Log In | Sign Up | Help
Upload_transparent

Why Religion And Science Should Not Conflict

 
 
 
 
 
Value This
Doc 		Scribd
Average
     
Pages: 2 43
Words: 681 13640
Characters: 3909 81678
Lines: 4 623
     
     
Letters per word: 5.74 5.99
Words per line: 170.25 21.89
Words per page: 340.5 317.21

Document Information

  • Add_to_favs_transparent
  • Flag

6,412 Reads | 10 Likes | 21 Comments | 14 Favorites

Added By
Description

Religion and science have no reason to conflict with each other because they seek to explain different things. Only when they step outside of their respective purposes should there be conflict because they cannot be what they are not.

Txt2_16x16 2 Pages

Date Added

12/29/2006
Category

Uncategorized.

Tags
Groups

Awesome Links, Business, Life & Spirituality Ebooks ..., Dnyan, MBA-PEC-VRK, MY DOCUMENTS - for study, reference, ..., My Things, Psychology and Parapsychology (Medita..., Religion_Trip, The Writing of Bill Allin Group_add

Awards

Flame Hot

Copyright

Attribution Non-commercial

More info »

 

Comments

Login or Signup to Leave a Comment

Showing 1-20 of 21 comments

1 2 Next » Last »
rochmatsalim 5 days ago

there is no god except GOD, the science must not conflict with religion if the funcion of science is for give empiric realiity of religon statement

rochmatsalim 5 days ago

there is no god except GOD, the science must not conflict with science if the funcion of science is for give empiric realiity of religon statement

RoseDQ2878 about 1 month ago

I would disagree with the statement you began with regarding there being only 2 reasons for a person wanting to share their religious views. I'm not sure we would be even talking about the same thing because I think the word "religion" has taken on such a negative connotation that many of us who are totally excited about our experiences with God reject the word entirely. The reason that I share my experiences related to God is simply because of being excited about it. And I am perfectly happy and interested in hearing what other people have to say about their own experiences and beliefs even if they are totally different from mine.

alannaswasteland 6 months ago

I am not sure the two fields do not seek to explain the same thing. Obviously in some areas they do not but with the big question 'where did the universe come from?' They clearly do both seek an answer. The difficulty is that each field is dissatisfied with the others's explanation and we are lead to a circularity of there being nothing before the big bang, but maybe God existed to create the big bang.
To see more information about the compatibility of science and religion: http://alannaswasteland.blogspot.com

on EAGLESWING'S 6 months ago

i find this article interesting, but i have since found out that if you practice science with an open mind, you can actually see and sense the God factor in science. On the other hand, many religious people are afraid science will make nonsense of their belief, hence they close their minds.

ranjanijps 8 months ago

the way of your explanation neither of religion and science is not the way factually it is..
there are much deeper explanation which u have to to be aware

shivaramkumar 8 months ago

It is a wrong perception that religion and science conflicts.Religion never conflicts with science ,is is the wrong interpretation of religious teachings which conflicts.In addition of it so many deformations are also created in almost all the religions due to which some conflicts appears.

mbhusal about 1 year ago

"Religion is now and has always been a tool of unity"- I literally do not agree with this statement. Religion has always been a tool of division between the people,not unity. I don't know if your meaning of unity implies the formation of some sort of sects or cults. However, I totally agree that religion is a political as well as business stereotype. One brand or another,nowadays, the Christian brand is quite famous, as Microsoft is on the PC world, Mc' Donalds for fastfoods etc..

Do religion and science have conflict? No, not at all or should not be. There is alwasy conflicts between sciene and superstitions,but never between religion and science. Most of the times what we understand as religion is mere manifestations of superstitions. For instance, we believed our earth was flat, and these so called religions supplied that answer and prosecuted the scientists in spite of their proof!! Still these maniacs are selling tickets for heaven or hell. Sheer nonsense!! We never understood the plain reality that Jesus did not come to establish Christianity, churches nor to write the Bible. Similarly, the Buddha and Muhammad also did not intend to establish Buddhism or Islam. We are so foolish and continue to create this complex structure even more intricate. There are at least 300 religions in the world, who is right? Of course, if you are a Christian, Jesus is your savior and if you are a Muslim, only Allah will liberate you...my dear friends your saviour is only you!! Jesus just gave a message and went away and will never return, so did Muhammad and Buddha. Don't stick with words and phrases of the Bible and the Q'uran. Go beyond mind, true religion borns out of search, never out of faith or belief. Faith or belief so easily blind people. Finally a quote from Mary Alice McKinney, “Religion does three things quite effectively:Divides people, Controls people, Deludes people.”

Nachtholm about 1 year ago

From what I have seen, religion has nothing to do with the universe. Religion, in and of itself is a tool of social order. All religion, at it's core, deals with how a person must live in a civilization. Rules of basic decency and how to get along. Most everything else is dogma. Humans have attempted to use religion to explain the how and the why of the universe, but this is not religion's place. Religion is now and has always been a tool of unity, and thus a matter of politics. There is NO way to explain the "whys" of life, the universe and everything. There are a large number of things that we will NEVER know or understand. As a race we must accept this. We are the closest things to gods in this godless world, and we will never know how this world came to be. For if there was some all-powerful cosmic being, it is LONG gone.
Until humanity learns to accept these simple truths, there will be no peace.

calisto over 2 years ago

I wanted to comment about this article but found that I had enough for an article of my own. Click on my name to see my thoughts on this article in my documents area.

fb-160200851 over 2 years ago

I would like to know where the 40% number comes from. With out jumping into a lot of Bible mumbo jumbo I would like to address two questions you asked. First;

\"If the bible is wrong about the \"how\" of our world, and I would argue that it is, in fact, dramatically wrong, why should we give it any credence in explaining the \"why\"?\"

I think any literature professor would agree when I say that while the Bible contains numerous accuracies and concrete facts it also, through apocalyptic literature and symbolism, communicates a greater over arching meta narrative.

