Religion vs science, Some questions from a confused individual?

Question

1.Evolution vs. creationism: does the theory of the “unmoved mover” prove the existence of god? If evolution is false, how do we explain the examples of evolution we see daily? These include viruses and bacteria that “evolve” to adapt to new drugs and antibiotics every day.

2.Stages of human development, from Homo habilis to Homo sapiens and Homo floresiensis: these fossils exist, how can we refute their existence; they are there for us to see?

3.DNA and physical likeness: we share 99% or 98% (correct me if I am wrong) of our DNA with the Great Apes, how can we explain the likeness of fingers, toes and social hierarchy that resembles us so closely?

4.The timelines of the bible vs. carbon dating and Vickers micro-hardness: how do we refute the timelines of science, likewise, the bible can be interpreted a lot of ways. Please explain.

5.Dinosaurs and man together?? modern fossils of man are not found near dinosaurs or other ancient creatures; please explain the 6 days of creation

Answer 1

Ok folks, just calm down. Let's call a spade a spade and recognize that our asker is really looking for answers to a homework assignment.  Its better not to add fuel to the fire with deeply personal rhetoric. There is enough space and 1st amendment for everyone, so let's all believe in what we will without disparaging others... or doing someone else's homework.

Answer 2

I am a very religious person but also devoted to science.  I know all the evidence of evolution down to the molecular level.  I can easily see how life evolved on this planet minus some uncertainly about the exact mechanism in the beginning.  There is virtually no doubt that all life on the planet evolved from primitive bacteria and they sprung from inorganic matter.  We are physically connected to all other life on this planet.  The evidence is overwhelming and confirmed by multiple disciplines.  I have heard hundreds of theories and ideas about intelligent design.  I hear them a lot because I am a Christian.   They are all distortions of logic, pure and simple.  

I had a personal experience that makes me 100% certain that there is a higher being or beings directly involved with our life.  The way I look at it is that there may be something to us beyond our physical beings.  That is where religion belongs.  

Trying to disprove evolution is like saying the earth is the center of the Universe.  It doesn't fit the mountain of evidence to the contrary.  A religious person, if he is rational, will admit that our bodies die.  That is the undeniable physical nature of life.  Religion deals with the soul and that which is unknowable.  I have no particular problem knowing that some things are unknowable to me.  Many scientists are so arrogant that they can't see the possibility of a soul because they think they understand the universe.  Many religious people are arrogant because they think they are the center of the universe and were given divine knowledge about how it all works.

Answer 3

6 "days" are epochs, long periods of time.  In speech, we use "day" in various ways.  The day of our grandfathers; in Noah's day;  the day of dinosaurs; etc.

This insistance of 6, 24 hr. days has created incredulity.  When one annalizes the 6 stages required for life, delineated in the book of Genesis, it is beyond the realm of ancient Man to have understood  this required sequence.

Answer 4

1. Evolution is a fact. Anyone that says it is not doesn't know what they are talking about.

2. There are no missing links. Fossil evidence shows numerous examples of gradual development.

3. The great apes are our closest living relatives in the animal kingdom. We share a common ancestor with them thus we share 98% of our DNA with them.

4. The timeline of the Bible is a mythological timeline. It was made up by Bronze Age goat herders trying to explain thie past.

5. The majority of dinosaurs became extinct 65 million years ago. The only decendents of dinosaurs that man co-exists with are birds.

Antropology is a scientific disipline. If you seek religious answers, go to the Religion section.

Answer 5

believe what you want to believe....

"Religion and science (evolution) are very different things. In science, only natural causes are used to explain natural phenomena, while religion deals with beliefs that are beyond the natural world.

The misconception that one always has to choose between science and religion is incorrect. Of course, some religious beliefs explicitly contradict science (e.g., the belief that the world and all life on it was created in six literal days); however, most religious groups have no conflict with the theory of evolution or other scientific findings. In fact, many religious people, including theologians, feel that a deeper understanding of nature actually enriches their faith. Moreover, in the scientific community there are thousands of scientists who are devoutly religious and also accept evolution".

http://library.thinkquest.org/C004367/ph...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

Answer 6

okay lets see if i can explain this. their is no reason that science and religion cannot go hand in hand with each other. GOD is all powerful.HE made everything HE was here before there was anything. it's not beyond the possibility that for the worlds to be born that GOD Himself brought about the big bang to start the makinngs of the our planet and the universe.  in the BIBLE in Genesis it says that the Sons of GOD married the daughters of man. that means that along with adam and eve that there were others that GOD created these would be the creatures that evolved but were not totally created by GOD. were they evolved from giant apes. possibly. but they could have also been from a creature somewhere between adam and apes. this is called the missing link. rerember GOD is all powerful and can do anything HE wants to do. and HE can do it anyway HE wants to. People tend to forget that.i wish i could remember where in the BIBLE butu there is a passage that states that a day is as a thousand years and a thousand years is as a day. i keep losing that passage in the BIBLE.  it's been proven beyond a fact that time today runs differently than it did billions of years ago. theeres alot there to confuse the mortal mind. basically we just need to accept it on FAITH.

