2007-03-12 18:57:32 · 23 answers · asked by mithril 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Religion is a based mainly in history, and I do not see how the evolution denies the Bible. I really don't see how science and religion contradict each other.
And prayer is a powerful thing. Science doen't know how or why it work, but it does.
Oh, yeah, and I get that whole "observer as participant" thing. Behaviour does change when one know they're being observed.
2007-03-12 19:31:20 · update #1
Some of us think so. Many scientists find evidence of higher being in the amazing natural science they unlock. It really is a never-ending masterpiece of mystery.
2007-03-12 19:14:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Mithril:
Actually we don’t need to put them both “at odds”. Science gives you facts. A religion that is truly divine should neither oppose science nor should state things that science proves wrong. I do understand that sometimes science makes mistakes but in the long run if the religion is divine and sent by the one who knows all then there should be no problems as both should prove to be the same.
On the other hand, if the word is not from the creator of all beings then it is deemed to be wrong. Thus it looses its merit.
Nicolas H:
All religions are not like that. Islam laid the foundations for research and scientific analysis by ordering its followers to it. The Islamic period of science is a visible proof of it but when we left the path of research and knowledge look where the majority of Muslim countries are now and it’s a pitty.
Eldad9 and rosbif:
I know that my religion does not oppose science and the teaching that it had set more than 1400 years ago (even though not understood back then why they were done) have now been proven by science to be correct. Say for example something as common and simple as brushing your teeth, Muslims were ordered to brush there teeth daily preferably while preparing for each and every prayer. We pray 5 times a day. And the plant suggested for it has been proven to have amazing related medicinal properties. We were also orderd to bathe at least once a week at a time when the king of England did not bath for 17 years with fears that it will take away his good deeds. ï
Peace be to all
2007-03-13 02:38:33 · answer #2 · answered by chessman259 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pure religion and pure science would actually support each other, since both are looking for the truth and explaining the world. There is false religion, there is false science. It is the falsehoods in each which contradict each other, and in time all will be brought to light and I would think will conform more with each other once that which is pure is found and understood (though, granted, that might be at the throne of God when it happens).
2007-03-13 02:16:00 · answer #3 · answered by Laurel W 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You are right! Our universe and minds are big enough for both religious faith and the scientific method. For the most part they are working on different plains or dimensions of life. But when they do come together, it is a dynamic moment.
For example the many medical treatments that have come out of science have certainly helped the faith of those around the person who is sick to assist in the well being of all the person, spirit and body.
People have bodies that sometimes need science, and they have spirits which need spirituality through religion to maintain health and to exist in harmony we others.
2007-03-13 02:15:43 · answer #4 · answered by zclifton2 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Maybe bacause some of the people here were not taught that science is not a religion. Science is a study. It is a field established by man to seek answers.
They each have their merits but should be rationalized differently.
2007-03-13 02:09:32 · answer #5 · answered by coco_loco 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
true religion and true sceince will always agree since the Creator is the maker of all things, he has set the sceintific rules that govern his universe.
mans misunderstanding of both is the rub.
for example when the bible calles the earth a circle at isaiah 40:22...2100 years before columbus sailed around the earth to prove that fact in 1492.also that 'the earth hangs on nothing'
2007-03-13 02:12:57 · answer #6 · answered by Bill 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Both have merit. All science has challenged is a literal reading of the Bible. The adherents of literalism are the key to the problem.
2007-03-13 02:25:08 · answer #7 · answered by novangelis 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The core problem here is that the majority of Americans who claim that science is absolute fact get their science from the Discovery channel and nothing else, while the absolute fact religious section get their truth from sources like TBN and Benny Hinn. People are gullible and generally follow whatever "truth" their peers follow. Americans especially love to believe in a "truth" that they themselves couldn't even explain, yet they know it as "fact". Examples being someone who believes in "god" yet has no systematic thought process to back it up. "I believe in god, therefore god exists". and those who believe in evolution, yet couldn't tell you the difference between macro and micro evolution. "I believe in evolution because the Discovery Channel said so".
2007-03-13 02:15:35 · answer #8 · answered by seperationistsanxiety 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only way to really learn from either is to give them only the merit they've earned.
I've been debating with someone from this forum over the last 24 hours, and he just told me that "observation" in science was ridiculous.
I'd certainly like to give science more merit than that, but it's really hard to take this person seriously.
2007-03-13 02:06:34 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Science cares nothing for religion. Religion is the one overstepping its already horrific boundaries and trespassing on science, contradicting known facts.
And it has no merit. All the good in religion can be had just be deciding to be a decent person, without any gods involved.
2007-03-13 02:00:48 · answer #10 · answered by eldad9 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