what do you think
2007-12-04 23:04:22 · 26 answers · asked by df a 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
They are opposites.
Religions makes absolute claims about reality. It basically ignores evidence, other than the rantings of old zealots, until it is forced to admit it was wrong. Even then, it just makes slightly different absolute claims, pretending that the "holy" texts should have just been interpretted differently.
Science makes no absolute claims about reality. It makes assumptions and theories based on observations of the world around us. It constantly refines those theories as more evidence comes in. It is willing to throw out a theory completely if it is shown wrong.
Both religion and science try to make statements about how the world is. However, religion pretends to know everything, while science recognizes that we know nothing, at least in any absolute sense.
2007-12-04 23:05:59 · answer #1 · answered by nondescript 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋
I am a logically minded science student who is also a practicing Anglican, so perhaps my views will be interesting to you. You are right in a way, but I also disagree. Unless you are talking about an extreme religion that takes every word of the sacred text literally, both science and religion have there place.
I'm going to focus on Christianity (but I assume there are similarities with other religions too). The whole Old Testament of the bible doesn't need to be taken literally. Plenty of priests agree. Logically I don't believe the creation story from the bible is anything but a nice story for children to learn. I'm not knocking the bible, because even the parts that I don't think are fact are still important to me and are a vital part of my religion. They have very important messages when you read them.
First - scientist don't know everything (though some think they do :) ). They can map time back the begining of time, but they don't know what came first. Why was there a big bang? I don't think science will ever truly be able to tell, and I do believe this is something that each religion can explain in it's own way.
The Pope on the other hand (I'm not Catholic so I have no qualms criticizing him), has said that evolution didn't happen (and I suppose continues not to happen) simply because it can't be recreated in a controlled lab environment. like duh... it would take thousands of years and many environmental factors to recreate 'natural selection' to the extent where a distinct new species would develop. If the pope had actually talked to a scientist before making his outrageous statements he would have known it too.
Basically every scientist that knows anything will agree that evolution is a fact. There is incontrovertible evidence to support it and it is also the logical argument. I could explain it in more detail if you want :).
Dispite believing that evolution is natural and still occuring (very gradually) and will continue while there is free will and inequalities (in all species), I do truly believe there are higher forces at work. Humans are absolutely amazing. What an amazing chain of events created life to start with, way back in the primordial soup. Why have humans developed into such special creatures compared to other all other species that have been evolving too. The more you learn, the more gaps in science you find.
To fill these gaps I use religion, as do many other people. I definetly believe science and religion can coincide easily if one keeps an open mind.
2007-12-04 23:37:41 · answer #2 · answered by chocoholly1 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If you believe “science” is already determined, and is merely about majority consensus, you are actually referring to religion. If you believe a potential finding in scientific studies, or hypotheses presented by scientists are unquestionably true, you are actually talking beliefs. If you believe in this concept of science above all else, and cannot consider criticism or permit this science to be challenged or questioned, then you are following dogma. If you believe all people must follow this science without doubting or searching for more answers, you are demanding an act of faith. If you believe that the amount of science you have at your hands right now is the ultimate knowledge, and that all people must be compelled through peer pressure or laws to follow this science, you are attempting to make our country a theocracy.
2016-05-28 06:41:33 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Really? Tell your friend to open genesis 1 and read the creation story. Note that night and day are created on day 1. On day 4 God creates the sun.
How can we have night and day without the sun. So you see the contradiction between religion and science has been shown from the first few verses. Now in my opinion when the foundations are not correctly laid then the whole house comes tumbling down.
Noah's Ark has also been scientifically debunked. Do the Math yourself. You can calculate the space on the Ark from the Bible. Then do a quick search for an approximate number of mammal, reptile, bird species and do the calculation (even use the minimum estimate. There simply wasn't enough space to live. Not including Noah and his family and their wives each animal has a maximum of around 2 square feet of space, if we use a low estimate of species. Did Noah and his family sleep standing up for nearly a year? What about food? Where was that stored? Was the Ark really a Tardis?
2007-12-04 23:24:57 · answer #4 · answered by penster_x 4 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Science is only an approximation to the truth. It does not have the whole truth. Many things that were true in science 100 years ago are no longer true today. Hence, I take science with a pinch of salt, even though I am science trained.