Answer 7

Creationism is based in the myths of creation included in the Bible/Torah. It is pure myth (def: a story designed to explain a phenomena which is not understood by those who observe it.).

Creationism cannot be applied to science, as they are not compatible methods. Creationism is rhetoric, based on one written document, without supporting evidence, and cannot be proven through experimentation or observation. Science is observation and experimentation, continual discussion and conjecture, and an open-minded approach.

Points 2-5 take similar issues, which put science against mythology.

Point 5, for example, is a prime example of creationism playing "keeping up with the Jonses." In the past, fossils were explained away as being from the flood, or that of the giants mentioned in the Torah/Old Testament. As science surpassed rhetoric, understanding which remains were which (and clearly not bones of giants, for example) creationist were forced to acknowledge these animals, although they chose to continue to adhere to rhetoric and dogma, claiming that since they exist, they must have been created by יהוה  , and therefore in the "Garden of Eden."

This also speaks to the myth of "Intelligent Design," which further acknowledges not only the variety of extinct life, but also the vast timeline. In this case, they argue that יהוה simply created the world long ago, populated it with various creatures throughout history, and finally created man around 6000 years ago.

Answer 8

Evolution is a fact. Scientists didn't write the bible, bible writers just collated and manipulated historical fact and stories to fill the need of the people (and also control them) They used the "materials" they had at the time. People needed an explanation of why we are here as we are, they did their best, bless.

I don't think science undermines faith though. Have you seen the film "Contact"? That dealt really well with science versus faith.

Answer 9

First off, these are problems for individuals who are American Protestants (evangelicals, fundamentalists, and non-denominationals mainly).  Many Christian traditions today (such as the Episcopal Church, Catholic Church, Orthodox Churches and other faiths such as  Judaism and Islam (which come from the same cultural and religious background as Christianity) do not see conflict between religion and science.

In the Roman Catholic Church, nature is seen as another book to read (like the Bible, nature was created by God - therefore it is good and cannot decieve us). God gave us brains, logic and the ability to develop science so that we could learn more about the world and Him.

Now for your questions:

1. There does not have to be a conflict between evolution and creation. Many Christians believe in Theistic evolution (or that God made the world and has been in charge of its development for the billions of years of its existence). I would reccomend that you read up on this :

http://www.catholic.com/library/Adam_Eve...

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.ph...

2. Who said we should refute their existence? I have degrees in Religon and Theology as well as Anthropology and Geology. I have taught Human Evolution at the college level, and I always tell my students that one can study evolution and still be true to the faith. When we look at the stages of human development, and see how the speicies has evolved, we are looking at the handiwork of God.

3. It is easy, we all come from the same family tree. Of course we share DNA and gene sequences - family members share genetic material.  It only makes sense that our closest family members in Creation would have similar physical, emotional, mental, and social traits.

4. There is only a conflict if one reads the Bible LITERALLY. This is not necessarry. The Bible is meant to teach us the things about God that are necessary for us to live in obeidience and harmony with God and our neighbours.  The Bible is NOT meant to be a Science textbook - that is what Nature (and our ability to learn and reason) is for.  God gave us faith and reason so that we can learn about ourselves, others around us, all of Creation, and even God himself.

5. That is just crazy talk. Dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago. Human beings began developing only a few million years ago. There is no way that they are contemporaneous...

The way that I look at the two accounts of Creation contained in Genesis 1-3 is that God is trying to tell the story of how he created the Universe and all that is in a way that human beings can understand it.  We are pretty smart, but in comparison with God, we are really not bright at all! Also, remember that the books of the Bible were composed over a period of hundreds of years - and at a time when people didn't have "science" like we have today.  If God had started telling Moses at Mt. Sinai that the universe was billions of years old and then going on about physics and cosmology, Moses would've probably just gotten confused and frustrated.  God always communicates the Truth in a way that we can understand it.

The six days of creation are meant to explain how the world came to be through the creative acts of God in a way that people of all times and cultures could appreciate.

I hope that helped some... Good luck and God Bless!

Answer 10

I went to seminary and also did very good in science so I could address the question but am concerned people would become confused as to wither I would be bragging or complaining.  Let's get back to the chicken and the egg thing.

Answer 11

Religion and science can't be in the same room together.  Some of my professors won't even discuss it.  As a Christian, I believe in God and Creationism, but as a scientist, I believe in Evolution.  Does that make me a hypocrite?  Sure.  I'm not going to dispute science and the proof of evolution, but I'm also not going to disregard what my heart and soul know to be true.  I don't believe one thing at one time or the other some other time.  Both of these concepts exist simultaneously, ever clashing and always a mystery I don't care to solve.

