Why can't science and religion just get along?

[Caliburn24]

If God, in whatever form and with whatever name you want to give him, used Evolution as his tool, what does that tell us about the nature of God?

Did he look down at the competing bacteria and later organisms and decide that he could not make them the way he wanted to, so he decided to let them fight each other for survival for a few million years while he kicked up his feet and relaxed? Did he not know which would win in the end?

That would suggest limits on God's power and omnipotence.

As God looked down at the long chain of mammals that slowly evolved to become the modern day Human, when did he give them the ability to know good from evil? When did he give them an immortal soul? If God just watched generation after generation struggle to survive and better itself, what does that tell us?

It suggests to me that God is cruel and not altogether good.

For those people who want to suggest that science(and we're not talking all science here, just big-E Evolution) and religion can coexist without impacting the other, just answer one question. Fittingly it is similar to a question asked once in Star Trek, "What would God want with a starship?"

If God is all powerful, all knowing, and all good, why would he choose to use Evolution as his tool?

 

[JarodRussell]

God is only the product of generations of people's imagination that "something must be out there". The worse you feel, the more you pray. And generally you change your beliefs as you wish to make it fit into your current way of life. There has never been any evidence that something is out there, or that something must be out there. Non-arguments like "our very existence is evidence for God" are totally absurd nonsense.

Science is the only way to fully understand our universe. Science will stop being able to explain what's outside. But whatever there is outside our universe, it definately is not important at all. We will never be able to get outside, so why bother? And whatever exists outside our universe will never be able to interact with us. "What came before the big bang?" WHO CARES? Science doesn't. Because whatever came before the creation of our universe, is not part of our universe anymore.

Problem is, way too many think it's so important to blow themselves up in public places. Just because you draw a cartoon of someone who made up his own fantasy novel. None of the events in Lord of the Rings ever happened. Why do people think that thousands of years ago what people wrote down needs to be about real events and real characters? Riverside, Iowa, has a stone that says "The future birthplace of Captain James T. Kirk, March 22 2228". If you ask me, the similar nonsense 2000 years ago caused the myth of Jesus coming back from the dead with the promise of the Judgment Day.

 

[Mr Cool Dude]

I care about what happened before the Big Bang.

A person should explore their potential for leading a spiritual life - and I think they should explore it as an individual. Science does not invalidate this potential.

 

[mimic]

I think a major problem is that a lot of people (not just religious people) don't really understand the epistemology of scientific knowledge. In particular, major confusion stems from the scientific meaning of the word 'theory', which is completely different from everyday English. Hence the dismissal of things as 'just a theory.'

Laws CANNOT turn into theories. Scientific theories are a completely different type of knowledge. A law describes a relationship and a theory is an explanation underlying that relationship. So the law would be PV=nRT and the theory undergirding that law would be the kinetic theory of gases, which explains why varying pressure, temperature, and the number of molecules would result in certain changes to the system.

 

[JarodRussell]

I care about what happened before the Big Bang.

We don't even know IF something happened before the big bang. That's a problem of our language. You can always ask "And what happened before?" even if nothing at all happened before.


Spirituality and religion actually limits your potential as a human being. For thousands of years people believed thunder and lighting was a sign of the wrath of God. But no, it's just the weather, a lighting is electric discharge, a thunder is a sound wave. Nothing to be afraid of. There is no angry character that causes them. There are countless of other examples where faith in something that doesn't exist prevented progress and limited individuals. And eventually every phenomenon will be explained, just like the thunder. And it will never be caused by a devine power.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

^^ This is true. The term used should be "organized religion." Religion is seldom harmful on an individual level, but seldom helpful on an industrial level.

Actually, I think the term should be, "dogmatic religion." The conflict comes when a religion makes non-negotiable claims which are scientifically testable. For instance, the claim that the universe is 6000 - 10,000 years old is testable and can easily be shown to be false. A religion need not make testable claims. One that does not can not be in conflict with science.

Christianity/Islam/Judaism are fractured (especially Christianity) so there are going to be those of each of those pursuations who insist on a literal interpretation of their respective holy books and those who do not. The fundamentalists of any dogmatic religion are always going to be at odd with science (and reality) of course.

