Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
It is necessary to start with the fact that such concepts as “science in general” and “religion in general”, that is, regardless of what kind of science and what kind of religion – terms that mean the totality, and not a single phenomenon. Even the name of the organization is “academy of Sciences”, not”academy of Science”. Although such an expression as” scientific picture of the world “implies a certain unity, but” religious picture of the world ” completely depends on which religion it is taken from. Therefore, the question arises as to who should measure the peacefulness of coexistence.
Let's say we can take religious leaders (only traditional ones, not marginal ones) on the one hand and some prominent professors on the other. In Russian, the sciences are divided into natural sciences and humanities, while in English, natural sciences are sciences, and humanities are studies. Therefore, it is probably legitimate to take only professors from natural sciences.
Traditional religious leaders did not speak out against the sciences. Most of the professors were not hostile about religion, either. But there is still an insurmountable misunderstanding. It is expressed as follows.
Natural scientists perceive religions as a source of knowledge about the world around them, alternative to scientific knowledge. If this is true, then religious leaders should challenge scientific knowledge. Do they do this? No. Is scientific knowledge authoritative for them? Yes. It turns out a certain contradiction. To resolve it, you need to delve into the question. Do religions have knowledge about the world around them that contradicts scientific knowledge? In some cases-yes, in some-with a certain interpretation, in some-no. Then what is it? Why won't religions, at least in the first category, disappear? And here lies the very thing that many debates are based on. When looking at the religions of the so-called “people of science”, knowledge about how the world works is the main thing in any religion. And they are not willing to back down from this view. For the so-called “people of religion”, religious knowledge about how the world works is secondary, not even secondary. But once such knowledge about the world around us was the only one. When other knowledge began to appear, a conflict arose in the minds of many people (most often ordinary, lay people). Not everywhere, but in certain places, churches have attempted to combat alternative knowledge without delving into analysis. And here remains the historical resentment of the proponents of scientific knowledge, seasoned with the ideological conviction that scientific knowledge is a threat to religions. Although the creation of the world in the Bible takes only one and a half pages, it is considered the most important knowledge in the Bible for “people of science”. In the words of Buddha, Jesus and other founders of religions, it is possible to isolate the “doctrine of the world order” only by interpretation, but it will not be possible to prove that it exists there. But in direct text there are teachings about a proper way of life, a way of thinking, which scientific areas do not touch at all. Here is such a difficult situation.
Therefore, the answer to the question is not just can, but should.
They couldn't, they can't, and they never will.
Science, if this concept is understood as modern scientific methodology, as well as attempts to penetrate the secrets of the Universe of objective reality, strives for knowledge or knowledge. And without knowing in advance what this knowledge will be, but to a certain extent and the identified patterns reflect the reality of our World. It is this desire that leads to scientific discoveries, to various theories, on the basis of which the technical progress of mankind develops, as well as the understanding of the human phenomenon itself, its psychology and sociality. Such sciences as psychology and sociology became possible only since the last century, when the stagnation of the religious worldview in human relations was fundamentally overcome.
And the very technological progress of mankind begins approximately from the XVII-XVIII centuries, when in many Western countries religion began to separate from the state, removing the shackles of religious understanding of the World.
Few people know that before the 1917 Revolution, some representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church opposed the electrification of cities and villages, and their builders were called apostates.
Religion is a pre-dogmatic worldview, on the basis of which there are various kinds of beliefs. That is: the basis of any religion is not the desire for new knowledge, but the desire for Dogma and, accordingly, the reduction of both known scientific data and newly discovered ones to this Dogma. Therefore, practically no religion in the world can boast of any scientific discoveries, but only their reduction to their accepted canons.
As Mark Twain so aptly pointed out, religion is always trying to jump on the last wagon of progress. But this was said in the century before last, and now religions are trying to sit comfortably in the very car of progress.
So religion and science will never be able to exist peacefully: science will always strive for new knowledge that will overturn the canons of religions, and religions are forced to swallow contradictions, passing them off later for allegedly conforming to their Dogmas.
