Religion, why do people compare it to science?

Question

It can help cure illness, it can make discoveries.
I'm sorry but i've heard lots of Atheists mouthing off on how religion hates science,
Science, can be for everyone who's interested within this subject, don't see how this proves anything
like what's up with the stupid stereotype?

isaac newton happend to be a christian, and look what he did :D

Answer 1

The power of the human mind can be amazing. It can sometimes heal seemingly incurable diseases. It can also lead people astray, making them believe all kinds of preposterous things. I agree that religion should not be likened to science. Science is observation of facts and drawing up hypotheses which are altered and modified when new evidence disproves them. Religion is blindly defending a hypothesis, no matter how much evidence disproves it. A bit like comparing 'carrying your head high' and 'burying your head in the sand', don't you think?

Answer 2

No one has ever said that someone cant be a scientist because they are religious. Definition of scientist:



"One whose activities make use of the scientific method to answer questions regarding the measurable universe. A scientist may be involved in original research, or make use of the results of the research of others."



The trouble is, in religion the scientific method doesnt work. Religion lacks falsfiability - that there must be something that could happen, that would make clear the religion is completely wrong. There has to be repeatable results -- obviously, hard to get in religion. And there has to be peer review and documentation and many other things. That is the scientific method, and none of that can be applied to a supernatural force.



BUT. And this is important: Scientists can be religious. As long as they follow the scientific method, there wont be any issue. They shouldnt discuss these matters from the perspective of a scientist, and if they do, they're being dishonest. They can, however, make clear that science is fact, and religion is faith, and that they are only interested in advancing society through the use of the scientifc method.



The problem is, a lot of people with religious affiliations do not do that, and instead get people with PHds on totally unrelated subjects to speak with authority about a field they have no authority in, or discuss a subject that has long since been disproven. My father is a scientist -- structural engineer -- and he's also christian.

Answer 3

Probably because they don't understand what religion and science are.



Science vs. Religion:



A religion is a faith-based belief system regarding the supernatural.



Science is an evidence-based method of truth verification regarding the natural. Religion and science are antithetical to each other; diametrically opposed polar opposites. Let's break them down:



1) What They're Based On:



• Religion: Faith (belief in something that is unsupported or contradicted by evidence)

• Science: Evidence (measurable, testable, independently-verifiable observations)



2) What They Are:



• Religion: Belief system (consists of prescriptive declarations about reality)

• Science: Truth-verification method (consists of descriptive, predictive explanations of reality)



3) What They Pertain To:



• Religion: The supernatural (that which is incapable of being studied, explained, or even understood)

• Science: The natural (demonstrable reality)





Addendum: "isaac newton happend to be a christian, and look what he did :D"



Yes, Newton was a Christian.



But, first, almost *everyone* belonged to some religion in those days, and, two, Newton's contributions to the world were made in *spite* of his supernatural beliefs, not *because* of them.



There's a reason Newton is remembered for his insight into physics, and not his speculations on alchemy.

Answer 4

If Isaac Newton were alive today, he would certainly be an atheist. Contrary to Catholicism's Aristotelian Scholasticism, Newton's "Principia..." (his physics) amounted to mathematical proof that the physical realm actually exists. After Rene Descartes and Galileo Galilei, Newton's work was the spark that ignited the Enlightenment.



Christian beliefs misrepresent the nature of reality so severely that only the truly deluded or a willful hypocrite can be both a working scientist and a Christian. Deceptively pretending matters of faith are exempt from the same veracity expected of reliable knowledge is utterly absurd.



The stereotype you mention is due to ignorant Christians who relentlessly attack cosmology and biology, but it hasn't always been thus. Decades ago I knew numerous professional scientists -- PhD department heads, not mere BS lab rats-- who professed to be Christians, but those days are long gone. Thanks to the massive PR damage done by fundie bigots, no legitimate scientist with a professional reputation to protect wants to be associated with what passes for Christianity these days. ...and you can thank the legions of stridently intolerant Christians for bringing that about.

Answer 5

I don't mind all religions. Take Buddhism, or paganism for that matter. They go in a completely different way than that of Science. Evidence says something, they accept it. Their religion go on a philosophic way that does not affect Science at all.

Christianity, on the other hand, ignores logic. Evolution is wrong, the Earth is the center of the universe, using condoms is a sin.

Answer 6

There is nothing wrong with science, except that it often causes more problems than it fixes. Even in the medical field, many guinea pigs, including the human variety, must suffer before something of 'value' is discovered.





The real problem with science is when people worship it as though it were a God. Hence the relationship between science and God - namely the religious variety, which like science, has resulted in horrendous suffering.

Answer 7

Religion is compared to science in order to point out the differences in approach to knowledge. In science, you investigate and discuss ideas with your colleagues. You gather information and you continually update your worldview based in the new data.

In religion, you make up a lot of bullshit, claim it as divinely inspired, defend it to the death, refuse to change your mind and vilify anyone who disagrees with you.