And I personally find no need for that--what we find in the natural world is what it is and there's no need to try to go around it. I do find it interesting that at times certain imagery in Genesis does seem to reflect the early phases of the universe (the Big Bang and its immediate aftermath), so it is my personal supposition that some ancient person did experience a vision of certain portions of the creation...but can you imagine trying to write that down and put that into words, when your only experience is your life as a desert nomad? No wonder we get abstractions, things out of order, details left out, and no conception of the spans of time involved (really, the word billions hadn't been invented yet, and possibly not even "zero" except as a placeholder).

This does not make the visionary stupid...it means he was just doing the best he could. And it also means that a literal interpretation wouldn't be sensible at all, but that a poetic reading is more appropriate--one geared towards picking up the main message (which has to do with the reason for Creation) rather than fixating on the details.

While there may be some groups that make that claim, that a literal reading is required, my own church has no official position regarding the theory of evolution but does make the statement that science and theology should be regarded as complementary and both part of understanding our place in the universe.

 

[Mr Cool Dude]

I care about what happened before the Big Bang.

We don't even know IF something happened before the big bang. That's a problem of our language. You can always ask "And what happened before?" even if nothing at all happened before.


Spirituality and religion actually limits your potential as a human being. For thousands of years people believed thunder and lighting was a sign of the wrath of God. But no, it's just the weather, a lighting is electric discharge, a thunder is a sound wave. Nothing to be afraid of. There is no angry character that causes them. There are countless of other examples where faith in something that doesn't exist prevented progress and limited individuals. And eventually every phenomenon will be explained, just like the thunder. And it will never be caused by a devine power.

I appreciate your point about the Big Bang. But you wrote this: ""What came before the big bang?" WHO CARES?"
I just wanted to say that I care what came before the big bang, that was all.

When I wrote about the potential of a spiritual life, I did not mean thunder and lightning caused by an angry god.
Basically, what I meant is that a person should explore their personality. For example, whenever I have a dream, I write it down in my book. Then I will read it, and I will try to understand it, as much as I can, because I believe that the dream comes from my Unconscious, and it contains vital information.
This is part of my own understanding of a spiritual life. My point is simply that people should not be hunkered down by the 'spirit of the age'. But they should explore their own lives as individuals - even if they travel into bizarre and mysterious places.
Just sitting around waiting for someone else to do all the work so that "eventually every phenomenon will be explained" is not for me I'm afraid.

 

[StarryEyed]

If God, in whatever form and with whatever name you want to give him, used Evolution as his tool, what does that tell us about the nature of God?

Did he look down at the competing bacteria and later organisms and decide that he could not make them the way he wanted to, so he decided to let them fight each other for survival for a few million years while he kicked up his feet and relaxed? Did he not know which would win in the end?

That would suggest limits on God's power and omnipotence.

As God looked down at the long chain of mammals that slowly evolved to become the modern day Human, when did he give them the ability to know good from evil? When did he give them an immortal soul? If God just watched generation after generation struggle to survive and better itself, what does that tell us?

It suggests to me that God is cruel and not altogether good.

For those people who want to suggest that science(and we're not talking all science here, just big-E Evolution) and religion can coexist without impacting the other, just answer one question. Fittingly it is similar to a question asked once in Star Trek, "What would God want with a starship?"

If God is all powerful, all knowing, and all good, why would he choose to use Evolution as his tool?

Well evolution happened so what ever one believes regarding God needs to square up with that fact. If it does not, the belief must be modified because you can't change facts. When someone attempts to do so, they are at odds with known reality and that is irrational.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Unfortunately, I can say from experience that many of my friends are becoming more dogmatic and fundamental in their faiths.

Periods of forward thinking always alternate with periods of backward thinking. This kind of things come and go periodically. Like herpes.

I think a major problem is that a lot of people (not just religious people) don't really understand the epistemology of scientific knowledge. In particular, major confusion stems from the scientific meaning of the word 'theory', which is completely different from everyday English. Hence the dismissal of things as 'just a theory.'

Laws CANNOT turn into theories. Scientific theories are a completely different type of knowledge. A law describes a relationship and a theory is an explanation underlying that relationship. So the law would be PV=nRT and the theory undergirding that law would be the kinetic theory of gases, which explains why varying pressure, temperature, and the number of molecules would result in certain changes to the system.

This is a point that couldn't be emphasized enough.

I care about what happened before the Big Bang.

We don't even know IF something happened before the big bang. That's a problem of our language. You can always ask "And what happened before?" even if nothing at all happened before.