Hardly. 4 out of 5 definitions of religion on Wikipedia suggest belief in the supernatural. Now two tricks from mathematical logic:
As soon as there are scientific observations of the supernatural, it suddenly becomes natural.
While there are no scientific observations – everything supernatural does not manifest itself in any way and therefore does not affect our world, and therefore taking into account the will of an imaginary Loki or some other deity is to act on the basis of false assumptions about the world order. False assumptions can (quite probably) lead to false conclusions.
So far, there are scientific observations about Christian prayers – no effect has been noticed. (Подробнее тут: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficacy_of_prayer#The_STEP_project )
We can talk about science and religion in at least two ways: 1) as a set of methods, knowledge, and beliefs; 2) as specific social organizations.
So, if we talk about science and religion in the first sense, then they are absolutely incompatible. Science is the only effective method of acquiring new knowledge; you will not derive new knowledge from any religion. A normal scientist, while researching his field, seeks refutation of his views, and by this method of eliminating errors, improves his theories. A religious person, on the contrary, is always looking for confirmation of his views, i.e., he is busy pulling an owl on a globe.
Speaking about them in the second sense, it is necessary to note the sad fact that there are some “scientific” communities that are concerned only with eating up the budget, do not produce new knowledge, but are engaged in imitation of scientific activities and even outright pseudoscience. So they can be friends with religion and even accept religious figures into their ranks. It is a consolation that not all scientific communities are like this.
SCIENCE and RELIGION exist in two modes/states –
1) in an unhealthy, irreconcilable, militantly politicized
2) and in a healthy natural household –
in the first case, we have an eternal destructive senseless war, in the second case, we have a natural real unity/coexistence.
EXAMPLE – even Intelligence and Stupidity get along/coexist/co-exist in any person-in some topics a person can be very smart, in other topics he can be very stupid. Similarly, all other qualities – Positive and Negative-are represented in a person.
Of course you can!! Initially, this was the case. Please note that in our time, science, art, philosophy and religion follow a path that is more profitable for everyone…
In a good way.. art and philosophy contain scientific and religious principles. We need to study this. Even though they are considered separately, they together form the basis.
There have been people in history who have remained in our memory as great Teachers, such as Jesus, Krishna, Buddha, Hermes Trismegistus, etc.,
there were many prophets, in the north, in the south, in the east, and in the west. All these outstanding people were able to purify themselves inside, came into contact with their inner being. The inner God gave them this knowledge, which they expressed, in words, books, to their disciples, and to all of humanity.
So it's very important to get the gist of it. We can say that all knowledge is supported on four pillars: SCIENCE, PHILOSOPHY, ART, and RELIGION.
Philosophy teaches us techniques, practices, and spiritual tools of all kinds to help us find answers to the most important questions of all Creation: Where did we come from? Who are we? What is the purpose of our life? How did Genesis come into being?
Religion comes from the word RE+LIGARE, which means “to unite anew”, “to reunite”. Combine what? – To unite our consciousness, soul with its source, beginning, God, inner father – you can speak in different terms. It means learning synthesis without separating from everything else.
That is, when we talk about religion, we are not talking about specific confessions (Islam, Buddhism, Christianity), but about religion as a practice, as a method or method of this reunification. All these foundations are connected: Science, Philosophy, Art, Religion. every person has a heart, and there is a secret passage to it. This is religion. Find this secret inner path to yourself, to your source.
I hope we helped you understand a little bit about these deep aspects!
Sincerely yours!
They can and do co-exist. Religion ( or rather the Church) has long ceased to pursue science, and science laughs at religion (theology). Each does its own thing without interfering with the other.
In very many cases, both ignorant dogmas and incomprehensible quantum tricks of academics get along peacefully.
If we talk about the essence of these philosophies, then religion and science tend to converge. Or at least to smooth out sharp corners. Look, theology no longer claims, as it did 100 years ago, that hell and heaven are geographical places of torture or bliss. Today, she explains that hell and heaven are not geography, but a state of consciousness. And physicists approach the creator of the system from their own side-the quantum side.
