Can science and religion co-exist peacefully, or do the two condradict the other always? Is God a scientist?
551203
As food for thought, if God is the creator of the known physical universe and thus all the laws that govern it -- well, wouldn't that mean he also was the author of science?\n\nIn a very broad sense, all "truth" then is God's truth.\n\nScience does have different facets. Hard science is stuff that we can study right now, with quantitative results. It's usually the theoretical aspects of science (such as evolution) that muddy the waters between empiricism and  the possibility of a creator God, however one would like to define Him.\n\nI should point out that some arguments between science and Christian religion in particular are at least partly the fault of Christian apologeticists who make claims far beyond what could be proven or might not even accurately represent God's position. \n\n(I still see atheists and Christian fundamentalists squabble over particular verses, where the Christians were inaccurate in understanding the verse and the atheists see that inaccuracy as somehow disproving God -- where actually it's simply disproving the position of the fundamentalists.)
252937
Yes.  Science is a belief that there are cause and effects that can be studied in a certain way, such that we may learn the underlying ways in which the physical universe operates.  It does have its limitations, however, and has limited applications in the really important areas of spiritual growth and awareness.  It is also limited in the fact that it requires and observer, and the observer influences the scientific findings, invariably.
122073
I feel that ignorance of any sort reflects badly on anyone.  I think the problem many religious people have is that they feel science and religion are mutually exclusive, and that the sole purpose of science is to debunk religion.  I'm of another school of thought, that science and faith can coexist quite nicely.  I'm in good company, too:\n\nJohann Kepler, one of the greatest astronomers who ever lived: "“I thank Thee, my Creator and Lord, that Thou hast given me this joy in Thy creation, this delight in the works of Thy hands; I have shown the excellency of Thy works unto man, so far as my mind was able to comprehend Thine infinity”"\n\nBlaise Pascal, mathematician and philosopher, discoverer of what is now called Pascal's Law: "..the only perfect knowledge [comes] through Christian revelation"\n\nSir Isaac Newton: "This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being"\n\nLouis Pasteur: "..spontaneous generation (like materialism in general) threaten[s] the very concept of God the Creator"\n\nWernher von Braun, one of the world’s foremost rocket engineers: "It is as difficult for me to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advance of science. Far from being independent or opposing forces, science and religion are sisters....There is certainly no scientific reason why God cannot retain the same position in our modern world that He held before we began probing His creation with the telescope and cyclotron”\n\n'nuff said. :-)
108729
Science does not concern itself with religion, it can make no statements about it. \nScience proved much more useful than religion in inventing cars, computers, refrigerators, washing machines, and all those other gimmicks which I am sure you use a lot every day. Not to forget that I much rather go to a scientificly trained doctor than to a religiously trained priest if I am sick. \n\nFrom the general idea of your question I think that you don't understand science correctly. No scientist would claim oder has ever claimed that monkeys (at least you should say apes there) will evolve into humans, especially not in as short a time as 200 years. Maybe you should study science first (you can regard it as "know your enemy" if you like) and draw your conclusions afterwards.
537674
Dear Wanda,\n\nMy experience is that scientists in general have the same amount of faith (or non-faith) as the population at large. \n\nHaving said that, the degree to which some scientists dont believe in God does not make their belief or non-belief truth...\n\nTo me, what is more important (than the numbers) is the reasons that people (including scientists) give for their belief, or non-belief.\n\nYou mention that the people who believe that god exists are the dumbest people on earth... \n\nIn response... If you read the information in the links I provide below, and then still think that I am one of the dumbest people on earth (because I am a Christian theist), then please let me know, and I will accept your judgment, with humility.\n\nI used to be an atheist. Over a period of time however, I grew convinced of the existence of the Christian God, and ultimately committed my life to Christ. \n\nFor a draft-version of my journey from atheism to Christ, see http://www.godsci.org/gs/chri/testimony/seek.html\n\nFor scientific and intellectual evidence for the existence of God, see http://www.godsci.org/gs/godsci/evidence.htm\n\nFor evidence for the historicity and truth of Jesus Christ, see http://www.godsci.org/gs/chri/jesus.htm\n\nFor information regarding scientists who believe in God, see http://www.godsci.org/gs/godsci/scientists.htm\n\nCordially,\nJohn
376370
A gruesome over-simplification of both science and religion.\n\nScience admits the existence of circumstances required for life to begin on this planet were very specific.  The "systems" you speak of were in place (i.e. the nature of the things that were on this planet that dictate how those thing interact.)\n\nChristianity allows for another type of "accident" (if you'll allow me to use such a term).  The "system" is free-will that God allows us in our lives.\n\nTrying to discredit either religion or science (or any other "system") on over-simplified generalizations and semantics is easy enough, but not thorough enough to be valid.
