The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Today believe in religion slows the progress of science.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Jeffrey_Rocks has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/18/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 280 times Debate No: 106850
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)




1. Denying the big bang and believing the earth was created about 10,000 years.
2. Being a against abortion
3. Denying parts of human history.
4. Discarding physical laws. (Believe in miracles).
5. Condemning homosexuals.
6. Being against embryo research.
7. And recruiting more people to do the same.

Religion slows down the progress of science.


Thank you for an interesting topic. I will mainly speak from the point of view of Christianity since that is what you seem to be addressing.

1) No Christan should deny the Big Bang theory. In fact, the Big Bang goes a long way towards showing that the universe has a creator. All that is left is to show that this creator is personal. Secondly, scripture nowhere states that the earth is 10,000 years old, and it strongly suggests that humans at least have been around for longer. Those who hold this view misunderstand science and religion, but this would be the case regardless of their religion or lack thereof.

2) Being against abortion is the use of science and reason. Abortionists who believe the human being has the right not to be killed only it passes out of the magic vagina where special humanity dust is sprinkled on it.

3) Please specify which parts, and I will be happy to address it.

4) Belief in miracles does not destroy science. Surely some physical laws can be violated at times by God, but the vast majority of events happen outside of the supernatural. In other words, miracles have to be rare to be called miracles. Conversely, scripture tells us that God is the same and that He upholds the universe by His unchanging word. Therefore, we know that the universe behaves now like it did in the past. This is the basis of science and something that naturalism cannot possibly show.

5) This isn't really a scientific issue. It is more of a moral issue.

6) Perhaps you are correct on this point, but this isn't necessarily a bad thing. Christians also slowed down the science of the Nazis during WWII. Maybe they even prevented discoveries by doing so, but we should all be glad they did.

7) This only applies if the above are valid, so it does not apply.

Naturalism is Incompatible with Science:
1) If naturalism is true, then we cannot know that the past behaved like the present. Naturalist must simply assume this by faith.

2) If naturalism is true, our brains are simply just complex machines. If this is true it is impossible for humans to have free will since our decisions are simply very long domino effects. This makes human reason impossible since reason requires the ability to make decisions (correct ones). Secondly, if naturalism and evolution are both true, there is no reason to trust our minds. Evolution alone is unable to create things like philosophical and scientific reasoning. Perhaps it is able to make us choose which berry is not poisonous, but there is no reason for humans to be able to think about questions like "where did we come from?" This ability is the foundation both to the pursuit of science and the ability to understand scientific data. On the other hand, those who believe in God, regardless of whether evolution is true, can believe in human reason, the basis of all science.

3) Naturalism cannot form any type of moral foundation. When you are in the lab, what scientific imperative tells you that you must be honest with your findings? If it is okay for you to be dishonest in your findings, I think it is obvious that this would have a negative effect on science, much more so than a few fringe young earth creationists outside of the scientific community. Those who truly live out such a naturalistic philosophy have the ability to negatively affect the science from a greater position of power.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by backwardseden 3 years ago
Well there's so much hate in religion. And religion has the necessity, the need, the requirement, to hate. If it didn't their gods would be out of jobs and not be considered gods. You only touched on a brief few of the christian hatreds which blocks science. There's always the absurd self righteous egotistical 10 commandments... break the sabbath, curse at your parents, become an adulterer, blaspheme etc etc all requires death according to the bible. Now you did get that one wrong though as the christian god MOST CERTAINLY IS NOT IN ANY WAY against abortion as he's killed countless pregnant women in his genocides and one of them being the great flood which wiped out ALL LIFE. But that teeny tiny stint never really happened. And hey this god guy has freely admitted to having evil, anger, wrath, vengeance, rage, fury, jealousy... just what everybody wants in a grown, mature, with no baggage, happy (who in which never admitted he was happy so he must have been miserable all throughout the bible) yeah just what everybody wants from ---any--- great role model supreme deity. Yep this god guy killed 2,821,364 in which there certainly must have been some pregnant women, thus the abortion issue comes off the table unless christians, and they do, believe in a super duper superior contradictory hypocritical god that has gone belly up. Science will win in the long run because religion is far too stupid for it not to.
Posted by rennerpetey 3 years ago
Jesus took a literal translation of the bible, so if you don't then you are disputing the claims of Jesus Christ(God himself)
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.