In a sense, one can say that without knowing God, one cannot have a reliable knowledge of anything.
Even in order to deny something, you must first realize what you are denying.
In theory, religion and science have the same goal-to explain the structure of the world to people. Therefore, ideally, they should combine and complement each other. But there are forces that do not want people to have a complete picture of the world, and as long as these forces control religion and science, there will only be a truce between them, but not unification.
If “science” means the totality of natural sciences, then there is no war between “science” and religion, and there can be no war
Because they operate in different areas of knowledge
Religion focuses on the knowledge of ethical issues (ethics is a philosophical discipline that studies morality) and the spiritual world (non-material), while science deals with the knowledge of the material world
Missing field for conflict
It is not science that can conflict with religion, but materialism (a philosophical teaching), which, in its essence, is also a religion, since it cannot prove its basic idea (the absoluteness of matter and the secondary nature of everything else), but simply postulates
And every materialist, in fact, is a religious person, because he accepted the absoluteness of matter without any evidence, having made his religious choice outside the critical scientific way of thinking
They will be able to live peacefully and drink champagne when they understand what GOD is and why he needs the faith of living people to be strong. And while they solve it, they will be in conflict.
Of course, they can, moreover, they exactly co-exist, but exactly as long as they do not penetrate each other, i.e. as long as “God” or “God's Will” does not appear as arguments in a scientific work (then this is no longer science), and in religious writings any scientific facts and formulas are not attracted as arguments (this is creationism, not religion). I.e. if you do not mix religion and science together, then neither one nor the other will suffer)
The purpose of the Christian religion is to help people get acquainted with the Creator and God's plans for humanity. The goal of science is to explain the structure of the world He created and learn how to live competently in this world.
It is sad that many scientists try to erase God from the picture of the universe, but a sane believer will never speak out against science.
So the conflict comes from atheists, not believers.
As for such phenomena as the Inquisition, the people who were engaged in the extermination of scientists (Giordano Bruno) cannot be called believers, since Christ did not teach this. The god of the inquisitors was power and money, not Jesus Christ…
Can. But, this existence will not be like the current one. It will be more of a worldview. Since religion implies prayer and religious practices.
Alternatively, I will describe my worldview. There are works of physicists who claim that universes can not only self-generate (unfortunately, there is little material about this, I had to Google for a very long time), but also be created. No magic, no mysticism. Also, by developing science, we will be able to influence our world more and more. Over time, we will also gain immortality (biological or cybernetic). We can radically improve our genome. Let's Create Artificial Intelligence. And we can also create worlds with the laws of physics, which we will also develop. And we can create all the living things we want.
And, for beings with a lower stage of development – we will be gods. We can let them know about us. Or we can just stay out of it and watch.
And the question arises. If science suddenly develops to such a level, then there must have been beings who reached the top before us. And, they could also create our world with the help of science, and just not interfere in our lives.
Well, all these priests, books, stories, prayers, temples… This is just human folklore.
“Can science and religion coexist peacefully?”.. The question is asked, at least naively, in a childish way. Religion is not only, and not so much, a rite that shapes a person's relationship with God. This is the system in which a person who has accepted the concept of Deity is called to exist. The acceptance of this system, which we call the religious life or the life according to the commandments of God, is accepted by man either voluntarily, with complete free will. Or, most often, under severe pressure from the church organization and the state. The state changes its attitude to religion in different historical epochs, guided only by the expediency of union with the church at one time or another.
Religion, as mentioned above, is accepted by a person voluntarily or under pressure from outside, but it concerns not only the external person, but, above all, the internal one. True, this is the lot of truly religious people, for whom the truth is higher than the law (the Gospel parable of the good Samaritan).
For these people, the spiritual world is known only through the Word preached in the Holy Scriptures and conveyed to people through Jesus Christ. In the Holy Qur'an, the Word of God was preached through the Prophet Muhammad. The ancient Jews received the law of God through Moses.
