Christian Scientists?

Barry E. Martin, Ph.D. The Matter Myth: Quandaries of Modern Physics "Experiments in quantum physics suggest that the world (the universe) is not made of objects at all, rather it is created out of probability waves." Sir Roger Penrose - 'consciousness itself has a link to the strange quantum realm' David Albert, Ph.D- "I don't like how human consciousness is being pressed as the center of everything material when the consciousness is what makes up everything material including ourselves" - Radio interview. Amit Goswami, Ph.D "the world is made of consciousness, world is consciousness, the ground is consciousness, quantum physics makes this clear as day light" John Hagelin, Ph.D "unified field theory based on super string identify a single universal field of intelligence, an ocean of existence of the basis of everything mind and matter, all the so called particles of the universe the forces of our universe, everything in our universe are just ripples on that ocean of existence. That's the unified field and that field is a non material, it is ultimately the field of consciousness" I guess they would have to laugh at these guys first maybe they should revoke their PhD's for saying what they did? The only argument against the evidence found is the persons beliefs of the finder. I don't care who comes forward with any evidence the scientific community is blind to agree with anything out of the norm just like digs sites that prelude clovis first. That is not a scientific method of anything other than we can't change our theory so it must be wrong.

"Most quantum physicists now believe that everything in our universe is made up of waves..." Pretty much accurate as far as it goes: things act at waves of probability until you measure them, at which point they stop acting like waves and start acting like particles. "...and that consciousness is the underlying connection that makes up everything" I think you're going to look long and hard for many. let alone most, quantum physicists who wouldn't laugh in your face at such a statement -- at best. As to the "fossilized finger" found next the the fraudulent "human tracks" at the Paluxy, debunked here: http://paleo.cc/paluxy/finger.htm

The Martin quote appears to be someone's lecture notes instead of anything direct. Can you give a proper cite? Dr. Albert is on record that he was selectively edited in order to present his views as exactly opposite to what they actually are. Dr. Albert does not believe there is a connection between Quantum Mechanics and consciousness or spirituality. Drs. Hagelin and Goswami, respectively known for running the political arm of the Transcendental Meditation guru and for being in the movie that misrepresented Dr. Albert gives you... two. Two is not "many" physicists by any measure. Thanks for confirming my hypothesis.

This sounds about right. That is somewhat why I asked this question. For people to say why or why it's not probable. I think saying that anything is possible is not believing in God, it's not disbelieving either but, close enough.

I just want to make sure that I understand what you are saying: Are you saying that a scientist cannot be a Christian? Or a Christian cannot be a scientist?

I found this on Wikipedia concerning Sir Isaac Newton: "Though he is better known for his love of science, the Bible was Sir Isaac Newton's greatest passion. He devoted more time to the study of Scripture than to science, and he said, "I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by those who were inspired. I study the Bible daily."[8] He spent a great deal of time trying to discover hidden messages within the Bible. After 1690, Newton wrote a number of religious tracts dealing with the literal interpretation of the Bible. In a manuscript Newton wrote in 1704 in which he describes his attempts to extract scientific information from the Bible, he estimated that the world would end no earlier than 2060. In predicting this he said, "This I mention not to assert when the time of the end shall be, but to put a stop to the rash conjectures of fanciful men who are frequently predicting the time of the end, and by doing so bring the sacred prophesies into discredit as often as their predictions fail."[9]" Wikipedia

I agree. I like to devote my time to things that I know for sure with my own two eyes, ears, and other senses exist for sure. Like my two little girls and the other wonderful things in my life.

It's rare to find physical evidence of an individual's life. However there is the James ossuary. This has been declared a fake because (it was claimed) that the patina showed that the words "James son of Joseph" had been added. This, it was argued, proved that the words "brother of Jesus" had been added - talk about objective science! I suppose there's also the so called Jesus tomb but this actually poses problems for Christianity if you believe that it did contain Jesus's ossuary (the wording on this is very hard to read and I'm not at all convinced that it really says "Jesus son of Joseph"). However this tomb may well have been used by early Christians (hence the number of ossuaries baring Jesus related names). The ossuaries of some other Biblical characters like Ananas the priest and Simon of Cyrene have been found. Then there's the tomb in the Church of the Holy Sepulcre and some other items claimed to be related to Jesus, including the shroud of Turin. This evidence may be questionable but it's overly simplistic to claim that there's NO evidence.

