Can science and religion coexist peacefully?

Hilarious. Surely a good, honest Christian nation like the US should be adopting a similar practice?

 

If someone can lend me the money for a flight to India, I can promise to pay them back double

 

Depends on religion, but no.
I mean, it depends in what you belive. But "mainstream" religions like Christianity, Budism etc. can't exist in harmony with science. What I'm trying to say is that church (just an example) is trying to be tolerant, and they try to follow step with science but I think it's bullshit. My teacher was talking 'bout this before 2-3 days ago. She started with " I hate homofobes, xenofobes etc. " and " I don't like people who critiseze people based on their religion ". And then she started off with some bullshit how science is bad blah blah. Yes, it may look bad, but I like it. I like how nature works and how science describes it. I like how it can explain everything and prove it. The best part is "proof", which religion doesn't have. Many people have turned against religion, and are into science. That's why relgion is trying to get back those people, by saying that they approve science and that there's nothing wrong with Big Bang theory etc. I think spiritualism is bullshit, in a way they see it (like, priests are the choosen ones). I hate to say this, but I somethimes mock, even critisize people based on their religion (no metter which one) and I always use some scientific facts. I think there is no interconnection between them, and if there was they just made it up so people could be on both side - religion and science.

 

Buddhism is arguably the most compatible religion. It's not even a religion, more of a philosophy (some of my friends are buddhist and they don't like it when it's called a religion) that is all about enlightenment and keeping an open mind.

And I'm gonna say yes they can coexist. Here's a better question: Can science and morality coexist?

 

Church cant coexist peacefully with science. At least not the common type of church as organization, since its aim is to drain money from believers, and reduce their consciousness. Religion however is not the opposite of science, and I think they can go hand in hand. Many great scientist were believers, and most of religions do promote good values such as peace, consciousness and equality. It's just that they are wrongly interpreted. But as long as someone is not trying to force others into his faith, and doesn't use the religion as excuse to spread violence, its ok for me.

 

taoism for the win.

 

I think religion is oppsite of science, and the more I read from todays church, the more I think we should destroy religion. Ok, I know you said todays church can't coexist with science, but it is going to be really hard to destroy what it has made. Many peoble are brainwashed ( I know some, like my father), and they think they are doing good thing. Well, they are not. There are as many people who belive in god and follow "eace, consciousness and equality" as anarchist on this earth, so, I don't think we should rely on them (nor the peolpe should rely on anarhists to destroy the government and make us all free while they are resting)


@slude : I think hard, but posibble. Nowdays, for sure, not. But if we could control science, and not let science and our will to create something new conrol us, it could be possible. Why ? Well, today we really don't know about many "important" science projects going on. And that's the problem. We should all agree if something is useful or not for us. Is it just a waste of time to create new life, or we could have some, lets say profits, out of it. For example ( I don't know the details), they tried to make "Black hole" on earth, just to see how it work BUT there was 1% that if they created it, it would "eat" us and destroy the earth. But we wouldn't even realize that, becouse we would travel through it for eternitry. So, we did now about this project, but no one said "Hey that's really stupid idea", and there's thousands of projects going on every year. Why do we want to know what's outside our solar system ? With todays technology we can't, and I think we should keep it that way. I'm not saying science shouldn't advance, and discover something new, but we should all agree about it, it should be economical, and possible to do.

 

well the thing about science is you don't know what progress is what field is going to yield what beneficial result. For example, the moon could be a potential source for alternative fuel.

And I'm not really sure about how I feel on science vs morality. Because morality is an inhibitor and science to serve it's ultimate function breaks all the limits. It's a pretty complicated question.

 

No.

Religion + a shitty B scifi movie = scientology


But no religion and science can't coexist peacefully. Science is fact, religion is random babblings written by primitive fuckwits.

 

Both of these things are not necessarily true.

 

In most cases are. And if not, religion is faith, hope that something good will happen, and we just have to wait for it ( like Jesus will come back ). Science is trying to prove that religion is wrong, so they are creating facts which can or don't have to be true. But if the experiment is made, and they have logical solution - then that's fact for me. They said that all started with Big Bang, look I would rather belive in that, then in god. Science doesn't make you a slave, god does. Science is logical, religion isn't. Science can prove things, religion can't. but - science can be bad as religion.

 

I would say that science isn't intentionally directed against religion, science is about finding out how the world works/had worked and using the knowledge thus gained to describe it and further itself - and the world.
But science itself is neutral, any attempt to harness it for specified goals will only end up in promoting a new superstition, most famous examples:
The bolsheviks "scientific socialism" or the more recent "christian sciences" - smokescreens to promote the corrupted view of the world and preserve the contradictions between ideology and reality.
Scientology might fit in too, but their theoretical stuff is far from being scientific, like other dumbfucks they just use "logic" and "cognition" in every second sentence to hide their bleak ambitiousness and make the brainwash sound "convincing", maybe they are a good example for how organized religion started and worked in history too.
But the refutation of religious superstition by science is just a by-product, resulting from the unmasking of the propaganda-lies and miracle tales - they can't be true and sciences proves it just in passing by.
And we are only at the beginning of science, just 300 years ago absolute superstition ruled...

 

There's a difference between religion and church. Church is a tool used to manipulate the masses. This is the enemy of science of logic. Religion is a philosophical belief system. You can't prove it wrong because it has no factual basis to begin with. It's meant to be a source of comfort and guidance. You have to use your best judgment to seperate what about it is going to enhance your life.

