Reconciliation between Christianity and science
-
I don't believe that science and Christianity are born enemies. After all, when you learn science, you discover how God created the nature in perfect order. Sir Issac Newton, I believe was a person who sought to reconcile Christianity and science.
-
Pope John Paul II says, "Science can purify religion from error and superstition. Religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes."
-
haha i never once thought that science was an "enemy".. science has proven that earth isn't millions of years old. its only scientists trying to find an alternative to God's creation theory.
-
But it isnt created in seven day either...Originally posted by dumbdumb!:haha i never once thought that science was an "enemy".. science has proven that earth isn't millions of years old. its only scientists trying to find an alternative to God's creation theory. 
Who says science didnt prove earth isnt millions years old..?
Be mindful of using something to cover up everything...its a big fallacy if i ever see one... -
Earth definitely isn't millions of years old, because it is billions of years old
-
Short of saying what science and christianity says, there is definitely room for science and christianity to co-exist. Science has given us alot. When we are sick, we get medicine. this is just one example of the goodness of science and the importance to us.
However, we need to be clear about the limitations of science. When we come to the most important questions in life, scientists can only provide very limited answers.
Science is useful for answering the 'how?' questions, describing how things work. What science can't do is answer the 'why?' questions - it can't explain why things are as they are. Let me give you a few examples that I would credit from some sources which is forgotten by me...(cos i keep them in my computer whenever I find one):
"Think of Isaac Newton sitting underneath the apple tree. He gets hit on the head by an apple and thinks to himself, "Aha! Gravity!". Now we may be tempted to think that he explained why the apple fell. He didn't. Scientists still can't tell us why the apple fell. Isaac Newton's great achievement was to describe how it fell. What he said was that the same mathematical formula that describes how the apple fell (the inverse square law) also describes the attraction between any lumps of matter. He described how this happens - he didn't explain why.
Let's take another example. Why are you breathing? A scientist could describe how you are breathing. If he hadn't given the problem much thought he might feel he was answering the why question by saying "Because your muscles are lifting your rib cage, creating a negative pressure in your chest and drawing in air." But why, I would then ask, are the muscles doing this? .... "Because a raised partial pressure of carbon dioxide in the blood circulating through your brain results in the activation of nerves which stimulate our chest muscles." Well why is that? ... "Because your cells are producing carbon dioxide." But why is that? ... "Because of the action of intracellular enzymes." But why is that?... "Because the enzymes are coded by a DNA template." And why is that? ....why? ...why? .... Do you see that we could keep asking "why?" because what the scientist is actually doing is not explaining why but describing how?"
But wait, I am not saying that the bible then can tell you why exactly for everything. What I am trying to say is that while science is so important in our lives, it is not everything and cannot prove everything and certainly is not infallible or without error.
I am not going to go into what the bible says but the bible and science can definitely co-exist to help us not understand the purpose of things around us but also the purpose of us being here. -
I seek to differ. In fact, religion is doing the same as what science is doing: explaining the how and not why of the world around us.
Take for example the bible; it tells us how the jewish god created the world and not why; it tells us that the human race decended from 2 persons and not why the jewish god created human.
Pardon me for sounding blasphemous but the most fundamental question would be: why did god exist? -
Bear in mind many religions existed for many centuries. Unless they have been fully described as such by reliable third parties, religion has never been reconciling with science in the first place.
Bear in mind people like Galileo who kept quiet about telling the church who view anything like the fact that the earth revolves the sun as heretic, Took sometime for the Church to recognise that.
Bear in mind too, early Christians strive to rid of anything unfamiliar to Christianity, such as the Alexanderian science and paganism in and out of the Roman Empire.
Archimedes was left floating out of sphere till some good souls bring him back.
Lastly, imagine for the last two hundred years, without these advances in technology, will we be still so good as to say religion wanna reconcile with science?
In fact, i viewed that, because technology has such huge impact on our lives, with the fact many people are becoming secular and do not believe in any religion at all, its fruitless to talk about religion to them. In fact, it should be that religion mellows down and play along the science line.
Think about it. Many people of all faiths would attribute disaster, miracles and paranormal activities to god and religion, in the past. Heck, hardly any sane people wouldnt be saying such things in modern time. Religion therefore approach a different line to convert people to their side. Only recently do i see religion trying to play along logic and science, rather than faith, Many overly educated people of today would definitely not listen to anything illogical or cannot be proven by science.
