faith of the untruthfulness.
2006-09-05 07:35:46 · answer #6 · answered by inov8ed 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No because you can prove the existance of atoms but not god
2006-09-05 07:38:19 · answer #7 · answered by JerseyRick 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not at all. We only started to "believe" in those things because people found them and are able to study them. People believe in religion only because a book says so.
2006-09-05 07:19:05 · answer #8 · answered by Indigo 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No. You answered your own question. Atoms can be seen. Next.
2006-09-05 07:21:11 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yes, faith!! I have it and know there is life after death. Jesus promised it! God bless!
2006-09-05 07:22:13 · answer #10 · answered by altruistic 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