224676
:}\nscience does agree with God every time they figure it out.  takes a while sometimes but they often get there
121995
Well, this is a touchy question...God or science. It is also a complicated question, but I will do my best.\n\nThe thing about faith, is if you don't have it, you don't understand it, but if you have it then no explanation is neccessary. In other words, people of faith do not need proof nor do they care to learn, they simply believe in God. People of science need proof of what they believe in. Scientists believe in the atom because they can see it, they can study it. Religious followers do not need to see God to believe in him. \n\nSince man could first walk upright we have been searching for a reason that we are here. Some people turn to God to make their search simple and refreshing. Others turn to science in order to seek a more rational explanation. \n\nReligion is nothing more than a very comforting way of going about your life. God put you here for a reason, God will protect you, God will forgive you, God will give you eternal happiness, and so on are just ways of controlling the weaker 96% of the worlds population. \n\nOn your question, science has not proven that religion is fraud, but it has proved that certain things mentioned in the Bible are untrue. This is easy because the Bible is not a historical record, it is a collection of stories that were passed down by mouth for generations before ever written down. As an example, the Bible says the world was created in six days, (remember, the seventh day was for rest not creation), well, was that six Earth days, or extra-solar days? A lot of what is in the Bible is relative. \n\nNow, although science has proven that a great many things in the religious world are not factual, science has yet to prove that God does not exist. That is one thing that science may never be able to prove...but just to be fair, Religion will also never be able to prove that science is wrong.\n\nI realize that I have put a negative window on religion and I wish to correct this. I myself, am Atheist...I have no belief in any God, I simply believe that no God exists, and I am fine with that. Many others have a need to believe in God. They feel good believing that there is an all-knowing and omnipotent being watching over them and taking care of them and guiding them, I have no problems with that in fact I encourage that.\n\nAlthough I am Atheist, I do read the Bible because the Bible does not only teach about God, it teaches you a good way to live your life and how to be a good person, it teaches morals, values, discipline, and responsibility. If you feel you need to believe in God, then you should, if you are comfortable not believing in God, then go ahead. It is all about personal convictions and preferences. Believe or dis-believe in whatever, or whoever you chose and let others do the same.\n\nI will end this with a quote, although I am not sure who said it. "If God did not exist, then it would be neccessary for man to create Him"
539489
Maybe. And maybe not. The point of religion is that it is based on faith, not knowledge: so proving God exists would actually destroy all possibility of religion, because it would render faith impossible. You can only believe in something that may not exist. Believing in a God whose existence is rationally proved would be like believing in the postman, and THAT would be goofy nonsense.
838226
i think this person is trying to say that science (physics) and religion (10 commandments) are opposing forces and that while most people order their world around science, this person prefers to use religion...now why they think the 2 can't coexist is beyond me
407385
both are plausible. faith and science cannot disprove the other. you can try all you want to use God to explain science and use science to explain God but in the end you will find that science happens through the will of God.\n\nkeep in mind that humans have souls and animals do not. perhaps our souls (something not bound by the laws of science) are the image of God while our physical appearances are only our animalistic aspect. \n\nwe are God's creation, but also made in their image.
434320
God and religions requires belief which comes from a leap of faith.  With so many variations of beliefs, faith in God is totally subjective. \n\nScience is a method of proof, utilizing verifiable facts, evidence and substantiation.  We have yet to prove or disprove an existence of any Gods.
581980
Religion and science are not in opposition. They only look at life from different perspectives.
553047
Just logic. Science has answered so many things about the world that religion hasn't been able to.\n\nThere is no need for religion or "Jesuses" anymore.
419185
I always find it interesting how people assume that science and religion are irreconcilable.  It is possible to believe in both and it is possible that God does exist and that the big bang theory is what created the earth.  Many creationists approach the creation theory from a fundamentalist perspective.  The Bible is full of metaphors and figurative language.  It is not necessarily meant to be taken literally.  Perhaps God provided the catalyst for the big bang making both creationism and science accurate.  Just a theory.
24461
I don't see why the "God" and the "Big Bang" theories can't go hand-in-hand. My personal opinion is that GOD made the two atoms ram into each other, thus causing the BIG BANG occur. I think it makes sense enough, but that's just me...
541297
Good question. Rationally, you would expect science to at least consider all possibilities and seek to encompass them in a complete model.\n\nWhile a great many scientists have a personal belief in God, as an organized system, "science" itself is more akin to a religion, deliberately seeking to pit itself as a force against monotheism or any acknowledgment of a higher power.\n\nThe debate on Godel's theories, the uncertainty principle, the anomalies within Quantum and the rejection of all forms of paradox point to science (as a system) actively ignoring any possible signs of God, even at the expense of incomplete and broken theories.\n\nThis of course is not rational and against the very principles of science.  But it is where we find ourselves. Privately, scientists are happy to confess their belief and views on God, but collectively you'd have a better chance in getting them to admit in the existence of Santa Claus.\n\nUntil science (as a religion) accepts rational debate, there can be no theory that will suffice.