What do you mean "what"? What did you not understand? Don't TRY to be stupid! Or are you not trying. Let me try to explain again: ALL RELIGIONS BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE THE RIGHT ONE! Get it now or will you attack something irrelevant in my post. That seems to be your MO.
He makes a harmless joke, and you jump on him... I think we all know who's doing the attacking. :thumbs:

He makes a harmless joke, and you jump on him... I think we all know who's doing the attacking. :thumbs:

When in Rome,
Do as the Roman Poster boys !

Oh man, that was funny, let me try that again.

Oh I mean.. What?


yeah..i figured!

He makes a harmless joke, and you jump on him... I think we all know who's doing the attacking. :thumbs:

that's a joke?

that's a joke?
Apparently you've never heard of the saying "I mean... what?" before. It's very difficult to explain what it means, although you'd get it if you heard it out loud. Perhaps not the best joke to use online I suppose.

yeah..i figured!
Thats the problem. You make to many assumptions. You're even going to get this post wrong.

Let me try to explain again: ALL RELIGIONS BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE THE RIGHT ONE! Some hold that they are "a" right one, not "the" right one.

Some hold that they are "a" right one, not "the" right one.
I think that's the more logical, realistic, and humble way to go about it. :)

Some hold that they are "a" right one, not "the" right one.

The monotheistic religions claim the are right and everyone else is wrong tho. That alone makes em hard to take serious.

The monotheistic religions claim the are right and everyone else is wrong tho. That alone makes em hard to take serious.
Not all Christians claim that they are THE right one. Shiloh is a Christian and he's actually having an argument with another Christian in another thread about exactly that. So I conclude that there must also be some Jews and some Muslims who don't have the same exclusive attitude... In fact, the Bahai faith, which is an offshoot of Islam, holds as one of their central tenets that all religions are equally valid and all lead to the same thing.

Not all Christians claim that they are THE right one. Shiloh is a Christian and he's actually having an argument with another Christian in another thread about exactly that. So I conclude that there must also be some Jews and some Muslims who don't have the same exclusive attitude... In fact, the Bahai faith, which is an offshoot of Islam, holds as one of their central tenets that all religions are equally valid and all lead to the same thing.

I wasn't referring to individuals or offshots, but to the core teaching of these religions.

I wasn't referring to individuals or offshots, but to the core teaching of these religions.
Someone has to be wrong some where. If people didn't think they were right then there wouldn't be any religions.

Someone has to be wrong some where.
Why? Have you personally talked to God? How could you be so conceited as to think that you know exactly what God wants and plans for the world? I can't believe how people cannot even admit that there's a chance that God wants people to believe in different things, or that people who have different interpretations of God couldn't possibly be right.

Have you personally talked to God?
Yes, I have said several times that I have.

Why?
How could you be so conceited as to think that you know exactly what God wants and plans for the world? I can't believe how people cannot even admit that there's a chance that God wants people to believe in different things, or that people who have different interpretations of God couldn't possibly be right.
I have also said,
Let me find it.

Me personally, I like to think that I'd be pretty stupid to worship something I didn't know existed. If for example, I simply had a concept that "a" God existed, I'd still be pretty stupid to simply pick a religion and hope it was "the" religion of "the" God.

I know him, like I know you or Blob or Frogger, or Nap.

I don't think God would let those people stay in a religion that wasn't the one he meant for people to be in. Eventually if God wants you to know him like I do, you'll wind up being a Christian.

To recap, I know God exist, I know God wants us to worship him one way and I know this because I know God.
If I didn't know I knew God then I wouldn't be part of any religion.
Why would I?

To recap, I know God exist, I know God wants us to worship him one way and I know this because I know God.
If I didn't know I knew God then I wouldn't be part of any religion.
Why would I?
You can know God exists and know that god wants you to worship him in a certain way but still respect the beliefs of others. You don't think that God could talk to some people in different ways and tell them to do different things?

You can know God exists and know that god wants you to worship him in a certain way but still respect the beliefs of others. You don't think that God could talk to some people in different ways and tell them to do different things?
I respect other peoples beliefs, I haven't done anything other then answer your questions. I can say with confidence that I have never tried to push what I believe on other people and I'm certain you have never seen me do so.

I might think they're wrong, but I'm not the one to tell them. God works in everyone at one point or another. What he does can be life changing or so completely minute that there is no chance anyone will notice.
Only God can say what each person is capable of.
So, I let God do his thing, because he knows better then I do.

Because God works in everyones life, that in no way means what that person is doing is OK by God. It just means when God interceded, God needed something from that person.
I know that sounds rude, but I feel if I put it exactly the way I think it works you will get the wrong impression.
Which I already have to a point and you took it out of context.

I don't think I took it out of context. You think that everyone who believes something different than you do is wrong and is therefore going to Hell. I haven't made any other judgments about your beliefs.

To recap, I know God exist, I know God wants us to worship him one way and I know this because I know God.
If I didn't know I knew God then I wouldn't be part of any religion.
Why would I?

Since you are speaking in absolutes here, I assume you mean everyone else is wrong unless they "know" what you know? How can you "know" in this context purely based on faith? Isn't that a contradiction?

Since you are speaking in absolutes here, I assume you mean everyone else is wrong unless they "know" what you know? How can you "know" in this context purely based on faith? Isn't that a contradiction?
Knowing something exist based on my experience isn't a contradiction.
If I insist theres a chair where there isnt a chair and say what I've said above, then sure, its as you said.

I've seen you talk about ignorance of science and how people don't know it but still insist its wrong. Why couldn't I have the same understanding here? In this case you're wrong and making assumptions on what I know.

Knowing something exist based on my experience isn't a contradiction.
If I insist theres a chair where there isnt a chair and say what I've said above, then sure, its as you said.

I've seen you talk about ignorance of science and how people don't know it but still insist its wrong. Why couldn't I have the same understanding here? In this case you're wrong and making assumptions on what I know.

But you are claiming you know god exists yet cannot provide evidence for it. Why can you not just say it is faith? It is much more honest.

But you are claiming you know god exists yet cannot provide evidence for it. Why can you not just say it is faith? It is much more honest.
Not if I know it.
To have faith in the manner you're speaking of would require an act of will on my part. I don't will God into existence, hes already there. Knowing this I chose to worship him.

