Science versus Religion what do you choose to believe?

Answer 1

Science and my religion. You see, I do not view my religion's mythology as literal but symbolic of greater truths. (keep in mind I am no Christian). Most all of the books I read are hard science books and my line of work does involve some times science of the theoretical kind.

I suppose I would have to say science seeing how it's not something you have to believe in as it is fact.

Answer 2

I tend to follow science far more than I do religion (of any sort). Mostly because religion relies on simply having faith in something being there, even though there is no proof of it's existence. I'm not sure if science is entirely right on the subject of creation either, as it's mostly just theoretical.. However there is far more proof in the scientific approach to creation and the past world than there is to the religious one. Religions will lead you to believe that the world is fairly new, only several thousand years old.. but when science is applied to these measures, that is quickly and clearly proven to be untrue. Science also began with an unbiased approach to the entire subject. Scientists had no expectations on what they would find out, they simply state the facts of what they do find, or the theories of what they assume is most logical. Whereas religions are always biased towards their beliefs, no matter what.

Answer 3

"Science" and "Religion" are both very broad terms. There are many scientific areas of study, and many religious doctrines and methodologies. I will assume you are addressing the dead horse of creation verses evolution. If anyone were to do their OWN homework, it is easily recognisable, that both of these theories can occupy the same chronological space. There is no need to believe in one and discount the other. The preponderance of evidence dictates proof of the existence of humans on the planet prior to the Garden of Eden (an event only 6000 years old). And there are many Biblical passages referring to knowledge not obtained until the 20th century. "The sphere of the earth" comes to mind, when the entire world assumed the earth was flat. Cain was sent away for his transgression against his brother, and married a woman from the land of Nod, which is in a region in north eastern Iran. The woman obviously already existed, thus became the cross between what had naturally evolved and what God had created. This is not a complicated theory to see, and leaves no need to choose between one or the other. Both theories are correct.

Answer 4

I don't view it as a "versus". I base much of my life from both science and religion. Humans have always passed down information using language and much of religion is just that, stories that help us grow, adapt, and evolve. I think religion is taken to scary extremes by too many people. Science can be taken to a religious extreme so I think one should find that happy medium with both and just chill out.

Answer 5

Scientology VS. Science?

Answer 6

I CHOOSE to believe in both.

This may seem a bit of a dichotomy for some, but only if one believes that the bible is both literal AND inerrent in all areas of geology, biology, meteorology, paleontology, etc.

I think that science and religion are like oil and water, respectively.

Oil (science) is a useful tool that makes our life easier. More specifically, science teaches us HOW God works His wonders.

Water (religion) is absolutely necessary for survival. Although oil is useful, and absolutely essential in the world's economy, we lived without it before oil was discovered, and we will live after it is no longer available or cheap. Atheists may disagree, but THEY choose to not believe in God or an afterlife. There is no scientific evidence to prove them wrong or right. I simply CHOOSE to disagree with them. however, IF there is an afterlife, religion comes a lot closer to helping us decide our fater than science ever will. Religion is intended to explain to us WHO created the universe, and us, and WHY. Not HOW.

In summary, both oil and water are necessary, but cannot mix together.

If I want to know how electrons move through copper wire in the presence of a magnetic field, I will trust science.

If I want to know how God LOVES us, and wants us to live our lives, I will trust the bible. Those of other religions will trust their appropriate doctrine.

Personally, I believe there is only ONE God, and that is the God of the bible. But that is a belief based on faith, not empirical proof.

There is no reason why one cannot believe in BOTH science AND religion, as long as one recognises that each has its appropriate place to be considered.

Answer 7

You find a book like (Where Science & Magic Meet by Serena Roney-Dougal ISBN 1-85230-446-4)and read it .There is a lot that used to be called Magic(a religious belief)that is now called science.
Religion is based on Faith. and Science is based on repeatable things that come from religious thinking at first. It is religion that is rejecting scientific facts that prove a lot of religious beliefs.

Answer 8

God is the only answer that makes sense. If science was the answer that would mean that we evolved and were not created, which if you look at the last 2000 years, completely proves evolution does not exist. There has not been one case of a human evolving into any other species, or any fish to develope wings and fly, no creature has evolved in even the slightest way. Now as a humans thought they were getting smarter, they have destroyed many creatures that God made.... I have heard that all the atoms already exist and it is a matter of how they are arranged... if that were so, then it would be evident by finding things mechanical things that no hand ever touched... I will pray for you... God bless.

Answer 9

The one with demonstratable facts to back it up, the one where I can take a look at how someone did something and if I don't believe the results can do it myself.

Kinda rules out religion. But you don't 'believe' science, there's strong evidence for it.

Answer 10

Science!!
.