Singapore Expats Forum

Can science and religion complement each other?

Discuss about the latest news & interesting topics, real life experience or other out of topic discussions with locals & expatriates in Singapore.

User avatar
Wind In My Hair
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2306
Joined: Tue, 19 Jul 2005

Re: Religion

Postby Wind In My Hair » Thu, 18 Aug 2005 12:55 pm

ringo100 wrote:All established religions do still teach their relevant scriptures as literal events and do not believe they are simply symbolism.


Really? I am Catholic and all the courses in understanding scripture I've attended conducted by Catholic priests state very clearly early on that very little in the Old Testament is to be taken literally. For example, Genesis and the well-known story of creation is an allegory.

ringo100 wrote: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.


That's like saying if a parent tells the child a fairy tale before bed-time then the parent does not exist because the fairy tale is not true.

ringo100 wrote: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.


This is finally sounding more sensible. Still, doesn't the 'fact' that you think we are the most intelligent type of one particular group of organic life forms make us special? What's wrong in holding both beliefs as true simultaneously?

Wham
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 384
Joined: Tue, 12 Apr 2005
Location: Singapore

science is the enemy of religion

Postby Wham » Thu, 18 Aug 2005 1:17 pm

The longer i live, the more i beleive in god and the less i beleive in religion. The reason is that Religion is a creation of man, whereas the concept of a devine spirit or somehing akin to mother nature - exists in its own right.

By this line of reasoning, the logic of science is the enemy of religion, because science strips away the excrutiatingly self serving human veneer that surround most religions - and inevitably science leaves our minds free to appreciate the diviness of creation without the BS of religion.

...oh, and ever wonder why most religions have fought science TOOTH AND NAIL AT EVERY STEP OF THE WAY? Because the organized religions KNOW that IGNORANCE is their FRIEND!!!

ringo100
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 235
Joined: Sun, 26 Dec 2004

Postby ringo100 » Thu, 18 Aug 2005 6:23 pm

1) The point about the Catholic church now saying much of the old testament is not to be taken literally is a relatively modern event and has only come about because only uneducated people could now be convinced that it is actually true, it is a matter of their survival.

So as a Catholic you actually believe in the Virgin birth, the resurrection etc. and every Sunday you actually believe you consuming the actual blood and body of Christ. The Catholic church teaches these as literal facts.

2) Your analogy is completely wrong. You have equated humans with the children and the parents with God. It is the priests who are the story telling parents and God is the fairytale.

3) And no I don’t believe you can actually believe in both, it is a total paradox to claim that you believe in omnipotent, omnipresent being that is bound by a set of fundamental rules.

If you except science you except a set of fundamental laws and principles that govern the universe. If a God cannot break and change them at will is your God really a God?

User avatar
Wind In My Hair
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2306
Joined: Tue, 19 Jul 2005

Postby Wind In My Hair » Thu, 18 Aug 2005 7:11 pm

i don't want to get into a no-holds barred religious argument here. an online forum is unlikely to change years of deep-seated beliefs held by you, me, or anyone else here. as long as there is no antagonism and we can have an honest and respectful discussion i am happy to comment. but once emotions run high i think we should leave it alone. so if you want an answer... here goes:

ringo100 wrote:1) The point about the Catholic church now saying much of the old testament is not to be taken literally is a relatively modern event and has only come about because only uneducated people could now be convinced that it is actually true, it is a matter of their survival.


religion, just like science, evolves. i was merely pointing out that your earlier statement that "ALL" established religions "STILL" take scripture literally was not accurate.

ringo100 wrote:So as a Catholic you actually believe in the Virgin birth, the resurrection etc. and every Sunday you actually believe you consuming the actual blood and body of Christ. The Catholic church teaches these as literal facts.


IF you believe there is a God, then you have to believe that He is capable of bringing about a virgin birth, of resurrecting, of transubstantiating etc. or He would not be God. And if you believe those who witnessed these events, then yes these are literal facts. it boils down to historical accuracy, not theology.

i won't comment on the analogy as agreeing with an analogy or not does not prove anything. we were making different points, perhaps.

ringo100 wrote:3) And no I don’t believe you can actually believe in both, it is a total paradox to claim that you believe in omnipotent, omnipresent being that is bound by a set of fundamental rules.

If you except science you except a set of fundamental laws and principles that govern the universe. If a God cannot break and change them at will is your God really a God?


i thought we were discussing whether we could have evolved into beings of exeptional intelligence and be special at the same time. you are off on a different tangent, but let's take it from here.

an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient being can create the rules, then decide not to meddle with them in most cases. if not, science would not be possible. and he does break the rules, sometimes, just pick up any book documenting miracles and supernatural events.

User avatar
samantha
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 226
Joined: Sat, 23 Jul 2005
Location: Singapore

Postby samantha » Fri, 19 Aug 2005 10:43 am

Religion to me is an extreme exaggeration of events.

Religion and Science definitely clashes. For one, religion was a thing of the past, where people based anything they could not explain, on god. Either that they make someone they really admire a god (something like celebrity worship nowadays, they get "immortalised" at Mdm Tussads). :P

One classical example would be the Architect for the Great Pyramid of Egypt: Imohtep. He was an excellent scribe, mathematican and scientist. He designed and oversaw the pyramids construction and he made many other contributions. About 200 years after his death, he bacme worshipped as a diety. :wink:
I'm so stupid that I surprise myself sometimes...