Would you like a list of scientist who think or have thinked the same way?

I wasn't referring to individuals or offshots, but to the core teaching of these religions.One of the great struggles in many of the more liberal-minded mainline denominations is religious plurality, as opposed to exclusivity. It is a difficult road at times, because, by definition, if I accept that there are many roads of faith which encourage and support the experience of God, then I must acknowledge and even accept that for a long time that path in American Christianity has often been defined by a sort of literalism that demands exclusivity. It may ultimately become a wide enough rift to splinter the UMC.

(I have always taught my children that they must be as tolerant of the bigot as they would hope the bigit could be of others. Easier said than done!)

Someone has to be wrong some where. I'd say this in support of this post: people who do not seek, and yet believe that there is nothing better for them are wrong.

Not if I know it.
To have faith in the manner you're speaking of would require an act of will on my part. I don't will God into existence, hes already there. Knowing this I chose to worship him.

Well, if you define "know" as ultimate faith, then fine. For the rest of us, knowing requires evidence, if you have evidence that would be a historical event.

Would you like a list of scientist who think or have thinked the same way?

A list of scientists who state that something exist with no evidence that it does? Yeah, that would be fun.

Well, if you define "know" as ultimate faith, then fine. For the rest of us, knowing requires evidence, if you have evidence that would be a historical event.



A list of scientists who state that something exist with no evidence that it does? Yeah, that would be fun.


Please don't try to argue with this person. They will just keep twisting the discussion....and it will never end...

Well, if you define "know" as ultimate faith, then fine. For the rest of us, knowing requires evidence, if you have evidence that would be a historical event.
No evidence :(

A list of scientists who state that something exist with no evidence that it does? Yeah, that would be fun.
I know, thats why I asked.
It's a long list, but I suggest reading bottom to top. You might see something that you may want to check out. Not that I have any one thing in mind, just saying.

John Philoponus (c.490–c.570) His criticism of Aristotelian physics was important to Medieval science. He also theorized about the nature of light and the stars. He was also called John of Alexandria, hence the picture. As a theologian he rejected the Council of Chalcedon so was a figure in the Monophysitism minority of Eastern Christianity. Cornell University[1] and Stanford University[2]

Bede, the Venerable (c.672–735) Catholic monk who wrote two works on "Time and its Reckoning." This primarily concerned how to date Easter, but contained a new recognition of the "progress wave-like" nature of tides. He was an influence early medieval knowledge of the natural world. David Edward Cartwright (1999). Tides: A Scientific History. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-5216-2145-3.

Pope Silvester II (c.950–1003) A scientist and book collector, he influenced the teaching of math and astronomy in church-run schools, and raised the cathedral school at Rheims to the height of prosperity. A liberal as Gerbert of Rheims, when made Pope he disowned his Gallican antecedents and supported the claims of the papacy. Truman University and History of the Christian Church and an article by William Wallace [3]

Hermannus Contractus (1013–1054) He wrote on geometry, mathematics, and the astrolabe. He was also a monk who composed Marian antiphons and was essentially beatified. McTutor

Robert Grosseteste (c.1175–1253) Bishop of Lincoln, he was the central character of the English intellectual movement in the first half of the 13th century and is considered the founder of scientific thought in Oxford. He had a great interest in the natural world and wrote texts on the mathematical sciences of optics, astronomy and geometry. He affirmed that experiments should be used in order to verify a theory, testing its consequences. A. C. Crombie, Robert Grosseteste and the Origins of Experimental Science 1100-1700, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971)

Pope John XXI (1215–1277) He wrote the widely used medical text Thesaurus pauperum before becoming Pope. When he took office as pope in 1277, he immediately cracked down on heterodoxy including Averroes works and teachings on Aristotle. Lawrence & Nancy Goldstone (2005). The Friar and the Cipher. Doubleday. ISBN 0-7679-1472-4. & Richard Hofstadter (1996). Academic Freedom in the Age of the College. Transaction books. ISBN 1-5600-0860-1.

Albertus Magnus (c.1193–1280) Patron saint of scientists in Catholicism who may have been the first to isolate arsenic. He wrote that: "Natural science does not consist in ratifying what others have said, but in seeking the causes of phenomena." Yet he rejected elements of Aristotelianism that conflicted with Catholicism and drew on his faith as well as Neo-Platonist ideas to "balance" "troubling" Aristotelian elements. In 1252 he helped appoint Thomas Aquinas to a Dominican theological chair in Paris to lead the suppression of these dangerous ideas. Helen S. Lang (1992). Aristotle's Physics and Its Medieval Varieties. State University of New York Press. ISBN 0-7914-1083-8. and Lawrence & Nancy Goldstone (2005). The Friar and the Cipher. Doubleday. ISBN 0-7679-1472-4.

Roger Bacon (c.1214–1294) He was an English philosopher who emphasized empiricism and has been presented as one of the earliest advocates of the modern scientific method. He joined the Franciscan Order around 1240, where he was influenced by Grosseteste. Bacon was responsible for making the concept of "laws of nature" widespread, and contributed in such areas as mechanics, geography and, most of all, optics. It is said that he was imprisoned by the church for many years because of his scientific teachings, although this is disputed. Lawrence & Nancy Goldstone (2005). The Friar and the Cipher. Doubleday. ISBN 0-7679-1472-4. and Lindberg, D.C. (1995). "Medieval Science and Its Religious Context". Osiris 10: 60–79.

Theodoric of Freiberg (c.1250–c.1310) Dominican who is believed to have given the first correct explanation for the rainbow in De iride et radialibus impressionibus or On the Rainbow. In theology he disagreed with Thomas Aquinas on metaphysical positions and tended more towards Neoplatonism than him. Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy

Thomas Bradwardine (c.1290–1349) He was an English archbishop, often called "the Profound Doctor". He developed studies as one of the Oxford Calculators of Merton College, Oxford University. These studies would lead to important developments in mechanics. Catholic Encyclopedia

Jean Buridan (1300–1358) He was a Catholic priest and one of the most influential philosophers of the later Middle Ages. He developed the theory of impetus, which was an important step toward the modern concept of inertia. Essay "Scientific Revolutions as Changes of Worldview" by Thomas Samuel Kuhn in Can Theories be Refuted?: Essays on the Duhem-Quine Thesis edited by Sandra G. Harding. (D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1976)[4]

Nicole Oresme (c.1323–1382) Theologian and bishop of Lisieux, he was one of the early founders and popularizers of modern sciences. One of his many scientific contributions is the discovery of the curvature of light through atmospheric refraction. (2005) Medieval Science, Technology, and Medicine: An Encyclopedia. Routledge. ISBN 0-4159-6930-1.

