0
Is it true that science and religion must be in conflict in relation to the creation of the world?
Wiki User
∙ 6y ago
There may be a conflict on how Christianity views the world with Science. Since your question says "Religion" and not specifically Christianity, then, the Dalai Lama (Buddhism) wrote in his book, "The Universe in a Single Atom" (Morgan Road Books): "My confidence in venturing into science lies in my basic belief that as in science so in Buddhism, understanding the nature of reality is pursued by means of critical investigation: if scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims."
- Answer 2
Many think that science, and specifically Evolution, have proved that there is no God. They don't comprehend that even if Evolution was an unquestionable fact, it would not automatically follow that God isn't there. They also may be unaware that there are some highly-qualified scientists who do not believe in Evolution.
Wiki User
∙ 6y ago
Wiki User
∙ 9y agoConflict is not necessary. Stephen Jay Gould proposed the concept of Nonoverlapping Magisteria (NOMA) as the ideal solution to this issue.
He said that the domain or magisterium for science is the empirical realm - what the universe is made from and why it works the way it does. He said that the magisterium of religion includes the ultimate meaning and moral values. These magisteria are nonoverlapping - science does not comment on the ultimate meaning of life, while religion should not comment on the natural world. If accepted, this concept takes questions about creation and evolution out of the religious magisterium.
However some who believe that the origins of the world and of life on earth can only be found in The Bible, strongly dispute the science. For more information, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation
Wiki User
∙ 8y agoThey need not be in conflict. If you believe that God formed our world slowly through old-Earth Creationism, or if you scientifically determine that young-Earth Creationism is the most logical origin for the universe, your belief in God and your scientific knowledge can actually support each other.
Many think that science, and specifically Evolution, have proved that there is no God. They don't comprehend that even if Evolution was an unquestionable fact, it would not automatically follow that God isn't there. They also may be unaware that there are some highly-qualified scientists who do not believe in Evolution.
See also the Related Links.
Link: Can you show that God exists
Link: God's wisdom seen in His creations
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why is the science creation story important?
There is no science creation story. There are scientific theories concerning the creation and development of the universe, the formation of the solar system and the earth and the emergence and evolution of life.
How will you prove that religion without science is lame and science without religion is blind?
Sumit vashishtha
What caused conflict between science and the romantic Catholic Church?
The birth and growth of science led to the conflict between scientists and the church.
When did Albert Einstein say 'science without religion is lame religion without science is blind?
Albert Einstein, "Science, Philosophy and Religion: a Symposium", 1941US (German-born) physicist (1879 - 1955)
What did Einstein mean by science without religion is lame religion without science is blind?
well, why don't you take a minute and think about it. Science is constantly proving religion wrong and it gives science an underlying purpose to keep moving forward with its work in every category while religion is constantly revising its interpretations of an apparently flawless book. While at the same time religion needs science because it does actually explain how some of the "miracles" could have occured if the people in the stories were the thinking kind of people who could predict wind patterns and sun locations. In short, they need each other I have a slightly different take on this subject. With regards to the first half of the statement, "science without religion is lame", I equate the statement to mean that science would be uninspiring and dull without religion. I infer this interpretation because of another of his quotes, "We should take care not to make the intellect our god; it has, of course, powerful muscles, but no personality." The second part of of the statement, "religion without science is blind", may be paraphrased as theories or attitudes held by people or organizations can go off in the wrong direction if not subjected to a structured and systematic study. Just my 2 cents.
What were the conflict between science and religion in 19th century?
The conflict between science and religion in 19th century was about the creation accounts.
What two points do science and religion agree on in relation to creation?
That it, and we, exist.
What science is a systematic study of God's creation?
Science does not study religion. As Stephen J. Gould says, science and religion operate, or ought to operate, in quite distinct magisteria. Science is the systematic study of the natural world, while theology is the systematic study of religion. Of course, if we regard theology as a science, then theology is the systematic study of religion and therefore of God's creation.
What has the author Glenn Gates Cole written?
Glenn Gates Cole has written: 'Creation and science' -- subject(s): Bible, Bible and science, Creation, Criticism, interpretation, Religion and science
What has the author Frank Lewis Marsh written?
Frank Lewis Marsh has written: 'Evolution, creation and science' -- subject(s): Religion and science, Evolution, Creation
How was science and religion like in the early 1400s like?
Religion and science had no conflict. Science was a way of discovering all the beautiful complexity of the world God made. nuff sed.
Why did the Islam's want to follow this religion?
Islam is the truth and doesn't conflict on science
What has the author Sjoerd Lieuwe Bonting written?
Sjoerd Lieuwe Bonting has written: 'Mens, chaos, verzoening' -- subject(s): Life, Religion and science, Theodicy 'Creation and double chaos' -- subject(s): Chaos (Christian theology), Creation, Religion and science
Why do Muslims generally regard science as being in conflict with their faith?
If you believe that the religion of Islam has all the answers to everything, then you don't need science. Either science is going to agree with Islam in which case it is superfluous, or it going to disagree in which case it is heretical. Either way, science loses. I should note that there is an effort by Muslims to create Islamic science, showing how science can be used to confirm the teachings of Islam. This is not unlike the Christian study of "creation science". In the end, everybody does want science on their side, but science must be subservient to religion, of you are a religious fanatic, as many people are.
What conflict did the Tennessee trial of John Scopes illustrate?
Science vs. Religion Evolution vs. Creationism
How does science differ from religion in the creation?
Science posits that life is spontaneously created by natural forces. The religious viewpoint is that life was created by a supreme being in the universe.
What are some popular books one can purchase which delve into the relationship between Science and Religion?
There are many books that delve into the relationship between science and religion; however, many of these books have a bias towards science or a bias towards religion. Some books that delve into the relationship between science and religion are "Science and Christianity: Conflict or Coherence?" by Henry F. Schaefer III and "Rock of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life" by Stephen Jay Gould.
