Dear George,

"Is being a scientist compatible with believing in God?" is the title of the article. How has your belief in God affected your science?

david..<<..How has your belief..in God affected your science?>>..

my thought..that by attempting..to percieve
beyond the obvious..is what science does

i know that there is always more

so im posting that here
http://www.celestinevision.com/celestine/forum/viewtopic.php?p=15042#15042

is being a scientist..compatible..[sounds like a question]
indeed..the very question george asked..but that depends[deep-ends]..on what means compatible?

we cannot mean..in the mathematical sense
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=compatible+number

com·pat·i·ble

adjective

1.
<<..capable of existing or living together..in harmony:>>

that seems fine

the most compatible married couple I know.
2.
<<..able to exist..together with something else:>>

Prejudice is not compatible with true religion.
3.
<<consistent; congruous (often followed by with ):>>

His claims are not compatible with the facts.
4.
Computers.
a.
(of software) capable of being run
on another computer without change.
b.
(of hardware) capable of being connected
to another device without the use of special equipment or software.
5.
Electronics. (of a device, signal, etc.) capable
of being used with equipment in a system without the need for special modification or conversion.
6.
denoting a system of television in which color broadcasts can be received on ordinary sets in black and white.

Relevant Questions
What Is Compatible Numbe...
What Signs Are Compatibl...
What Signs Are Compatibl...
What Sign Is Compatible ...

What Zodiac Signs Are Co...
Who Am I Compatible With...
What Is Compatible Numbe...
What Zodiac Signs Are Co...

What Signs Are Compatibl...

.
noun
7.
something, as a machine or piece
of electronic equipment, that is designed
to perform the same tasks as another, often in the same way and using virtually identical parts, programmed instructions, etc.

: Software written for one computer
will probably run on its close compatibles.
Origin:
1425–75; late Middle English
< Medieval Latin compatibilis, derivative of Late Latin compat&#299;
( Latin com- com- + pat&#299; to suffer, undergo). See -ible

Related forms
com·pat·i·bil·i·ty,
com·pat·i·ble·ness, noun

com·pat·i·bly, adverb
non·com·pat·i·ble, adjective

non·com·pat·i·bly, adverb
non·com·pat·i·ble·ness, noun

Dear oug,

When I first got involved in science I believed in God. I lost the belief, but I don’t think losing it was due to science. I think it was due to learning more about the different things that people believe in, and the way religion gets transmitted. People often believe in a religion because they were raised in that religion or because it fills a need. I realised that religions as well as God were human inventions, and I felt no need for religion.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=10065 will direct you to my article, “God is a human invention”.

Dear oug,

I realise I did not answer your question. My belief in God did not affect my science at all. It was a belief I discarded.

Banjo wrote: “Latin is to be found among the roots of our languages, not among the branches.”

Dear Banjo,

I think the analogy of languages to a tree with branches and roots is faulty. Languages stem from one another, but they also interact with one another. English has many terms from other languages. Branches in general don’t grow into one another. They are distinct. English has 400,000 words. Norwegian, like most other European languages, has about 80,000. English, like Chinese, has far more words than most other languages. English and Chinese have absorbed far more words from other languages than other languages.

Latin is not even a dead language. It is still used by the Catholic Church, and many church documents are written in Latin. The version of Latin I learned in school is called classical Latin and is different from the version used in Catholicism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages tells about the 439 Indo-European languages to which Latin belongs. There are earlier Indo-European languages than Latin. The article also discusses the tree versus wave model of language development. The tree model seems appropriate only in cases where branches are isolated from one another.

thanks for that link david
can i just..point out..some practical/reasons..Behind..the mosaic laws

<<..Why not eat pig?..>>

how else would we figure out..jesus words
that..its not what..man puts INto..his mouth
which makes him..unclean..but that which issues forth from it

but for the cleanliness obsession..
we would miss that..of..the creed..of hand washing
[which..forbade any to eat..[even on..the mount]..with unclean hands]

[no hand-wash jars..no eating..
we KNOW*..that *for sure]..thus the increase

simular..drinking even..the best wine
from the toilet..[hand-wash jars]

jesus looking at a spot..saying
thats NOT leprosy..[cause that was cause..enough..to exclude you from the temple]

there is a story..i have heard
because god turned our ancestors..into pig..

[the aborigine..for example..hold strict laws..
against eating..their own 'totem'..[in..my case it..would be..not eating books/deer/sacrificial ritual.

but lets not forget..
pigs love eating feces/filth/corpses.offerings
and oysters..are filter feeders..[its all as you hint at..for logical reason]

<<..If oysters..and lobsters were transported..to the desert they would probably..be spoiled..so it would be wise not to eat them..>

its said..if we KNEW*
what was really..in a sausage..we would refuse to eat

my favorite 'law'..is the law
against adulteration..of gods words..
not..not having sex...but..here we are..talking..of creed/RELIGION*..which i hate for its mindlessness..

when..for me its about god..who is
all loving/merciful..etc..who dont write any rule
[unless for good cause..if its good/useful..its of god..a clear separation..

between the good/seen..
and the ob'scene..in between