How the Public Resolves Conflicts Between Faith and Science

Psalms18_28 · September 5, 2007

On Subjects such as Evolution, Many Americans Are Aware of -- but Reject -- the Scientific Consensus
by David Masci, Senior Research Fellow, Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life
August 27, 2007

The relationship between faith and science in the United States seems, at least on the surface, to be paradoxical. Surveys repeatedly show that most Americans respect science and the benefits it brings to society, such as new technologies and medical treatments. And yet, religious convictions limit many Americans' willingness to accept controversial scientific theories as well as certain types of scientific research, such as the potential use of embryonic stem cells for medical treatments.

Science and religion have traditionally, and often incorrectly, been viewed as enemies. This perception has been fueled in part by a number of famous episodes in history that have pitted scientists, like Galileo and Darwin, against the prevailing religious establishments of their time. But more often than not, scientists and people of faith have operated not at cross purposes but simply at different purposes.

Today the situation is much the same. Certainly, there are modern scientists who are actively hostile to religious belief. British biologist Richard Dawkins, for instance, in his best-selling book, The God Delusion, argues that many social ills ? from bigotry to ignorance ? can be blamed, at least in part, on religion. In addition, a significant number of scientists ? roughly a third according to a 2006 Rice University survey of more than 750 professors in the natural sciences ? do not believe in God, compared with only one-in-twenty in the general population. But regardless of their personal views, most scientists tend to view the two disciplines as distinct, with each attempting to answer different kinds of questions using different methods. The late evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould famously referred to this complementary relationship as "non-overlapping magisteria."
... (more) http://pewresearch.org/pubs/578/when-sc ... ually-wins

qwerty guy · September 5, 2007

I think the biggest problem today is that the arguments against evolution are not taken for what they are. You hear people say that religion wants all studies to stop, or to persecute scientists who believe in evolution, anyone who stands up against anything that has to do with evolution is labeled as a hater of all science.

The argument for years now has been: Stop using tax dollars to force feed your theories to the kids, disguised as facts.

Most people don't care what someone else believes, they just don't want it forced on them.

Very few people have trouble with truth, the trouble is when unproven garbage is forced upon people as fact, and we're told that we are hate filled anti-truth because we don't accept a theory.

Psalms18_28 · September 6, 2007

That's what I thought too, but was wondering what other people's opinions on this article.

They say we have a problem with science but yet we don't have a problem with science. It isn't that we have a problem with it, it is that we don't interpret science the way they do. We believe God made everything, and every little discoveries they found is of God.

They want us to allow tax money on more researches but we won't allow them. So they are mad about that. just because they are able to manipulate God's creation doesn't mean it is right... like making human/animal embryo (very unethical and wrong) . They want educate our children so they will have more evolution scientists but are mad that we are teaching our children the opposite.

qwerty guy · September 6, 2007

Morally, the farther you go the farther you can go. 100 years ago, if a woman showed her knee in public she would be arrested, but as morals slipped, now you can run around in your underwear as long as it's brightly colored.

Science has gotten away with lies and falsehoods long enough that's it's not a career ender, and political motivations for "greater goods" has allowed for full corruption.

Take the "embryonic stem cell" debate for an example. The government, under george bush, banned embryonic stem cell research.

When a government bans something, it means no government money can be used in that area, nor in support of agencies that practice in that area.

it does not mean it's illegal, it only means you can't have government money involved. If a lab wants to do embryonic stem cell research, it can. NOTHING is stopping embryonic stem cell research in the united states, your lab just can't get government support or grants or tax deductions.

Is this what they say though? Nope, they say they cannot do embryonic stem cell research. They say that all these great cures for things are being stopped by the government. They say that because of the ban science is held back. And they attribute this to religion interfering with science.

The truth is, a couple in new york spent over 20 million dollars of their own money, not in support of stem cell research, but in lobbying to remove the ban. Why? Because they want YOUR money to go for this. They could of donated the money to a lab, but instead they spend this fortune to get tax dollars, YOUR dollars, to go for this research.

Maybe M.Keaton should of gone on T.V. and told everyone how they want the ban lifted so you could pay to chew up unborn babies because he figures if thousands of babies are aborted to help him, it's a good trade, and you should pay for it.

The argument is also full of "it could lead too... it might find..." It's like evolution.. they have no idea, but go on theories. They say "wow, if we could some how get them to turn into this, at this point, at this time, why, we could cure this!!!" It's a rabbit trail of what ifs that they use for the argument of what is being "held back"

B-17, or B-27, what ever that vitamin is that supposedly cures/prevents cancer, has a government ban, but is very popular in many Christian circles that focus on biblical eden diets. I haven't seen any commercials though crying about this. Probably because the same people interested in it, are the same people who don't think other people should pay for their life.

Science has become a welfare child, always with it's hand out wanting you to pay for it, and never question it. We are the closed minded one? I read the science books, and subscribe to 3 different science magazines, I wonder how many Christian books they read.

The only good thing I see coming, is the rubber band snap when things go too far too fast when people get too bold in matters like this. Unfortunately, the rubber band doesn't snap back all the way, paving the way to move farther in the future.

Colin Stolzer · September 6, 2007

B-17, or B-27, what ever that vitamin is that supposedly cures/prevents cancer, has a government ban

It is actually a purely money issue with B-17 also known as laetrel (sp?). There is a really good book about it "A World Without Cancer" you can get it through Creation Science Evangelism (Kent Hovind) Ministries for about $7.00. It talks about how well researched it was in the 1960's and 1970's in a few major research facilities and that it was proven to work with alot of forms of cancer but the reason it's not comercially available in the USA is because it can't be reproduced chemically in the lab, it's only found in nature. If you can't reproduce it synthetically, then you can't patent it and since it cost 10's of millions of dollars to get pharmaceuticals approved by the FDA it doesn't make any sense financially to do all the research to get it approved if you can't own the patent and your competition can produce it for less and cut you out of the market. You see this happen all the time that when a pill first hits the market it's really expensive but after the first seven years the price drops and the generic versions hit the market, this is because the patent expires usually after seven years and the company has to recover all their money in that time frame. Once the patent expires though the competing pharmaceutical companies can produce it for much lower costs and still make a profit, hence the generic versions.

This is alot of the reason that they always want Gov't funding for research, why spend your own profits to see if something works or not when you can get the tax payers to do it for you?

As to the conflict between scripture and science or math or reading or any other subject I've never found one in the KJV Bible everything in it works just fine with math and science and physics and every other subject. There is no conflict.

C

Martyr_4_FutureJoy · August 31, 2021

On 9/6/2007 at 8:39 AM, Colin Stolzer said:

It is actually a purely money issue .....

Love of money causes the corruption.

What causes people to believe the corruption ?

Martyr_4_FutureJoy · August 31, 2021

Not for the public, not for how the public does anything, rather warnings against the worldly deceptions, and spiritual deceptions, in high places (and low places)

as written in KJV.

John 5:43
I have come in My Father's name, and you have not received Me; but if someone else comes in his own name, you will receive him.

2 Peter 3:17
Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.

Matthew 7:14
But small is the gate and narrow the way that leads to life, and only a few find it.

King James Bible
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

King James Bible
For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

King James Bible
For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

King James Bible
Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

King James Bible
For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

King James Bible
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.