Do people realize there is no science versus religion battle?

Question

Science just says here is what happened and how it works. Here are the studies and tests and all the information that exists.

Religion says here is what happened and how it works. But do not present evidence or tests or studies.

When science contradicts religion the only option religion has is to attack that specific science. This is why not a single religious person ever attacks gravity or Quantum Theory.

So why do people see it as a battle? It's fact versus conjecture.

Answer 1

The conflict is that religions make claims about the nature of the universe and how the universe began. This is absolutely in direct conflict with science. Furthermore, science is based on empirical evidence and reason. The existence of God is based on faith, which is belief without reason.

Answer 2

The Bible is scientific fact. @ Job 26:10 we find that God told him that the earth was round. Also at Isaiah 40:22. Also at Ecclesiastes 1:6 we see how the winds of the earth travel that controls our wheather and also shows again the earth being round.

Job also mentions that he was spared death by the skin of his teeth. Scientist today now know why Job made that statement. The enamal on your teeth and your fleashly skin is made up of the same molicules but just a different molecular structure.

Also why did Jehovah God take the rib bone to create Eve. He could have used any part of the body he wanted to. Both male and female have the same number of bones, so you would think that Adam would have a missing bone, thus he would not be perfect. Well? The rib bone is the only bone in the body that if cut off will grow right back again. Have you ever heard of any one with a missing rib bone in an accident? NO thats because all the surgion has to do is wrap them up and they will grow right back where they were. I could go on and on so if you would like more information on this subject I would be glad to send you some.

Sincerely yours
Fred M. Hunter
[e-mail]

Answer 3

I think the problem is between science and churches,(or any religious institutions). Religion is about realizing that there are questions that have no clear answer, perhaps no answer at all, and trying to cope with them. The trouble is when a church claims to have all the answers, and would just as soon kill everyone who doesn't agree. It's the kind of nonsense that leads some people to imagine that the Bible is a history and science textbook, instead of a collection of ancient wisdom that can help us to understand how we ought to treat each other.

Answer 4

I agree with you that there is no battle. But not because the ideas put forth by religion are "conjecture". I just believe it is "that which is proven by science" and "that which is not yet able to be proven by science." There are a lot of things that science proves to be true now that at one time seemed like fantasy before the science caught up. Fortunately, some people were visionary enough to believe in them until they could be proven.

Answer 5

You seem to have forgotten or haven't the education to understand that science is based on fact. Religion is fact without need for scientific explanation. Just as electricity could make possible international communication before science provided validity. As in your own words..."and all the information that e x i s t s".

We could speak to people we couldn't physically touch long before science discovered HOW. But what many imbeciles have done is put in place "theories" - assumptions to support their personal philosophies. Like atheism and evolution. NO scientific evidence of any sort supports either of these philosophical "points of view".

Intelligence is as monkeys in circus performances. Yet they have no understanding . Maybe this is why atheists are so quick to empathize with animals. No concept of greater purpose or fulfillment. Just peanuts.

So in that sense you are correct. There is no battle between science and faith. Just skirmishes between ignorant people and understanding.

"God does not play dice with the universe." - Albert Einstein.

God bless

Answer 6

No there is no battle. Religion (spirituality) begins where science ends. Science is limited . There are trillions of things science does not know about or cannot explain - from inside the body to outer space, from what was before birth to what is after death. 'Scientific' knowledge is continuously updated and some times things turnout to be quite the opposite of what they were thought to be.
Spirituality is innate knowledge and an undeniable experience.

Answer 7

in order for science to exist everything must have an origin, however not everything could have an origin point. for example God has no origin point, so by science standard then God does not exist, or there is no way of knowing if God exists. the same is true with the big bang theory. so by that same scenario what would be the earth's origin point.? There is no reason to question gravity because it can be proven. In the same way there are things which men has never seen, but we have to take some things by faith. case in point would be a thought, no one can physically see a thought, but we know we have ideas and beliefs, so we must have thoughts. Why does everything have to pr oven, and I'm sorry to say not all things can be pr oven, but that does not make them wrong. It means we do not have enough information to understand them yet. I know it has to understand that we are not all knowing and there are things outside of our understanding. Case in point would be God. Fundamentalists, or Christians believe that God does not have our limitations. he is outside of time, or gravity, so he does not have an origin point, but that does not mean that he does not exist. It means he reveals to us what he wants us to know about him. And frankly if i could figure out everything about God then he would not be God. we would be equal to god and that is what Lucifer or Satan tried to do and look where it got him.

Answer 8

The problem is, religion makes many people feel comfortable, secure, and self-righteous, while science scares the hell out of most of them. So even though religion is nonsense, they'd rather stick to what makes them feel good about themselves. I don't think this will change for a long, long time, unfortunately.

Answer 9

That sounds similar to what Dr Collins has to say.

Dr. Francis S. Collins is Director of the National Human Genome Research Institute at the National Institute of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. He currently leads the Human Genome Project, directed at mapping and sequencing all of human DNA, and determining aspects of its function. His previous research has identified the genes responsible for cystic fibrosis, neurofibromatosis, Huntington's disease and Hutchison-Gilford progeria syndrome. He is a member of the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Sciences. For the rest of his credentials, click on the link here: http://www.genome.gov/10000980. Collins spoke with Bob Abernethy of PBS, posted online at http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/transcripts/collins.html, in which he summaries the compatability of fact and faith thusly:

"I think there's a common assumption that you cannot both be a rigorous, show-me-the-data scientist and a person who believes in a personal God. I would like to say that from my perspective that assumption is incorrect; that, in fact, these two areas are entirely compatible and not only can exist within the same person, but can exist in a very synthetic way, and not in a compartmentalized way. I have no reason to see a discordance between what I know as a scientist who spends all day studying the genome of humans and what I believe as somebody who pays a lot of attention to what the Bible has taught me about God and about Jesus Christ. Those are entirely compatible views.

"Science is the way -- a powerful way, indeed -- to study the natural world. Science is not particularly effective -- in fact, it's rather ineffective -- in making commentary about the supernatural world. Both worlds, for me, are quite real and quite important. They are investigated in different ways. They coexist. They illuminate each other. And it is a great joy to be in a position of being able to bring both of those points of view to bear in any given day of the week. The notion that you have to sort of choose one or the other is a terrible myth that has been put forward, and which many people have bought into without really having a chance to examine the evidence. I came to my faith not, actually, in a circumstance where it was drummed into me as a child, which people tend to assume of any scientist who still has a personal faith in God; but actually by a series of compelling, logical arguments, many of them put forward by C. S. Lewis, that got me to the precipice of saying, 'Faith is actually plausible.' You still have to make that step. You will still have to decide for yourself whether to believe. But you can get very close to that by intellect alone."

Answer 10

So then, you are saying you have actually witnessed the proof of life by evolution?

Let us try it again.
Your first comment proclaims the 'evidence'.
Yet the 'evidence' of life by chance, is a theory.
So is this not tantamount to 'here is how it works. but does not provide evidence, other than theory?
How is it that people can blindly put faith into this so willfully?
It so puts you on the same playing field as the blind religionist.
I thank your intolerance beforehand for the expected thumbs down. Fortunately, facts are not subject to democractic process.
Also, thinking ability, is apparently so rare today, that as far as this forum is concerned, the evolutionist/atheist has taken his place standing shoulder to shoulder with the fundamentalist.