People who profess these three religions accept the material world through the prism of God's spiritual revelations, in which they must remain until the moment of transition to eternity. Knowledge of the spiritual world is not a top priority for a believer. What matters to him is not knowing about it, but recognizing its existence. The parameters of the spiritual world cannot be measured with material instruments. For example, in the spiritual world there is no time and space : everything is measured by the state of a person's morals, that is, by the degree of his closeness or detachment from the Lord. Whereas in the material world there is time, space, speed, and weight. And this natural world can be measured, weighed, and calculated. Because with the help of science, as a method of cognizing the material world, we can determine the degree of dependence of a person on physical parameters. Which have certain qualitative characteristics and regularity of manifestation. The laws of physics, chemistry, mathematics, and so on that have been discovered allow a person to study these parameters.
But these tools cannot be used to examine the degree of good or evil in a person, his morality, his inner will and reason.
Science explores a small part of the unknown, invisible wonderful world, over which there is only one master, and only in His power to open the next page in our knowledge of the world or not.
Therefore, science is not something that can coexist with religion. There is no contradiction in them. But science should not invade areas that cannot be confirmed or refuted by it. This is the realm of the spirit where it is simply powerless. Science should know its place, which was determined by the Creator, without giving possible means for the study of the supernatural. This is the area of religious comprehension.
One camp consists of scientists, such as the chemist Peter Atkins, who believe that science and religion are mutually exclusive. According to Atkins, “to refer to God as an 'explanation' for any or all phenomena is unworthy of a sane person.”
The other camp is represented by believers who accuse science of undermining faith in God. In the opinion of such people, today's science is a hoax; and even if the facts are true, they are interpreted in such a way that it destroys people's faith. For example, according to the biologist William Provine, Darwin's teaching implies that ” moral principles are based on nothing, and life has no definite purpose.”
Let's set up a hypothetical experiment. We will consistently exclude religion and science from the life of the human community and see what happens.
Definitely, without science, the world will descend to a cave existence.
And without religion? Far from it, it will flourish even more.
Imagine what a huge share of the world's GDP is consumed by a greedy pack of parasitic brethren
And if these resources are used for the development of production, science, culture, and social needs?
Science and religion are antipodes. And I find it funny to listen to the statements that these are two branches of the same process of learning the world.
Adherents of this thesis, give at least one example of the result of this knowledge on the part of the church.
If you spend thousands of years hammering away at the same dogmas like a woodpecker on a branch, without even thinking about real knowledge of the world, where will the results come from?
Doubtful. One negates the other and vice versa. Although there are opinions-half-measures, such as everything happened according to the idea of God, such as the big bang, evolution, everything from his submission. BUT not a single true believer does not recognize that man came out of the water in the form of something fish-like and evolved. Similarly, the scientist does not recognize anything supernatural and will try to prove everything scientifically.
It depends on the individual, not on science or religion… There is no need to generalize There is not a significant part of” scientists ” who do not believe in any religions, but the main part of the educated population of the Earth, including scientists, believes and accepts religions in all their manifestations .. Yes, what can I say, without religions, there would be no scientists and no discoveries…
The problem is that Western civilization is post-Christian. Therefore, other religions are automatically identified with Christianity. Christianity began to have problems when Giordano Bruno and Galileo Galilei discovered that the earth revolves around the sun, and not the sun around the earth.
In Islam, just the same, there was no discrepancy with science. On the contrary, the latest scientific discoveries are confirmed in the Qur'an, written more than 1000 years ago. At the same time, according to experts, only less than 10% of the scientific information from the Koran is unraveled by humans.
For example, it would be very interesting for me to unravel the line where it says that there are two east and two west on earth? Is this some other sun that is invisible to the human eye around the earth? Or is the moon an independent luminary, and not a reflection of the sun?
What kind of science and what kind of religion.
I doubt that the Mithraicists were ever opposed to studies of heterogeneous transitions between two semiconductors.
The pagans were very much against materials science.
Christians in the nlm have ever opposed hydrodynamics.