I must point out that "What happened before the Big Bang?" is not just a pointless question (as in, we could never knew it), but a meaningless question, because times as we understand it started with the Big Bang. Asking what happened before the Big Bang is the same as asking what's outside the Universe. The answer isn't "Nothing", because that would imply knowledge of something that, by definition, is outside the scope of scientific inquiry (that inherently involves everything that deal with space and time). As for science is involved, there simply can be no answer.

When I wrote about the potential of a spiritual life, I did not mean thunder and lightning caused by an angry god.
Basically, what I meant is that a person should explore their personality. For example, whenever I have a dream, I write it down in my book. Then I will read it, and I will try to understand it, as much as I can, because I believe that the dream comes from my Unconscious, and it contains vital information.
This is part of my own understanding of a spiritual life.

Well, I would call it "psychic life" instead of "spiritual life", but as a matter of semantics, the distinction is not really important if we all agree that is what we are speaking about.

 

[Mr Cool Dude]

I must point out that "What happened before the Big Bang?" is not just a pointless question (as in, we could never knew it), but a meaningless question, because times as we understand it started with the Big Bang. Asking what happened before the Big Bang is the same as asking what's outside the Universe. The answer isn't "Nothing", because that would imply knowledge of something that, by definition, is outside the scope of scientific inquiry (that inherently involves everything that deal with space and time). As for science is involved, there simply can be no answer.

A while ago I was reading an article in a magazine. The article pointed out that computer games are far more sophisticated now compared to how they were twenty years ago. Take Centipede, for example, and compare it with Call Of Duty, or something like that.
To cut a long story short, in the future, the technology will be so advanced that you could create a person. Like in the holodeck in Star Trek - and the person will be self aware.
In the future, people won't actually go back in time. Instead they will create entire universes with their Playstation 3119s, and they will be able to go wherever they wanted. These artificial universes will be filled by artificial people who believe that they're real.
There will be an almost infinate amount of people created, that the odds are that you, and me, are overwhelmingly far more likely to be a computer generated artificial life form than a 'real person'.
There is no way we can find out - because, as you say, we are restricted to our own universe, and such an investigation is beyond the scope of scientific inquiry.

To wonder about the possibility that I might just be a computer program, is not a pointless question to me, or even a meaningless question. It is an absolutely necessary question. I understand perfectly well that time began with the Big Bang - and I appreciate your point. However, questions like 'why are we here' and 'where did we come from' are questions that people have asked since humankind has been in existence. They are questions that are more suited to religion though.

 

[scotpens]

If God, in whatever form and with whatever name you want to give him, used Evolution as his tool, what does that tell us about the nature of God?

Did he look down at the competing bacteria and later organisms and decide that he could not make them the way he wanted to, so he decided to let them fight each other for survival for a few million years while he kicked up his feet and relaxed? Did he not know which would win in the end?

Essentially, you've just described deism. Or, to put it in Hollywood terms, God as Executive Producer of the Universe.

 

[Luther Sloan]

Double post.

 

[Luther Sloan]

When I was an atheist, (oddly enough) I also believed that there was evil in the world (Satanism) because I seen the dark things in my life I couldn't explain. Trust me. At that point: I never expected to start picking up the Bible one day and seek out God. He came to me and opened my eyes. He showed me what was right and good in the world. And no. They were not in visions or anything. I was slowly nudged in many ways through out my life you could say. There were two very loving people that led Christian lives by example that helped. But it wasn't like I was being forced into it or anything. It was still my choice. And when the time was right, and I heard God's message (from the Bible), it opened my heart up to His Love and His plan for my life (And I accepted it).

After I accepted God (i.e. Took that leap of faith like Indiana Jones did in the Last Crusade), I later found a peace that I had never known before. I also did a lot of reading afterwards, too. I discovered that there is a lot of scientific facts that back up the Bible. But I came to realize that it is not the facts that win people's hearts over... but someone answering to God knocking on the door to that person's heart (Via the Word (i.e. The Bible).

Granted, I am far from perfect. But I have included God in my life as much as possible (Mostly thru prayer).

 

[Luther Sloan]

If any of you are interested any further I would recommend the site called chick. Just Google it and it will tell you His plan there.

 

[the 4th hanson bro]

^ That would describe me as well. Not to mention that my kids are in Catholic school, and they're learning about all that stuff (including evolution), too.

Me three. I was taught evolution by priests. I remember the statement well. "If evolution is the mechanism of creation, so be it." And that was the end of any conflict.

