Is science and religion separate or overlapping?

Answer 1

Completely and totally separate. Religion provides explanations based on faith. Science provides explanations based on observations of natural phenomena. Unlike science, religious faith is not testable, repeatable, or empirical. If I push you off a cliff, you will fall every time (and probably will be injured) due to the law of gravity, not a divine being.

If there is any perceived overlap, it is because the person does not fully understand what religion or science is. That being said, I do not think science and religion should be pitted against each other since they are not trying to disprove each other.

Answer 2

Over lapping. I will give the following examples
In the Bible it talks of many lands that were once thought of as Myth. Through archeology, we now know that these places were not myths.
The Hebrews in the Old Testament Knew that the Earth was round while other cultures thought that the Earth was flat, or on the back of a tortoise, or some other weird idea.
The Hebrews knew that using wild oregano (hysop) was a good anti biotic. I could name many things that the Bible has been in accord with science while never trying to be a book of science, but God's gift to people for guidance.
If one looks with an open mind and not closed before hand, that person would see that the science of man is because of God. Not the other way around. Science is only now learning of things in the past 200 years that God tried to teach us thousands of years ago. The science of health and nutrition for one. Geology and geography. Chemistry. Physics. Animal husbandry. Agriculture. The Bible wrote of these things long before science had a grasp on it.

Answer 3

desirable answer: the courting between faith and technology has been a concentration of the demarcation subject. Statements on the subject of the international made by skill of technology and faith count on distinctive methodologies. Religions count on revelation and faith, mutually as technology relies upon on observable, repeatable studies, ontological naturalism, philosophical realism, rational skepticism, fallibilism, the thesis that not something comes from not something, and the regulation of monetary device. some pupils say the two are separate, as in John William Draper's conflict thesis and Stephen Jay Gould's non-overlapping magisteria, mutually as others (Thomas Berry, Brian Swimme, Ken Wilber, et al.) recommend an interconnection. The Pew communicate board has printed records on attitudes approximately faith and technology

Answer 4

Science is called a "natural philosophy", meaning that it seeks answers with natural explanations. Religion is based on the supernatural, or "things science cannot explain", so therefore it's inherently outside of science, by definition. If God turned out to be an extraterrestrial, and all the miracles and mysteries have scientific explanations, then religion would become part of science. But it doens't want that.

Answer 5

You gotta read Stephen Jay Gould's book "Rocks of Ages". In it he explores how science and religion can be separate but still respectful on each others' areas. I liked it because it put into words what I have always believed: That problems like the struggle over evolution stem from religion trying to operate in science's area. He gives many examples and some really clear explanations we could all benefit from, regardless of which side of the fence you are on.

Answer 6

Separate

Answer 7

Neither, science is the study of creation and they cannot be made separate. Science is a noble endeavor whose reward is the elevation of the human condition. This is in perfect agreement with religion. Those who would divide the world also would divide creation. The petty disputes are base examples of following Christ. There are more important studies such as the fruits of the spirit.

Answer 8

Separate

Answer 9

I guess it depends on what religion. I think religion can sometimes overlap science, but never the other way around.

Answer 10

Seperate