Nicholas of Cusa (1401–1464) Catholic cardinal and theologian who made contributions to the field of mathematics by developing the concepts of the infinitesimal and of relative motion. His philosophical speculations also anticipated Copernicus’ heliocentric world-view. McTutor

Otto Brunfels (1488–1534) A theologian and botanist from Mainz, Germany. His Catalogi virorum illustrium is considered to be the first book on the history of evangelical Church. In botany his Herbarum vivae icones helped earn him acclaim as one of the "fathers of botany" Meyers Konversationslexikon 1888 - 1889, Jahn, I. Geschichte der Biologie. Spektrum 2000, and

Mägdefrau, K. Geschichte der Botanik. Fischer 1992

Nicolaus Copernicus (1473–1543) Catholic canon who introduced a heliocentric world view. In 1620, his work was forbidden by his church "until corrected". The church demanded, in "about a quarto page of fine print" that nine sentences, by which heliocentrism was represented as certain, had to be either omitted or changed. This done, the book was still specifically banned in each edition of the index of prohibited books, with an expanded entry in the 1819 index, and not removed from the list until the final edition, in 1828. Catholic Encyclopedia[5], Joseph Mendham (1840). An Index of Prohibited Books: By Command of the Present Pope, Gregory XVI in 1835; .... Duncan and Malcolm.

Michael Servetus (1511-1553) Nontrinitarian who was condemned and imprisoned by Catholics before being burned at the stake in Protestant-ran Geneva. In science wrote on astronomy and his theological work "Christianismi Restitutio" contained the first European description of the function of pulmonary circulation. Salon review of a biography of Servetus, History of Science article

William Turner (c.1508–1568) He is sometimes called the "father of English botany" and was also an ornithologist. Religiously he was arrested for preaching in favor of the Reformation. He later became a Dean of Wells Cathedral, pictured, but was expelled for nonconformity. Galileo Project

Ignazio Danti (1536–1586) He was a bishop of Alatri who convoked a diocesan synod to deal with abuses. He was also a mathematician who wrote on Euclid, an astronomer, and a designer of mechanical devices. McTutor

Giordano Bruno (1548–1600) He was an Italian philosopher, priest, cosmologist, and occultist, known for espousing the idea the that Earth revolves around the Sun and that many other worlds revolve around other suns. For his many heretical views he was tried by the Roman Inquisition and burned at the stake. The Catholic Encyclopedia labels his system of beliefs "an incoherent materialistic pantheism." Catholic Encyclopedia and The Pope and the Heretic by Michael White.

Bartholomaeus Pitiscus (1561–1613) He may have introduced the word trigonometry into English and French. He was also a Calvinist theologian who acted as court preacher at the town then called Breslau, hence the image of their town square. McTutor

John Napier (1550–1617) Scottish mathematician known for inventing logarithms, Napier's bones, and being the popularizing the use of decimals. He also was a staunch Protestant who wrote on the Book of Revelation. McTutor

Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) His model of the cosmos based on nesting Platonic solids was explicitly driven by religious ideas; his later and most famous scientific contribution, the Kepler's laws of planetary motion, was based on empirical data that he obtained from Tycho Brahe's meticulous astronomical observations, which Kepler stole after Tycho died of mercury poisoning. There is circumstantial evidence that Kepler himself poisoned Tycho. He had wanted to be a theologian at one time and his Harmonice Mundi discusses Christ at points. Galileo Project and Adherents.com and Joshua Gilder and Anne-Lee Gilder (2005). Heavenly Intrigue: Johannes Kepler, Tycho Brahe, and the Murder Behind One of History's Greatest Scientific Discoveries. Anchor. 978-1-4000-3176-4 (1-4000-3176-1) ISBN.

Laurentius Gothus (1565–1646) A professor of astronomy and Archbishop of Uppsala. He wrote on astronomy and theology. Uppsala University

Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) Scientist who had many problems with the Inquisition for defending heliocentrism in the convoluted period brought about by the Reformation and Counter-Reformation. In regard to Scripture, he took Augustine's position: not to take every passage too literally, particularly when the scripture in question is a book of poetry and songs, not a book of instructions or history. Catholic Encyclopedia[6]

Marin Mersenne (1588–1648) For four years he devoted himself to theology writing Quaestiones celeberrimae in Genesim (1623) and L'Impieté des déistes (1624). These were theological essays against atheism and deism. He is more remembered for the work he did corresponding with mathematicians and concerning Mersenne primes. MacTutor archive

René Descartes (1596–1650) Descartes was one of the key thinkers of the Scientific Revolution in the Western World. He is also honoured by having the Cartesian coordinate system used in plane geometry and algebra named after him. He did important work on invariants and geometry. His Meditations on First Philosophy partially concerns theology and he was devoted to reconciling his ideas with the dogmas of Catholic Faith to which he was loyal. This attempt was, and is, considered unsuccessful by the Roman Catholic Church so his philosophy is still considered erroneous in it. McTutor

Blaise Pascal (1623–1662) Jansenist thinker; well-known for Pascal's law (physics), Pascal's theorem (math), and Pascal's Wager (theology). McTutor

Isaac Barrow (1630-1677) English divine, scientist, and mathematician. He wrote Expositions of the Creed, The Lord's Prayer, Decalogue, and Sacraments and Lectiones Opticae et Geometricae. A Short Biographical Dictionary of English Literature and MacTutor

Nicolas Steno (1638-1686) Lutheran convert to Catholicism, his Beatification in that faith occurred in 1987. As a scientist he is considered a pioneer in both anatomy and geology, but largely abandoned science after his religious conversion. Australian E-Journal of Theology and

Seth Ward (1617–1689) Anglican Bishop of Salisbury and Savilian Chair of Astronomy from 1649-1661. He wrote Ismaelis Bullialdi astro-nomiae philolaicae fundamenta inquisitio brevis and Astronomia geometrica. He also had a theological/philosophical dispute with Thomas Hobbes and as a bishop was severe toward nonconformists. Galileo Project and University of Hanover's philosophy seminar

