PDA

View Full Version : Can Science and Religion Co-exist?


Robert
08-07-2006, 02:31 AM
This is a question that has always intrigued me.......What are your thoughts on this?

To me, it is particularly hard to believe the core teaching of my religion, Catholicism, that we are the children of god and this god created us in a seven day period, when science demonstrates that it is almost certain that we evolved from primates.....

While the theory evolution still has it's doubters, there is a huge body of evidence supporting it, such as the fossil record, comparative gene information between species (primates vs. Humans), comparative morphology and the presence of vestigal organs (the appendix in humans).....basically it is accepted as truth by the great majority of scientists.

So how can science a person follow a religion's teachings and the teachings of science when the two appear to contradict each other?

Do you regard the teachings of your religion above science?, do you believe in both but concede that some aspects are one or the other untrue?, are you an atheist that believes science is the only truth? or do you have another opinion?

Share your thoughts......

Edgar Erebus
08-07-2006, 06:13 AM
Yeah, it's possible. Albert Einstein was deeply religious and he still kept on making breakthrough in science, blowing away all the grounds old universe philosophy stood on - including religion.

About Catholicism and Darwinism.... Pope John Paul II in 1996 said Church admits theory of evolution, they just keep on claiming God created soul.
It was a huge mistake what Church was doing in Middle Age, trying to destroy any kind of science on ground "God created everything". But, as I notice, ANY religion must go through this phase of dumbness and extremness. Look @ the Talibans, they were doing this shit approx. 1300 years after Islam was created. Middle-age reppression of science by Catholic Church was happening 1300 years after Catholicism was founded.

Visionz
08-07-2006, 08:46 AM
do you believe in both but concede that some aspects are one or the other untrue? I look at the Bible as speaking in metaphor a good deal of the time. Single-cell organisms had to begin somewhere right? Perhaps they originated in the dirt. Basically, imo, God understands people long ago wouldn't have been ready to hear the absolute truth of the matter. After all they'd of hung 600 years ago for thinking the world was round. The truth is revealed when we're ready for it and even then its a struggle. At the largest scope science explains the working of God, whether the scientist realize it or not.

Robert
08-07-2006, 09:00 AM
Does anyone believe that the two can exist side-by-side, unadulterated?

Frontal Lobotomy
08-07-2006, 09:05 AM
While they continue to believe in creationist theory, no.

the silencer
08-07-2006, 09:09 AM
Catholicism has all these silly doctrines and shit now because ppl started reading and interpreting the Bible in a literal, historical sense. It is not meant to read that way. IMO, the Bible should be read symbolically.

I don't follow religion anymore but I'm not an atheist. I know there is God. And I sort of take whatever I can get from all the religions of the world because they all DO have the right motive in the end but too many ppl fucked things up and now most religions are a mess. I basically follow the religion of Abraham which is of the one true God (or al-Lah, "The God").

I definitely think the two can co-exist, though. Without a doubt. The early Muslims and the Moors and shit were HUGE on studies of astronomy, biology, chemistry, mathematics, etc just trying to learn as much about God's universe as a human possibly can. Humans are the only species that can actually think about such things (why are we here? how did we get here?) and come up with answers so we SHOULD be doing this kinda shit as much as possible.

But, what is beautiful about KNOWLEDGE and science and all that...is that it is INFINITE. We've been trying to understand ourselves, the Earth, and the universe for YEARS and there is still so much we don't know.

Here is a dope line from Einstein:

"To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself to us as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty, which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms--this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of all true religiousness. In this sense, and in this sense only, I belong to the ranks of devoutly religious men."

do the knowledge on that quote^^

PEACE

JASPER
08-07-2006, 09:15 AM
Science teaches people to discover, question, be curious and find solutions for problems.
Religion teaches to believe without questioning and that we have no choice but to life between the lines of an old book.

But religion has taught us morals and values that even the godless nowadays follow like unwritten rules.

In some situations, religion gets in the way of practical solutions, like abortion, condoms, euthanasia and such.

I think religion isn't needed anymore, everyone has been taught morals and values regardless of their believes. We have made God reduntant.

