science has dismissed the need for religion, it has in fact made it ridiculous, how can we educated people?

Question

just to clear up my poorly worded question, i meant educated in science and the history of religious books, ie by whom and when they were written, they may find man created god not the other way around.

Answer 1

Why is it that a smart educated atheist like you doesn't know a fact of science a silly stupid christian like me knows?
Although two chemical molecules may appear to have the same elements and similar properties, they can still have different structures. When two molecules appear identical and their structures differ only by being mirror images of each other, those molecules are said to have chirality. DNA develops a twist in the chain because each component contains chirality or handedness. It is this handedness that gives DNA the spiral
shaped helical structure. If one molecule in the DNA structure had the wrong chirality, DNA would not exist in the double helix form, and DNA would not function properly. The entire replication process would be derailed like a train on bad railroad tracks. In order for DNA evolution to work, billions of molecules within our body would have to be generated with the "R" configuration all at the same time, without error. If it is impossible for one nucleotide to be formed with chirality, how much less likely would it be for billions of nucleotides to come together exactly at the same time, and all of them be formed with the same chirality? If evolution cannot provide a mechanism that forms one product with chirality, how can it explain the formation of two products of opposite chirality? Chirality is not just a major problem for evolution; it is a dilemma. According to evolution, natural processes must explain everything over long periods of time.
However, the process that forms chirality cannot be explained by natural science in any amount of time. I know this isn't too deep for you because I am just a stupid theist and I understand it...


Jim

Answer 2

Science has not dismissed anything. Science is supposed to be objective. A scientist should honestly conduct and experiment or watch a natural phenomenon and come up with a theory based on his observation. They should then conduct the experiment or watch the phenomenon again, to see if the theory fits. They should keep repeating the process and modifying the theory until the theory fits all known relevant facts.
The problem is, we know comparatively little about the universe. Is it not at least possible that there may be a universal law which is fundamental to every operation of the universe of which we are currently ignorant?
Let's suppose that God exists. He created the universe that scientists are puting in sterling effort to investigate. It would stand to reason that God would knowa great deal more than any of these scientists. It may even stand to reason that God knows a great deal more than all the scientists put together, since we don't know God properly and therefore don't know the limits of his knowledge, if indeed He has any limits.
One of the main questions for many as regards God's existence is "Why does He permit so much Suffering? (or any other matter that concerns the asker)?" The answer has to do with sovereignty. In the Garden of Eden Satan questioned God's way of ruling, implying in his conversation with Eve that God was witholding something from her. This was not true. When Eve persuaded Adam to disobey God, sin and death entered the world of mankind. Mankind turned their back on God's rule and stuck out on their own. So far, the 'experiment' has failed. A wide variety of governments have been tried, but none has been able to bring their subjects any great measure of securtiy or happiness or any other thing that we need to live effective and productive lives. It's true that many are secure, happy, effective and productive citizens, but many are not and there is nothing that human governments can do about it. They no longer promise that level of nor do they try. God's kingdom, as described in the Bible, is the only hope for mankind.

Answer 3

I think that is a bold statement to make. To answer your question from a Christian perspective (not that you might want it, but I will give it any way). Since I am a Christian, I believe (note the key word "believe") science has not dismissed any need for religion. If it were so, the facts would be speak for itself. The fact (please someone tell me if I'm wrong) that 49% of Britian (this could be students) believe in creation over evolution is just one sign that science has yet to dismiss religion. Now, before you say that the 49% above mentioned are uneducated, the fact is that they are. There are many people, from all religions who study the sciences, and can come to no other conclusion than that God exists.

The Psalmist writes: 'The heavens declare the glory of your name'. The Bible speaks about all creation pointing to God for his glory. When a scientist says (I'm no scientist, I just hear what scientist friends say) can you believe this 'thingy ma bobby' (insert technical words here), and you hear them say afterwards: 'wow, can you believe God made this, it's fantastic', then God has been praised and given glory.

Now, I don't believe the Bible is a science manual. It wasn't made for that purpose. While I am a conservative Christian, I don't believe Genesis is an entirely full account of what happened at the creation of the world. I do believe that the Bible and true science work in harmony. Why do I say 'true science'? Come on people, we are still teaching our children in schools that evolution is 100% fact, when it is still theory and far from being proven. The whole issue of carbon dating... now that's funny (sorry, this comment is not directed at the person who asked the question - it's directed at the evolution people - monkeys). *side note: that was a joke - goes to sit in corner*

God Bless,

-Rat.

Answer 4

LOL!! Honey, what planet are you on? Science certainly has not "dismissed the need for religion." Where did you get that? Science has also not made religion rediculous.

There are many scientists who became religious because their scientific studies lead them to it.

Science has confirmed many anomolies in our world that just might point to a higher being looking after us. Such as this - all fluids in the world - but one - freeze from the bottom up. Which one does not. Water. Why? Could it be a divine plane that aquatic life have a place to live even during the coldest weather?

If the "survival of the fittest" rule were true, why do lactating mothers of premmie babies produce more nutrients and protein in their milk?

The more we ask, the more we find God.

Answer 5

It may have dismissed the need for a religious explanation of reality, but it has not yet dismissed the need for Religion. Psychiatry would probably disagree with the notion that outward prayer and/or meditation, regardless of whether or not it is heard, cannot be helpful to a person with a need to get something off of his chest, or who needs to find the confidence to do something. Sociologists understand that people in tight religious communities can help each other through difficult times, and are aware of the political power of belief in bizarre ideas of the post-death existence.