The first element of which is that God is in control. In early hebraic culture and literature seven represents completeness. Thus creation was simply completed by God. This makes more sense when placed along side the Biblical claim that a day is as 1000 years and 1000 years is as a day to God. Interestingly there is a second account of creation in Genesis chapter 2 that is not broken into days and has things being created in a different order. Looking again to literary analysis for an explanation one will find that in hebraic literature those concepts that are most important are repeated. Here the concept of \"God in control\" is the repeated theme.

Your second question was \"What are the flaws in evolution?\" Obviously my study of science does not match my study of literature,but the only flaw most of us Christians have who actually read is the matter of evolution between species. (Reptile to bird, Monkey to Human) Natural selection, survival of the fittest etc. Are no problem and are illustrated within the Bible. Any way hope that clears it up for you.

Lorcan over 2 years ago

Religion and science do not conflict - I could not agree more. They are like two wings of a bird. If one wing is weak the bird cannot fly. - Lorcan

Anonymous over 2 years ago

Here is some more science in the Bible!! It describes precise movement in the universe

“Thus says the LORD,
Who gives the sun for a light by day,
The ordinances of the moon and the stars for a light by night,
Who disturbs the sea,
And its waves roar
(The LORD of hosts is His name):
“If those ordinances depart
From before Me, says the LORD,
Then the seed of Israel shall also cease
From being a nation before Me forever.”

Jeremiah 31:35,36

J-SUN over 2 years ago

Here is some science in the Bible! There are tons of scientific revelations given by God. How did Job know that the world was indeed suspended in mid air. He was only a farmer!
Job 26:7
“He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; He suspends the earth over nothing.”

Anonymous over 2 years ago

sorry, wrong.

J-SUN over 2 years ago

For comment:
“I have never seen any coherent explanation for why any theological answering of "why", be Christian, Hindu, Taoist, Ancient Greek, Norse, Tribal African, Muslim, or Shinto, offers anything that can't just as readily be explained with more dispassionate and more free-ranging open philosophical inquiry.”

You should here this theologian speak. He speaks on all religions and the differences and why Christianity is the only one that makes sense and best fits the current reality of life. Link is below. Go to “Radio” and then to “Archives”...

www.rzim.org

Anonymous over 2 years ago

That religion has a unique niche on answering "why" is just misdirection. It is true that science doesn't try to answer why, but that is precisely what philosophy is all about. More importantly, philosophy, as opposed to theology, doesn't come pre-hobbled with dogma -- it is free to explore whatever avenues present themselves.

I have never seen any coherent explanation for why any theological answering of "why", be Christian, Hindu, Taoist, Ancient Greek, Norse, Tribal African, Muslim, or Shinto, offers anything that can't just as readily be explained with more dispassionate and more free-ranging open philosophical inquiry.

The reality is that religion used to be about answering the how questions. Over time, as our explanations got better, and our systems for developing those explanations improved, religion got muscled out of that realm by science. Now religion is trying to fight its way alongside philosophy, but I don't really see how it will fare any better there.

J-SUN over 2 years ago

I like your paper Builder but one little thing I must disagree with. For the comment:

“As I see it, there are only two reasons why people want to share their religious views with others. One is because they are uncertain that their views are valid, but feel more confident if they are among others who believe the same (thus they want to convince others to join them).

I don’t know what religion you refer to but my confidence in Jesus is what drives me to go out to the darkest places in this world to preach the Gospel. I think most Christians will agree. Consider the Apostle Paul who despite his constant struggle, pressed on to what he believed. He must have seen something in his religion... He writes,

“Let no one take me for a fool. But if you do, then receive me just as you would a fool, so that I may do a little boasting. In this self-confident boasting I am not talking as the Lord would, but as a fool. Since many are boasting in the way the world does, I too will boast. You gladly put up with fools since you are so wise! In fact, you even put up with anyone who enslaves you or exploits you or takes advantage of you or pushes himself forward or slaps you in the face. To my shame I admit that we were too weak for that!

What anyone else dares to boast about—I am speaking as a fool—I also dare to boast about. Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they Abraham's descendants? So am I. Are they servants of Christ? (I am out of my mind to talk like this.) I am more. I have worked much harder, been in prison more frequently, been flogged more severely, and been exposed to death again and again. Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one. Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was stoned, three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and a day in the open sea, I have been constantly on the move. I have been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from my own countrymen, in danger from Gentiles; in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea; and in danger from false brothers. I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked. Besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches. Who is weak, and I do not feel weak? Who is led into sin, and I do not inwardly burn?”

-2 Corinthians 16

ag over 2 years ago

Bill, again I apologize for any belligerence on my part. I like your work on Scribd a lot, and I look forward to hearing your responses.

Builder over 2 years ago

Thanks for your thoughts, ag.
I return to my statement and main thesis that religion and science "should" not conflict because they should not overlap. It's the intentional overlaps (by each side, including the one you propose, I believe) that result in conflicts.
It's no coincidence that Stephen J. Gould and I agree on the thesis. His work is well known to me.
Whether or not religion answers any questions is of no consequence because, as I said, religion seeks to answer the unanswerable. However (and here I disagree with you), the major religions of the world agree on matters of principle, though not of detail. They use different words, different rituals and costumes, but they all agree on what is right and how a person should live a good life. Almost all agree on something supernatural, though they disagree on what it is and what form it takes.
I will take some time to prepare my answer to your questions about my two statements. They may appear in a separate article. I have written about these questions a number of times previously, but not in Scribd.

Showing 1-20 of 21 comments

1 2 Next » Last »