Just kidding, in a secular state-maybe.
In a religious one, if you're lucky. Maybe Boku Haram, or maybe the Ben Gurion Institute
So they already coexist peacefully. When science begins to study what religion does, spirits, the devil, then these studies are immediately made secret. Not academicians will tell you that in the USSR all psychics were registered with the KGB and were involved in special operations, but a former general of the KGB of the USSR in a film about Messing. Here Bekhterev studied the phenomenon of Malevannogo and described it in his book. How much do you know about scientific research on supernatural phenomena in modern sects? But all this is being studied. The CIA exposed our ( Soviet )leader in the sixties a resident who had four identities. One person, say John Smith of Oklahoma. With childhood memories, names of teachers and excellent knowledge of the geography of those places. They say the code word , and then he's Jack Wesson from Minnesota. With other childhood memories, names of teachers and excellent knowledge of the geography of those places. And only one person was Pyotr Ivanov, a communist, a patriot of the USSR and a captain of the KGB of the USSR.
Here is where you can read about the theory and practice of such a deep correction of a person's personality? In The Reports Of the Academy Of Sciences? But these scientific studies were conducted and gave such impressive results.
And the poor religious people keep guessing:”What kind of seal will the Antichrist put on a person that he will not be allowed to cross himself or pronounce the name of Jesus Christ?”
So you can see how well science and religion coexist. The most important thing for the devil is to make sure that no one knows about his existence. Here's how to explain to atheists the enthronement of the Antichrist? Aliens arrived, made contact with humanity and chose the most worthy person?
In Islam, it somehow exists… When the Enquisition burned Galileo in Europe, the Koran said long ago that the Earth revolves around the Sun 🌍
Religion in its teaching is based on philosophical and theological justification. The truth for all sciences, without exception, should be the same, but unfortunately in real life this is not the case. Why is this happening? Because concepts, categories, etymology of words at different historical stages had different meanings, and therefore changed their philological content both in philosophy and, therefore, in science. In this regard, the goals, tasks, and requirements of science received other ways and methods of solving them. Art comes from religion, and any religion generates a corresponding culture. The truths of religion are unchangeable and permanent, because they go back to a Constant, Unchangeable, Absolute Source. The scientific concept assumes the finiteness of human life and activity in space-time. It follows from this teaching: if a person is mortal, then why create culture, science, that is, what “I” think is right for me at this historical stage, then it is true. A person must analyze the universal historical and philosophical path. And the main thing is that this analysis does not contradict the concept of previous thinkers and the board of the scientific community. Christianity has the fullness of its creed, which is based on a sound theological and philosophical theory. Therefore, Christianity marked the beginning of the development of science in the Middle Ages. R. Bacon: any scientific discovery, theory is based on a posteriori knowledge of scientific research. Experience is analytical cognition carried out through experiential observation. Experience as observation can be external, internal, supernatural, and analysis of the experience of previous generations (the Egyptian pyramids, Noah's Ark), i.e. before the discovery of the laws of Newton, Galelei, and other prominent scientists. This is followed by an experiment, i.e. review of experimental studies. Unlike the Christian religion,
Science will never give a comprehensive, scientific answer to such questions as what is the soul, its properties, human consciousness, since the soul in religious and philosophical understanding is not material, and does not consist of particles, and the functions of the soul cannot be verified experimentally. Therefore, this question will always remain open to science. The main scientific task in the field of scientific research since the end of the 18th century is man, knowledge of the world, since the Modern period is the heyday of humanism, and therefore scientific and philosophical anthropology. The main goal of religion is spiritual life, which is revealed in moral behavior, human happiness throughout universal History, and the goals of science and philosophy change throughout History and this depends on the person's worldview. Therefore, with the end of the 19th century, pragmatism becomes the main goal of science. Therefore, the main condition of science is the knowledge of practical truth, that is, the things of life and activity itself: “what's useful.” Marx: what has been proven by experience is true.” Therefore, Science sets a goal: to increase technological processes-GDP, aircraft construction, medical equipment, construction equipment, etc. The main task of religion is to know the Truth. The main task of modern philosophy is the logical analysis of the propositions and concepts of science in the practical study of the subject matter, while science is understood only in its empirical content. Only those sentences make sense that have experience as their referent. Philosophizing can be done only within the framework of materialistic dialectics and in accordance with empirical science.
