Einstein the great physicist said that the rules of nature will always be suspended ( Non-changeable ) and religion is always grabbing the issues of miracles ( resurrection, changing water to wine , healing) and many other anti-scientific phenomena thus what science states from the beginning is that such things are impossible and of course 200 , 000 years of observation and discoveries had made science so stable .So science will never give up on it's theories and religion build it basic bricks on miracles and magic which are non accepted and never will be by science
I have listened that science is trying to find god particles by passing a light from two sides with the speed of 300000km per second. I say that a science can never find god particles and science will always be anti-religious. Because if science will find god particle then all people will be religious and nobody will do the things that harms religion. Then why is heaven and hell made by god. I believe in god but i say for the science that if there is god he will never let you find god particle.
Religion is a way of describing what science cannot yet explain, e.G- if a scientific explanation for how the universe is found then religious theories become invalid but then new questions my arise about the discovery that science at that time cannot explain and so that may become new religions belief. Another example of how it works is death, science can never explain what happens after and so religion is free to fabricate a nice story that links to their faith that no one can question because the truth is unknowable and for these short reasons that are purely my opinion I conclude that religion and science will always be in conflict without hope of resolve.Thank you for reading.
It's more that religion is anti-scientific. It supposes stuff without evidence, and continues to defend it even when it's shown to be incorrect. As long as religion continues to teach that science (and Evolution in particular) is wrong because it contradicts scripture, it will never be able to co-exist with scientific knowledge.
Science is learning about the natural world, and how it works. Common scientific belief is that the big bang created the universe, life finds a way, evolution all that jazz. All of this stuff can theoretically happen without the intervention of a unknown being. However if there is proof, and/or theories that include religion then science can be shifted into a completely different concept.
It's really all in the name, so in order to finish this off Here we go:
Q q q q q q q q s f w a d f s f e a d sswßw. Fd v ń. Śßßsßßß Ed s f w f w x f s w r f w f e a f e a f a c s a d a d a
The claims that science was and will always remain anti-religious implies that science is partial, or that it's intended purpose is rooted in bias discovery. It is not the science that is religious or anti-religious, It is the scientist that is either religious or anti-religious. Science is merely a tool used by scientists to gain greater knowledge and understanding in forms of testable explanations and predictions about the universe. It is the scientist that sets out to prove, disprove, or simply explore more of what is or is not, however science in and of itself is impartial. Your assertion comes as a personification of an objective tool, and I suspect that although your personal beliefs are shared by many, it is nonetheless you who's claims are subjective, and are attempting to inject one's own subjectivity into a tool of objectivity.
Science has proven many many prohecies and information given in the Holy Qur'an. For example the honey bee and the honey and its curative qualities and royal jelly. In chapter 16 verse 68-69 it has been mentioned about it. A German researching pharmacology firm Wilhelm wrote in its annual gazette about the Royal Jelly that we started researching the bee hive upon reading these verses from the Holy Qur'an and discovered the Royal Jelly.
Also astronomical facts.
In field of Physics Dr. Abdul Salaam won the Nobel prize in light from guidance of the Holy Qur'an . His research was based upon facts mentioned in the Holy Qur'an.
Nowadays Science is researching if there is life on other planets. The Holy Qur'an tells that extra terrestrial life is there and when ever God wants we will engage with them.
Science is human explanation for our world and its laws. There's no rule that says (I mean I'm agnostic but still) if there is a god, that physics is not true. They disagree on some small things, (i.E. The earth revolves around the sun or the sun around the earth.) In other words, no one said that this means there is automatically no god, nor that religion is automatically wrong. In the big picture they do not disagree. People say that the Bible wasn't written by the wisest people and others say it was written by god. Others say it is a list of stories added over time.
Regardless of the case, the universe could technically revolve around the earth and provide the illusion that the earth goes around the sun from a zoomed in distance. But that isn't likely, considering that we observe differently and there's no proof of this.
Religion also may be metaphoric. What people call "scientific fact" is really just what scientists currently think based on tests they can muster up. Physics are the laws of the universe but guess what? No one said god couldn't have made physics.
It will only remain anti-religious to the people who want to keep it that way. "Biblical religion was not the enemy of science but rather the intellectual matrix that made it possible in the first place. Without key insights that Christianity found celebrated in the Bible and spread throughout Europe, science would never have happened.... The evidence is incontrovertible: It was the rational theology of both the Catholic Middle Ages and the Protestant Reformation--inspired by the explicit and implicit truths revealed in the Jewish Bible--that led to the discoveries of modern science." - Robery Hutchinson, "one day science and religion can live together harmoniously" - Pope john Paul XVI. I don't think it will remain anti-religious forever, or maybe it will, but it will take a lot of education and understanding for this to happen.
I do believe that says it all. To go further the "what if" argument applies to every single scientific theory that is said to disprove God but instead of ever being considered, 9 times out of 10 the opposing side is given the quote "you cannot teach the irrational rationality."
Science is the methodological study of the natural world. It has no position on the existence of gods, nor does it have any bias in such matters. It does not, as many theists claim, set out to "disprove god".
While science may examine certain CLAIMS of religions that fall under the testable, falsifiable, and verifiable, it has no stake in these outcomes. If it happens to prove that claim wrong, the religious who made it should learn to accept facts and change with them. The Dalai Lama recently stated that if science disproved an aspect of Buddhism, then Buddhism needed to change. Not all religious are so stringently stuck in denial that they ignore science, nor do they all find them in conflict with their faith. Most people in the world understand that they are separate entities, religion and science.
Science has never been anti-religious to Hinduism. It is for in Hinduism or Sanātana Dharma as it is originally called is based on Science and Nature by itself. The Ancient Indians had found out about the shape of the Earth 3000 years before any European found it or of any other race. In India also from the beginning has had the argumentitive approach to both Math and Science so Thus at least for the Sanātana Dharma(The Truth) This will remain unchanged.
The scientific method was created in a highly religious culture. The only way it could be antireligious is if religions founded their beliefs on a claim about nature. For example, if people worshiped a being that lives on top of Mt. Olympus. Using science, we see that there are no beings on Mt. Olympus. Then science would eliminate this religion. However, the monotheistic religions do not appeal to these kind of truths that science seeks out. So it can't me antireligious.