Isaac Newton is actually as very educational case on this subject. When he used the scientific method, he came up with brilliant ideas that are still taught today. When he relied on religious ideas, he came up with crap that was quickly discarded and that even most religious people today would disagree with.

That ought to tell you something about the two approaches.

Answer 8

People do not compare it to science.



Science asks for evidence, and uses the Scientific Method for discovering answers.



Religions are put in pigeon holes, and never pull out and examined under the light of reason and logic.



They are poles apart. They are faiths. And faith, by definition is belief with no proof.

Answer 9

When Newton was alive, failing to be a believer placed one at serious risk of *execution*.



Nowadays, with freedom OF and FROM religion, 93% of scientists are NOT believers. That should tell you something.



Science works, science does tests, science demands evidence before acceptance.



Religion is the OPPOSITE.



Science discovers, religion CANNOT.

Answer 10

very properly, that's a question I in lots of situations contemplate. i'm deist, and that i do no longer understand each physique else who's. i've got seen the attitude of religion and technology from my friends, who're atheist, jewish, catholic, or different issues. human beings understand, at the back of their minds, that many things technology has shown is genuine. yet substitute is frightening. some human beings, notably in the "Roaring 1920s" include substitute, however the unhappy element is, maximum human beings do no longer like it. human beings do in comparison to issues like the theory of Evolution with the aid of fact it contradicts what they suspect. think of approximately Galileo. He substitute right into a great guy of technology, however the day he introduced his discovery, he substitute into killed. and alter isn't the only problem. human beings desire to win, and being proved incorrect is a slap in the face to many human beings, notably to the religion that human beings carry so costly. i understand i could be biased, with the aid of fact many medical theories agree or are independent to Deism. yet particularly, that's what i will provide help to realize.

Answer 11

Religion makes claims about the world.

Science does too.



The two sets of claims are not compatible. For example, women couldnt have been made from a rib of a man, and also evolved over millions of years.



Science has evidence for its claims

Religion has none.

Answer 12

In the United States the believers (and aspiring theocrats) have managed to make a false equivalence between the two a fairly common fallacy.



More often than not it is people who want their fairy tales taken seriously who try to force this false equivalence into debates. Creationists are a good example of this.

Answer 13

It would be more accurate to compare religion to serious brain damage since the two would go together very well. Religion has no connection with science because science is about truth.

Answer 14

All things are relative!!!!!!

There is a sweet science to religion.

There have been discoveries of things that have a biblical connection.

People that say there is no such thing!

Ask them 1 thing!

Is there 1 thing that scares the hell out of them ea. night?????

If they tell you no!

They are lying!!!!

The thing that scares the hell out of people b4 they go to bed every night is............"not waking up the next day!!!!!!!!

I think Madelyn Murray O'Hara was more concerned about exercising her rights.

Than her freedom.

There is a connection!

Do not let anyone tell you otherwise.

Answer 15

Only the religious compare religion and science because they come from position of weakness. Scientists don't consider them equivalent

Answer 16

I find religion to be incompatible with science because it goes against the scientific method.

Answer 17

For some reason some people say that science and religion doesn't mix. But I didn't know isaac newton was christian. Maybe people just have their own opinions. Just like in politics.

Answer 18

Religion has cured no illnesses nor led to any new discoveries. Are you on drugs?

Answer 19

religion closes down the brain ... Science helps explain everything for us ...

Answer 20

Faith, not credulity: The Bible provides us with knowledge of God and his purposes that cannot be gleaned from any other source. Why should we trust it? The Bible itself invites us to test its accuracy. Consider its historical authenticity, its practicality, the candor of its writers, and its integrity. By investigating the accuracy of the Bible, including statements of a scientific nature and, even more convincingly, the unerring fulfillment of hundreds of prophecies throughout the ages and into our present day, one can acquire firm faith in it as the Word of God. Faith in the Bible is not credulity but a proven confidence in the accuracy of Scriptural statements.



Respect science; acknowledge belief: Jehovah's Witnesses invite open-minded people, both scientific and religious, to share in a sincere quest for truth in both realms. In their congregations the Witnesses nurture a healthy respect for science and its proven findings as well as a profound belief that religious truth can be found only in the Bible, which forthrightly and with abundant evidence declares itself to be the Word of God. The apostle Paul stated: "When you received God's word, which you heard from us, you accepted it, not as the word of men, but, just as it truthfully is, as the word of God."—1 Thessalonians 2:13.



Of course, as with science, damaging falsehoods and practices have infiltrated religion. Thus, there is true religion and false religion. That is why many people have left organized, mainstream religion to become members of the Christian congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses. They have been disappointed by the unwillingness of their previous religions to disavow human tradition and myth in favor of discovered or revealed truth.



What is more, true Christians find real meaning and purpose in life, based on an intimate knowledge of the Creator, as he is revealed in the Bible, and of his expressed intentions for humankind and the planet we live on. Jehovah's Witnesses have been satisfied with reasonable, Bible-based answers to such questions as, Why are we here? Where are we going? They would be more than glad to share these insights with you.