Answer 12

Religion is something created by man, to use against man, to control man, and to give man something to love, but most of all, fear. There are some pretty interesting books and videos out there explaining this. I believe in evolution, but I don't nesssisarily believe thats all there is, eaither. There are people who are so stuck up and stubborn they will just keep saying "faith" whenever you question their God. Faith just means they have no more answers than the rest of us out there, we're all oblivious as to if we have an afterlife or not, no matter how tightly some hold that little book to their chest and plug their ears to the voice of reason.

Answer 13

Science would explain "God" and "Religion" as human construct. It was originally created to describe the unexplainable. It would rain 100 miles away and a flash flood would wipe out a village. Drought destroys a year's crops. An earthquake would hit, or a volcano would erupt. Someone would become sick unexpectedly. Prior to the application of science these experiences were quite scary for lack of understanding how they occured. The natural response by early man was to hand the responsibilty of such events over to a "greater force" and henceforth religions popped up all over the globe to allow man to move on when hit by the unexplainable. When more complicated social structures came about through the development of civilization, those who were in control of religion began to realize that they could control society and those who were in control of the state realized that they needed to have control of the society. Based on these forces, an age-old tug of war between religion and state developed. In some cases opposing religions were encompased into the threatened state (Roman Catholic Church), in other cases the state would create new religious doctrine that was more acceptable to their people (Church of England) and in yet other cases States would try to create barriers from religion (USSR) based on the simple realization of calling religion for what it is... a method of controlling people as shown in the frequently coined term "opiate of the people". This last model devoid of relegion, however, did not succeed... why? It appears that people like to be controlled more subtly by religion then by brute force of Stalin's iron fist. The point of all this being that Religion was constructed, adapted and restricted throughout our history simply as a means to manipulate society. If something terrible happened it was easier for the state to lay the blame off on "god" and to simply say "only god knows why this happened", we shall "leave it in the hands of god"... whatever, it's all the same, a scapegoat. Yet when society had successful years you can be sure that the state would claim responsibility and go about collecting their taxes as they talk about how their vague decisions improved the economy, or that their irrigation project defeated the drought. Of course the church took their cut as well, 10% for christians please! Where did that come from anyways?

With the advance of science the unexplainable began to be explained. An earthquake was no longer "gods bidding" and now the entire world knows which areas on the globe are more prone to seismic activity and can choose to live there or not and can construct buildings with this in mind to alleviate the amount of destruction that occurs. When the Tsunami hit Indonesia and when Katrina hit New Orleans a lot of christians piped up that one event was an attack by God on the primarily muslim Indonesia and that Katrina happened because of the sinful nature rampant in New Orleans. They forgot to mention that the french district was not badly damaged by the hurricane, or that many synagogues were left standing all over Indonesia due to their pillar style construction which did not create much drag from the onrushing water. At the same time christians will rave about... say a church near Paricutin Volcano in the state of Michoacan, Mexico which, although badly damaged, was the only structure remotely recognizable after a lava flow wiped out the village there. Suddenly this "act of god" is proof that god is real because their church survives the natural disaster... hey wasn't it built of stone while the rest of the buildings in that town were made of wood? It is interesting to see how similiar events are construed in completely polar directions by those biased by religion. All said, science allows a more appropriate and rational explanation of all of these events which were previously dominated by religious description. That is why there is a surge in people turning to science because people, on a whole, like explanations that have incorporate reason and allow for the development of knowledge through the scientific method that can lead to predicting and preparing for such disasters rather then mindlessly hiding under "god's wing" as we had for millenia. Now we put in Tsunami detection systems so that American or Japanese lifes can be saved if one were to hit the pacific. As I mentioned before, buildings can be constructed to withstand earthquakes of a reasonable force, again of which America and Japan are of primary advantage while villages in Iran and South America... (wait isn't S. America a bastion for Catholicism?) are being destroyed because their construction is still not as scientifically advanced.

In the end, the final battle between science and religion comes down to "infinity". Scientifically, we know what this term means, but within our minds it is an impossible term to truly wrap your brain around. It is this single word that will ensure that relegion pushes on. The reason why I pick this word is beacause no matter which force you believe to be responsible for our existence, they both depend on infinity. The Big Bang relies on an either A) an infinite time frame allowing for the expansion and contraction of the Universe in a cyclical pattern recreating itself in an infinite amount of space over and over an infinite number of times (if the mass of the universe is enough that gravity reverses our expansion) or B) has encountered one Big Bang and will expand for infinity but this begs the question of what was before the initial Big Bang. (if the mass of the universe is not enough such that our universal expansion is not reversed) Religion, on the other hand, rests solidly on "infinity" as well, by doing what our species has always done, turning the unexplainable over to, you got it, "GOD the infinite". I don't know if we'll ever be able to fully wrap our brains around this term, I doubt it, and so long as it exists as such a powerful word, God will still have the power that this word lends him.

Answer 14

Just believe what has been and can be proven. Evidence and logic is what you should believe in. Religion was created by humans, it's only spoken about and written about therefore it really is not a rational belief.