Is religion against science?

[paarsurrey]

Please quote from the scripture of any revealed religion where it is mentioned that it is against science.
Or
Please quote from science where it mentions that it is against any revealed religion.

Regards

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Please quote from the scripture of any revealed religion where it is mentioned that it is against science.
Or
Please quote from science where it mentions that it is against any revealed religion.

Regards

Please define science. All religions do not reject the laws of nature. We just have different perspectives of who created it and the role it plays in our lives.

Nam.

 

[Awkward Fingers]

No, but I would say many religious are against science.

 

[Crypto2015]

It depends on the religion. Christianity does not make any sort of scientific claims. When I say Christianity I mean the Bible. On the other hand, the Quran makes several scientific assertions that are in open contradiction with experimental scientific observations.

 

[Lyndon]

More anti Muslim nonsense......

 

[Leftimies]

It depends on the religion. Christianity does not make any sort of scientific claims. When I say Christianity I mean the Bible. On the other hand, the Quran makes several scientific assertions that are in open contradiction with experimental scientific observations.

I think the Bible makes the assertion that the world was created in six days, and beyond that, the order in which it was supposedly created is not the order we today recognize. I guess you could take the whole Genesis as allegorical, though.

 

[Quintessence]

Please quote from the scripture of any revealed religion where it is mentioned that it is against science.

Considering the "revealed religions" wrote their scriptures long before the sciences as we know it existed, you're not going to find such a quotation. It's possible there's such a quotation in a new religious movement that calls itself a "revealed religion," but I've never heard of or seen such a thing. Not sure why you limit this to "revealed religions" or quotes from scripture. Its an issue for religions broadly, and religions are hardly defined by their scriptures (assuming they even have them) alone. Now, if you want to find individual people who happen to be members of particular religions who speak venom against particular sciences or scientific findings, well... you can find those pretty easily. They, however, do not speak for religions as a whole. Nobody does. They only speak for themselves.

Please quote from science where it mentions that it is against any revealed religion.

Such a quotation doesn't exist either. Sciences don't deal in value judgements and being "for" or "against" things. Now again, if you want to find individual people who happen to be scientists who speak venom against particular religions, well... you can find those pretty easily. They, however, do not speak for the sciences. Nobody does. They only speak for themselves.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

My religion isn't and it is a great patron of the sciences.

 

[George-ananda]

Is religion against science?

Not any intelligent modern religion.

 

[Crypto2015]

I think the Bible makes the assertion that the world was created in six days, and beyond that, the order in which it was supposedly created is not the order we today recognize. I guess you could take the whole Genesis as allegorical, though.

The Bible does not state that Genesis is a literal account. Furthermore, how could the days be actual days considering that the sun wasn't created in the first day?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Religion isn't against anything. Religious people may be against science.

 

[picnic]

Here you go. The devil attempted to perform an experiment, but Jesus told him that God is opposed to being tested experimentally.

5 Then the devil taketh him into the holy city; and he set him on the pinnacle of the temple, 6 and saith unto him, If thou art the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and, On their hands they shall bear thee up, Lest haply thou dash thy foot against a stone.

7 Jesus said unto him, Again it is written, Thou shalt not make trial of the Lord thy God.

http://www.religiousforums.com/bible/matthew/4/

 

[Eileen]

Here you go. The devil attempted to perform an experiment, but Jesus told him that God is opposed to being tested experimentally.

http://www.religiousforums.com/bible/matthew/4/

That's a stretch!!!

 

[Leftimies]

The Bible does not state that Genesis is a literal account. Furthermore, how could the days be actual days considering that the sun wasn't created in the first day?

Well, the Bible does state that it is the Word of God, instruction upon all mankind. I suspect that it would be most astute to also consider that the language used in Genesis is very descriptive - nothing in it implies a metaphor or allegory. Its furthermore a story that establishes the original sin and the fall of man, a notion which is further used to justify the need for salvation through Christ. We are all sinners after falling from God's grace, and we need Christ to get back to Him; were the Genesis merely allegorical, need for salvation would be severely diminished.

I think its meant to be taken as literal, and even if it isn't, all major traditions seem to take it literally - at least historically.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Well, the Bible does state that it is the Word of God, instruction upon all mankind. I suspect that it would be most astute to also consider that the language used in Genesis is very descriptive - nothing in it implies a metaphor or allegory. Its furthermore a story that establishes the original sin and the fall of man, a notion which is further used to justify the need for salvation through Christ. We are all sinners after falling from God's grace, and we need Christ to get back to Him; were the Genesis merely allegorical, need for salvation would be severely diminished.

I think its meant to be taken as literal, and even if it isn't, all major traditions seem to take it literally - at least historically.

No, most mainstream denominations do not take the Genesis creation narrative literally. Biblical literalism is actually a recent development in Christian history.

 

[Leftimies]

No, most mainstream denominations do not take the Genesis creation narrative literally. Biblical literalism is actually a recent development in Christian history.

Oh, really? That is fairly interesting. How were the Christian scriptures viewed traditionally, then? I haven't heard of this kind of approach before.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Oh, really? That is fairly interesting. How were the Christian scriptures viewed traditionally, then? I haven't heard of this kind of approach before.

Yes, really. The Catholic Church and the mainline Protestant denominations accept evolutionary theory. I'm sure the Orthodox accept it as well, since they're much like Catholics in their approach to the Bible. Pretty much the only ones who don't accept evolutionary science on religious grounds are Protestant fundamentalists which aren't affiliated with a mainstream denomination.

https://biologos.org/common-questions/biblical-interpretation/early-interpretations-of-genesis
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/creation-and-genesis

 

[RedDragon94]

Please quote from the scripture of any revealed religion where it is mentioned that it is against science.
Or
Please quote from science where it mentions that it is against any revealed religion.

Regards

I don't think religions are against science as much as certain practitioners are.

 

[JRMcC]

Furthermore, how could the days be actual days considering that the sun wasn't created in the first day?

The scientific view of how the sun was formed definitely conflicts with the idea that the sun was created by God. Doesn't it?

 

[Kirran]

'Religion' and 'science' are absurdly heterogenous terms.