It's a shame you're getting downvoted. I agree with your posts.
I 100% believe in God and live in awe of the facts/rules/laws/etc He created that we call science. The two are NOT mutually exclusive. You don't have to be an atheist to be a scientist nor should a man of faith discount science due to their belief in God.
The only problems that arise are when the two cross over. One cannot mix science with religion and vice versa ... as you said, God wouldn't be too thrilled with people cheapening His creation by claiming some kind of magic occurred :-).
People often forget that many priests were genuine scientists hundreds of years ago. Atheists may laugh at that, but they were as interested in the universe as the most secular of scientists were. They wanted to know the facts that allow our existence (the truth of our existence is a philosophical one). They followed a SCIENTIFIC process, not a religious one. If they weren't priests, they may have been very religious. Issac Newton is such an example. That man is second only to Einstein when it comes to the greatest scientists in my opinion.
Sure, some of the priests were totalitarians and impeded the research of others claiming that it interfered with passages in the Bible, but we also see that today when liberal scientists wreck the lives and careers of people that question their work on bullshit like global warming so that their belief in the fairy tale of a peaceful, one world socialist government may come true :-) . That's mankind interfering though, not God.
If I am not mistaken, this hardcore line that was drawn between being a person of faith and a person of science occurred right around the time the Marxists latched onto Darwin's work as a sort of proof that there is no God. Once that happened, those that use religion for more dubious purposes convinced their followers that science was evil for that reason. Once again, we can thank a socialist and a fanatic for sewing the seeds of division :-). Prior to that, nobody really cared if a scientist was a person of faith.
It is written that God created man in His image. I don't think that must mean a physical form. I think our self awareness is what's created in His image ... basically our soul. I'd have to think that God created this universe with its rules (be it physics, organic chemistry, etc) in a way that life can exist, but isn't directly "created" by Him.
We are all here for some kind of purpose. Who knows what that is ultimately. What I do know is that He isn't going to allow Himself to interfere with the universe for the most part (that's where miracles come into play, and I suspect they're the result of prayer, but that's an entirely different topic). I doubt He created all of this only to interfere constantly though :-). Much like Ben Franklin said that we are only guaranteed the right to pursue happiness, but it is up to us to achieve it, God laid down the rules for our existence ... it is up to us to figure out what to do with them.
Sorry for the rambling :-) ... I love discussions like this :-).
It's a shame you're getting downvoted. I agree with your posts.
I 100% believe in God and live in awe of the facts/rules/laws/etc He created that we call science. The two are NOT mutually exclusive. You don't have to be an atheist to be a scientist nor should a man of faith discount science due to their belief in God.
The only problems that arise are when the two cross over. One cannot mix science with religion and vice versa ... as you said, God wouldn't be too thrilled with people cheapening His creation by claiming some kind of magic occurred :-).
People often forget that many priests were genuine scientists hundreds of years ago. Atheists may laugh at that, but they were as interested in the universe as the most secular of scientists were. They wanted to know the facts that allow our existence (the truth of our existence is a philosophical one). They followed a SCIENTIFIC process, not a religious one. If they weren't priests, they may have been very religious. Issac Newton is such an example. That man is second only to Einstein when it comes to the greatest scientists in my opinion.
Sure, some of the priests were totalitarians and impeded the research of others claiming that it interfered with passages in the Bible, but we also see that today when liberal scientists wreck the lives and careers of people that question their work on bullshit like global warming so that their belief in the fairy tale of a peaceful, one world socialist government may come true :-) . That's mankind interfering though, not God.
If I am not mistaken, this hardcore line that was drawn between being a person of faith and a person of science occurred right around the time the Marxists latched onto Darwin's work as a sort of proof that there is no God. Once that happened, those that use religion for more dubious purposes convinced their followers that science was evil for that reason. Once again, we can thank a socialist and a fanatic for sewing the seeds of division :-). Prior to that, nobody really cared if a scientist was a person of faith.
It is written that God created man in His image. I don't think that must mean a physical form. I think our self awareness is what's created in His image ... basically our soul. I'd have to think that God created this universe with its rules (be it physics, organic chemistry, etc) in a way that life can exist, but isn't directly "created" by Him.
We are all here for some kind of purpose. Who knows what that is ultimately. What I do know is that He isn't going to allow Himself to interfere with the universe for the most part (that's where miracles come into play, and I suspect they're the result of prayer, but that's an entirely different topic). I doubt He created all of this only to interfere constantly though :-). Much like Ben Franklin said that we are only guaranteed the right to pursue happiness, but it is up to us to achieve it, God laid down the rules for our existence ... it is up to us to figure out what to do with them.
Sorry for the rambling :-) ... I love discussions like this :-).