@Graptopetalum: Given that the alleged Jesus tomb identifies the "Jesus son of Joseph" as having a wife and child, there are indeed problems posed for Christianity. The shroud of Turin has been pretty much conclusively shown to be a thirteenth century hoax. @Ezra710: In the absence of a body, how do you prove Jesus was ever buried in that tomb?

Prophecy #1 Isaiah 40:7-8 (New Living Translation) 7 The grass withers and the flowers fade beneath the breath of the Lord. And so it is with people. 8 The grass withers and the flowers fade, but the word of our God stands forever.” This was written about 2700 years ago. Men have come and men have gone. Wise men have come and wise men have gone. Even today, the Bible is still the number one best seller. The Bible has been forbidden, attacked, burned, discredited, and criticized but it is still here. It will continue to exist as Isaiah said that the the word of God stands forever. So it was written and so it shall be! Note! More prophecies will follow.

I counter with: When it comes to god, and religions, so far there is zero percent proof and one hundred percent unproved speculation ;) It is always hilarious when religious folks throw out "lack of proof" as an argument FOR their religion. And, for the record, there is far more evidence for evolution than there could ever be for a god. Evidence for evolution includes: 1. A fossil record of change in earlier species 2. Chemical and anatomical similarities of related life forms 3. Geographic distribution of related species 4. The recorded genetic changes in living organisms over many generations Evidence for god: 1. Because humans say so. You see, the beauty of scientific theories is that they are constantly being compared and challenged objectively based on evidence in the natural world. It's constantly trying to prove it's assertions and rejects implausible explanations - for example, 'god did it.'

Surely all the reports of paranormal phenomena over the centuries is evidence for God. What about the Biblical prophecies which have come true or sound suspiciously as if they're talking about things the writers shouldn't have known about? How have the Jews survived all these centuries of persecution if there wasn't something very special about them? Then some would say the fact that we life and humans exist is evidence for God. You certainly can't claim that humans saying so is all there is!

I see. Well thanks for the explanation. That's a very interesting perspective. I am constantly wondering about the truth of our existence but I think that it's something we just weren't meant to find out.

To me? The bible is a set of myths that were collected across a number of centuries and then underwent a series of cobblings together into a narrative that supported the political agenda of each in the series of cobblers. I do not regard it as a source of truth or knowledge in any spiritual sense. What I meant by the Bible being poetry instead of a physics text is that the many people who wrote the many documents that became the bible, as well as the many people that later edited and translated those documents, wrote poetry rather than literal truth.

I have to disagree. If you reduce the Bible to myth, poetry, alagory, you can argue that it means whatever you want it mean and you have no real basis for your faith. This road leads to madness! Obviously some parts of the Bible are poetry and some have hidden meanings and even codes but that doesn't mean that their face value meanings are wrong. Then the Bible isn't a physics book but the main scientific problem seems to be with biology. I really wish that Genesis just said that God created heaven and Earth and then skipped the details. However it doesn't and people get into a lot of arguments over it.

Feynman lectures didn't resolve any of the problems in quantum field it only gave the opinion that one day it will be resolved but until that time continue on. It would be interesting if Feynman was still alive today to see what he would think of the current string theory and M theory. Theories to explain less than 2% of everything matter and leaves out well over 98% (or 99.9999999% depending on if you buy some theories or not) is some pretty big gaps if anything the quantum field has just shown us how little we as humans know or understand.

I direct your attention to the Feynman lectures -- quantum and classical (Newtonian) mechanics have been reconciled for decades. But, by all means, keep rocking that God of the Gaps argument!

@Graptopetalum: Why do you think no one had ever seen a comet strike the earth before 90 (or 70) CE? You've never heard of the Uncertainty principle?

Could you prove it, please?

