Can religion and Science ver co-exist in harmony?

Question

The conflicts,similarities,possible future relation.

Answer 1

As religious person and a scientist I believe so. Also, as a shia muslim it is essential that they do. Science is Gods law you can not deny one and not deny the other. In the Quran (Islam's Holy Book) God commands us in many verses to look to his creation as proof of his existance and mercy. I think that this is how God pushed us to study the sciences. If you look at the history of the Islamic empires you will see many of the greatest thinkers where also very pious men. Look up Ibn Sina (Aviccena) or Al-Jabr (algebra). Just off the top of my head. This is not a coincidence.

Answer 2

Religion and science spur each other on and have been for a long time...its a never ending battle and the only way to win is to expirience death...they will never co-exist in "harmony".... I do feel that some of the earliest religions began as an early form of science....in that hey tried to explain things that logic and reason could not explain at that particular time.

Answer 3

Yes, the reason is that religion is a creation of society to shape our moral values whereas science's purpose is to explain the world around us. By using an all powerful god as a creator and distributor of moral guidelines ancient societies found a way to provide answers to the questions of life and a moral framework for people to follow. In our modern times we must realize that religion is not about explaining the physical world but rather creating a loving and just society. Therefore, it is the over extension of religion into an area that it does not belong that results in the quarrels of today.

Answer 4

Of course they can. Many scientists are very religious people. Though it may seem on the surface that science and religion are conflicting, they actually have something in common. Science is the way to understand God's material creation and religion is the way to understand God's spiritual creation. Philosophy is a way of harmonizing them.

God's fifth epochal revelation to us, the Urantia Book, is a magnificent example of this harmony. It explains God and his creations to us using science, philosophy and religion in an amazingly logical and comprehensive tapestry. Take a look and decide for yourself.

Answer 5

No because even just look at evolution vs. creationism. Creationism involves a higher power- God
Evolution is really a theory and is closer to science and is saying that no higher power created the human body and other things in the world, which i believe is crap. There is no way a planet or animals can just come out of existence.
Basically, no they can't co-exist.

Answer 6

Science and religion are just catagories.

People who believe that science is everything or religion is everything will always find reasons to fight. The main problem we have as humans is not talking about the obvious. We are bloodthirsty and do not like one another, so we look for excuses to fight.

Answer 7

It is highly improbable. There are some subtleties at work here that seem to escape the notice of most people. They have to do with the nature of 'belief'.

A rational person might say "I believe in the Big Bang." A religious person might say "I believe in creation, as described in Genesis." But these statements are not even remotely similar, with respect to what is meant by the word 'believe'.

For the rational person, the statement of 'belief' in the Big Bang means that they understand that the concept provides a scientifically and mathematically consistent explanation, congruent with the evidence, which accounts for the evolution of the universe from a fraction of a second after the initiating event, up until the present. When the 'inflationary model' came to the fore, rational people said "Well, good... that clears up a few questions and makes things even more coherent." NOBODY threw up their arms and wailed "Oh, no... oh, no... ain't so... ain't so... the Big Bang is the inerrant truth... not this ridiculous, atheistic 'inflationary' model."

See... when we say "I believe in the Big Bang", we don't really mean the same thing as the religious person means when he says "I believe in creation, as described in Genesis," or "I believe in God." Our 'belief' in the Big Bang (or anything else) isn't really a 'belief'... it is more properly a 'paradigm'... a useful way of looking at something, or thinking about something. If additional information is uncovered that adds to the conceptual model, that is a good thing... not a disaster. If part of the conceptual model is discovered to be incorrect, and must be tossed in the trash and replaced with something completely different... that is also a good thing... not the end of the world as we know it. And often, no matter how highly confident we may be of the accuracy or completeness of a particular paradigm, we may have reason to apply a DIFFERENT paradigm to the same thing, in an effort to tease out new insights; for example, we might want to contemplate the potential implications of a change to a theory from the perspective of the Tao Te Ching, the Gaia hypothesis, or ecological homeostasis. We KNOW that all theories are approximations... and that is OK. We KNOW that we don't have all the answers... and that is OK, too. There is nothing wrong with saying "We don't know... yet; but we're working on it."

