I find no reason to believe that science contradicts my faith or the bible in any way (Some may argue otherwise with the theory of evolution, but I know plenty of christians who believe in evolution and while I may not hold to that, The theory remains just that- a theory).
"Great are the works of the Lord, studied by all who delight in them."
God's work is amazing, and he encourages us to study them. But let us not be so consumed in creation that we forget about the creator.
With the loud protests of a small number of religious groups over teaching scientific concepts like evolution and the Big Bang in public schools, and the equally loud proclamations of a few scientists with personal, anti-religious philosophies, it can sometimes seem as though science and religion are at war. News outlets offer plenty of reports of school board meetings, congressional sessions, and Sunday sermons in which scientists and religious leaders launch attacks at one another. But just how representative are such conflicts? Not very. The attention given to such clashes glosses over the far more numerous cases in which science and religion harmoniously, and even synergistically, coexist.
In fact, people of many different faiths and levels of scientific expertise see no contradiction at all between science and religion. Many simply acknowledge that the two institutions deal with different realms of human experience. Science investigates the natural world, while religion deals with the spiritual and supernatural — hence, the two can be complementary. Many religious organizations have issued statements declaring that there need not be any conflict between religious faith and the scientific perspective on evolution.
Furthermore, contrary to stereotype, one certainly doesn't have to be an atheist in order to become a scientist. A 2005 survey of scientists at top research universities found that more than 48% had a religious affiliation and more than 75% believe that religions convey important truths.2 Some scientists — like Francis Collins, former director of the National Human Genome Research Institute, and George Coyne, astronomer and priest — have been outspoken about the satisfaction they find in viewing the world through both a scientific lens and one of personal faith.
This is not to suggest that science and religion never come into conflict. Though the two generally deal with different realms (natural vs. Spiritual), disagreements do arise about where the boundaries between these realms lie when dealing with questions at their interface. And sometimes, one side crosses a boundary in its claims. For example, when religious tenets make strong claims about the natural world (e.G., claiming that the world was created in six days, as some literal interpretations of the Bible might require), faith and science can find themselves in conflict.
Though such clashes may garner print, airwave, and bandwidth headlines, it's important to remember that, behind the scenes and out of the spotlight, many cases exist in which religious and scientific perspectives present no conflict at all. Thousands of scientists busily carry out their research while maintaining personal spiritual beliefs, and an even larger number of everyday folks fruitfully view the natural world through an evidence-based, scientific lens and the supernatural world through a spiritual lens. Accepting a scientific worldview needn't require giving up religious faith.
The relationship between religion and science has been a subject of study since classical antiquity, addressed by philosophers, theologians, scientists, and others. Perspectives from different geographical regions, cultures and historical epochs are diverse, with some characterizing the relationship as one of conflict, others describing it as one of harmony, and others proposing little interaction.
Science acknowledges reason, empiricism, and evidence, while religions include revelation, faith and sacredness whilst also acknowledging philosophical and metaphysical explanations with regard to the study of the Universe. Both science and religion are not unchanging, timeless, or static because both are complex social and cultural endeavors that have changed through time across languages and cultures. Most scientific and technical innovations prior to the Scientific revolution were achieved by societies organized by religious traditions. Much of the scientific method was pioneered first by Islamic scholars, and later by Christians. Hinduism has historically embraced reason and empiricism, holding that science brings legitimate, but incomplete knowledge of the world. Confucian thought has held different views of science over time. Most Buddhists today view science as complementary to their beliefs.
Events in Europe such as the Galileo affair, associated with the scientific revolution and the Age of Enlightenment, led scholars such as John William Draper to postulate a conflict thesis, holding that religion and science have been in conflict methodologically, factually and politically throughout history. This thesis is held by some contemporary scientists such as Richard Dawkins, Steven Weinberg and Carl Sagan, and some creationists. While the conflict thesis remains popular for the public, it has lost favor among most contemporary historians of science and the majority of scientists in elite universities in the US do not hold a conflict view.
Many scientists, philosophers, and theologians throughout history, such as Francisco Ayala, Kenneth R. Miller and Francis Collins, have seen compatibility or independence between religion and science. Biologist Stephen Jay Gould, other scientists, and some contemporary theologians hold that religion and science are non-overlapping magisteria, addressing fundamentally separate forms of knowledge and aspects of life. Some theologians or historians of science, including John Lennox, Thomas Berry, Brian Swimme and Ken Wilber propose an interconnection between science and religion, while others such as Ian Barbour believe there are even parallels.
Public acceptance of scientific facts may be influenced by religion; many in the United States reject the idea of evolution by natural selection, especially regarding human beings. Nevertheless, the American National Academy of Sciences has written that "the evidence for evolution can be fully compatible with religious faith", a view officially endorsed by many religious denominations globally.
Perhaps it is time to look at a new way of thinking. Perhaps we have been asking the wrong questions. God and science are not opposites. Perhaps God uses science as a means of creating and sustaining human life.
Dr. Collins wrote an astounding book about DNA called The Language of God. Collins argues that biology does not undermine God. It illustrates God's creative powers because it shows God implanted within nature a way to evolve.
In other words, faith and science are not at odds. They depend on one another. Each reveals the other's power. Of course some scientists would argue against this view. How can one prove a supernatural creator implanted the ability to evolve within organisms? Yet, they would have great difficulty finding a counter-argument to it. The beginnings of life remain shrouded in mystery, and will remain so.
As Max Planck, one of the twentieth century's most celebrated scientists put it, "Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are part of nature and therefore part of the mystery that we are trying to solve."