To answer the main question, I think if we take the good parts of religion and discard the rest, science and religion can co-exist.

Robert
08-07-2006, 09:17 AM
The thing is for thousands of years the bible was meant to be taken literally....even relatively recently people like Darwin that spoke of alternatives to the teachings of the Bible were widely criticised.......is then taking the bible in a metaphorical sense conceding that the literal teachings of god are false (or to some extent untrue) and therefore suggesting that science and religion cannot exist together in there purist forms......

Visionz
08-07-2006, 09:26 AM
But some things were always meant to be understood metaphorically. It's human error that some take things in a literal sense when they shouldn't. I don't think that makes God a liar.

Robert
08-07-2006, 09:29 AM
But is creation meant to be metaphorical?

And if so why are some schools in America fighting to teach creation theory in science classes instead of evolutionary theory?

Frontal Lobotomy
08-07-2006, 09:32 AM
Doesn't the Bob Jones univresity (which isn't accredited as such) or whatever its called, still teach exclusively creationist theory, and totally discards evolution?

Visionz
08-07-2006, 09:33 AM
I think creation was always a metaphorical story.

And schools cling to teaching creation because they're still trying to apply things in a literal sense. It was taught that way forever so its hard to do away with the traditional thought. This is true for any belief that has been widely accepted. They never die without a fight. Sometimes I think the thoughts are realler than the people who have them.

Strange Fruit
08-07-2006, 09:38 AM
i think the co-existance of Science and Religion would be the death of learning as we know it.
for centuries, these two aspects of life, have debated with one another,
and more and more philosophers/scientists/ even priests, have tried to find answers,,,

it just wouldn't make sense to have a world without choice, or vast area of learning.

it's like saying,,, that good and evil can co-exist. it just cant happen.
because without evil, we wouldn't know what good is,
and vice versa.

Edgar Erebus
08-07-2006, 09:40 AM
And if so why are some schools in America fighting to teach creation theory in science classes instead of evolutionary theory?

Evolutionary theory speaks about some dinosaurs, who were large, fat, violent, ruled whole Earth, and disappeared....

Get it?

Aight with the dinosaurs, someone'll say "Yeah, it was asteroid's fault". But then, you got 1st frogs, who were meters long, extremely large mammals and shit, and they all get extinct because smaller, more agile animals were more fit to survive than them.

And creation theory doesn't mention that at all. It says: God Created All Animals And Humans As Are Now.

Visionz
08-07-2006, 09:45 AM
i think the co-existance of Science and Religion would be the death of learning as we know it.
for centuries, these two aspects of life, have debated with one another,
and more and more philosophers/scientists/ even priests, have tried to find answers,,,

it just wouldn't make sense to have a world without choice, or vast area of learning.

it's like saying,,, that good and evil can co-exist. it just cant happen.
because without evil, we wouldn't know what good is,
and vice versa.

I understand what you're saying but I think a world of extremes is possible. I don't think you have to understand or even have experienced hate to understand what love is. You would only have to imagine the absence of that loving prescence w/in your own life.

Robert
08-07-2006, 09:52 AM
Evolutionary theory speaks about some dinosaurs, who were large, fat, violent, ruled whole Earth, and disappeared....

Get it?

Aight with the dinosaurs, someone'll say "Yeah, it was asteroid's fault". But then, you got 1st frogs, who were meters long, extremely large mammals and shit, and they all get extinct because smaller, more agile animals were more fit to survive than them.

And creation theory doesn't mention that at all. It says: God Created All Animals And Humans As Are Now.

Right i think you completely misinterpreted me, i know exactly what evolution and creationism are so please don't threat me like some retard.....perhaps you should have another read because that's not what my quote is asking......

Robert
08-07-2006, 09:54 AM
i think the co-existance of Science and Religion would be the death of learning as we know it.
for centuries, these two aspects of life, have debated with one another,
and more and more philosophers/scientists/ even priests, have tried to find answers,,,

it just wouldn't make sense to have a world without choice, or vast area of learning.

it's like saying,,, that good and evil can co-exist. it just cant happen.
because without evil, we wouldn't know what good is,
and vice versa.


good point....