Can Science and Religion be the same?

Christianity is one of the most popular practiced religions today. In the bible it states God said let there be light and so tgere was light.But then why are there theories of the Big Bang.What if when God said let there be light the Big Bang theory happened.

God created humans , so it says in the bible. But if so why is there history of evolution. Lets face it no one was around back then, but what if the humans were what evolution has stated. We dont know if God created apes in the form of whats called an human. Just think on it.

 

The theory of evolution is one man's manifested ideas to convince himself that us humans came from a single cell organism. Through time and changing conditions this single cell evolved so as to adapt to environmental changes. Now if we evolved, why have we stopped? Certainly with climate change posing a trait to our very existence we should be evolving as we speak.

 

I definitely think that there are places where science and religion overlap. It's very possible that some all-powerful deity caused the beginning of the universe- what we see as "the Big Bang", for example, could very well have been God's light in the beginning of creation. After that point, however, a lot of compatibility issues pop up, especially having to do with evolution. Replying to Oneka Laurent's post above mine, I really think the issue here is evidence- we have countless volumes and museums full of evidence for evolution, and not a single drop of evidence for omnipotent design. In the case of the Big Bang versus God's creating the universe, one theory really is just as plausible as the other- we don't really have any evidence as to what caused the Big Bang, so it's just as likely to be God as it is to be flying monkeys or simple spontaneity. Evolution, however, is extensively documented, and its effects are immediately visible with a bit of research. As for the question of "why have we stopped evolving", I think the answer contradicts the question- we really haven't stopped evolving, and we probably never will. The thing is, evolution takes a long time to produce any visible effects. We're talking hundreds of years for small visible changes, and hundreds of thousands to millions for anything major- certainly much longer than we've been causing climate change. I am certain that we are beginning to biologically adapt to the effects of climate change, but we won't see any drastic changes for a long while- and by the time we get there, it might be too late.

 

Quite simply put, evolution is a process that takes a vastly long time to show any affect, and conventional humans, Homo sapien have only really existed for about 0.2 million years. Evolution isn't something that you can instantly recognise between two generations, or even ten. Also, climate change isn't really a problem for us, the climate has always been changing, it's more the speed at which it is changing.

Another factor to consider, is the fact that we have evolved to a state where we are building complex contraptions, which are currently impossible for other species to grasp. This could bring in the question, have we gotten to the point where we don't need to evolve, as long as we are able to invent contraptions which meed our environmental stresses?

Back on topic. I am an atheist, so I don't really have any religious belief. Though this is my belief, it doesn't mean that religion and science cannot come hand in hand. I'm sure people could likely argue that some omniscient being could have created processes like evolution. You could also argue, what was happening before the Big Bang. It definitely poses some interesting conversations.

 

Simple Question to you my friend..

What is the purpose of Life? Yes with science it helps to explain processes so as to aid our understanding of them e.g the rain. But it still cannot say who is the architect of that design. The Evolutionary theory is just a way for many who don't believe in that Architect to explain their existence. If you say we came from a single cell. Who designed the single cell? Oh yeah the big bang . I beg to differ!

 

Point taken. Question - Who set of the big bang? Yes it may be fact that there's a lot of evidence in favor of evolution. As you said," evolution takes a long time to produce any visible effects", we,re aging ever second of the day. The way evolution is proposed, is that we evolve for better, to improve. So why can't this theory find a solution or crack that code of not dying?

 

We keep on comparing fields of study and some go on to make mighty defensive debates on this topics that end up to be heavy unending paradox of all time. Many souls have died protecting both science and religion till today. It is very sad I tell you.
We humans need to transend and believe that everything has a purpose and must coexist in order to support each other. The reason why the gospel of any religion is far more wide spread and deeply entrenched into societies, is because of science through
all electronic devices from broadcasting devices such as media and computers to archeological devices that have really boosted the authentication of any religious material on paper, stone or bones. It is time we wake up and stop fighting and live together as one. Use the car built by science, the roads, food, paper, medicine, guns, tanks, beds, clothes, toothbrush and paste, schools, buildings and knowledge but don't ever be that soul that differentiates what can't be solved. We are here to survive looking forward to life as the primal epicenter of the whole universe and life forms.

 

Science is towards discovering the source of everything. It is to explain the things that are left as a mystery and therefore belonged to religion. If science proves that nothing can become something, then no mystery remains. Science will conquer. But if God turns out to be the creator as viewed by religion and magic and miracles exist, then Religion stays. Science creates; Religion has a creator. Science and Religion cannot be the same.

 

It can never be the same,evolution of science and bible are totally different

 

Science and religion are two faces of the same coin. Science and religion, both are very important to the humankind, however, these two concepts are very different. The science says the universe was created through big bang, however, religion says the world was created by God in 6 days. Likewise, religion tells the story of Adam and Eve, contrarily, science says human beings evolved from unicellular organism.