Robert Boyle (1627–1691) Scientist and theologian who argued that the study of science could improve glorification of God. ASA and Stanford University[7]

John Wallis (1616-1703) As a mathematician he wrote Arithmetica Infinitorumis, introduced the term Continued fraction, worked on cryptography, helped develop calculus, and is further known for the Wallis product. He also devised a system for teaching the non-speaking deaf. He was also a Calvinist inclined chaplain who was active in theological debate. Galileo Project and University of Hanover's philosophy seminar

John Ray (1627–1705) An English botanist who wrote The Wisdom of God manifested in the Works of the Creation. (1691) The John Ray Initiative of Environment and Christianity is also named for him. University of California, Berkeley[8]

Gottfried Leibniz (1646–1716) A polymath who worked on determinants, a calculating machine, He was a Lutheran who worked with convert to Catholicism John Frederick, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg in hopes of a reunification between Catholicism and Lutheranism. He also wrote Vindication of the Justice of God. McTutor

Isaac Newton (1643–1727) He is regarded as one of the greatest scientists and mathematicians in history. His scientific fame notwithstanding, Newton's study of the Bible and of the early Church Fathers were among his greatest passions, though he consistently refused to swear his allegiance to the church. He wrote Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse of St. John (Nontrinitarianism). Gutenberg.org copy of that book

Colin Maclaurin (1698-1746) Briefly a Divinity student, had a Christian institute named for him. The Maclaurin Institute

Firmin Abauzit (1679–1767) A physicist and theologian. He translated the New Testament into French and corrected an error in Newton's Principia. His birthplace of Uzès is pictured. Scientists of Faith and Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition

Emanuel Swedenborg (1688–1772) His writing is the basis of Swedenborgianism and several of his theological works contained some science hypotheses. Swedenborgian site

Carolus Linnaeus (1707–1778) He is known as the "father of modern taxonomy" and also made contributions to ecology. Natural theology and the Bible were important to his Systema Naturae and Systema Vegetabilium. Berkeley bio

Maria Gaetana Agnesi (1718–1799) A mathematician appointed to a position by Pope Benedict XIV. After her father died she devoted her life to religious studies, charity, and ultimately became a nun. Britannica.com

Joseph Priestley (1733–1804) Nontrinitarianism clergyman who wrote the controversial work History of the Corruptions of Christianity. He is credited with discovering oxygen, although Carl Wilhelm Scheele did so a year earlier. Starr King school for the ministry

Olinthus Gregory (1774–1841) He wrote Lessons Astronomical and Philosophical in 1793 and became mathematical master at the Royal Military Academy in 1802. An abridgment of his 1815 Letters on the Evidences of Christianity was done by the Religious Tract Society. Preface to "Evidences" and 1911 Encyclopedia

William Buckland (1784-1856) Anglican priest/geologist who wrote Vindiciae Geologiae; or the Connexion of Geology with Religion explained. He was born in 1784, but his scientific life did not begin before the period discussed herein. University of Oxford site.[10]

Augustin Louis Cauchy (1789–1857) A mathematician who defended the Society of Jesus, tried to convert other mathematicians to Catholicism, and was a member of the Society of Saint Vincent de Paul. Catholic Encyclopedia and Istanbul Technical University

Lars Levi Læstadius (1800-1861) A botanist who started a revival movement within Lutheranism called Laestadianism. This movement is among the strictest forms of Lutheranism. As a botanist he has the author citation Laest and discovered four species. University of Texas article

Edward Hitchcock (1793–1864) Geologist, paleontologist, and Congregationalist pastor. He worked on Natural theology and wrote on fossilized tracks. 1911 encyclopedia and Amherst College[11]

William Whewell (1794–1866) A professor of mineralogy and moral philosophy. He wrote An Elementary Treatise on Mechanics in 1819 and Astronomy and General Physics considered with reference to Natural Theology in 1833. Stanford philosophy site and Middlesex University article

Michael Faraday (1791–1867) A Glasite church elder for a time, he discussed the relationship of science to religion in a lecture opposing Spiritualism. BBC[12] andAdherents.com

Charles Babbage (1791–1871) The Difference Engine and the Ninth Bridgewater Treatise. Victorian Web and

Adam Sedgwick (1785–1873) Anglican priest and geologist whose, A Discourse on the Studies of the University discusses the relationship of God and man. Scientists of Faith and University of California, Santa Barbara

John Bachman (1790-1874) He wrote numerous scientific articles and named several species of animals. He also was a founder of the Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary and wrote works on Lutheranism. The College of Charleston and Newberry College

Robert Main (1808–1878) Anglican priest who won the Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society in 1858. (The image is of Asaph Hall's 1879 Gold Medal of the RAS.) Robert Main also preached at the British Association of Bristol Royal Society's obituaries, pages 227-235

Orson Pratt (1811–1881) He was a mathematician who wrote New and Easy Method of Solution of the Cubic and Biquadratic Equations and Key to the Universe. He also wrote missionary tracts for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, to which he belonged. 1911 Encyclopedia and Science and Mormonism

Gregor Mendel (1822–1884) Augustinian Abbot who was the "father of modern genetics" for his study of the inheritance of traits in pea plants. Catholic Encyclopedia.[14]

Philip Henry Gosse (1810–1888) Marine biologist who wrote Aquarium (1854), and A Manual of Marine Zoology (1855-56). He is more famous, or infamous, as a Christian Fundamentalist who coined the idea of Omphalos (theology). University of Houston hosted article.[15]

Asa Gray (1810-1888) His Gray's Manual remains a pivotal work in botany. His Darwiniana has sections titled "Natural selection not inconsistent with Natural theology", "Evolution and theology", and "Evolutionary teleology." The preface indicates his adherence to the Nicene Creed in concerning these religious issues. Gutenberg text of Darwiniana and ASA

Francesco Faà di Bruno (1825—1888) An Italian mathematician most linked to Turin. He is known for Faà di Bruno's formula and being a spiritual writer beatified in 1988. McTutor

