Yes, as long as religion is willing to adapt. The Dalai Lama is reported to have said that if science proved something contrary to Buddhist teachings, then Buddhism would adapt. To be compatible with science, Christianity and other religions must adopt the same approach.
ANSWER 2:
If God created the world, as most theists believe, then it stands to reason that God provided the means for mankind to learn about his world (science), just as God provided the means to know about his creation through the revelations of God's Messengers (religion). For this reason, science and religion MUST agree. When they are at odds, it should be assumed that one has yet to discover the truth. Remember that at one time science was sure that the sun revolved around the earth, and it was the norm for doctors to "leech" or bleed people to help them heal. Science has now proven beyond doubt that the earth is millions of years old; therefore, fundamentalist Christians, for example, need to now rethink the story of Genesis as each "day" probably standing for an entire geologic "age".
Answer
A growing number of scientists in reality do not believe that science and religion are compatible. 93% of elite scientists of the National Academy of Sciences do not believe in a personal god, but they have invented the idea that science and religion are separate domains that never intrude on one another, something the scientists called non-overlapping magesteria. The main reason science came up with this scheme was so as not to lose favor with the public, which includes their funding, which is mostly Judaeo/Christian.
But as I said many scientists such as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Victor J. Stenger, and the late Journalist and literary critic Christopher Hitchens, see and have seen that, on the whole, religion does far more harm than good, and have decided to take the risk of losing favor by being less accommodating to religion.
Author of Atheist Manifesto, Michel Onfray believes we are moving to a post Christian, post God era, and that we must do this for the good of humanity. The aforementioned men along with a growing number of other scientists, philosophers, and intellectuals are collectively called the New Atheists, the 'new' in their being less accommodating and more outspoken about science and religions incompatibility.
Michel Onfray's book "Atheist Manifesto" details the bloody history of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
Richard Dawkins is a biologist who clearly explains evolution without recourse to intelligent design in his book The God Delusion and his earlier book The Blind Watchmaker.
Victor J. Stenger is a physicist who shows that a god can be ruled out beyond a reasonable doubt due to lack of evidence that should be there in his book God The Failed Hypothesis [How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist]. And he also dedicated a whole book to the incompatibility of science and religion in God and the Folly of Faith [The incompatibility of Science and Religion].
Sam Harris is a neuroscientist and one of his books is Letter to a Christian Nation.
These men see no reason why religious claims and morals should not be given the same scrutiny as any other phenomenon, and likewise subjected to measuring and testing.
As the Greeks studied science, how did it begin to change their relationship to their religion and to their gods?
Science requires objective validation, not just words.
Both religion and science stem from the need of explanation how human come to exist and how the world around us work or created.
there isn't a connection between sience and religion but with hindis there is a prediction with the moons and stars
To an extent, I don't believe in god, science supported my beliefs, but without science I would still gave trouble believing the bible fairytale
Religion is a very complicated subject, since there are many different religions, and each religion is subject to many different interpretations. Science is much more unified. I would say that there are at least some interpretations of religion which are compatible with science. There are also interpretations of religion which are incompatible with science. The choice is yours.
Religion is not a science.
R. C. Wallace has written: 'Science and religion' -- subject(s): Religion and science 'Religion, science and the modern world' -- subject(s): Religion and science
Albert Einstein said, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind" in his 1954 essay "Science and Religion." In the essay, he emphasized the importance of understanding and integrating both science and religion for a more holistic view of the world.
It is an art as it can not be a science.
; The quote is Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. : Albert Einstein, "Science, Philosophy and Religion: a Symposium", 1941More quotes of Albert Einstein; see link "Quotes Albert Einstein" on left.
God created the world including science, hence science and religion are interconnected.
Although science and religion are not necessarily contradictory the point of view of each is different. Science is a model based reality. Stephen Hawking has a paper given on the difference between science and the need for God. A good model gives a good, rigorous, and testable explanation that can predict future repeatable outcomes that can be tested. Religion gives us a faith based reality that doesn't give predictions that can be tested. Religion can be based on past experience both spiritual and physical. Faith is the underlying proof which is difficult to give to someone that doesn't have it. Therefore as a Christian and a scientist I do not have compatibility problems with science and religion as long as the literature and focus of each are recognized.
== == Religion is all about faith, whilst science is a branch of overall knowledge for mankind. Religion is about belief whilst science emphasises more on knowledge-seeking. However religion is something that cannot be proven - right or wrong and true of false. Religion & Science at times may not be compatible or can run parallel to one another. Just as science cannot prove religion, it goes without saying religion cannot empirically prove anything on science. However, for believers science is part of religion, and NOT vice versa. ---- Thus, there is no way to prove the truth of any religion scientifically. All religions are equally based on faith alone, and which one you choose to follow, if you choose to follow a religion at all, is simply a matter of faith. Religion is the source of all knowledge of the world. Religion is for our spiritual ascension while science is for our physical ascension in this world. Both the disciplines are necessary for the successful physical as well as eternal life. Both are distinct in themselves and hence cannot be compared at any instance. Science cannot reach the spiritual zenith of religion and Religion cannot bow down to the levels to justify the theories of Science. "RELIGION BEGINS WHERE OUR INTELLECT ENDS". The things for which we could reason out automatically becomes 'science' for us. And the things which are beyond the reach of our intellect and power of reasoning automatically becomes 'religion' for us. Science is the vast ground and Religion is the unending sky. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sumit vashishtha
Peter Gottschalk has written: 'Religion, science, and empire' -- subject(s): Religion and science, Historiography, Religion and politics, Religion and sociology, History
Religion.