Can science and religion complement each other?

[Kimi]

Do you think the two that are often seen as the opposing sides to each other can actually complement each other?
If yes, how?
If no, why?

[Guest]

Science can definitely complement religions which expound the TRUTH, such as Buddhism.

But science will deal the final death blow to religions that are made up of myths and folk-lores, such as ... you know which ones.

[dot dot dot]

kimi, you enjoyed reading 'Angels and Demons' by Dan Brown?

Eric

[Kimi]

Very much indeed Eric
Also this book, Science and Religion by Gary B. Fergren, not a novel though.

There are a lot of scientists, renowned in their fields, who are also religious. Some of them might try to mix these ideas by making claims about one with theories of the other, but most seem to be able to keep them apart pretty well. So I reckon it is possible for the two of them to live next to each other. And why not; evolution theory does not necessarily exclude a deity being from being around.
But what do you reckon?

[Guest]

Well, we're down to axioms here, and if the axioms of science and religion can coexist. For the mainstream christian churches, liberal islam and most of buddhism this has worked out to be less of a problem than we'd imagine. The religions that believe in a God it seems that they adapt pretty well to the thought of a completely mechanical universe with a undetectable but omnipresent divine backdrop. There is really no problem defining your axioms in a way that does not cross the scientific method (wich is what would have been a problem.)

In the educated theological circles this seems to be prevalent. In the masses on the other hand. The people who make up the bulk of the religion, you will find people who have more problem grasping the concept of putting both in the same logical system. And you've got the loud zealots that doesn't seem to understand the concept of basic logic even and argue their cause even when it completely contradict itself.

The trick, I guess is to avoid postulating religious axioms that are testable and verifiable, and avoid referring to untestable axioms as science.

[beenhere10years]

I could never understand why science and religion are on opposite sides of the argument.

Why can't evolution be seen as evidence of a higher power? I think it would take the divine to conjure up the opposable thumb.

Perhaps humankind was spawned from the intervention from another planet, who knows? If there was water on Mars, that pretty much guarantees there was life on Mars.

If faith is the belief in things unseen -- isn't gravity unseen? We can see the evidence of gravity when an object falls, but not gravity itself.

[samantha]

Lets put it this way.. History, Religion and science are all intertwined... But personally i think religion and science oppose each other to a very large extent...

For example, christians believe ghosts are caused by evil spirits.. Scientists think ghosts are caused by disturbances in the electromagnetic field..

beenhere10years,
there may be evidence that human beings came from mars.. A 10 million year old fossil of a footprint, no actually it was a shoeprint, was found.. Complete with grooves and stiching..Does that mean that martians came to earth when their planet died out?? And lost their technology due to lack of materials?? Erm i don't think you want to drink water from mars... Its more like red mud water ..

Besides.. Religion condemn science... Thats why the industrial revolution took so long to come about... And people in europe only startred eating turnips, potatoes and all other crops grown beneath the soil in the 18th century.. Prior to this, the chuch told them that since it was growing underground towards hell,it must be bad to eat. and crops that grew above the soil were going towards heaven, were good to eat!!

[sved]

Someone has told you that God created you from sand and wind, and another one that atoms has gathered smashing on the ground, you have chosen to believe one of them. (and by the way, they don't sound so different)

[beenhere10years]

Dear Sam,

Please don't misunderstand. I don't personally think life on the Earth is directly from Mars, but I am open to the possibility that we were, in part created from an entity not from this Earth.

As for the rest of your post, not sure of its meaning exactly. I do feel as if organized religion has done more harm than good and that John Lennon was right.

[samantha]

To put it simply, I think religion and science clash against each other... For example, religion disapproved of the inventions of machines, as they believe it was the devil's work..

[ringo100]

If faith is the belief in things unseen -- isn't gravity unseen? ???

I have never heard before. Very strange. And maybe we can see gravity it’s just we don’t know how to look.

I think religion is constantly evolving and changing because science is constantly proving that religion is not true. Now religion is fleeing into the only place left with a universe that has no influence from any God and a heaven and hell that don’t exist anywhere.

The sooner people wake up and realise that religion, while fascinating, is not real is simply part of the spiritual and philosophical development of mankind. Most of it is a good guideline for living a moral existence but the few (generally uneducated people) who still believe Jonah was swallowed by a whale or that whole Earth was flooded etc. are quickly waking up.

[sved]

If you take these examples as facts, for sure you have a problem ... But if you take them in a symbolic way, then you understand the point of the writer(s).

[beenhere10years]

Ringo,

I would ask surviving tsunami victims if the believe in an all-encompassing flood. I think the Bible (Koran, Torah, etc...) reflect the best wisdom of their day, but still has moral truths that can be applied to our present day lives. To dismiss them as Guide books for the Uneducated is too simplistic.

BH10Y

[ringo100]

I think the point is that religion states things as fact only until the point it is undisputedly disproved by science. Also, all established religions do still teach their relevant scriptures as literal events and do not believe they are simply symbolism.

Maybe if the stories in these scriptures should not be taken literally the whole idea of a God or Gods should also not be taken literally. I think concept of a higher omnipotent creator is just as mythical as stories of fairies or goblins etc.

Religion, myths, folklore are just part of mans journey of discovery where we question why we here from our misguided arrogant belief that we are special as opposed to being just the most intelligent type of one particular group of organic life forms.

[sved]

But sometimes some facts and writes are linked in a strange way...

Like the part about the creation of the world... if you extend each of the seven days to billions of years, symbolic days, you can encounter nearly the same sequence of creation that science has proven ...

Same for the seven plagues of egypt, which have been romanced, but I've read a study which explain all of them by a volcano... and even if it rationalizes the miracle part, it is still impossible to prove that it has been a whole coincidence...

Science doesn't oppose religion, it just moves the question further ...