Science Vs. The Bible

the problem is that king james made his own version into english as he understood it and through translation to english , which is what we can read, it lost a lot of the truth and meaning. so, in places it seems to be contradicting when in the real text its not.

Hello! :) For this one, I would just like to share one of my all-time favorite quotations from one of my all-time favorite novels, Angels and Demons by Dan Brown. "Science and religion are not at odds. Science is simply too young to understand." I think what this quote is trying to tell us is that religion and science do not operate in the same realm. Religion sees past the physical properties of the world that science investigates. I believe that science was not born to disprove the existence of God but to support it. Most scientists believed in the existence of a Higher Power and that is the reason why they're fascinated with looking into the carefully engineered mechanisms of life down to the molecular level. Science is trying to understand what religion tells us by looking into the framework of creation. That's the way I see it anyway. :)

Thanks to the Church, science evolved. Many of them were trying to prove that God existed. Yet, the church and science became at odds with each other; from Copernicus and Galileo, to Giodarno Bruno. The church followed some Greek's notion that the earth was the center of everything. Copernicus and Galileo tried to show that earth revolved around the sun and that there were other worlds. Galileo at his hearing, showed that the Bible even supported his claim (besides his telescopes.) Church dogma said, "no." When Bruno also dared say that there were also other worlds and possibly other beings; he was burned at the stake. All of these men were good Catholics and scientists. If one looks hard enough at the Bible, they can see the Big Bang. They can see the the waters (whatever that infinite black substance is) separated by the firmament (heavens or our universe) from out earth(s) separated from our earthly waters. So it's logical that Bruno would think of other planets and possible beings. As on myLotter quotes, science is way behind. And yet, there are no contradictions. Evolution does not prove the non existence of God. And as for the big bang, some scientists think we have multiple universes and "brains" running these universes. We have a lot to learn.

I was having this debate in Philosophy yesterday, and it came up that there is just as much faith involved in science as there is with religion. People are taught science in school or read it in books, and follow it just as blindly as they follow the bible. Im sure that most people that claim that 'Science eliminates the need of religion' havent gone and proved their scientific beleifs. After all, there are some laws of science that are just as difficult to believe as God creating the earth in a matter of days... You could say that science and religion go hand in hand, and that scientific discoveries teach us more about God. On the other hand, you could say that with all of the scientific discoveries that we make there is no longer a need for God, and that we are explaining all of the 'miracles' written in the Bible. Personally I think that science has the answers over religion, because science allows us to develop further, and it does have proof and makes sense to me. I think that religion is quite out of date, and the only comfort i can see in it is the belief that we arent all just here by chance, and that theres an afterlife. But really, Im quite happy thinking that I am here completley by chance, because its so improbable that it makes it all the more special. :)