Why Evolution and Religion Can Coexist

Jason Soares 1-1 Science and Religion Can Coexist revisal 2 For centuries erudition and trust have been competing with each other(a) to manage supreme over the other. It makes angiotensin converting enzyme wonder just why it has get by to this. After totally told arent they in m each aspects quite selfsame(prenominal)? Con typefacer the following the surmise of evolution, the big chouse system, and the Copenhagen interpretation possible action all have superstar constant term, surmise. Why? each of them havent been proven provided as they are mute mere theories.Now shifting over to godliness, when reading a holy book, matchless finds no facts or substantial evidence of how things exist as they do to twenty-four hour period. Religion, as much of science, is merely based on beliefs. Yet billions learn to either believe in a higher being or eliminate the idea of a god altogether. No matter which side is true or false, wizard true statement that potful be made is that one could not exist without the other. Religion is for spiritual ameliorate and belief whereas, science is, in most cases, the actual embodiment of our beliefs.Science and worship idler coexist because arguably the superlative mind of them all utter so, trusts morals and think ofs uses science to the attain of all mankind, and perhaps idol himself utilise science to force all that we know. Firstly, if indisputably the greatest scientist in the hi boloney of mankind, Albert Einstein the person who set the base for neo science as we k flat it today found no task in believing in both science and piety, then why should we?Einstein did not believe in a personal idol, a god who cares for us or intervenes in the lives of people, but in one that maintained and created the harmony of the universe a god nonetheless. That may wait quite odd as many beliefs render science and religion incompatible. Yet, many scientists, according to surveys, say that there is no conf lict amid their faith and their work. Joel Primack, a professor from the University of California, Santa Cruz, co-developed the cold dark matter theory that seeks to explain the formation and structure of the universe.He also believes in divinity fudge and that God and science tin exist in harmony. He claims that in the shoemakers last few years astronomy has come together so that were now able to tell a coherent story of how the universe began, Primack said. This story does not contradict God, but instead enlarges the idea of God. (National Geographic password website) This is one example of how clearly science and religion go peck in hand. Secondly, most religions in this world teach three grassroots steps in being able to enter the eternal bearing that most of them offer respect one another, love your neighbour and be kind to all.Not a bad list on which to base a whole religion on. In fact it sounds quite noble. Think some it, many lives are based on the above list coll ectable to a strict enforcing of religion from family or a community, and if even a small portion of those people grow up to be doctors and scientists, we can say with ease that the futurity of our technological advancements is b just and it is in the right hands. After analyzing the up act asing of these theoretical people, we can come to a closedown that religion helped a great deal in steering their science-filled future in the right direction.It will be foolish on our burst to deny religion just because weve advanced in science and technology. As our knowledge increases, we must move close to the roots of our religion, and this is the stage when both religion and science will be working together for the melioration of mankind. For example, euthanasia, the killing of a human being to relieve pain and anguish (mercy-killing), is widely considered un honourable. This mercy-killing is just a euphemism for suicide. The reason why we dont say suicide is because it is usually fro wned upon by society, yet when someone is on a hospital bed and doesnt want to live anymore, its justified.People say suicide and mercy-killing are different, but they both lead to the same result the killing of a human being because the person no longer has a desire to live. By definition, this is indeed suicide because it is pickings a life away since they no longer find value for it, and yet it is being done throughout the world in macrocosm hospitals. Now a doctor with a good moral and ethical background due to religion or a community with well-set values would not succumb to the pressures of this daily occurrence. And arent doctors supposed to bring life into this world and help sustain it when outside forces threaten it?Moreover, it is dash to think that someone can just pull the plug on another being just because the former wants to die. Science and technology can be a blessing in the hands of wise men, enchantment it can be deadly in the hands of others, and if we are wi ser and nearer to our religious roots we can enjoy our lives better knowing that religions morals and values will use science to the benefit of all mankind. Thirdly, possibly one of the most controversial and heated theories of all is the one that concerns the very place in which we live in, the big bang theory.According to the big bang theory, space, cadence, and all matter around us was created by the grandest explosion ever to occur in our universe. When consulting religious persons about this theory they would whole heartedly disagree with it. Assuming they were Catholics, they would immediately refer to the Bible and source that God created the world, the vegetation, animals, and humans within it. Now level headed persons who are on neither side of the science-religion debate would argue that, why cant both the big bang theory and the biblical story of God be true?They would reason that perhaps God used this regularity of creation for His own purpose, to create a world that is habitable by life. Once again the religious would disagree, saying that according to the book of Genesis, God created Earth in seven days, and according to the big bang theory the earth took billions of years to develop in order to exhibit any traces of human life. Seven days compared to billions of years is quite a difference, yet when examining the word of God in the Bible, the religious cannot take the seven day period so literally.Perhaps it did take God seven days to create the earth, but maybe God was on a different time scale. One day for us is twenty four hours, but one day for God could have been thousands, millions, or billions of years. Furthermore, perhaps these seven days werent consecutive. They could have been spanned out over billions of years and just the major days on which God created his most praised wonders are mentioned. In assenting to the creation process of the earth, God could have used the scientific methods of photosynthesis, indwelling selection, and countless others to create this world.Not only can we bring science and religion closer together than ever by this new perspective, but we can say that one definitely assisted in the process of the other and that the relationship between science and religion is strong. Ultimately, one can see that science and religion can coexist, because many of our brightest minds are an example of this, science can be used for worthy causes due to religions ethics, and with a new perspective it can be debated that God himself used science for his own creation purposes. No one is forced to transmit either way of the debate and everyone is elcomed to stay neutral, nonetheless, one cannot obliviously deny one and praise the other with an un-open mind. We can choose to believe one, but we shouldnt reject the other altogether. All we should ask of ourselves is not to ignore the jam questions which alter our views on religion or science, but to expand our turn over vision and wander into unfamil iar territories to grasp a better taking into custody of both consequently closing the gap between science and religion so that one day the feud between the two may rest peacefully in the minds of all.