As scientists have learned more about evolution, they have also recognized a truth the Bible described long ago. Creation is vast and almost infinitely diverse. Consider, for example, that earth contains 40,000 types of beetles! The Bible celebrates this diversity in the Book of Psalms, where we read,
As we learn more about the world, we are uncovering the vastness God implanted within it. Even more astonishing, this diversity shares a common source. Every organism shares the same genetic code. To use a literary metaphor, we are all part of one dictionary.
As science writer Matt Ridley put it, "Wherever you go in the world, whatever animal, plant, bug or blob you look at, if it is alive, it will use the same dictionary and know the same code. All life is one... This means -- and religious people might find this a useful argument -- that there was only one creation, one single event when life was born."
The final area of convergence is language. Language is not simply the words we speak. It is a series of symbols used to structure reality. Recall how Dr. Collins entitled his book The Language of God. That language, in Collins metaphor, is DNA. DNA are strings of letters array in different orders. The arrangement of the letters creates life. Is it coincidental that God's creation of the world begins with the words, "God said 'Let there be light, and there was light?"
To continue this metaphor, we can understand creation as a result of different permutations of letters. We call these letters DNA, and they are really the building blocks of life. Science may not prove God to everybody. Yet, the more we learn, the more we can grow in our awe and amazement at the beauty of God's creation.
Someone tell me, how earth was created? I want you to be 100% sure and it must be provable. You won't find anything. There is absolutely nothing in science field to prove this phenomenon. Further, if you end up looking for the information and find some "bullshit". They will call you a scientist and before you die, you will say, "There is nothing greater than God" in a fear of going to hell.
Science has given us our current understanding of our solar system, galaxy and our universe. It has given us all the technology that connects people all over the planet as well as the medicines that have eliminated diseases like polio and leprosy and many others. Where would we be without MRI machines, CAT scans, and the thousands of other aspects of medicine, surgery, diagnostics and so on?
Science teaches us and shows us the endless possibilities of the human race, whereas religion would keep us backward and intolerant and ignorant.
80-90% of our population still have no real understanding our solar system, galaxy let alone our universe. Billions still don't understand basic hygiene, germs or viruses. They are forbidden birth control and watch their children die from disease, malnutrition and lack of water. They are even forbidden condoms to help avoid the spread of HIV and AIDS. Why? Because this is all part of their faith and its beliefs, as well as dictated to by the holy catholic church, and other religious leaders.
Religious leaders and zealots of all faiths have and continue to use violence, murder, wars and other atrocities to keep and force people into beliefs that are backward, restrictive and misogynistic. Many have and still do punish free thinkers and those who seek knowledge or decide to leave their faith. Imagine if they succeeded. No doctors, vaccines, computers, electricity, phones, planes and so on. If God existed, would he/she wish their children to get sick and die, to be emotionally and mentally stunted. Would God want half of its children to be treated less fairly with no rights?
Imagine a world without Religion,
Peace, possibly world peace.
Women would be free of all the religious persecutions and restrictions they currently face.
We could start executing violent sex offenders, baby murderers, etc. without all the hang ups we currently have about human life being sacred.
All schools would be the same. Money from religious schools could be put in to the public school system and thus afford the poorest child the best education. All curriculum would be geared to knowledge and understanding in all areas of mathematics, sciences, literature and arts.
Jerusalem would no longer have turf wars between religions. Jews could move anywhere because Jews wouldn't need a homeland.
Science and medicine would move faster. Money spent on wars with ISIS and religious extremists would be spent elsewhere.
We could turn Vatican city into a beautiful museum, school, who knows. All that beautiful art would be moved into museums, where it really belongs.
Hopefully, space exploration would be accelerated. Colonies on the Moon and Mars would become a reality.
Mankind would finally use planned parenthood and nip overpopulation in the butt once and for all.
But before this can happen everyone must have the right to be educated first. Then they can realize that like many children books its time to grow up and put away childish beliefs, like the belief in God.
Something that we have to understand is that science has helped us more than what religion has in more than a thousand years. Secondly, religion has too many restrictions but I believe that god does not need to impose restrictions on us humans if we need to develop and survive.
The crusades, the Spanish inquisition. The fights between groups of Muslims. Religion does teach a lot of good things like respect and kindness. Then at the same time wars are fought and lives are lost over religion. The hardcore religion people that can't listen to science. Science has been more productive in moving mankind forward than religion has ever been.
The funny thing about god is that no matter how much proof shows that he is made up, religious people just refuse to listen. I've talked to people who would go so far as to say that evolution is the lord's work. Every scientific fact can easily be attributed to the work of god. The big bang? God done did it. Evolution? God done did it. Gravity? Black holes? DNA? God god god....There is no winning for science. But there is one thing you should know: if god does exist, he is the most evil villain in all of of existence. Anyone here know about Negan from The Walking Dead? What does he do? He doesn't rape, he gives women choice. And what is that choice? Well, basically you can either choose to love him, or be cast out into a wasteland that is a post apocalyptic world. That kinda sounds a lot like God. The only difference is that god, should you choose not to love him, is promising an eternity of pain and suffering. That's who you're worshiping.
Science is true whether you believe in it or not. However religion will cease to exist without belief. Does rational thinking require the adherence to beliefs at all? Does productive science, ethics, or a satisfied life require any attachment to a belief of any kind? Can we predict future events, act on data, theories, and facts without resorting to the ownership of belief? A person does not need to own beliefs of any kind to establish scientific facts, observe and enjoy nature, or live a productive, moral, and useful life.