Nobody has ever shown how life started and now scientists are invoking panspermia, life being transported to Earth from elsewhere. Nobody has ever proven a change from one major group to another. The one normally pointed to is the change from birds to dinosaurs but as many scientists now think they're basically the same group, this doesn't really work. The only way to really prove evolution is to have a big bang in a God-free universe and see if life still appears.

nat, we have studied subjects such as Science, Social Studies, Literature, Language, Mathematics, Physical Education, Religion and Home Economics in formal school. That is why we could correspond here in mylot. We are supposedly "the learned!" I am sure that in our years of studying, we had debated upon all the questions you have asked in this discussion. If these were not dealt upon in high school Biology, well, the Physics teacher could have also explained the force. By now we must have learned what scientists contend "Where Science ends, religion begins!" Addendum: Of course my premise there was not exclusive for those who had completed high school. There are exceptional mylotters here who are undergrads. They simply are gifted!

Well thanks for your response. How do you know for sure it is him that ordered our existence. Are you sure it's not mostly because this is what you were brought up to believe? What about the Adam and Eve story, do you really think they were the first humans with all the scientific evidence of evolution. Do you just believe in God or is the bible exactly as people interpret also? Do you think Jesus was a man? Just questions I have for believers, I just don't understand. With all the scientific info available it's hard for me to believe this.

What is the "evidence" that led you to this conclusion? I am just curious.

It's often stated that chimps (I think more accurately bonobos) have 98% the same DNA as humans. I've never heard exactly what this means. Did they compare the entire genome or just a certain part of it and which? Bonobos (and I think all apes) have 48 chromosomes while humans have 46 - how is this reflected in the 98% figure? The fact that such obviously different creatures have such similar DNA, when it's thought that there have been about 10 species (presumably on each side which would make a change of 0.1% per species) since our latest common ancestor, actually seems to be a logistical problem for evolution rather than proof.

Thanks for your response. Everyone does have a right to their own opinion. I believe some people get lucky in being successful but most people have to work for it. I think karma is a big part of it. The energy we put out, the energy that the people we surround ourselves with put out. If it's mostly good we have positive around us, good things happen to us. And if we do bad then the opposite. I think religion, faith, fate, karma, it's all more scientific then we know.

Thanks for your response. Glad to see some people do have an opening and questioning mind.

No, it is a one time event. A slime pit, somehow magically brought forth life. Then began evolution. Monkeys do not continue to evolve into people, fish do not continue to evolve into land based mammals. My answer is that there IS a 2% difference. Explain the 2%. Closely rated? Hmmmm,yeah, just closely related. Why doesn't a dog drive down to the vets and get his own tatoo or identification chip implanted into his body. Ask a pet owner and they'll say ,"Oh my little Sparky he is just like a person." Trouble is little Sparky can't take any self improvement courses, or go get a job to help pay for his room and board. or pay for his own health ccare. God gave man dominion over every living thing upon the earth. That is the 2% difference. There has been evolutionary changes in a specific species, but evolution has never been proven to be the basis of all life. It is only a theory and a false religion. Someime take a trip to Glen Rose, Texas and check out the Creation Evidence Museum or go to Petersburg, Kentucky and see the Creation Museum.

This is the worst advice I have ever heard. "Don't question anything, just accept it." Very 1984 Orwellian and very scary... are you a politician, by any chance? And no, Einstein was NOT a believer, he came out and said that he was misquoted. In a 1954 letter written in English, he stated, "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions. I do not believe in a personal god."

Yes I believe the whole idea of religion and church is a good idea a good bases to run your life on. Like the ten commandments, those are the way we should live our life. Not because I am a believer but because I believe in karma. I think God or the idea of him helps a lot of people stay sane and in control of their life. But it's just not for me. I try to teach my kids to always wonder. And if they don't know the answer for themselves to try and find out. I have heard many theories about child development. I think there are a lot of factors that shape our childhood and how we see the world.

That's very interesting about the Times survey thing. I assumed it was a large percentage that probably were not religious. I think everything should be questioned unless you have seen it for yourself.