CS Lewis: “Men became scientific because they expected Law in Nature, and they expected Law in Nature because they believed in a Legislator. In most modern scientists this belief has died: it will be interesting to see how long their confidence in uniformity survives it. Two significant developments have already appeared—the hypothesis of a lawless sub-nature, and the surrender of the claim that science is true. We may be living nearer than we suppose to the end of the Scientific Age.”

Wikipedia: Scientific method and religion

“Laplace's work earned him a place in the prestigious French Academy of Sciences. It also removed the idea of God further (if not completely) from the mechanistic cosmology that had been unfolding over the previous century. Not even deism could stand up to this assault. Indeed, the story goes that when Laplace presented a copy of his work to Napoleon, the latter uttered a concern that Laplace had made no mention in his work of the Divine "Originator" of this marvelous system--to which Laplace replied: "I had no need for that hypothesis!"

http://www.kingsacademy.com/mhodges/09_Biography/09b_Thinkers/enlightenment2.htm

And we have:

“Experts say the “low hanging fruit” of scientific knowledge, such as the laws of motion and gravity, was attained using simple methods in previous centuries, leaving only increasingly impenetrable problems for modern scientists to solve.
Uncharted areas of science are now so complex that even the greatest minds will struggle to advance human understanding of the world, they claim.
In addition, the remaining problems are becoming so far removed from our natural sensory range that they require increasingly powerful machines, such as the Large Hadron Collider, even to approach them.
Russell Stannard, professor emeritus of physics at the Open University, argues that although existing scientific knowledge will continue to be applied in news ways [JS: That's called engineering], "the gaining of knowledge about fundamental laws of nature and the constituents of the world, that must come to an end”.
He said: “We live in a scientific age and that’s a period that’s going to come to an end at some stage. Not when we’ve discovered everything about the world but when we’ve discovered everything that’s open to us to understand.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8020211/Is-the-age-of-scientific-discovery-ending.html

Maybe "Goddidit" will outlive science.

Originally posted by JS357
Science Kills God; God Gets Even

Originally posted by JS357
CS Lewis: “Men became scientific because they expected Law in Nature, and they expected Law in Nature because they believed in a Legislator. In most modern scientists this belief has died: it will be interesting to see how long their confidence in uniformity survives it. Two significant developments have already appeared—the hypothesis of a lawless sub-nature, ...[text shortened]... 8020211/Is-the-age-of-scientific-discovery-ending.html

Maybe "Goddidit" will outlive science.

Originally posted by JS357
CS Lewis: “Men became scientific because they expected Law in Nature, and they expected Law in Nature because they believed in a Legislator. In most modern scientists this belief has died: it will be interesting to see how long their confidence in uniformity survives it. Two significant developments have already appeared—the hypothesis of a lawless sub-nature, ...[text shortened]... that science is true. We may be living nearer than we suppose to the end of the Scientific Age.”

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Though we all observe scientific laws, the question becomes who or what enforces them.

People who claim that "God is dead, there is only Science" are as blindly restricted by their closed minds as those who say "Science is dead, there is only God".

They both miss the full picture.

Originally posted by Suzianne
People who claim that "God is dead, there is only Science" are as blindly restricted by their closed minds as those who say "Science is dead, there is only God".

They both miss the full picture.

Originally posted by sonship
Put another way - "All truth is God's truth."

Originally posted by twhitehead
CS Lewis, as was often the case, was talking nonsense. Scientists did not expect Laws in nature because they believed in a Legislator.

[b]Uncharted areas of science are now so complex that even the greatest minds will struggle to advance human understanding of the world, they claim.
To a large degree that was the case even in previous centuries. I ...[text shortened]... ite a long way away from that situation. At a guess I would say we are less than half way there.[/b]

Originally posted by FMF
This may well be so. What a pity then that so many of your fellow Christians see science as some kind of nemesis and take pride in believing in palpable nonsense like the Earth being only 6,000 years old and that all the world's racial diversity comes from the sons of Noah at a relatively recent point in mankind's history. What a pity that sincere and headlong f ...[text shortened]... his way, and in so doing turn them away from the possibility that "All truth is God's truth". 🙂

Originally posted by sonhouse
My take: Although humans have intellectual limits, even the best of us, that does not mean we will not penetrate deeper into the mysteries of the universe.

We are no longer alone in our pursuit of deep knowledge. We now have computers getting ever more powerful, now able to crank out quadrillions of calculations per second to simulate facets of the unive ...[text shortened]... ned human/computer team can also change the world with discoveries we can only speculate on now.

Originally posted by FMF
Who "enforces... [the] laws"? Scientific "laws" are generalizations that describe recurring happenings in nature and not a collection of rules imposed by authority. Language is interesting enough already without sophistry and wordplay. 🙂

Originally posted by FMF
I think that human curiosity, endeavour, and achievement ~ as expressed and exercised through scientific method, research and accumulating knowledge ~ (and alongside mankind's other capacities and attributes, such as its morality and social nature) is arguably an example of the human spirit at its most potent and wonderful, and as credible [if not more credible] ...[text shortened]... to see science [along with people in different religionist cul-de-sacs] as threats and enemies.

Originally posted by twhitehead
CS Lewis, as was often the case, was talking nonsense. Scientists did not expect Laws in nature because they believed in a Legislator.

[b]Uncharted areas of science are now so complex that even the greatest minds will struggle to advance human understanding of the world, they claim.
To a large degree that was the case even in previous centuries. I ...[text shortened]... ite a long way away from that situation. At a guess I would say we are less than half way there.[/b]

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Curious turns of phrases (pointing toward a pursuit of answers) when the atheistic world view declares none exist and such questions are illegitimate.