The method of modern science is an experiment, since the material substrate is presented to the study. The methods of studying religion, philosophy, psychology, and political science are apodictic judgment, but not dialectical and no longer rhetorical. Therefore, there are differences between Science and Religion that should not have existed, since religion uses the experience of observation and the analytical historical-philosophical method, rational, and not experimental. Therefore, Science creates its own materialistic or biological psychology. In such a scientific view, a person turns into the concept of an” object”, not as a living intelligent organism, but as a material object. If a person is an “object”, then this is not a complete representation of his metaphysical nature, and therefore of his inner sensation; such a representation leads to the alienation of the living organism from the spiritual world. It is precisely this alienation in the philosophical and psychological representation of a living person in the form of a material object – this is the alienation of labor (according to Marx). Therefore, philosophy and religion lose their significance, and as a result, the humanities, to a greater extent, generate meaningless theories about the human being and the world around him. .. “Unity in the act of judgment and its character are not invented by the mind, nor are they brought from the outside by the understanding: this unity is the realization of the unity that is already outlined in the present material”(Lossky, The World as an organic whole). Lunacharsky wrote, in 1904: : “We are eager to transform reality according to the ideal we have developed, in which the evil of life will be eliminated… and if we ourselves have to crush someone innocent on the road, what should we do” (quote from: Eremin, Gurevich A., Ideals and Reality. Questions of philosophy and psychology. Book 72). Kant “Analysis of concepts of the understanding”, third section: “Critique of pure reason as justification of metaphysics”.
Rational knowledge requires the recognition of opposites, since in God all variants of contradictions are present, since God is Absolute Reason. Speculative logic, which comprehends the unity of these limited definitions in their opposite. “But only speculative logic removes opposites” (Hegel) .
Therefore, faith is intelligent and rooted in God, and reason is given to man by God to resolve contradictions in our world (Kant, Hegel, and others).
It should be assumed that this is quite possible, but only in a competent bundle, without self-personal violations, using a clear understanding, and of course it is your own path.Breaking the same, and ignoring the dogmas, there will be a burnout, which will affect extremely negatively in general, and in part.
Let me describe a completely wild concept, from the far , far future – or rather, “from the fool” so that you do not criticize strictly and look for the essence of your question, and not for scientific accuracy:
And so, in some other being, the chaos of superposition collapse probabilities generates a myriad of relationships , which for convenience we will represent as ones and zeros . And in a trillionth combination, they formed a relationship that began to spread the collapse of superpositions into a certain reality . The point of exodus of such “order” in ” chaos “we will call a big name:” The phenomenon of the subjective observer ” or imagine it as a big bang . And the spread of matter through the universe – that is, its expansion-will be called the aspiration of his gaze – ” the gaze of being deep into the non-existence of chaos. ” You can also adapt it to a conveniently understood concept, such as – in order to view chaos more deeply-he grew his sense organs with appendages and was this angel's army , which is like a wave in 4 dimensions and still rushes deep into the “not yet seen” by his eyes. And where his angels-that is , he himself-lingered and showed inspiration describing (materializing into reality from non-existence) chaos – there appeared seeds of life that had to evolve themselves into subjective observers and expand the “quality” of the world they saw.
No one canceled the flight of fancy : ) so, let this wild theory remain in the framework of “brainstorming”.