George Jackson Mivart (1827 - 1900) A fellow of the Zoological Society of London who did notable work on Insectivora and became involved in controversies with Charles Darwin. He was also a convert Catholicism who taught at the Catholic University of Leuven, their library is pictured, and received a Doctor of Philosophy from Pope Pius IX in 1876, However his later works were considered unorthodox and led to his excommunication by Cardinal Vaughan. * "St. George Jackson Mivart, Ph.D., M.D., F.R.S., V.P.Z.S., F.Z.S.". Catholic Encyclopedia. (1913). New York: Robert Appleton Company. Also the end of the Catholic Encyclopedia article on Hell mentions him.[16]

Armand David (1826–1900) A Catholic missionary to China and member of the Lazarists who considered his religious duties to be his principle concern. He was also a botanist with the author abbreviation David and as a zoologist he described several species new to the West. The Vicentians

George Stokes (1819–1903) A minister's son, he wrote a book on Natural Theology. He was also one of the Presidents of the Royal Society and made contributions to Fluid dynamics. Gifford Lectures site.[17][18]

George Salmon (1819 - 1904) He won the Copley Medal for his mathematical works. He later became chancellor of St. Patrick's Cathedral, Dublin, pictured, and wrote numerous works of theology. George Salmon: from mathematics to theology

Henry Baker Tristram (1822-1906) A founding member of the British Ornithologists' Union. His publications included The Natural History of the Bible (1867) and The Fauna and Flora of Palestine (1884). University of Durham

Lord Kelvin (1824–1907) He gave a famous address to the Christian Evidence Society. In science he won the Copley Medal, the Royal Medal, and was important in Thermodynamics. Institute of Physics[19] and his own article.

Pierre Duhem (1861–1916) He worked on Thermodynamic potentials and wrote histories advocating that the Roman Catholic Church helped advance science. McTutor and Scientist and Catholic: Pierre Duhem by Stanley Jaki[20]

Georg Cantor (1845–1918) Lutheran who wrote on religious topics and had an interest in Medieval theology. IUPUI[21]

Dmitri Egorov (1869–1931) Russian mathematician who made significant contributions to the broader areas of differential geometry. He was an Imiaslavie who defended religion during the Soviet era. In 1930 the Soviets arrested and imprisoned him as a "religious sectarian." He died of a hunger strike in protest. McTutor

Pavel Florensky (1882-1937) Russian Orthodox saint who wrote a book on Dielectrics and wrote of imaginary numbers having a relationship to the Kingdom of God. Second paragraph of Page 26 in a paper from Middlesex UniversityMiddlesex University article

Robert Millikan (1868–1953) The second son of Reverend Silas Franklin Millikan, he wrote about the reconciliation of science and religion in books like Evolution in Science and Religion. He won the 1923 Nobel Prize in Physics. Nobel Biography

E. T. Whittaker (1873-1956) Converted to Catholicism in 1930 and member of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. His 1946 Donnellan Lecture was entitled on Space and Spirit. Theories of the Universe and the Arguments for the Existence of God. He also received the Copley Medal and had written on Mathematical physics before conversion. McTutor

Arthur Compton (1892–1962) He won a Nobel Prize in Physics and in Christianity Takes a Stand he supported the controversial idea of the United States maintaining the peace through a nuclear-armed air force. A picture from Washington University in St. Louis, where he was chancellor, is shown. American Physical Society[22]

Georges Lemaître (1894-1966) Roman Catholic priest who first proposed the Big Bang theory. Catholic Education Resource Center

David Lack (1910-1973) Director of the Edward Grey Institute of Field Ornithology and convert who wrote Evolutionary Theory and Christian Belief in 1957. As he is in part known for his study of the genus Euplectes a Black-winged Red Bishop is pictured. Western Kentucky University and ASA's book reviews section

Charles Coulson (1910-1974) Methodist who wrote Science and Christian Belief in 1955. McTutor

Theodosius Dobzhansky (1900-1975) Russian Orthodox geneticist who criticized young Earth creationism in an essay, "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution," and argued that science and faith did not conflict. [23][24]

Michael Polanyi (1891–1976) He was born Jewish, but became a Tolstoyan and was also married in a Roman Catholic Church. In 1946 he wrote Science, Faith, and Society ISBN 0-226-67290-5 (Merton College, where he had a fellowship, is pictured) Polyaniana

Henry Eyring (1901-1981) American chemist known for developing the Eyring equation. Also a Latter-Day Saint whose interactions with LDS President Joseph Fielding Smith on science and faith are a part of LDS history. National Academy of Sciences[25]

Carlos Chagas Filho (1910-2000) A neuroscientist from Rio de Janeiro who headed the Pontifical Academy of Sciences for 16 years. He studied the Shroud of Turin and his "the Origin of the Universe", "the Origin of Life", and "the Origin of Man" involved an understanding between Catholicism and Science. Brazilian Academy of Sciences

Arthur Leonard Schawlow (1921-1999) American physicist, co-awarded the 1981 Nobel Prize for the development of the laser. He was a Methodist of Jewish ancestry. Seventh-Day Adventist Geoscience site and Essay by ID activist Henry F. Schaefer, III
Sir Robert Boyd (1922-2004) A pioneer in British space science who was Vice President of the Royal Astronomical Society. He lectured on faith being a founder of the "Research Scientists' Christian Fellowship" and an important member of its predecessor Christians in Science. He was connected to the University College London which is shown here in an old drawing. Obituary and CiS

Arthur Peacocke
(1924-2006) Anglican priest and biochemist, his ideas may have influenced Anglican and Lutheran views of evolution. Winner of the 2001 Templeton Prize. He was a Dean at Clare College, Cambridge, which is pictured. Society of Ordained Scientists' website[26]

C. F. von Weizsäcker
(1912) German nuclear physicist who is the co-discoverer of the Bethe-Weizsäcker formula. His The Relevance of Science: Creation and Cosmogony concerned Christian and moral impacts of science. He headed the Max Planck Society, which is pictured, from 1970 to 1980. After that he retired to be a radical Christian pacifist. ASA

Charles Hard Townes
(born 1915) In 1964 he won the Nobel Prize in Physics and in 1966 he wrote The Convergence of Science and Religion. University of California, Berkeley[27] and Templeton Prize's site.[28]

Ian Barbour
(born 1923) A physicist who wrote Christianity and the Scientists in 1960, and When Science Meets Religion ISBN 0-06-060381-X in 2000. For years he taught at Carleton College, hence their chapel is pictured. Templeton Prize site.[29]

