Why do science and religion always have to be different?

A1C (Join to see) There's a very small, but very loud, group of people--on both sides of the so-called "religion debate"--who are of the opinion that science and religion are diametrically opposed to each other. Most people, even devoutly religious people, understand that the Bible is not a science text book, nor does it pretend to be one.

Nor does that concession mean that it isn't true. But, and I'm going to borrow from Pilate here, though not as sarcastically: what is truth? Are true facts derived solely from the laboratory? Of course not. There is such a thing as philosophical truth. Once that definition is spelled out, it's not a very big leap to understand that what it is that am empirical scientist is setting out to do and what a religious person is setting out to do are two different things.

Now, with that said, as well, it is worth noting, too, that the scientist does not venture out into the world of scientific process without an assumption of faith, specifically that the world is, in fact, know-able. The scientist bases his entire process on the assumption that there is, without exception, an explanation to the question he has. That is an utterly unscientific conclusion to reach. There is no way to prove or test that theory. However, it does speak to a particular Abrahamic belief that God Created the universe with intelligence, meaning that there is order and there are explanations. In the Christian philosophical tradition, we look to the beginning of the Gospel of John for the source of this: "In the beginning there was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God." The Greek (the original language that John was written in) for 'word' is "logos," from which we also get the word "logic."


Getting back to your original question, though: religion and science are not opposed to each other. Something that occurred to me once while having the never ending "evolution" discussion with an atheist (I for the record am Catholic) was that asking someone if they believed what is written in the Bible or (exclusive or, that is) do they believe that science is true is rather like asking someone: "Do you use premium gas in your car, or do you like to drink chocolate milk?" as if the person couldn't pump the premium gas and then walk into the gas station convenience store to buy a bottle of chocolate milk. The two choices are not mutually exclusive in the manner that some would like to believe.

My simple take

Faith: beliefs, cannot be quantified or have assigned value.

Science: attempts to quantify everything. Will forever come closer to faith, but will never reach it.

To bridge the two disciplines is to understand that those two will never cross and live out the rest of our numbered days on this planet with respectful and humble attitude.

This isn't really a military question, but its a good one. My post-military career is as an environmental scientist, and I actually wrote a paper on this topic.

The OP's implication is that science and religion must be at odds. Not true. Science deals with the portion of our lives that is observable and testable. Religions (all of them) deal with faith in the portion of our existence that is neither observable nor testable.

Pope John Paul II offered this (among many) quotes detailing this symbiotic relatiolnship:

"Science can purify religion from error and superstition. Religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes."

A well rounded person accepts that some ideas may be substantiated via the scientific process, while others must simply be believed as a matter of their faith. These things are rarely mutually exclusive.

One of the sub-definitions of Science is 'knowledge', and we know that God is omni-scient...so God is ALL-knowing, or ALL-Science. Without God, there would be no Science, or any matter (including humans) to observe or study.

I disagree that they are the same thing, because...they aren't. Science deals with observed world (sight, sound, touch, etc.). Religion deals with the unobserved world (spirituality, metaphysics, etc.). Do they both cross over onto each other? Yes, sometimes.

So, I disagree that they are the same, but I do agree that they can (and are) compatible.

Science speaks to the natural world and things that are observed through our senses, that I believe God made and gave us, and that we process through our minds. I also believe that God gave us our minds and our ability to use reason and logic. We should feel free to use these things when observing the world that he created.

Science focuses more on the "how" than the "why."

Since I believe God is the Creator of All, our observations of this world and our comprehension of his written Scripture should line up, because God, is all-knowing. The Bible IMO (and, essentially, all religions), focuses on the "why."

Most of these religions are pre-scientific---especially the old ones.

Today we are scientific. That's where the issue comes in---with modern people trying to force their scientific views on pre-scientific writings. This happens from proponents of religion and those who are proponents of science. Again, it doesn't have to be an either/or, it can (and should be) a both/and type of relationship between the two.

If there is an error in either, it's because of man's flawed thinking and understanding---not because the two are actually in different realms.

This is especially true for those who are proponents of a literal creation story in Genesis (Christian Bible) and those who are proponents of the fossil record or an evolutionist type of thinking (non-literal Genesis interpretation).

Religious adherents and science adherents are both dogmatic about their positions and try to use one side to disprove the other. The issue isn't in the science or religion, but in their non-compatible worldviews. One argues from a non-theistic position, while the other argues from a theistic one.

I am religious person who loves science. I don't really feel torn between the two, or like I have to chose one over the other, at all.

I know most of what I posted has already been said...but I love talking about this discussion with people, because it interests me.

A1C (Join to see) There will always be radical elements from both sides of the debate that will refuse to acknowledge the merits of each other's arguments.

Science and Religion compliment each other and are not mutually exclusive. I personally believe that if more people could come to this realization, then we would be taking a first step in reaching a level of civility and tolerance in this age old debate.

I think you should change your post to "Why does science and the bible have to always be different?"

The reason is your basing your theory on the bible and the bible alone which is less than 1/5th of the worlds population belief.

If you would like to include the other 4/5th and their accumulated documentation, then you could state the word religion and have an accurate question.

I don't think they are mutually exclusive. If you pay attention, the Bible never even saysthe earth is 7 days old. It actually says "In the beginning, the earth was without form and void, and waters covered the face of the earth..." so it could have existed for a week, or for millennia, before the "first day". Nor does the bible proclaim itself a physics or biology text, it doesn't even say evolution does or doesn't happen.
So, there's room for both.
My opinion.

A1C (Join to see)

I actually disagree with your statement. I think science and religion are very compatible. I do find that many who claim to believe is science disregard their own observations of God’s existence because they ignore much of the proof right in front of them. You will find a lot of scientist converting to Christianity after trying to prove that God does not exist. I think if you look at all the things that had to happen for life to exist on Earth and think that it is random, you are being disingenuous at best. So if it is not random, there has to be a plan, if there is a plan, there has to be a planner or Creator. So what do we call this Creator?
If you look closely at the science, the data can come closer to proving that there is a God than it can to proving there is not a God, BUT as close as it can come to proving there is a God, it always comes up a little short. I believe that this too is planned. That the Creator created a system where in the end, WE have to make step of faith.

I'm so with you on this. Science is the observation, recording, and eventual understanding of the natural world. Just because we figure out how God designed the world to operate doesn't preclude his existance...even when it comes to age of the earth, evolution, etc...