Why christians are ANTI - SCIENCE ?

Question

you know the international science academy and national science academy of every modern country supports both the big bang and the evolution. so why are you against them not to mention hate them because they disprove your beliefs

i posted this question again because someone has screwed the last one with rainbow words

Answer 1

Because they fear what they do not understand. According to some of them, they feel more comfortable with simply saying "god did it" as the answer to all types of questions

Answer 2

The Catholic Church has always taught that "no real disagreement can exist between the theologian and the scientist provided each keeps within his own limits. . . . If nevertheless there is a disagreement . . . it should be remembered that the sacred writers, or more truly ‘the Spirit of God who spoke through them, did not wish to teach men such truths (as the inner structure of visible objects) which do not help anyone to salvation’; and that, for this reason, rather than trying to provide a scientific exposition of nature, they sometimes describe and treat these matters either in a somewhat figurative language or as the common manner of speech those times required, and indeed still requires nowadays in everyday life, even amongst most learned people" (Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus 18).

As the Catechism puts it, "Methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things the of the faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are" (CCC 159). The Catholic Church has no fear of science or scientific discovery.

Answer 3

I am a christian, I do not believe big bang or the THEORY of evolution. This does not mean I am anti-science. In fact, I have always excelled in science, and as a matter of fact, was asked to speak in front of the National Science Foundation when I was in school to pose my views on different educational matters.

Answer 4

I don't think all Christians are like this. Some are because they see it as a threat to their beliefs. They don't care what is true they just want to be able to hold onto what they believe because they are so invested in it. In psychology this is called dissonance. It occurs when an important belief or perception is contradicted. The more invested you feel in this belief the more painful the challenge to it is and the harder to let it go. People will go to great length to hold on to the belief by trying to deny contradictions or vilify the source.

This is the dilemma with people who have a very literalist/fundamentalist religion and science that contradicts the Bible.

Answer 5

Would you agree that the "Big Bang" and "Evolution" (from an amoeba to a human) are Theories - meaning they cannot be reproduced, nor can you talk with anyone who watched them?
Then why can't you even allow for the "Theory of" Creation?

Second. Christians don't hate science at all. Many great scientists have become Christians while they were in the process of trying to refute creation. Besides, God created science.

Answer 6

Christians are not anti-science. You are comiting a logical fallacy by confusing a small percentage of the Christian population (less than 10%) with "Christians" in general. Evolution is official Church dogma for some 55% of Christians, is taught in the majority of Christian schools, and is believed by most members of the so-called 'liberal' denominations that make up the second and third largest Christian denominations on the planet.

Answer 7

Stereotypes are how you make your stand in favor of science? All Christians are not anti-science. Hmm...

I, for one, am a Christian who believes in both, the big bang AND evolution. I don't see how either of them disproves my beliefs. For one thing, they are admittedly just theories, so they are not proof of anything. For another thing, if God exists, then who is to say he didn't create evolution or the big bang? Who knows? But I am not going to say I know that. Last I looked the Bible was a spiritual guide and history, not a science textbook. My point is only that Christianity and science are not necessarily in opposition to one another. There are Christians who oppose science, and atheists who oppose Christianity, but that does not make all scientists anti-religion, nor all religious people anti-science. Stereotypes don't really resolve anything, do they?

Answer 8

Not all christians are against science we just dont believe that the world was created through evolution. Just so you know big bang theory goes with evolution and I dont hate anyone because that would be against what I believe. You assume too much.

Answer 9

Most Christians are not anti-science. Science and Religion are not necessarily incompatable. Just because we have the ability to figure out some small part of God's design, doesn't mean that God isn't responsible for it. Being that he blessed us with superior intelligence (well, most of us anyway), doesn't it follow that he would expect us to use it?
A better question would be; Why are scientists Anti- Religion?

Answer 10

There are no facts to evolution. Random chance has no facts.
Assumptions, guesses, theories and down right lies are not facts.

If the big bang occured God created it, because my belief in God for Creation and your belief in chance as creation are entirely different. If science cannot see a Designer then science is blind. It takes more to believe in evolution than it does to believe in creation. You are asking me to believe the impossible and I will not do it. I don't care what the rest of the world may think. I believe in God.

Answer 11

Religious faith depends on emotion.
Science depends on reason.

Emotion always wins over reason. In other words, humans are more emotional than reasonable.

But to be fair it's worth mentioning that evolution hasn't been proven to bring life from non-living material. A reasonable scientist can only consider this to be the most likely scenario.