Can Science and religion Coexist? Disproving the myth:

☔Disclaimer!!☔ I’m selfishly writing this for myself but i want to welcome you into my world of thought as i explore this wide and complex topic. I’m no expert in Philosophy, Theology or Religion. Just a student.

Intro

My simple answer would be, ABSOLUTELY, THEY CAN COEXIST! But we all know that response wouldn’t satisfy you. So here goes my long answer. To avoid strawmaning, i always start with defining terms. Plus i find that it easily solves many of my problems.

What is religion?

In sociology, it is defined as a system of beliefs, value, and behaviors and norms concerning what a person holds sacred or considers to be spiritually significant. By this definition, we can include political and sports affiliation, right? That said, we understand that when we talk of religion, we cheapen the definition to mean spiritual or faith beliefs so that when i ask you what religion you belong to, you’ll probably answer me Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Scientism, and yes Atheism etc.

What is Science?

Oxford defines it as the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation,experimentation, and the testing of theories against the evidence obtained. Also as knowledge of any kind. It is what was called natural philosophy by the Great Olds like Aristotle, Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei etc.

Okay. Using the two definitions, do you still see them as alternatives? Then why is there such a great argument about this? The argument lies in the question they try to answer and the explanation they offer. That is the question of the origin of the universe. Religion says God or gods and as Athiesm (lack of belief in the existence of God or gods), and followers of scientism (fringe) say, science; on the other hand, Science says…does it really say anything about it though?

John Lennox gives the best analogy of a pot of water boiling. He asks, “Why is the water is boiling?” The scientific explanation is that it is because the heat energy is agitating the water molecules but the explanation that most of us would give i think is, because I want a cup of tea which is the agent explanation. The two explanations do not compete but are rather complementary. In our case, The agent explanation of the universe is God. The scientific explanation is, well, science. The God explanation tells us what caused while the science explanation tells us how it happened.

I think from here we can tell that the argument is not really between science and religion. I think the argument is really between natural atheism and belief in God or gods.

I can talk to no end about religions as I’ve done a great deal of research but here, I will only talk about the Christian God explanation because this is where my experience and faith is at. The Christians claim that a personal God created the universe (time, space, matter) from nothing in the beginning. The Natural atheistic explanation is that the universe originated from the big bang. If you are an atheist and you don’t believe this, i’m aware there exists different explanations but the big bang is the mainstream explanation.

It may surprise some people but i don’t believe the big bang conflicts with the Christian God explanation. If you have read Genesis then you know what i mean. It’s really not far fetched to believe that God caused a ‘big bang’ to form the universe. Please note this is not my belief but i can see how one would conclude that. What i cannot see is how a natural atheist would conclude that the big bang caused a/the universe. How something came from nothing contrary to science as claimed by natural atheism.

I will leave you with some things that science cannot explain:

1. Aesthetic judgments (beauty),
2. Metaphysical truths like there are other minds other than my own or the external world is real or that the past was not created 5 minutes ago with an appearance of age (consciousness),
3. Ethical believes about value,
4. Logical and mathematical proofs (science presupposes logic and mathematics), and
5. Science itself. Can science prove that we can only know/believe what can be tested by the scientific explanation?

I may have belabored my point , or not but, my claim is simply that science and religion do not conflict, if anything, natural atheism and science do. To be continued…I have not talked about why Christians believe in a personal God (The causal agent), as i hope to address it in another post soon. The role Evidence and/versus Faith play.

Please note that this is a wide topic and i may not cover all i want to. Anyone is welcome to disagree. Please share thoughts below post.

Great are the works of the Lord, studied by all who delight in them

– James Clerk Maxwell (father of modern physics)