I was taught by Jesuits. I'm still in counseling.

St. Thomas Aquinas said that "There can be no genuine conflict between the deliverances of faith and the deliverances of reason, which separates reason from faith and gives exclusive preference to reason, and anti-secularism (or fideism), which separates reason from faith and gives exclusive preference to faith).

Even in the thirteenth century, this was a question raised by the rediscovery of Greek science and philosophy and the threat it was perceived to pose to Christianity.

Thomas posited that the two were not in conflict, but were necessary to a full understanding.

What derails the partnership is blind adherence to dogma on both sides. Faith and reason can get along, and in Thomas' view, can, when working together lead to a deeper and fuller understanding of the truths of the universe.

 

[Angela 0077]

When I was an atheist, (oddly enough) I also believed that there was evil in the world (Satanism) because I seen the dark things in my life I couldn't explain. Trust me. At that point: I never expected to start picking up the Bible one day and seek out God. He came to me and opened my eyes. He showed me what was right and good in the world. And no. They were not in visions or anything. I was slowly nudged in many ways through out my life you could say. There were two very loving people that led Christian lives by example that helped. But it wasn't like I was being forced into it or anything. It was still my choice. And when the time was right, and I heard God's message (from the Bible), it opened my heart up to His Love and His plan for my life (And I accepted it).

After I accepted God (i.e. Took that leap of faith like Indiana Jones did in the Last Crusade), I later found a peace that I had never known before. I also did a lot of reading afterwards, too. I discovered that there is a lot of scientific facts that back up the Bible. But I came to realize that it is not the facts that win people's hearts over... but someone answering to God knocking on the door to that person's heart (Via the Word (i.e. The Bible).

Granted, I am far from perfect. But I have included God in my life as much as possible (Mostly thru prayer).

It is great you were able to find alot of happiness through god Mr Sloan.

There is so many bad things in this world and it is good when you can come into the light instead of the darkness

There is so many tough things in this world and l think there is alot of poeple who do not no where to go

I n Australia alot of religtous groups will help the poor who dont have places to go or are starving and it is these types of groups that help the less fortunate

I have know you for over two to three years and you are a very good person and l always enjoy it when it comes to your religtion and they way you express it is always interesting



My daughter is enrolled in a Christian college and they are the most helpful lovely people you can find.

There teaching is interesting and keeps my daughter entertained on learnig so many different things through the bible.

They also have so many things for the youth of today to go too.
Which keeps them on the straight and norrow and it keeps them happy and contented.

She has also met many good freinds where when she is too.

Well do Sciece and religtion have something in common.

Yes they do.

If you look at IVF and a abortion they are very big topics in religtion and science

Also Artificial cells

There has been many disagreements with religion and science over this issue.

I think it is great that there is a place for poeple who can not bear children through IVF and because this is not natural and the right way some religtions are against it.

I am not sure if all beleivers are the same aboutthis

But it is a big qestion and there is always fights over this if you have seen media reports.

 

[Lindley]

If God is all powerful, all knowing, and all good, why would he choose to use Evolution as his tool?

Wouldn't it be ironic if God is a scientist?

 

[StarryEyed]

If any of you are interested any further I would recommend the site called chick. Just Google it and it will tell you His plan there.

You mean Jack Chick?

Yes, everyone. By all means check out chick.com. If you ever wonder why some people equate religion with insanity, you'll find the answer there. This guy is one step behind Fred Phelps on the highway to utter lunacy.

 

[Angela 0077]

Why is it that there is always a person who will knock someone about there religion and beliefs

What do you know about the site anyway have you checked it.

What imformation do you have to prove this.

What do you know about these men and there religtion and why would you say that this Jack Chick is insane.

What has this bloke done to deserve this title as you say this is what this guy is.



.

 

[StarryEyed]

^ This thread is about the inability of science and religion to "get along." As I stated up-thread, I don't think they need be at odds - even in the case of organized religion. But I also state that you can't deny facts.

I am very familiar with Jack Chick. He is one of those fundamentalist nutjobs that insist that the universe is 6000 - 10000 years old. He also thinks you can "lose your soul" by playing Dungeons and Dragons. He's a prime example of a person who cannot reconcile his religious beliefs with reality - and so changes reality in his own mind. That kind of person is the problem. That kind of thinking is why some religious belief is incompatible with science and reality.