Consider that the personality of the” subjective “observer – to which we describe for convenience the essence (in fact, within the framework of this fiction) of the nature of the ordered-is an atavism of “cognitive evolution”.: )
What is the moral – even when we answer sooo many questions about our being – there will still be something that is still “sooo inaccessible” to us . And this is what will generate new interpretations of religions . The human brain cannot exist in peace without answering all the questions and it has to put a symbolic “plug” in an empty place. The picture should be poetic and correspond to a simple everyday narrative – which for us is modern, but does not even fit the lack of our own consciousness-in the way we viewed it throughout history. We cannot understand that the ego is an element of the CNS's response to the environment, which is necessary only for a certain period of evolution. There is still a lot we can't understand-hence “his ways are mysterious” as an ” X “in the equation – which will later be able to try on religion on its” deathbed ” with new , advanced views. Hence the promises of new messiahs and prophets that they will definitely come …. and let's be honest-they will be mixed (sorry) with shit by modern society, and first of all by those churches whose teachings and foundations predicted them. But the society takes out a new progressive view, and those who need to put it in a comfortable form will adjust the ceremonial and sacred texts to it. Thus, everyone will get bread for 1.5-2 kilograms of brains – whatever you call them and whatever properties you attribute to them.
At its core, any science is religious. To make this easier to understand, you just need to mentally descend to the origins of human existence. Eg. When a person was just learning how to make fire, and could not associate the nature of a thunderstorm with an electric current.
He interpreted these phenomena in his own way from the point of view of his young mind. He could give any definition of heavenly electricity. For he did not want to depend on the vicissitudes of nature, and to have fire always at his fingertips. And here he just walked the same path as modern researchers of science.
It gave the Thunderer super natural powers. He chanted spells, he danced with a tambourine, and beat bows. He made many mistakes and made many mistakes in trying to curb the fire with different methods. And most importantly, he took his first step on the road of a thousand miles, which would in a thousand years come to what we have now-it's just a flick of an electric switch.
Any science moves from the unknown to the known. And this unknown we sometimes call super natural. Going beyond the boundaries of the known. Going beyond the limits of your knowledge. Knowledge beyond the natural is where scientific discoveries are made. What we called faith yesterday becomes knowledge today. And yesterday's super-natural today becomes the usual platitudes.
But you need to understand that religion is not equal to God, religion is much broader, and God is only part of a particular religion. For the essence of religion is your philosophy of perception of the world, your worldview, your idea.
Religion and science can not only coexist peacefully , they are the fruit of the same tree.
God recommends that people study natural sciences. Since a deeper understanding of these sciences leads a person to understand that the world was created by God.
But not invented like philosophy.
No, they can't. These are mutually exclusive concepts. And often hostile to each other.
For several reasons, and they are also key:
1. Modern ideas of science exclude the existence of God and therefore their beginning of the world happened by itself. Random and chaotic. In the religions of mankind, the beginning of the world is laid by God and everything is created and not accidental. Religion excludes randomness and chaos.
2. In the ideas of science, the entire universe is a vacuum, the earth is round and rotates. Planets and stars in space are spherical and also rotate. It implies incredible distances and sizes of everything. In religion, the world is flat. And limited. It has limits and surmountable distances. Everything is measurable. Stars and other bodies spin above the earth. Similarly, most religions describe three worlds. The heavenly world, where angels live, the human world, actually ours, and the world of the dead, underground.
3. Science fundamentally rejects the existence of a human spirit, or primary energy, or intelligent soul. It's just a matter of terminology. Science represents a person as an ordinary clot of meat and blood. And denies life after death. Religions all recognize the presence of the human spirit and even try to describe it in detail. The spirit is attributed to the properties of reason, will, thinking, etc. The body with blood is considered the clothing of the spirit. Religions, although in different ways, but agree on one thing, this is that the existence after the physical death of the body continues.
4. Science denies recompense for the deeds of men. It is believed that there is no truth and all opinions are equal. Therefore, it is impossible to say what is good and what is evil. Religions usually always give an answer to what is considered evil and what is considered good. All religions proclaim retribution for actions. In religion, it is believed that there is one truth, other opinions are misconceptions.
5. The physical structure of the world in science and religion is very different. Religions often describe the forces that exist and often manifest in our world. Science, on the other hand, does not recognize what religions proclaim, and asserts its own set of physical forces, while in most cases not even explaining them.