Stanley Jaki
(born 1924) Benedictine who won a Templeton Prize and advocates the idea modern science could only have arisen in a Christian society. Seton Hall University site.[30]

Allan Sandage
(born 1926) An astronomer of Jewish ancestry who converted to Christianity late in life. He wrote the article A Scientist Reflects on Religious Belief and made discoveries concerning the Cigar Galaxy which is pictured. The religion essay, astronomy article and Bruce Medalist page,

Antonino Zichichi
(born 1929) A Sicilian physicist who wrote Why I Believe in Him Who Made the World that it is a "mathematical and scientific proof of the validity of the Encyclical 'Fides et Ratio,' two dimensions that proceed totally united and that cannot be made to oppose each other, as atheist culture would have it." He teaches theoretical physics at the University of Bologna and hence its seal is shown. Zenit News Agency andScience and Theology News

John Polkinghorne
(born 1930) Anglican priest who wrote Science and the Trinity (2004) ISBN 0-300-10445-6. Winner of the 2002 Templeton Prize. He is also a past President of Queens' College, Cambridge, which is pictured. His own website.[31]

Owen Gingerich
(born 1930) Mennonite astronomer who went to Goshen College and Harvard . He has written about people of faith in science history. Space.com[32] and Cambridge Christians in Science.[33]

R. J. Berry
(born 1934) He is a former president of both the Linnean Society of London and the Christians in Science group. He also wrote God and the Biologist: Personal Exploration of Science and Faith (Apollos 1996) ISBN 0-85111-446-6 As he taught at University College London for over 20 years its main building is pictured. iv press and Christians in Science

Ghillean Prance
(born 1937) A noted botanist involved in the Eden Project, which is pictured. He is also the current President of Christians in Science. CiS interview

Donald Knuth
(born 1938) (Lutheran) The Art of Computer Programming and 3:16 Bible Texts Illuminated (1991), ISBN 0-89579-252-4 His website.[34]

Henry F. Schaefer, III
(born 1944) He wrote Science and Christianity: Conflict or Coherence? ISBN 0-9742975-0-X and was awarded the American Chemical Society Award in Pure Chemistry in 1979. University of Georgia Athens

Michael Heller
(born 1944) He is a Catholic priest, a member of the Pontifical Academy of Theology, and a founding member of the International Society for Science and Religion.' He also is a mathematical physicist who has written articles on relativistic physics and Noncommutative geometry. His cross-disciplinary book Creative Tension: Essays on Science and Religion came out in 2003. He teaches at Kraków, hence the picture of a Basilica from the city. Templeton Foundation, Journal of Mathematical Physics, and ISSR

Hugh Ross
(born 1945) In astronomy worked as a postdoctoral researcher at the California Institute of Technology, which is pictured. In religion he founded his own ministry called Reasons To Believe. Reasons to Believe official web page and Trinity Western University News

Robert T. Bakker
(born 1945) Paleontologist who was a figure in the "dinosaur Renaissance" and known for the theory some dinosaurs were Warm-blooded. He is also a Pentecostal preacher who advocates theistic evolution and has written on religion. Interview with him at Prehistoric planet and a Spiritual site linked to him

Joan Roughgarden (born 1946) Transsexual scientist who wrote Evolution and Christian Faith: Reflections of an Evolutionary Biologist and has done Bible study. The image is from Stanford University where she teaches. New York Times and Stanford alumni magazine

Kenneth R. Miller
(born 1948) A biology professor at Brown University who wrote Finding Darwin's God ISBN 0-06-093049-7, The picture is of Brown's Science Library. St. Petersburg Times[35]

Francis Collins
(born 1950) He is the director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute. He has also written on religious matters in articles and in Faith and the Human Genome he states the importance to him of "the literal and historical Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, which is the cornerstone of what I believe." He wrote the book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. ASA and Genome.gov

Laurance Doyle
(born 1950) A scientist at SETI who argues that his faith, Christian Science, encouraged a scientific revolution. Christian Science site and SETI

Simon C. Morris
(born 1951) A British paleontologist who made his reputation through study of the Burgess Shale fossils, one of which is pictured. He was the co-winner of a Charles Doolittle Walcott Medal and also won a Lyell Medal. He is active in the Faraday Institute for study of science and religion and is also noted on discussions concerning the idea of theistic evolution. Gifford Lectures, Boyle Lecture, Boston University.

John T. Houghton
(born ????) He is the co-chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and won a gold medal from the Royal Astronomical Society. He's also former Vice President of Christians in Science. Christians in Science

Christopher Isham Theoretical physicist at Imperial College London, part of which is pictured to the side. In addition to being a physicist, he is a philosopher and theologian. Stephen Hawkins, the Big Bang, and God, by H. F. Schaefer

You can find many others from today's leading physicists, et al. (And I am not counting so-called Christian Scientists.)

Believing in God and being scientific is not mutually exclusive. I am an engineer and have no problem with my faith.

Can I "prove" that God exists to someone? No. But I cannot "prove" that I love my wife, but I know that I do.

You can find many others from today's leading physicists, et al. (And I am not counting so-called Christian Scientists.)

yeah ... tOOt's.
Where th'ells yer list.?
Just like a Female.
Always quick to capitalize on another's hard work.

[QUOTE=OldPhart]Believing in God and being scientific is not mutually exclusive. I am an engineer and have no problem with my faith.

" Science without religion is lame,religion without
science is blind. "

" God does not play dice. "

-- Einstein

yeah ... tOOt's.
Where th'ells yer list.?I'm not here to spoon feed you, ya little baby!
Just like a Female.
Always quick to capitalize on another's hard work.Your offensive sexism notwithstanding, I doubt it was "hard work" for Inviolable. Actually, anybody interested who has a computer, which btw is all participants on these boards, can do a damn search in seconds. This is not secret information, Fools.

I'm not here to spoon feed you, ya little baby!
Your offensive sexism notwithstanding, I doubt it was "hard work" for Inviolable. Actually, anybody interested who has a computer, which btw is all participants on these boards, can do a damn search in seconds. This is not secret information, Fools.
Well duh! But then I had to cut and paste and then split the list up and space out the names so they could be read.
Thats work.

Can I "prove" thatGod exists to someone? No. But I cannot "prove" that I love my wife, but I know that I do.I wonder. Evolution can not be proven by observation, i.e. we cannot observe the changes as they occur, but the theory is accepted based on its ability to predict, and its efficiency at explaining what is observed, i.e remains.

