Science and religion just do not mix. I say this not out of arrogance or even arrogance. This is simply in the nature of things. Science and religion look at the world on fundamentally different ways. In religion it's about believing . It relies on internal beliefs, personal visions, old traditions and none of it, there must be some evidence. Often, even the very fact that you declare believes without any evidence as particularly commendable feature. However, science is a method that has been specially developed to get an objective understanding of our world that we do not have to believe. In science, it's about to prove things to review and reject all that rigorously that this investigation does not stand holds. There is little that would be a bad fit together, as a religion and science. No wonder, because when it comes to conflict.
And of course there was always. If scientists were so cheeky, and the checks have to think out loud what one religion, then it has mostly ended up not good. To determine geologists that the Earth is not 6000 years but a few billion years old, and if notice biologists that humans evolved over billions of years from simple single-celled organisms, rather than directly created to be like it says in the Bible from God: In such cases, the church has ignored the findings of science like, or even rejected - as it was still possible - the scientists actively pursued. On the other hand, religions have also not afraid to complain to scientific knowledge for themselves if they think it would benefit them.
It was recently reopened the case, three physicists as the Nobel Prize for her work on the expansion of the universe and dark energy have received. Quite rightly, this was an excellent and revolutionary discovery. But this confirms "modern physics in an impressive way the Bible says," as in kath.net to read?
"This modern physics confirms impressively as the Bible says:" In the beginning God created heaven and earth "(Genesis 1:1), or" ... that the world is made out of God's word, so that everything you see, nothing has happened "(Hebrews 11:3 b). The Big Bang Theory - today the generally accepted theory of the origin of the universe - is undoubtedly a clear indication - if no evidence of -. the truth of the biblical evidence and the existence of God as the creator of what would have still more to accomplish in order to demonstrate his creative power, as something so gigantic as to create the universe out of nothing "?
In these sets of conflicting use or access to science is demonstrated nicely. The science has a lot of cases, clearly demonstrated that the creation story of Genesis is not a description of reality. Humans and animals were not created for example in its current form of God, but emerged in the course of evolution. These findings are then - depending on how conservative is the belief - but either rejected or ignored insofar as it declares that the stories of Genesis as a metaphor, a representation of events, which must be understood symbolically and not literally. But if you see the chance to own a Bible quote but bring something to a scientific result, in conjunction, then you suddenly nothing against science, it comes just in time to "impressive" to confirm that the Bible is quite has.
Specifically, consider the argument in the above quote is of course untenable. "In the beginning God created heaven and earth" could hardly describe the reality inappropriately. In the beginning there was the big bang and then it took 9.5 billion years before the Earth formed. Without God, as we know today - the planet formation does not require a creator. And what the phrase "what the Creator would accomplish more than to demonstrate his creative power, as something so gigantic as to create the universe out of nothing?" will show opens up to me either. Translated means of yes: "Because there is the universe, it must have been created by God." - And that's certainly a logical conclusion for which there is no basis.
No comments:
Post a Comment