Evolution is one of the greatest lie in science. It is based on faith and assumptions and imaginations rather than on solid facts.
God is real, and He speaks to me intimately. One pastor that I saw for the first time could tell what I did in the past without me telling her. There are many thousands of answered prayers.
The Bible is true. Eg. the flood during Noah's time really happened. Many discoveries around the world comprising different cultures attested to the flood, and one story from an ancient culture even mentioned Noah.
Excavations of the Middle East authenticate the Bible.
From Biology, I see the hand of a marvellous creator who has painstakingly designed the wonderfully complex human and animal forms.
From physics, the existence of quantum laws and Newton's laws show that there is a Creator who has created the universe with order in it.
Why are there Newton's laws? Science cannot answer.
Religion and science complement one another.
2007-12-04 23:17:58 · answer #5 · answered by Simple 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Science deals with facts
Religion deals with truths
Those are two very different things. So it becomes difficult for one to support the either.
Just as you would not expect science to be able to answer the question "What should be my purpose in life", so you should not expect religion to answer the question "What is the importance of the third chromosone in fruit flies".
What the Bible reveals is that God created everything through a set of logical steps. He first set up a "heavens and earth", directed within it the orbit of the plant earth (including its moon), divide it to have both liquid water and land, brought forth plant life, sea life, animal life and finally man. What in that does not "support" the current theories of science?
Remember that science deals with how things happen in the natural. Religion deals with why things happen from the spiritual. Nothing in understanding how gravity works contradictions the idea of a loving God. Nothing in decyphering the DNA of humans answers the question of how we should relate to God.
So science and religion "support" each other, in that they give us both the natural and spiritual understanding of the universe.
2007-12-04 23:16:55 · answer #6 · answered by dewcoons 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes. It's a fact that, with all due respect, many choose to ignore. While the Bible is not and never was intended to be a book of science, when it touches on scientific matters it is completely accurate.
Examples: It discusses the water cycles in a way that was unknown as the time (Isaiah 55); It refers to the one who is "hanging the earth upon NOTHING" at a time when quite the opposite was the accepted "scientific" belief (scriptural citation later); also if you look at the various sanitary guidelines given to the Israelites as part of the Mosaic Law, you will find them to be sound and accurate and again, vastly different from common practices.
There's also the matter or archaeology which time and again refutes critics' claims of bible inaccuracies. For instance, they claimed both David and Pontius Pilate never existed. However, recent archeological finds (well relatively recently anyway) have revealed references to Pontius Pilate and the "House of David" (which is a term found in scripture)
Now here's a question/food for thought: If science recognizes that it knows nothing in any absolute sense, why is evolution accepted as an ABSOLUTE fact by so many?
2007-12-04 23:28:34 · answer #7 · answered by Q&A Queen 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Ok, so god cannot be proven.
neither can some of the most important things in life...
Prove love? You cannot. Does this mean love is not true? I dont think so at all.
Prove God? You cannot. Does this mean god is not true? I dont think so...
Because science depends on fact-based knowledge, there should be no confliction between religion and god. They are almost total opposites but that does not mean that one disuades the other.
Im not certain they can support eachother either, but I dont think the ever living argument should even exist, the old Science Vs Religion conflict
I could rant forever about this but I will spare you
2007-12-04 23:13:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Interesting.
You say, "religion pretends to know everything, while science recognizes that we know nothing, at least in any absolute sense."
The truth is man knows little. Man created religion, so it cannot be considered reliable. And I agree that science recognizes we know nothing in any absolute sense.
So then the question becomes, how can we we fully understand this infinite God except through faith. God, not religion, says He created all things. That would include science. Our problem is that our limited minds and stubborn hearts cannot fully understand God and so we simply reject Him as unprovable.
2007-12-04 23:23:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
The only way that science could support religion is if science started to ignore the facts. And religion has never supported science.
2007-12-04 23:09:49 · answer #10 · answered by ☼ɣɐʃʃɜƾ ɰɐɽɨɲɜɽɨƾ♀ 5 · 0⤊ 4⤋