I imagine you could establish your committment/love/etc for your wife by those same standards. As I believe the notion of God could be established as a reality in a similar way. Thought I don't think it really matters.

I'm not here to spoon feed you, ya little baby!
Your offensive sexism notwithstanding, I doubt it was "hard work" for Inviolable. Actually, anybody interested who has a computer, which btw is all participants on these boards, can do a damn search in seconds. This is not secret information, Fools.

That's even worse,thar tOOt's.
Yer just TOO doggone LAZY to even run a search.
So typical a Female.
But,man,when they DO search the house fer a nutter credit
card,it's easy street.

Well duh! But then I had to cut and paste and then split the list up and space out the names so they could be read.
Thats work.Luv ya for that! :cool:

(You do agree, don't you, that if someone really cared to investigate this, they could do so? If they cared...)

That's even worse,thar tOOt's.
Yer just TOO doggone LAZY to even run a search.
So typical a Female.
But,man,when they DO search the house fer a nutter credit
card,it's easy street.Do you even know any actual women?

Do you even know any actual women?


Don't bee impertinent.
" There's such a thing as Insolence through Manner. "
-- Marlon Brando - Sayonara - {1957}

Don't bee impertinent.
...says the guy who calls me a female for not doing his homework for him!:slap:

Luv ya for that! :cool:
(You do agree, don't you, that if someone really cared to investigate this, they could do so? If they cared...)
Thanks for the love.

Yes I agree, but when you're the one making the point it isn't the other persons job to point out what you're saying.

Yes I agree, but when you're the one making the point it isn't the other persons job to point out what you're saying.Yeah, I think you are right about that. On the other side of that coin, though, it seems that sometimes we all (self included) could take the responsibility for trying to actually understand the position someone takes before hammering it. Looking something up is the least we could do.

Yeah, I think you are right about that. On the other side of that coin, though, it seems that sometimes we all (self included) could take the responsibility for trying to actually understand the position someone takes before hammering it. Looking something up is the least we could do.
Now you're just making excuses. :rolleyes:

I know this is going to sound strange coming from the creepy Christian.
I think, this whole "evidence" thing. will only help cement the anti-Christ to this world.

People are getting so dependent on evidence that Nap went as far as to deny the existence of hate.
The devil is going to pop up proclaiming he is God and he can prove it and people are going to be like, Wow! He can prove it!
Atheist everywhere will be worshiping the devil all because he has evidence.
Then they all get their brains sucked out by evil cabbage.
Oh wait, thats not the same thing.

I think, this whole "evidence" thing. will only help cement the anti-Christ to this world.

Atheist everywhere will be worshiping the devil all because he has evidence.Where's your evidence for that? ;)

People are getting so dependent on evidence that Nap went as far as to deny the existence of hate.I think Nap was highlighting that hate is a slippery eel of a concept to define or analyse, and so is not a useful term for explaining or predicting.

If you and I were to have a frank discussion to establish the nature of "hate" we'd probably tie ourselves up in knots and end up less clear than when we started. Yet if we did the same for something less tricky - such as water or the rules of arithmetic - we'd be able to talk about it effortlessly and to great precision. In this sense water and the rules of arithmetic have "more existence" than hate.

Where's your evidence for that? ;)
Wouldnt you like to know? or not.

I think Nap was highlighting that hate is a slippery eel of a concept to define or analyse, and so is not a useful term for explaining or predicting.

If you and I were to have a frank discussion to establish the nature of "hate" we'd probably tie ourselves up in knots and end up less clear than when we started. Yet if we did the same for something less tricky - such as water or the rules of arithmetic - we'd be able to talk about it effortlessly and to great precision. In this sense water and the rules of arithmetic have "more existence" than hate.
Thats my point. Along comes the devil with evidence that he is God, making it a simple thing for people to understand and see.
People will be all like, he got shot and lives 3 days later! and the devil will be like, theres your proof bitches! Now worship me!
And atheist will be like, We hear and obey...

Christian every where will be running around screaming bloody murder and getting their heads chopped off. Telling atheist they're wrong and the atheist will be all like, first you tell us we're wrong for wanting proof then god gives us proof and now youre mad because its not the proof you wanted, Die filthy scum!
Then the rebels will blow up the death star...

Oh wait... never mind.

Inviolable, as I expected, your list made no difference, I saw no statement of anyone claiming gods existence as a fact. A scientist would only do so based on evidence, so your fundamentalist might want to call themselves a scientist but wouldn't be anymore a scientist than Kent Hovind. Even fools stumble over the truth from time to time, but no real scientist would ever state gods existence as prooven and a fact.

And Foolsworth, your Einstein quote is old and out of context. Einstein himself refuted that use of the quote as not reflecting his personal opinion. He stated himself that he was not a believer in religion, and if he had to choose one, Buddhism would be the most reasonable to him.

You can find many others from today's leading physicists, et al. (And I am not counting so-called Christian Scientists.)

He failed to notice that I asked for scientists who claim God's existence is a fact and not just faith. I too know professors who believe in a god. That is not the issue.

I know this is going to sound strange coming from the creepy Christian.
I think, this whole "evidence" thing. will only help cement the anti-Christ to this world.

Oh, you actually are one of those creepy ones, then there truly is no point in arguing as your kind are simply blinded by religious dogma. I don't mean that as an insult, but I do know quite a lot of people like that. All I can do is quote "If rational argument worked on religious people, there would be no religious people."

This will lead absolutely nowhere, we will just do circles of arguments.

Inviolable, as I expected, your list made no difference, I saw no statement of anyone claiming gods existence as a fact. A scientist would only do so based on evidence, so your fundamentalist might want to call themselves a scientist but wouldn't be anymore a scientist than Kent Hovind. Even fools stumble over the truth from time to time, but no real scientist would ever state gods existence as prooven and a fact.

I didn't say it was proof just offered a list. Considering you think they're not real scientist, maybe you shouldnt take advantage of some of the information they gathered, for use in the scientific community. A few of which were noble prize winners and Im quite certain you use the knowledge they discovered all the time. With out a doubt learning some of it in school.

Star Wars quote.
Who's the more foolish: The fool, or the fool who follows him?