While i do not deny religion may reconcile with science, bear in mind, it is only becoming a recent trend, rather than something that is there all along.
Similarly, if there is no technology or science on the tip of our tongue today, i think, we will be all condemning science like hell today.. -
When they say the earth is made in seven days, it isn't literally mean seven days. It could mean seven periods of time.
-
tot the bible says 7 days??? if its 7 periods of time, y didnt the bible says 7 periods of time instead of 7 days...Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:When they say the earth is made in seven days, it isn't literally mean seven days. It could mean seven periods of time. -
God knows, in his eternal wisdom, there would come, from his chosen people, a person who will reveal to the world, the mystery of time.Originally posted by RaTtY81:tot the bible says 7 days??? if its 7 periods of time, y didnt the bible says 7 periods of time instead of 7 days...
Guess who is this person?
-
i beg to differ...
science has in fact helped religion exert its influence in the modern day world. take for example, christian networks all over the world. through such programmes, one can become a christian just by calling a hotline.
science and religion should coexist together. they are not mutually exclusive, for the idea of being so mechanized in today's world has created a void in us that science is not only unable to fill, but amplifies. this is when religion comes in, to fill the void inside us -- after all humans have a psychological affinity with religion.
religion shld serve as a moral guideline for scientists when they carry out their research. having religious consciousess actually helps curb the abuse of science. -
Your point is a big joke.Originally posted by devoid05:science has in fact helped religion exert its influence in the modern day world. take for example, christian networks all over the world. through such programmes, one can become a christian just by calling a hotline.
It is like saying science has helped the flat earth society exert its influence by connecting all its members in the virtual world so they can share and strengthen their belief. -
Who?Originally posted by Icemoon:God knows, in his eternal wisdom, there would come, from his chosen people, a person who will reveal to the world, the mystery of time.
Guess who is this person? -
Hmm, why not?Originally posted by Icemoon:Your point is a big joke.
It is like saying science has helped the flat earth society exert its influence by connecting all its members in the virtual world so they can share and strengthen their belief.
-
Are you sure you dunno? Who said 'God does not play dice'?Originally posted by laurence82:Who? -
Exactly. So he was basically shooting his own foot when he used the point to support reconciliation between Christianity and science.Originally posted by laurence82:Hmm, why not? -
I donch know....Originally posted by Icemoon:Are you sure you dunno? Who said 'God does not play dice'? 
-
No no, i mean he sounds rite when he says science, this virtual world connects members of the religion together..Originally posted by Icemoon:Exactly. So he was basically shooting his own foot when he used the point to support reconciliation between Christianity and science.
In which part is he wrong? Do explain. -
Albert EinsteinOriginally posted by laurence82:I donch know.... -
I see...Originally posted by nukewatch:Albert Einstein -
Not wrong, but he sneaked in the point to *support* his argument that "i beg to differ .. science and religion should coexist together. they are not mutually exclusive".Originally posted by laurence82:No no, i mean he sounds rite when he says science, this virtual world connects members of the religion together..
In which part is he wrong? Do explain.
If you realize, his example is actually moot. It doesn't support his argument at all, but can potentially trap the unwary and uncritical user to nod the head and thinks "yea, i agree with his example, he has a point .."
The redundant and confusing example becomes clear when we apply his logic to a more absurd case like the flat earth society. -
Meaning in actual fact, his points did not differ at all from the topic starter arguments?Originally posted by Icemoon:Not wrong, but he sneaked in the point to *support* his argument that "i beg to differ .. science and religion should coexist together. they are not mutually exclusive".
If you realize, his example is actually moot. It doesn't support his argument at all, but can potentially trap the unwary and uncritical user to nod the head and thinks "yea, i agree with his example, he has a point .."
The redundant and confusing example becomes clear when we apply his logic to a more absurd case like the flat earth society. -
like how?? how is it absurb?Originally posted by Icemoon:Not wrong, but he sneaked in the point to *support* his argument that "i beg to differ .. science and religion should coexist together. they are not mutually exclusive".
If you realize, his example is actually moot. It doesn't support his argument at all, but can potentially trap the unwary and uncritical user to nod the head and thinks "yea, i agree with his example, he has a point .."
The redundant and confusing example becomes clear when we apply his logic to a more absurd case like the flat earth society. -
playing guessing game???Originally posted by Icemoon:God knows, in his eternal wisdom, there would come, from his chosen people, a person who will reveal to the world, the mystery of time.
Guess who is this person?
wanna sae jus sae la...dun sae den dun sae lor...