User avatar
beenhere10years
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon, 23 May 2005
Location: Up here surrounded by big, green trees

Postby beenhere10years » Fri, 19 Aug 2005 3:21 pm

Makes me think back fondly to the days when the only chioces were one channel 5 and two channels 12s :lol:
When you go in for a job interview, I think a good thing to ask is if they ever press charges.

-- jack handy

User avatar
beenhere10years
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon, 23 May 2005
Location: Up here surrounded by big, green trees

Postby beenhere10years » Fri, 19 Aug 2005 4:06 pm

I mean would it kill them to bring in programming like 'Live at Lincoln Center' or some Ken Burns' documnetaries (American, granted -- but sooo good) Why do they always have to bring in the crap like Temptation Island. Well, I'm going to answer my own question: because the market asks for it. Ick.
Last edited by beenhere10years on Sun, 04 Sep 2005 3:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
When you go in for a job interview, I think a good thing to ask is if they ever press charges.



-- jack handy

User avatar
Bafana
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1393
Joined: Sun, 11 Apr 2004
Location: Singapore

Postby Bafana » Fri, 19 Aug 2005 4:21 pm

Science is the only true religion...

How do you think God was able to do all the things that he was able to do?

User avatar
samantha
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 226
Joined: Sat, 23 Jul 2005
Location: Singapore

Postby samantha » Fri, 19 Aug 2005 9:35 pm

Ok... I like that one... :wink:

:lol: :lol: Lets say it all boils down to atoms... :lol: :lol:
I'm so stupid that I surprise myself sometimes...

User avatar
briceloh
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 510
Joined: Sun, 03 Oct 2004

Postby briceloh » Fri, 19 Aug 2005 9:46 pm

Bafana wrote:Science is the only true religion...

How do you think God was able to do all the things that he was able to do?


by experimenting? :)
IBMing

User avatar
Kimi
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 598
Joined: Sun, 27 Mar 2005
Location: Where my feet stand...

Postby Kimi » Sun, 04 Sep 2005 12:01 pm

I suppose the passage below can be a good reference to consider, from the book Billions and Billions by Carl Sagan:

The methods and ethos of science and religion are profoundly different. Religion frequently asks us to believe without question, even or especially in the absence of hard evidence. Indeed, this is the central meaning of faith. Science asks us to take nothing on faith, to be wary of our penchant for self-deception, to reject anecdotal evidence. Science considers deep skepticism a prime virtue. Religion often sees it as a barrier to enlightenment. So, for centuries, there has been a conflict between the 2 fields - the discoveries of science challenging religious dogmas, and religion attempting to ignore or suppress the disquieting findings.

But times have changed. Many religions are now comfortable with an earth that goes around the sun, with an earth that's 4.5 billion years old, with evolution, and with the other discoveries of modern science. Pope Joh Paul II said,"Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish... Such bridging ministries must be nurtured and encouraged..."


And I must admit I agree with the above statement.
The way I see it, to put it simply, what is written on the Bible for example, shouldn't be taken literally, such as how the world was created in 7 days etc.
As we are created to be the creature who has the highest intelligence (even though I did have my doubts in times :P) on earth, I see it as a sin not to use that what can be considered a blessing I suppose, to what we decide to believe in, to have an opinion on, etc.
Even though science and religion have different approaches, I do reckon that the findings in science, such as how amazing the way our cells work together in our body (if you read Short History of Almost Everything, you know what I'm talking about), is to emphasise rather than to undermine the faith for those who are religious or I suppose believers of God's existence on how amazing God created things basically, when you can see how at least nearly perfect or how detailed the small things that build a larger system complement each other.

I do reckon that religion teachings are basically supposed to be good, at least from the moral point of view. However, as the teachings are delivered by religious leaders who are people as well like you and I, among who do have their own agenda, this is probably why religion has been distorted to fit that agenda or simply are just being humans with our usual characteristics such as being so bloody stubborn when challenged etc., and on the other side too I suppose, which is part of the reason why there has been a battle between science and religion.

User avatar
banana
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 961
Joined: Tue, 24 May 2005

Postby banana » Sun, 04 Sep 2005 7:37 pm

Science: I will prove you wrong with statistics. Most of it made up on the spot.

Religion: My imaginary friend is bigger than your imaginary friend.
some signatures are more equal than others

User avatar
Kimi
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 598
Joined: Sun, 27 Mar 2005
Location: Where my feet stand...

Postby Kimi » Sun, 04 Sep 2005 7:42 pm

banana wrote:Science: I will prove you wrong with statistics. Most of it made up on the spot.

Religion: My imaginary friend is bigger than your imaginary friend.


Hahaha, someday I'm going to bite you! You bananas!

Ok, no more threadjacking with taking the piss even though you're pissed unless you just want to piss me off! :???:

User avatar
banana
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 961
Joined: Tue, 24 May 2005

Postby banana » Sun, 04 Sep 2005 8:13 pm

Oh but I'm not just taking the piss luv. Hidden not so subtly under all that irreverance is a well thought through social commentary of the status quo in both scientific circles and religious orders. It is a remark of their commonality which proponents of either party spend so much time trying to deny rather than striving towards the goal. Which is precisely where they are the same.

Confused you yet?
:mrgreen:
some signatures are more equal than others

User avatar
Kimi
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 598
Joined: Sun, 27 Mar 2005
Location: Where my feet stand...

Postby Kimi » Sun, 04 Sep 2005 8:18 pm

Bugger, you English native speaker does have the upper wind here.
Well, o luvly sir, what is the goal you reckon?


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest