Can you reconcile science and religion

[Kevinb]

Thanks all. I am coming to feel there is nothing outside of the natural world..even in the last few weeks. I've been more able than most to think without bias...I've not had any levels of being pushed into churches..only been a few times and just been left to find my own way.

It makes me think..why Christianity...why not islam..why not Greek God's or any other. This surely boils down to where and when you happen to be born. I've seen the knots here people get themselves into trying to explain or twist or just deny the scientific in favour of following what the bible says..creation..Adam and Eve etc etc.  It feels like ...I'll assert God now go looking at the science to fit with that...even to incredible lengths of conspiracy of science to try and disprove God. Surely the best approach is to look at the evidence to form beliefs rather than the other way round? 

When we have good demonstrably scientific theories..that can be tested for the size..age of the universe....earth..formation of stars..death of stars..99% of species that have ever lived extinct. It's hard to see a creator plan here or involvement. Especially when the alternative is to just assert the bible..quran or explanations in any other religion. How do I possibly refute evidence then somehow pick the right religion...based on what?

[BK1110]

I can't tell exactly what your argument is here. What is it about science that you think precludes religion?

[Kevinb]

Well...young earth...Adam and Eve.. stuff in Genesis like moon producing light...day and night before the sun. Weve virgin birth..resurrection. these are all claims on science that aren't substantiated. That's christiantity...but all religions throughout our history of the gods we've had are the same of course. 

I guess I had some belief that I've a hard time hanging on to in the face of scientific understanding that would oppose as examples above 

 

[Kevinb]

Daniel... on the making up multiple universes to try and disprove God seems bizarre to me.  Science doesn't factor in God at all...science just tries to explain the natural world and the universe..creating theories and finding evidence or disproving is how progress is made. Maybe the multiple universe theory will get thrown out ultimately and for good but that will be on evidence...until then science just says...don't know..here's an idea..here's another...now let's go see what further evidence we can find to falsify or add weight to it. 

You could say the same about we now know we're not at the centre of the universe...the earth isn't flat..the earth goes round the sun. The lights in the night sky are other planets..stars and galaxies and so on..something surely now sensibly we can agree on at least where as once the church didn't? 

[Kevinb]

Many thanks on the videos...I'll not have time to watch but maybe you could detail a bit of on here? 

Don't get me wrong..I don't say no God...for me now...I've come to what's most likely based on evidence. I don't see God claims whatever God that might be has met a burden of proof. 

[BK1110]

On 5/4/2017 at 5:03 PM, Kevinb said:

Well...young earth...Adam and Eve.. stuff in Genesis like moon producing light...day and night before the sun. Weve virgin birth..resurrection. these are all claims on science that aren't substantiated. That's christiantity...but all religions throughout our history of the gods we've had are the same of course.

1. Young Earth is just one view. There are a lot of old Earth creationists; I tend to lean that way myself. Look up Hugh Ross, for that and many other issues like it (like the Flood, for instance), I think you might find his lectures and research very eye-opening.

2. What's wrong with Adam and Eve?

3. The Bible isn't a scientific textbook; just because it talks about the moon giving light at night doesn't mean it's claiming the moon is producing the light. It's just saying that the moon is the big lighted object in the night sky, which it is; the fact that it's reflecting light from the sun instead of producing it's own light isn't relevant to the point the Bible is making in that instance because, again, the Bible isn't trying to teach science like a textbook.

4. Virgin birth and resurrection are both miracles; I.E. direct action by God. Those would both be tiny things indeed for a God who had created everything, one who is literally omnipotent. The Bible never claims that those things are possible within the natural order, in fact the opposite; it claims that they are only possibly through the direct action of God, who supersedes the natural order. Circling back to Adam and Eve, if this is also your problem with them, again, same thing; their creation is the result of direct action of a being with omnipotence.

[Kevinb]

 

Thanks for your post. I've no one to talk to really about things like this. I certainly believe evolution by natural selection...old earth too...I guess initially not sure on a god involvement in some initiation of the universe but don't think I've even got that now. 

I don't particularly feel concerned by that although now thinking probably there's nothing after death isn't a huge comfort but I guess my comfort or not has nothing to do with what's true and I don't need to worry about hell.

I don't know the bible hugely well..kinda patchy. For me believing in evolution means no Adam and Eve of course...that would have to be a miracle but then how do 2 people give rise to a population without incest and genetic problems. It's all boiling down to...based on scientific methodologies and evidence which I think is the best way to find the truth.

What does it mean for a religious belief that the earth is 4.5 billion years old..humans are recent by evolutionary terms or creation? The sun is halfway through its life? 99% of all species that have ever been are extinct? It's hard to see a plan here...or is there not meant to be one as such?

[Absolem]

Yes but you can't have faith in natural things. Faith is spiritual.

[Kevinb]

I agree...but what does that mean really? How does that get you to what's really true? 

[BK1110]

If you assume evolution is true, then there will be obvious conflicts, as you've pointed out. It's good that you've noticed that; a lot of people like to try to say "well, God could have used evolution" and hand-wave away the obvious conflict of the slow, brutal process of evolution being clearly contradictory to a loving, purposeful God's nature.

I have no idea about your background at all, of course, but I'd ask why you believe evolution? How much have you studied? Is it just because it's what you were taught, or what "everyone" believes? If you're willing to do some reading and investigation, there's great info out there. Here's a list of scientists and their specialties; you could look any of them up to find their writings, etc.

http://creation.com/creation-scientists

And just that website itself has a plethora of info to go through, if you have the desire. God bless!