Answer 21

Evolutionists claim that through a series of random occurrences, massive explosions and intricate biological structuring, the world in which we live was created. Their Theory in a snapshot is that, at one time, there was nothing. Then, sometime 270 billion years ago, an explosion happened. This explosion had in it all the building blocks of our natural world. Life started evolving. Case closed. End of Story.



But what if that just wasn't good enough? What if having a theory were all life essentially comes from nothing, commits the same 'scientific' cardinal sin as the opposite theory of Intelligent Design? You know that one: All life was built by someone who knew just what the heck they were doing. Intelligent Design means someone transcended this universe and created it. Evolutionists shutter at the thought. But what I would argue that Evolution, in order to work, requires the same belief in the supernatural.



Consider The first law of thermodynamics. It states that matter cannot be created or destroyed; it can only be transformed from one form to another. Matter CANNOT be created. What does that mean? Scientifically speaking, something cannot come from nothing. Presence cannot come from absence. If, at one time there was nothing, there is no probable chance of getting something that eventually creates everything. Nothing has no elements of life. It possesses zero ingredients to start any kind of evolutionary process.







http://www.turnorburn.org/errors-of-evolution-part-1.html

Answer 22

Religion is stulid and science is useless... What a foolish pair

Answer 23

They have been brainwashed by modern-day Egyptian priests (scientists).

Answer 24

THEY DON'T want people to BELIEVE in the FATHER, the SON and the HOLY GHOST.









ANYMORE













EVER ---- FOR REAL.

Answer 25

BOTH science and religion, in their noblest forms, involve the search for truth. Science discovers a world of magnificent order, a universe that contains distinctive marks of intelligent design. True religion makes these discoveries meaningful by teaching that the mind of the Creator lies behind the design manifest in the physical world.



"I find my appreciation of science is greatly enriched by religion," says Francis Collins, a molecular biologist. He continues: "When I discover something about the human genome, I experience a sense of awe at the mystery of life, and say to myself, 'Wow, only God knew before.' It is a profoundly beautiful and moving sensation, which helps me appreciate God and makes science even more rewarding for me."



What will help one to reconcile science and religion?







Science has discovered a world full of distinctive marks of intelligent design

An Enduring Quest

Accept the limits: No end is in sight in our quest for answers about the infinite universe, space, and time. Biologist Lewis Thomas noted: "There will be no end to this process, being the insatiably curious species that we are, exploring, looking around and trying to understand things. We're not ever going to get it solved. I can't imagine any terminal point where everyone will breathe a sigh and will say, 'Now we understand the whole thing.' It's going to remain beyond us."



Similarly, when it comes to religious truth, the reach is boundless. One of the Bible writers, Paul, stated: "Now we see only puzzling reflections in a mirror . . . My knowledge now is partial."—1 Corinthians 13:12, The New English Bible.



Partial knowledge concerning both scientific and religious questions, however, does not prevent us from reaching sound conclusions based on the facts we have. We don't need a detailed knowledge of the origin of the sun in order to be absolutely sure that it is going to rise tomorrow.



Let the known facts speak: In the quest for answers, we need to be guided by sound principles. Unless we stick to the highest standards of evidence, we can easily be misled in our search for scientific and religious truth. Realistically, none of us can begin to evaluate all scientific knowledge and ideas, which today fill huge libraries. On the other hand, the Bible provides a manageable compendium of spiritual teachings for our consideration. The Bible is well supported by known facts.*



However, concerning knowledge in general, earnest effort is required to distinguish between fact and speculation, between reality and deception—in both science and religion. As the Bible writer Paul advised, we need to reject "the contradictions of the falsely called 'knowledge.'" (1 Timothy 6:20) To reconcile science and the Bible, we must let the facts speak for themselves, thereby avoiding conjecture and speculation, and examine how each fact supports and adds to the other.



For example, when we understand that the Bible uses the term "day" to represent various periods of time, we see that the account of the six creative days in Genesis need not conflict with the scientific conclusion that the age of the earth is about four and a half billion years. According to the Bible, the earth existed for an unstated period before the creative days began. (See the box "The Creative Days—24 Hours Each?") Even if science corrects itself and suggests a different age for our planet, the statements made in the Bible still hold true. Instead of contradicting the Bible, science in this and many other cases actually provides us with voluminous supplemental information about the physical world, both present and past.



The Creative Days—24 Hours Each?

Some fundamentalists claim that creationism rather than evolution explains pre-human history. They assert that all physical creation was produced in just six days of 24 hours each sometime between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago. But in doing so, they promote an unscriptural teaching that has caused many to ridicule the Bible.



Is a day in the Bible always literally 24 hours in length? Genesis 2:4 speaks of "the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven." This one day encompasses all six of the creative days of Genesis chapter 1. According to Bible usage, a day is a measured period of time and can be a thousand years or many thousands of years. The Bible's creative days allow for thousands of years of time each. Further, the earth was already in existence before the creative days began. (Genesis 1:1) On this point, therefore, the Bible account is compatible with true science.—2 Peter 3:8.