Science and Religion: Good Bedfellows?

[ozzy]

I'm just gonna say that I have no idea what either of you just said. :)

But as pertains to evolution, it is presently taught in BYU-I science classes (hardly the establishment of doctrine, but the claims are still doctrinally supported) that evolution is very real. Personally I won't say I am 100% certain as to the truth of it, but on that subject specifically it does seem to make some sense.

[ozzy]

Oh, and while I can't source it, I have heard that Joseph Smith (or at least one of the prophets) said that the German Bible is the most correct translation we have. Could be a myth though so don't take my word for it.

[Guest The_Doctor]

I personally feel that the two can coexist, because usually the two don't have to interact. Science covers the physical world and religion non-physical, well usually. I've also have come to the conclusion that science can try all it wants to try to disprove God, but an all knowing being desiring to save His children through faith won't leave proof that He created reality. Since without faith humanity can't be saved.

[James_Fryman]

I always say that true science and true Gospel go hand in hand, But Were also never going to gain a perfect knowladge of everything because there has to be room for faith, once you gain perfect faith then those things will be revealed to you

[Blackmarch]

So what do you think?

I am a scientist at heart. No matter what I do in life, I look at it through the tinted lense of scientific inquiry.

What, in your mind, does science do to faith? Are they by nature mutually exclusive? Do they have to be?

I have always loved a quote by Henry Eyring (the father) about this:

What are your thoughts?

This world in which we live is pulchritudinous in its very essence. Our pursuit of its understanding is, in my (never to be humble) opinion, the noblest of things with which we can occupy our minds as well as our endeavors.

All science does is tell us how God has set things up, and some of the what, but cannot answer who, where, or why.

In my experiece God generally instructs in the who, and why, and some of the where, and some in what, and hardly anything in the how.

Generaly the conflict arises when people try to use science to find out the who, where and why... Or try to use God to explain the How and the What.

[Bluejay]

Hi, RipplecutBuddha.

With science, we are trying to discover truth from our own efforts, and through our own senses...both of which are easily fooled at times.

At the risk of sounding apostate, I always get very upset when I hear people say this in Sunday School. It's much easier to fool a person's "spiritual senses" than it is to fool their physical senses.

In my personal experience, spirituality has proven itself to be very unreliable, and has led to a number of emotional disasters for me (I was a horrible senior companion on my mission). Reason and the five senses have served me much better, so much so that I am left completely uncertain as to whether I've ever even felt the Spirit at all.

I took up science in university, and am currently working on a doctorate in the biological sciences. Science does wonders for my confidence (which is still quite low by your standards, I'm sure), and the wounds from the spiritual phase of my younger life have not healed enough yet for me to be sure I can trust my spirituality anymore.

[Blackmarch]

Hi, RipplecutBuddha.

At the risk of sounding apostate, I always get very upset when I hear people say this in Sunday School. It's much easier to fool a person's "spiritual senses" than it is to fool their physical senses.

actually i'd say both are easy to fool.

In my personal experience, spirituality has proven itself to be very unreliable, and has led to a number of emotional disasters for me (I was a horrible senior companion on my mission). Reason and the five senses have served me much better, so much so that I am left completely uncertain as to whether I've ever even felt the Spirit at all.

until one deveops their spiritual senses yes it is pretty unreliable, and then when it is attained it's harder to keep it, which is why I think when we finally do take that leap of faith off the cliff for God, it is significant in his eyes.

I took up science in university, and am currently working on a doctorate in the biological sciences. Science does wonders for my confidence (which is still quite low by your standards, I'm sure), and the wounds from the spiritual phase of my younger life have not healed enough yet for me to be sure I can trust my spirituality anymore.

Just don't let either cloud the other.

[Bluejay]

Hi, Blackmarch.

actually i'd say both [physical senses and spirituality] are easy to fool.

How so?

-----

until one deveops their spiritual senses yes it is pretty unreliable

My experience tells me that level of development has nothing to do with it.

[john doe]

Hi, RipplecutBuddha.

At the risk of sounding apostate, I always get very upset when I hear people say this in Sunday School. It's much easier to fool a person's "spiritual senses" than it is to fool their physical senses.

In my personal experience, spirituality has proven itself to be very unreliable, and has led to a number of emotional disasters for me (I was a horrible senior companion on my mission). Reason and the five senses have served me much better, so much so that I am left completely uncertain as to whether I've ever even felt the Spirit at all.

I took up science in university, and am currently working on a doctorate in the biological sciences. Science does wonders for my confidence (which is still quite low by your standards, I'm sure), and the wounds from the spiritual phase of my younger life have not healed enough yet for me to be sure I can trust my spirituality anymore.

You have my condolences. Sorry to hear about this.

[Guest Godless]

Generaly the conflict arises when people try to use science to find out the who, where and why... Or try to use God to explain the How and the What.

I think the big conflict here is that the who and why are usually defined in ways that exclude God, or at least make him irrelevant. However, that doesn't mean that there is no truth in the "controversial" answers that science provides.

[Blackmarch]

Hi, Blackmarch.

How so?

ever gone through a book of illusions?

Play mindtrap.. or go thru politics, or study histories of wars and espionage?

It's very easy to fool the senses, one way is because the brain has formed patterns that it tries to fit everything into- and things that are close to the patterns but not, or are completely new to the brains experience, then it's very likely going to pull wrong conclusions. Compounding that is whenever there isn't enough info to process.

Edited February 8, 2010 by Blackmarch