 

Essentially and in keeping with the topic, no. Science and Religion are diametrically opposite

Science is the human race trying to understamd our habitat, our universe, our place in it and the rules that govern everything.
Religion on the other hand is the blind acceptance of doctrines passed down over millenia.

Societies, however primative, all develop a religion. It serves as a means to bind together a group under a common value system. It has no basis in science. but instead panders to a person's need to belong and have purpose.

 

Science and Religion speak different kinds of truths. While Science focuses on discovering truths of the material world, Religion answers questions about morality and how to live your life. Trying to replace one with the other will result in failure because religion can not tell you the truth about the physical word and science cannot tell you how you should live your life.

 

[QUOquesrkSilverD, post: 17526, member: 4409"]Science and Religion speak different kinds of truths. While Science focuses on discovering truths of the material world, Religion answers questions about morality and how to live your life. Trying to replace one with the other will result in failure because religion can not tell you the truth about the physical word and science cannot tell you how you should live your life.[/QUOTE]

One of my favourite quotes on this topic goes like this. A scientist has to see to believe, a religious person needs to believe to see.

Many famous scientists have also been religous, which flies in the face of reason. Most notably, Einstein , who in his later life abondoned pursuing certain aspects of quantum physics in favour of retaining his view on God and spirituality.

Each pursuit, be it religious or scientific has it's place in the world and perhaps what is required is greater tolerance and respect from both camps. Is it not science that saves the ailing pastor and who in turn does the doctor turn to on his deathbed?

 

You misunderstand the very fundamentals of the scientific process, which is probably why you're so hesitant to take them as fact. It's not that science "cannot say who is the architect of that design", it's that science says there's currently no empirical evidence to suggest the existence of said "architect". Science does not "try" to explain anything, science just is. If that makes sense to you.

You also immediately drew up a hypothetical on evolution that almost directly contradicts your own beliefs. You say that those who believe in evolution is just a way to explain our existence because we don't believe in said "architect", but isn't your unwavering faith to that same "architect" just your way explaining your existence as well? I feel like that's taking the easy way out, honestly. Scientists work tirelessly to provide explanations to the world around us, but the only thing I ever see religion used for is as an attempt to explain the unexplained.

 

In my view science and religion are more or less same in some respect. According to the theory of relativity any material particle present in the universe can be transformed into energy. That is, energy is the ultimate form of matter or a material particle. According religion or metaphysics the God is one and he holds all the energy of this universe. He is the superpower. All the living creatures or non living thing in the universe are a tiny part of the god.

The theory of Big-Bang, in Physics, also advocates that the whole universe is created with a bang of infinite energy content. In other words, the God is nothing but a store-house of infinite energy and we are a small fraction of it. When we die our body decomposes and get converted into free energy.

 

The problem is that we're limiting the scope of science when we talk only of evolution. Of course science and religion are not the same. This does not make them mutually exclusive. I don't think that any person who considers themself religious would dispute all of science: evolution mayb, but not science as a whole. We have to be careful to not be too narrow in our field of thinking. If the questions should be re-worded to ask if evolution and religion are the same, the answer still stands. They are not the same, but neither must the totally exclude each other.

 

Not the same thing, sometimes science does not agree with some religions and they have the power to prove their theory!

 

I think that, on the whole, religion and science do not disagree that much. Religion was designed to explain the world to people with little knowledge of the way things work. Many major scientific concepts are described by religion as miracles but when the primitive wording is replaced with modern concepts they seem less fantastic. Many of the disagreements religious people have with science stem from bad translation and stubborn opinion of interpretation.

 

I dont think science and religion can ever be the same.This is because each serve us differently. Although science is challenging religion. It is changing how people perceive the world and forces sorrounding them.

 

First of all there is a need to understand what is science and what is religion ? Religion is a study of about subjective matter i.e you can relate the events to the beliefs you have acquired from teachings of your religion whereas science is a study of objective matter (opposite to subjective) i.e. you can relate the happening of any event by carefully observing and understanding about the causes due to which that event occurs without involving your personal beliefs. In order to understand, take a simple example of death of a person by car accident. Let say if you ask about the accident from an individual who is deeply involved in religious views he would say that the person died because his time of death was arrived but if you ask from the one who has less interaction with religion or indulged in technical aspects about the cause of accident then he would say may be the mechanical parts of a car didn't functioned well or else.

So it demonstrate that science and religion both are different things. But they both are actually relative to each other because most of the science about different things, phenomena or aspects originated from the views and acts of historic religious messengers and holy books and in my opinion science is the way through which our religious beliefs could become stronger. The problem is that we have so many scholars from the religious site but I don't think that even a single from them came forward who actually makes his research over this and relate the religion with science in such a way so that even an atheist could accept the existence of God.