What do you think about using science to prove religious beliefs?

Question

What are your views, opinions? Is it contradictory to try to prove that which is based on faith? Or not? What are your views on science in general, as opposed to religion? Please think out your posts and try for grammatical accuracy; anything I can't readily read or understand will be disregarded.

Answer 1

So what do you think? Did God make man or did man make God? Are we made in the image of God or is God only in man’s imagination?
Evolution is still just a theory.

Check out this web site: http://www.icr.org/

Answer 2

Science and religion are in fact partially compatible. The problem arises because they are not used in the same way and their methods or processes are not always compatible. It is like two overlapping circles. Only the part in the middle that is inside both circles can be examined by both science and religion.

One does not have dominance over the other. Where they overlap, common truths can be agreed upon. Where they don't overlap, it is pointless, and fruitless to argue about it. In those areas, they are different.

Science can not explain everything. Science is a logical process who's goal is the testing of hypothesis to find truth. It requires testable questions. Just because a question can not be tested does not mean that it is false. Nor does it mean that it is true. It just can not be tested by current scientific methods.

When science reaches a level of competence where a philosophical or religious question can be tested, then the scientific results should modify the philosophical or religious beliefs. Truth is more important than tradition. But many traditions are based on deep truths. In the absence of scientific proof or disproof, it is not wise to abandon tradition simply because it can not be scientifically tested.

;-D A scientist is often deeply religious. Science is not a religion, although some act as if it were. It is only a set of rules which seek the truth.

Answer 3

Let me get the wording of this proposal exactly right:

"What do you think about using scientific methodology to prove contentions which are beyond scientific understanding?"

In mathematics, if a statement cannot be proven true or false, it is an undecidable. Proving a statement to be true is never established by failure to prove it false. Let's say that by scientific means it is proven that we cannot disprove existence of souls. Does that mean souls exist? No, it merely means it's still an open question.

On the other hand, if science successfully explains what souls are, then it becomes part of science, just like how electric forces became part of science after it was understood and measured. In this fashion, if science were to make natural sense of all those things in religion, like miracles, prophecy, transubstantiation, and the like, then I think the boundary between religion and science would disappear. Certainly nothing supernatural would be left of it, since all of it will have come into understanding under natural sciences. I"m pretty sure this is not what religious people have in mind.

Answer 4

First, it is not a new idea. Whenever there is any scientific breakthrough, there is a mad rush of people both trying to fit it in to their religion, and those trying to use it to discredit religion. Go back to Aristotle, Galileo, or even farther...

Personally, I would like to believe that if any religion were true, science would work to neatly fill in the holes and ultimately prove it so. People of faith should have no fear of science... as all truths should point to God (or whatever they believe). But alas, thruought history that has not been the case. Why is science viewed as the polar opposite of religious belief?

My view on science is that it is our attempt to understand the universe. My view on religion is that it is someones answer to understanding the universe. There are many religions. Religions have morphed and changed in relation to our human understanding of the physical universe. People are mostly born into their religion... but some choose. They choose based on how the religion fits or appeals to them. If you step back I think you'll have to agree that all religions cannot be correct, and that half of the worlds population can't be wrong. So I believe they are all wrong. Science provides a relatively constant and clear view... and seeks absolute truths... and they only faith you need is in the ingenuity and intelligence of those studying and advancing it.

Answer 5

Science and Religion are both based on views that may be opinionated. Science is based on theory, and religion is based on faith and beliefs.

You can prove some religious views scientifically if you think about it. EXAMPLE: Theorize: was there a star in the sky when Jesus was born? From what I understand, there actually was something in the sky at that time. I don't remember if it was a planet or star that was brighter than normal, but there was actually something at that time. Scientists have come to different conclusions regarding the sky just following the birth of Christ.

I think if science can prove religious belief, than it should definitely be used. We may gain more believers with the use of science.

Answer 6

The empirical philosophers attempted to prove their religion with empirical concepts. Basic to empirical thinking is: (By what sense do I know this to be true). Our five senses; (taste, smell, sight, auditory, and tactile) can not prove our religious beliefs. In my humble opinion, it is lack of faith that motivates many groups to attempt to prove their particular belief.

Science has attempted to look at basic religious concepts like spirituality and theorize that spirituality is that thing or those things that give meaning to life. And neurologist (while attempting to map the human brain) may have discovered the portion of the brain that encourages humans to have religious experiences. However, I think your question is more about can science prove or disprove the text of the world’s holy writings?