A lot of science isn't based on fact. A lot of it is based on theoretics. They have all these complex postulates with imaginary numbers that add up, but that only proves it's right assuming the initial theory is accurate. Which 9 times out of 10 it isn't. That's why there's so much debate within the scientific community. You'd be surprised how much of it is bullshit. I'm talking about things beyond our grasp though. Obviously there's a shit ton of things that has already been proven. Everything we know about science will be completely wrong given enough time though. Science can evolve, religion can't. But they're totally different things so there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to coexist.

 

Yes, I'm aware that church and religion are two differente things, but still. Religion was always a bit conservative, no matter if becouse of church or not. Science can be bullshit, but I accept it rather then religion. I think religion is something totaly made up by us. We wanted to have something big, so we created god. Religion's trying to explain everything with supernatural magic - god, and I don't mind that. If someone belives in that shit, fine. But Jesus bothers me. Everyone's telling me that I live in sin. Fuck that. Fuck religion. I know that it's told by church, but todays religion is church. We could change that, but then probbably no one will belive in god becouse no one could be manipulated by anything. People would be educated, they would start to search for answers - and they will not find them in religion, that's for sure. Religion is fantasty, that's why I don't like it. We must live in reality, we must face the problems that we all have, and we shouldn't just pray to god and ask him for help. Ok going off topic a bit, I'm asleep - see ya in 'da mornin'.

 

you're not understanding religion still. Yes, people did use it as an explanation for the world around them. That was before science. But it's much more than that. Why does jesus bother you? He wanted everyone to love each other, no matter who they were or what they did or what they looked like. He even challenged authority, look at that. Why does that bother you?

You're still not making the distinction between church and religion. It is possible to believe in god AND believe in science. Religion has a negative connotation because the church brainwashes it's followers into believing the bible is a science book. There's plenty of good lessons in the bible, like humility, generosity, loving, acceptance etc. There's a lot of shit in there, but like I said it's up to the person to decide what about it is going to improve their life and what isn't. You could not possibly imagine how much good religion has done for some people. Again, religion and science are two totally different things that shouldn't even intertwine, and each fulfill a need in a person's life that the other can't. Furthermore you're equating religion with american christianity which is obviously wrong.

But some dumfucks see the world as black and white. And they don't see the irony in that. (P.S. that's not aimed at you)

 

Hahaha - so good lessons from the bible, humility, generosity, loving, acceptance ect.are now favoured by the same dumbfuck that is advocating the death penalty, show-rapist gg allin, favorite serial torturer and killer albert fish and terrorism against his enemy no. 1: "The population"?
It's all about logic again, eh, dumbfuck?

And yes, Jesus (like albert fish too?) questioned authority: "Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto God that which is God's.", "offer the other cheek too...", "love your enemies" - at least by the framers of christianity who used the almost forgotten "jewish reformist" to keep moronic sheep like you under control - I guess it's the same rabit deficit in your mental abilities that made you create anarchist governments and nations?

Shut the fuck up, pathetic sleazebag, and fuck off!!!

 

I'll reply to this because there's at least something debatable here and I'm bored and you're really, really easy.

Would you kill someone? Would you kill for self defence? Would you kill someone in a war? Would you kill someone for a cause that you believe in? I'd call you a hypocrite but a hypocrite has at least a basic understanding of their position, they just aren't true to it. Your problem is that you're retarded and you have too much time on your hands. I'm not the only one here who supports the death penalty and you'll excuse me if I think serial killers, child rapists, and people who commit atrocities against humanity should die. They can't function in our society. They are a danger to those around them. But I guess you think locking them up forever is better? Or better yet letting them go? Brilliant.

On GG allin: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2958&start=80#p37571

You either don't understand what the word terrorism is, or I have wounded your fragile ego so badly that you're desperately looking for something to fault me on. I'm guessing it's both.
http://terrorism.about.com/od/originshi ... aparty.htm

Yeah it's a well known fact Jesus was the first nazi. You lack a complete ability to think on your own. You have no thought process what's so ever. You subscribe to an idea and then you militantly defend it without a basic understanding of either thought. I would tell you to fuck off, but what I really wish for you to do is die. I wish GG allin would rape you and Albert Fish to violently murder you. You are the worst type of scum that squirms on the earth because you delegitimize anarchy.

And stop following me around you dipshit. Don't you have a fucking life? You're pathetic.

 

Other good lessons from the bible:

-Murder your own son to show your allegiance to God.
-Get your father drunk and practically gang rape him to repopulate the world.
-It's holy to kill people for not being prude.
-It's perfectly normal to run into a flaming bush that talks.
-Everyone in the world is descended from one couple, who's sons had wives who appeared out of thin air and that's just normal.

The bible is a book full of contradictions. In one part it tells you not steal or kill and to love your neighbor (shit you should do just because it's right). Then it advocates murder, rape, inequality (not to mention the centuries-long campaign of torture/rape/murder/genocide it took to spread christianity throughout europe and the new world) etc. As for the good stuff in the bible, if you need a book to threaten you with eternal burning in hellfire to keep you from killing, raping or stealing then there is something seriously fucked up with you.

And that's just christianity. Other religious texts are full of retarded shit too. It seems religion is directly in conflict with science, as well as plain human decency. Back in the day I would've said "To each their own" but the older I get and the more I see i just say fuck jesusfreaks.

 

Oh yeah I guess you're too fucking lazy to read again. You seem to have a problem with reading. And I'm an atheist you dipshits.