But these modes of thinking, perceiving, contemplating and understanding are utterly alien to the 'religious' mind. For the religious mind, a 'belief' is not a paradigm... not a useful way of thinking about something... it is an internalized conviction that one knows the absolute 'truth' pertaining to some aspect of existence and/or fundamental reality. 'Beliefs' are one of the key interpretive component filters of the religious person's 'self-description'... a part of what DEFINES them as a person... the very thing that creates their world-view... an underpinning of their 'subjective reality'. Any challenge to one of these internalized 'beliefs' is perceived and interpreted as a vital threat... an attack upon the 'self-description'... and an assault upon their subjective reality.

And here is the key difference: When there is a change in one of the paradigms dealing with a scientific concept, or a new insight into the workings of the universe, to the 'rational' person it merely constitutes an interesting new piece of knowledge and understanding... a new insight. However, if that same new insight, or piece of information (a feature of the universe, for example) seems to threaten a tenet of Christianity, everybody goes to battle stations, goes into 'damage control' mode... for fear that the whole edifice will come crashing down. And, ultimately, it will.

So, when a fundie disparages evolution, for example, it really has nothing to do with a genuine, intellectual dispute regarding scientific details... they are generally scientifically illiterate, anyway. Any 'scientific' arguments that they present are inevitably not even understood... they are just lifted from the pre-packaged lies and misrepresentations that are found on dozens of 'Liars for Jesus' (LFJ) web sites, and parroted. They are in a battle. They are trying to sink science before science sinks them. They are desperate... and science is (mostly, and unfortunately) oblivious to the fact that they are even in a fight, and that somebody is trying to sink them. They are just blithely bopping along, doing what science does... figuring out how nature works.

No... none of this has anything to do with a mere disagreement pertaining to evidence and understanding. It has to do with minds that deal with fundamental issues in an entirely different way. It has to do with a flexible, open-minded, intellectually honest (willing to question and doubt one's own presumptions) curiosity about the universe, contending with a rigid, unyielding world-view that depends from a certainty that certain delusional faith-based (willful ignorance and magical, wishful thinking) 'beliefs' represent the absolute 'truth' of reality.

We might as well be talking to an alien species, from a distant planet.

When the religious enter a venue like this one, they are (generally) NOT seeking answers, or new information... these might cause them to QUESTION their beliefs, or might put their beliefs at risk. No... they are seeking VALIDATION... of their beliefs, and hence, of their self-description.

Answer 8

Facts -

The earliest dinosaurs and mammals date back to the late Triassic period, about 225 million years ago. Most of the first Triassic dinosaurs were small and quick meat-eaters that walked on their hind legs. By the end of the Triassic period (about 200 million years ago), larger prosauropods (20-foot-long plant-eating dinosaurs) were beginning to appear.
The Jurassic period began about 200 million years ago and lasted about 55 million years. Many new types of dinosaurs, mammals, and reptiles emerged during the Jurassic, including the plated dinosaurs and the sauropods — heavy, long-necked dinosaurs that walked on four legs. There were also large theropods, or meat-eating dinosaurs, roaming the Earth. The first birds (and bird-like dinosaurs) also appeared during the Jurassic period.
The Cretaceous period began about 145 million years ago and ended 65 million years ago with the extinction of the dinosaurs. Flowering plants and modern insects appeared. Dinosaurs of all shapes and sizes walked the land, including duckbills, armored, horned, and dome-headed dinosaurs. There were new forms of giant meat-eaters, as well as a deadly new breed of hunter, the "raptor" dinosaur, known for its sharp teeth and curved claw on each hand and foot.

Fairy tales - Bible and Quran

Answer 9

Of course they can. religion doesn't search the true to the same questions science wants to answer.For example religion tells who made the world but science tells how the world was constuncted

Answer 10

Of course they can. They have existed in harmony for centuries.

Funny how it's the science champions -- and not the "religious folks" -- who always see this "conflict" between science and religion.

My religion -- Roman Catholicism -- regards science as a wonderful thing, and always has.

That's why the Church was, for much of its history especially during the Renaissance, a major patron of learning and of the sciences.

Science leads us to learn more about the world that God created. This is a process that the Church has always encouraged.