I didn't say it was proof just offered a list. Considering you think they're not real scientist, maybe you shouldnt take advantage of some of the information they gathered, for use in the scientific community. A few of which were noble prize winners and Im quite certain you use the knowledge they discovered all the time. With out a doubt learning some of it in school.

If they claim gods existence is a fact and not faith, they are not scientists in the true sense of the word. Now they may have done work in areas where they never cross paths with religion, but they are still not scientists at heart.

IStar Wars quote.
Who's the more foolish: The fool, or the fool who follows him?

Coming from a Christian, I find that quote quite amusing :)

Oh, you actually are one of those creepy ones, then there truly is no point in arguing as your kind are simply blinded by religious dogma. I don't mean that as an insult, but I do know quite a lot of people like that. All I can do is quote "If rational argument worked on religious people, there would be no religious people."

This will lead absolutely nowhere, we will just do circles of arguments.
rotfl
That was a joke. Granted it kind of led to a real question.
At any rate, I agree with you. You don't know half of what I do and I probably haven't read most of what you have.

By the way, a lot of the scientist I left on the list have done studies warranting evidence toward God.
Anyway, you're going to keep calling me ignorant and saying your sorry and I'm going to keep replying patiently and its not going to lead us any where other then I'll have a pretty low perspective of your ideals.
Which you have already made clear of me.

rotfl
That was a joke. Granted it kind of led to a real question.
At any rate, I agree with you. You don't know half of what I do and I probably haven't read most of what you have.

By the way, a lot of the scientist I left on the list have done studies warranting evidence toward God.
Anyway, you're going to keep calling me ignorant and saying your sorry and I'm going to keep replying patiently and its not going to lead us any where other then I'll have a pretty low perspective of your ideals.
Which you have already made clear of me.

Well, I was calling you ignorant based on that comment, well, not ignorant, but blind. Not the same thing. In either case you just labeled me ignorant on the subject of Christianity which is also wrong. I have spent 25 years growing up in it and even studied theology for 2 years.

Reducing your list by eliminating those working under the rule and force of religious dogma, how many have provided evidence for a god? And most importantly, evidence for the biblical god? God is such a vague term really, and most religious people argue it without defining what they mean. If you say god is the distant and beyond our reality kind of being who initiated our universe, as you will find many scientists believe in, that is one thing where I will claim I'm agnostic. If you are talking about the biblical god, incorporating the doctrines regarding Christ, the holy spirit and sin and all those Christian essentials, you will be incredibly hard pressed to come up with even a shred of evidence it is true. On the contrary the pile of evidence against is staggering. You are left with faith alone.

Well, I was calling you ignorant based on that comment, well, not ignorant, but blind. Not the same thing. In either case you just labeled me ignorant on the subject of Christianity which is also wrong. I have spent 25 years growing up in it and even studied theology for 2 years.

Where did I say, based on the subject of Christianity? I didn't.
Thats going to be the problem, not that in particular, but all you're going to do our entire conversation is make one assumption after the other.
You don't know me any better then I know you. Of course following this post you're going to ramble on about how you know my kind just has you have been.

It only demonstrates short sightedness.
Exact same thing you have been accusing me of from the start.

Like I said, you don't know half of what I do and I probably haven't read most of what you have.
That just makes two different people, it isn't an assumption on what you have actually done.

Where did I say, based on the subject of Christianity? I didn't.
Thats going to be the problem, not that in particular, but all you're going to do our entire conversation is make one assumption after the other.
You don't know me any better then I know you. Of course following this post you're going to ramble on about how you know my kind just has you have been.

It only demonstrates short sightedness.
Exact same thing you have been accusing me of from the start.

Like I said, you don't know half of what I do and I probably haven't read most of what you have.
That just makes two different people, it isn't an assumption on what you have actually done.

Sorry, but you are doing the exact thing yourself.
Why don't you respond to my post about the topic instead of bickering over who assumes the most?

I didn't say it was proof just offered a list. Considering you think they're not real scientist, maybe you shouldnt take advantage of some of the information they gathered, for use in the scientific community. A few of which were noble prize winners and Im quite certain you use the knowledge they discovered all the time. With out a doubt learning some of it in school.

Star Wars quote.
Who's the more foolish: The fool, or the fool who follows him?

Yer list certainly wasn't Foolish.But what it did Prove is how foolish
many herein tend to become,especially if their Feathers are
ruffled.No matter the many Genius' that Befuddled em.
It bothers me greatly that some have no ability to render
a cognitive sense of displacement,about what other Historic Great
Men,have conceptualized.
It's truly Saddenening,The Hours,days,weeks,months,Years,
Decades,Centuries,Millennia it took for Mankind to amass such
greatness of thought,only to be hurled aside,like a mere airwhiff
of gnats.

Yer list certainly wasn't Foolish.But what it did Prove is how foolish
many herein tend to become,especially if their Feathers are
ruffled.No matter the many Genius' that Befuddled em.
It bothers me greatly that some have no ability to render
a cognitive sense of displacement,about what other Historic Great
Men,have conceptualized.
It's truly Saddenening,The Hours,days,weeks,months,Years,
Decades,Centuries,Millennia it took for Mankind to ammas such
greatness of thought,only to be hurled aside,like a mere airwhiff
of gnats.

It is equally sad that despite all those hours, weeks, months and years great people spend trying to progress humanity, some of us still want to live in that past.

It is equally sad that despite all those hours, weeks, months and years great people spend trying to progress humanity, some of us still want to live in that past.

If you would like to be the one who goes on record as saying
yer Time on earth { Your Generation } is more important in the
Grand scheme of things or design,than be my guest.
It proves yet another GenXer Moral Imperative...
Their Life's are far more important and intrinsic than Other's.
Which in hindsight is worse than George Orwell's - Animal Farm -.!

If you would like to be the one who goes on record as saying
yer Time on earth { Your Generation } is more important in the
Grand scheme of things or design,than be my guest.
It proves yet another GenXer Moral Imperative...
Their Life's are far more important and intrinsic than Other's.
Which in hindsight is worse than George Orwell's - Animal Farm -.!

Ain't you the clever one...
You don't really think much before replying to peoples posts do you? I did not say that, neither did I imply it. You simply made it up to dodge my post.

Let me quote another favourite:
"If you have to exaggerate my point before arguing it, you have already lost the argument."