Religion is fundamentally -not- the study of why things are (a mistake that many religious individuals also make). It is a social convention, and that has influence and meaning that so far science has created no alternative to.

(Though, to be honest, I hope it does. Organisation and dogma are harmful distractions in the search for truth.)

Answer 6

From this article on Wikipedia(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science), the following statement is made about science: "Scientists maintain that scientific investigation must adhere to the scientific method, a process for developing and evaluating natural explanations for observable phenomena based on empirical study and independent verification. Science typically, therefore, rejects supernatural explanations and arguments from authority." From this statement, it appears that the intent of science does not include proving or disproving religion.

It should also be noted that science does not prove evolution because evolution is a still a THEORY. Evolution is based on theory upon theory to support its case without physical evidence. We still cannot find any missing links that prove that species evolve. Doesn’t it seem reasonable that we would find fossils that are the missing link between each species? The founder of evolution Charles Darwin (a Christian) admitted that evolution is based on theory and questions whether his theory is a science or a faith.
Charles Darwin - "The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an improved theory, is it then a science or faith?" (http://www.darwin-literature.com/l_quotes.html)
Stephen Hawking is considered the most brilliant scientific mind of our generation and was formerly opposed to any idea of creation. In his video ‘Stephen Hawking’s Universe’ it is stated, “It seems that the church's ideas of a moment of creation were right from the beginning.” (http://www.shoppbs.org/sm-pbs-stephen-hawkings-universe-episodes-1-and-2-on-one-tape--pi-1405762.html#Details)

On a side note, spirituality (or religion) usually deals with the human condition and moral codes of conduct. The Bible teaches that humans are 'sinful' by nature so a moral code (The Ten Commandments) is required to show them their condition. I see this condition in myself daily when I have thoughts that do not line up with what I know to be ‘right and good’ according to my moral compass. When people are pressed and their backs are against the wall, do they think of saving the rest of the world and helping others? In the 5000 years of written human history, when has there not been rape, murder, stealing, lying, etc. Remember that all of these acts come from people. Everyone has a moral compass that knows that these acts are wrong, yet these acts still happen.
Most people of all cultures and creeds agree that these acts are wrong. Something inside us is there to ensure we know these acts are wrong. If it is survival of the fittest exclusively then why would we feel guilty murdering our neighbor, killing their spouse and breeding with them to spread our seed and perpetuate our lineage? We should be able to do that guilt free if evolution is true.

Please consider all of this when you make a decision to place your hope in science. Does science offer you an answer for the human condition that faces us every day? Do you want to be nonexistent when your body dies? Why do you have the desire to remain living? Where does the longing to live come? How do I make up for the wrongs I feel guilty about? Is there even a way to make up for these wrongs? Did you create these things in yourself? Admit that you don’t have all the answers and then seek to find them. The following is a link that can help you find the answers you seek. http://www.gotquestions.org/crucial.html What do you have to lose except pride and where has that ever gotten you? A hard lesson I have had to learn is that just because you don’t like what you hear or see does not make it any less true.

Answer 7

It is so presumptuous of "science" to think it can dismiss religion or the need for religion.

I have always wondered why some people have written about science as the new false god, since there is no worship going on or things like that. However, when I read here statements about science (or Science, to make it better) doing this or that, as a personified being, it starts to make sense. Science tells us what to do, and we have to listen. Isn't this what a god does?

Now, to answer your question: science is a discipline of study and, as such, cannot make decisions about people's lives. Some people may think they can interpret science in such a way that it leads to such decisions about people's lives. However, they are only human, and humans can be wrong.

Answer 8

Actually that is far from true. The more scientists try to disprove creation, the more proof they give it. The science journal NATURE reported in 1997 that almost 40 percent of biologists, physicists, and mathematicians surveyed believe in a God who not only exists but also listens to and answers prayers.

One of the reasons that some scientists try so hard to disprove God is that one of the rules of science is, 'no miracles allowed'.

After doing indepth research on the matter I have found that it is only logical to conclude that there is a Creator. After further research using the Bible as text, I have come to know him personally and his great name is Jehovah! I hope that you will continue to research this matter for a time. You may well find the evidence points more and more to God's existence ( as more and more information is made available).

Answer 9

Science hasn't "dismissed" the need for religion. Science simply isn't involved with religion one way or another. Science by definition is the study of the natural world and its natural processes. Nothing supernatural falls within the purview of science. If a scientist says there is a God, he/she is not speaking as a scientist. If a scientist says there is no God, he/she is not speaking as a scientist. Scientists are people after all, and are allowed to have beliefs outside the realm of science.

Answer 10

I think that what has most disillusioned the people of this word has been the fact that Science has looked for proof of that which was previously taken as a matter of faith.

Unquestioning faith is dangerous to anyone who practices. Not to say that you cannot take something "In Faith". But first you must know WHY you are taking it in faith without requiring proof.

It is a hard thing to question the spiritual beliefs that have often been instilled within us from early childhood. They bond us to our families, our friends, and to our selves.

It is an even harder task to examine who we truly are. If there are any of you in need of help then you may email me.

The Reverend Mother Erenae

P.S. Do not let the Reverend Mother part fool you, I am in no way associated with the Catholic Church. Yet I AM a Reverend Mother.