Some of the science disciplines do some research of religious text. However, I do not think that science should be used as a measuring rod for religions, or that religions are used to measure science, but that both can be used to improve the human conditions and understandings, because both science and religion should be working toward GOD or “Good Orderly Direction.”

As a man of faith, I have no need for a religion that is tenuously propped up by pseudo science, nor would science be of any value if it needed the support of religion. My faith is not bound by the limits of what archeologist, or historians, or astronomers, or any other discipline learns, proves, or disproves, because it is spiritual and not empirical.

Yes science can look at certain aspects of religions. It is important that people understand that no science can prove any religion to be neither right nor wrong; but only to learn certain empirical truths. We should always remember that in the western world, the common name for the time when religion controlled science is “The Dark Ages.” And a world without religion would be void of many of our cherished values and morals. Therefore, balance between the co-existence of science and religion should always be important.

Answer 7

I think trying to use science to prove religious beliefs is not useful or even possible.

But science facts that inspire religious beliefs are valuable things for bringing religion and science together. For example, the book "Just Nine Numbers" explores how strange it is that physical constants set just after the big bang are precisely tuned to create a universe that can sustain life.

That doesn't prove that there was a higher power setting things in motion, but it can inspire those of faith. In that way they may see that science need not be the opponent of religion, but can be its' friend.

Good website from a scientist who is also religious:

www.reasons.org

Answer 8

I think it is a wonderful idea! True religion and true science do not contradict. It is only when the religious people are biased and the scientists are arrogant that the two contradict. The one tells what is true. The other tells how and why. There is certainly plenty of overlap between the two, and a number of truths in the Bible have been proven by science.

Einstein's theory of relativity and the study of metaphysics certainly give credence to religious beliefs. There are forces out there that we do not know about yet. For instance, an experiment was conducted on dying patients using very sensitive scales. They weighed a tad less after they died. So what was measured and what created the difference? Their soul?

Answer 9

I think it's a bad idea. Science and religion are two separate spheres, or maybe two different ways of looking at things. Science is about studying the physical world through our senses and about gathering empirical data about it. Religion is more akin to storytelling, myth, music, drama, etc. It's not that one is 'right' and the other 'wrong'.

Science cannot help us in matters of the human experience, relationships, the meaning of life, etc. And religion should not try and discount what we can know about the world around us with it's doctrines. It's all probably more complicated than that, but that's a rough start.

I reject claims that only one or the other is the only 'true' authority. Both of those views are a type of close-minded fundamentalism.

Answer 10

My opinion is a novel of its own, but let me put it like this:

There are a lot of people out there, and they all come from different back grounds. Individuals. Some come from a world that’s so rapidly moving and 'technological' that they HAVE to grow up with Science - and believe it. Then, on the other hand, there are those who grow up within a culture, and they have no choice but to believe in religion because that’s the way he/she was raised.

For me, I've grown up in a family where religion was always important to them, but not me. I lived in between dictionaries, and encyclopedias - science books... and most importantly, evolution. I believed Evolution and Science over creation any time because it was logical. It made sense. And it seemed to have a lot of science to back it all up. The thing with Science is, you have to believe in Evolution in particular. If you believe this, then there really doesn't seem to be any space for culture or religion to come in (because Religion requires the belief of creation).

This causes a huge problem doesn't it? Religion is really all belief. And Science is what most of us consider as 'proof'. With this in mind, a lot of us are forced to believe in one thing only. And so, both Science and Religion start to clash against each other. Either you believe we came from apes or you believe God created us.

Recently, I learnt though, that what one can find in the bible can actually be found through the help of Science (proof). It was on an amazing lecture I saw on DVD. Professor Veith (look this guy up and watch some of his videos) proved that what may seem logical may not always BE correct. Anyway, he proved to me that religion can actually live along the lines of history. He used Scientific evidence to prove it - and to back it all up, his research on history helped. This amazed me, and so now I'm forced to believe in religion because science backed it up. It's really all a long story and you have to watch the lectures to know what I'm on about.

In conclusion, I think its very much possible to use science to prove religion. A particular thing you can do to find this out, is if you compare the section in the bible (about Pharaoh’s) and compare it with Egypt's history. You'll be surprised to find that the bible seems to have predicated the Pharaoh’s long ago.

Answer 11

I believe that science and the ways of the universe should continue to be studied with an open mind. For the sake of truth, not to prove or disprove the possiblity of God.