Christians, agree or disagree?

Question

In one of my other questions Randyken said something that I found interesting. It was in regards to whether or not Atheist’s are influenced by the enemy in some way. He said, “The idea that we are some chance occurrence instills fear, and I see this fear as the driving force behind science, to discover how to live forever and escape a perceived "ultimate, inescapable fate.”-Randyken

Do you agree or disagree? Why?

I tend to agree with Randyken. It really does seem that they are searching for proof that God doesn't exist so they are not responsible to his law.

Answer 1

Science neither proves or dis-proves the existence of God or any other divine being. The scientific method simply provides a method of proving physical phenomana and explaining what causes them. In my opinion as a Christian, Atheist simply put pure reason above all else, and since you can not prove or disprove their is a God with science God is rejected. I also believe certain segment of Christians fear science because accepting scientific findings would demand that they rethink their concept of God and their interpretation of the bible.

Answer 2

Curiosity is an inate human trait. Just because some of us are curious and want to discover - what is just around the corner - does not mean we do it from fear. The intellectual "ah ha" process that some scientists have coined, where we have some mental discovery process induces intense endorphins into the system and is much like a multiple orgasm. That is what keeps some scientist going. People of faith do not think so they do not ever get that endorphin high. Do not knock it until you have some idea about which you speak.

Answer 3

What a fascinating quote! Ridiculous but still compelling. I am amazed at what people can come up with to defend a position.

The search of a self-aware intelligence for meaning in the world and the fear of irrelevance are what drives people to posit a super-intelligence controlling that world and maintaining a sublime order. It's much like a child crying out to a parent who can protect him and keep the bad things away. When a child grows up, he learns self-responsibility, which involves understanding what to expect and how to cope with it.

In my experience, science derives simply from curiosity and an unwillingness to accept spoon-fed, untested "answers". Science doesn't bother with "why", preferring to focus on "how" things work. Truly understanding a process may allow one to manipulate that process and derive certain advantages (such as an extended lifespan), but the motive is not the manipulation but the understanding. Science lives within the limits of the universe, it just distinguishes between real physical limits and imaginary rules based on superstition.

We all naturally want good or innocent people to thrive and bad people to be punished (or at least repent), but the universe doesn't demonstrate a natural justice beyond what we do ourselves. To suggest that the justice happens somewhere else beyond this world is an unverifiable act of faith. People should be free to believe in it but they should not have the right to impose their belief on others. It's not that science itself denies metaphysical theories, it merely ignores them because there's nothing that can be observed or tested.

We also see the value in continued existence because memory is a large part of our identities. We naturally want to continue because we can see how valuable individual experience is and how poorly such memories are preserved outside of the witness's own mind. A just universe shouldn't be so wasteful, yet the observable clues suggest otherwise. Eons of cosmological and geological activity unwitnessed by any intellect, millions of species still unidentifed, much less understood even today, suggest that the universe progresses just fine without our awareness. Things like the possibility of climate change even imply that it may be indifferent to our existence, as important as it is. So we resort again to that afterlife where all the loose ends get tied up and our ultimate meaning is validated. Science has nothing to say about that, it can only deal with what we can experience here and now.

In the universe of matter and energy, ideas like "forever" and "eternity" are nonsense, merely mathematical abstractions. Everything has limits, no matter how extensive they may be. To speak of living "forever" is rhetorically sloppy. Nothing lasts forever. More precisely, one should say everything changes. Whether there is a conscious continuity in that change is a philosophical issue. I believe I am the same person as that little child of many years ago, even though I think, look and act very little like it. My memory tells me so. But if something should happen to those memories, I'd have to take someone else's word for it.

Even if science finds some way to eliminate disease, aging and genetic "defects", we are mortal beings subject to accidents, starvation and environmental extremes. Perhaps we will find a way to transfer consciousness and memory into more durable and capable containers but we are still vulnerable as long as we are made of matter and energy. The leap to incorporeal existence is purely speculative. How would such transcendence be possible, and how would it differ from the metaphysical idea of a "soul"? The underlying question would become what exactly "I" am.

Religion has already assumed, thanks to the ancient Greeks, that "we" are not our bodies (or thanks to the ancient Hindus, that the world we live in is merely illusion). As a consequence, the life we find ourselves in is essentially meaningless since it is ephemeral. Yet God is to determine our fate in the invisible "real" world by our reactions to this irrelevant world. Obviously logic is overrated here, but appearances suggest that one can debate just who is trying to "escape" an "ultimate, inescapable fate".

Answer 4

I disagree,I think natural curiosity is the driving force behind science. I don't see how fear plays a role at all. Heck,if scientists came up with an "eternity pill"I wouldn't take it. Living forever sounds boring,takes all the specialness out of life.

Answer 5

Agree...

The fear of making the wrong choices which might send them to a "Hell" is the force behind just trying to prove it wrong..so that there fate isn't written in stone.

Answer 6

yes. There is some truth in this. As well as curiosity about the universe. Curiosity is part of the evolution of a predatory species as was early humans.

Answer 7

This is why Jesus told use to love everyone as we love our self - for people are not bad, it is the sin and demons that are in them that drives them to do such things - like kill, suicide, and all other things.

When someone doesn't have Christ in their heart indeed they are full of fear and insecurity and yes this is a small factor that drives them to discover many things (science), but the main thing that drive them is what is inside for they give their backs to God and don't believe in Him.

The Bible tells us the the good man takes out good treasures from his heart and the wicket man takes out bad treasure from their hearts.

so you see it's what's in the heart that drives us to do things.

If Jesus is in your heart you will be honest, loving, carrying for his spirit is in you.

If you have hate, greed and lust in your heart then you will lie, steal and do bad things.

so you see it's all in the heart - what ever you have in there that is what will come out of you.

study the Bible, Seek God and you shall see

God Bless

Answer 8

A facile statement with which only a profoundly close-minded and uneducated person could agree.
.

Answer 9

It's a psychological argument. Simply attribute the actions of those who disagree with you to fear, and *poof*, they become irrelevant.

Answer 10

Yes I do.

And Chippy, it is science that limits us with mortality (if you believe/have faith in God) thus the quest to solve aging and disease, to erase our mortality. What if that quest is pointless? All I'm wondering, and just food for thought.