Do you see science and religion in conflict?

[satorimind]

I think they are complementary. One is the book of nature, the other is the book of faith.

I like Rabbi Jonathan Sacks quote from his great book, "The Great Partnership":

"Science takes things apart to see how they work; religion puts things together to see what they mean."

xx

[open2it]

I think science and religion are basically the same in that they both are man's limited use of earthly intelligence to explain things. Both it seems decipher things by their limited earthly understanding and beliefs.

Funny how science fails to recognize if something is validation of itself that is proof it exists. Jesus didn't need validation from the Jews, his miracles were his validation of what he spoke of. Religion didn't believe Jesus either.

[xXeNeRGy86Xx]

That's an interesting quote.

There is still so much we don't understand about science and changes in thinking in one area could change thinking in another. They say science is never settled, and the mysteries of the pyramids or the false narratives of 'the big bang' go to show how little we really understand.

Same is with religion (Christianity in particular because that is the dominate religion) has texts written by man therefore stories are potentially flawed from the original. Some have even claimed stories about how the real Bible was purposely changed by certain people (people?) in order to add in inconsistencies that would cause people to question their faith. But I don't think it's the stories themselves that are as important as the message.

I'm not a scholar of science or religion but I have my beliefs in both, I don't see contradictions between them, it's really just a matter of interpretation as with anything.

As humans, we like to put everything in a nice little box and claim things like 'this is the right way and there is no other way' and it's this kind of thinking and those kind of people that's problematic. Sometimes it just depends on the circumstance and we should never take things so literally without knowing all angles, which very few people, if any, have the kind of time to understand all the knowledge we possess. Religion is pretty complicated subject matter so it's difficult to say what is and isn't right. That's why I just focus on being a good person because the heart doesn't lie.

Is there a specific contradiction that you can't explain away?

[John32241]

Hi,

I see both as being at the early statges of evolving them self.

Most of us want religion to be that guidance we require for day to day living. It is that however this wisdom can become a lot better and it will.

Science is biased by what it has discover already. We cling to the known physics as if we had reached the peak of understanding about how things work. That is starting to change as our thinking on these matters gets better.

John

[Gem]

Originally Posted by John32241

Hi,

I see both as being at the early statges of evolving them self.

Most of us want religion to be that guidance we require for day to day living. It is that however this wisdom can become a lot better and it will.

It can't because it's not progressive. On the contrary it just sticks to the same old story as best as it can.

Science is biased by what it has discover already. We cling to the known physics as if we had reached the peak of understanding about how things work.

Not true. Science has been extraordinarily progressive and completely changed its paradigms several times since Newton. Prior to Newton the Church persecuted anyone who made discoveries, with Copernicus, Galileo and Descartes being the the most recent examples. Since then tables have turned and religion has had to accept scientific cosmology, abandon its 6000 year old universe nonsense, accept there are processes of evolution, and so forth (though we see many still trying to cling to the old fallacies).

History clearly shows that Science is transformative by discovery and has forced religions to change their story in significant ways.

[inavalan]

For most, science is also based on faith, as religions are: "faith in science", "faith in what others say and I don't understand". Many scientists, as many priests, act more with the intention of protecting their dogma and position, than questing for truth. I don't see science being complementary to religion. In a way it is worse, because it pushes us toward being Earth-centric, and away from our inner selves.

Originally Posted by inavalan

For most, science is also based on faith, as religions are: "faith in science", "faith in what others say and I don't understand". Many scientists, as many priests, act more with the intention of protecting their dogma and position, than questing for truth. I don't see science being complementary to religion. In a way it is worse, because it pushes us toward being Earth-centric, and away from our inner selves.

makes sense

[Rawnrr]

Religion is the earliest form of science formed by our ancient ancestors in their attempt to understand life and the world around them.

As our knowledge base grew, some continued to look further into understanding while others held dogmatically to what was believed earlier, and this is where the division arose.

This dogmatic clinging to old and outdated beliefs is still happening in the in the science world as new ideas emerge only to be shot down because they go against some theories that came before.

It seems to be a common process in humans to want to grow in understanding, but are afraid to let go of old outdated concepts created by earlier explorers out of some reverence to the ideas simply because they are old.

[weareunity]

Hello Rawnrr and all.

Reasoning can change direction with less discomfort than changing belief I think.

There may well be deep rooted considerations concerning personal and cultural identity which accompany holding a belief. Where this is the case the prospect of this identity component being removed will naturally be of concern to the person affected.--Possibly to the extent of closing down enquiry and questioning.

I think it probable that anyone, any of us, in a similar predicament might do the same.

Just love the other I think.

petex

[FallingLeaves]

Originally Posted by weareunity

Hello Rawnrr and all.

Reasoning can change direction with less discomfort than changing belief I think.

Just love the other I think.

the problem being exactly what you said later: reasoning is governed by belief, not the other way around. But I liked your conclusion.