What is science to a religious person?

I'm Pagan, but, science to an extremely religious person is devil-worship/an attempt to disprove their God and Lord... so... to me, it seems like science is a threat to an extremely religious person.

a human way to explain religion!!

Physics is a science, chemistry is a science, biology is a science, and astronomy is a science “do I need to continue”? The Big bang is a possibility “It is not proven yet” Evolution is just a theory it is yet to be proven, and therefore can not be considered as a science. So, where is your problem? Note: I’m not Christian, I’m a Muslim.

Ok, I'm devout, so here goes. Evolution is a scientific theory. It is unproven and flawed (ask why and I'll tell you). HOWEVER, the scientific community holds to it dogmatically, often refusing to acknowledge any evidence to the contrary or any other ideas. Often times, they will shut down and attempt to silence arguments that contradict evolution. THIS attitude is sometimes as narrowminded as what you'd find in a brainwashing cult. It is for this reason that many of the devout categorize it as "religion". STOP TEACHING IT ALL? I never said that. Science is the study of God's world. It is essential. My kids are learning science in their Christian school. When science conflicts with the Bible, we have to carefully examine both. We're either misinterpreting the Bible, or, as in evolution, we have to re-evaluate the theory. Fortunately, we don't need the bible as the only refutation of evolution. Though it has some valid points, the theory itself is so full of holes that the scientific community NEEDS to re-evaluate it, but they refuse with RELIGIOUS ZEAL.

I believe science is mankind's attempt to understand how God does things.

EDUCATED GUESSES

Three (Fwd) Wishes: Grace -> Mercy -> Peace. As for "religion", the Bible speaks of "pure religion" which implies there is also 'impure religion' to consider and compare, as if grace vs law and truth vs lie. What is truth(grace), compared to what it's not: lie(law). The Bible also clarifies such things are an "allegory". Omission of truth can also be a lie, and lead to doubt. Spin doctors and lawyers and churches do it all the time. As for the churches, now $illy for said "servants"(slaves) claiming to be "free". "Above a servant" is what's "free"; just as know-ing is above and beyond faith-ing & hope-ing. People only faith & hope for what they don't have or don't know it for sure. Reconciliation no longer needs mediation. As for science, it can also be pure, but only when it's based on all the evidence to determine what's "evident" thereof. Impure science exists ww: many doctors making megabucks don't really want people to be well, or even understand the concept of wellness. So also highly paid cancer researchers don't really want to find the actual cure for it or even have the root cause of it to be known. 'Cops For Cancer'? I think it is $ick to be in favor of ('for') cancer. I also think it is $ick to be in favor of ('for') law. "Law worketh wrath" is also a "ministration of death". Science is mentioned twice in the Bible. 1) Daniel had an understanding of "science", but also had "night visions" (night mares) from reading a book of law; and was finally told to shut up and seal it. 2) Paul said to Timothy (who was depressed about the churches he was sent to oversee getting bewitched): O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane [and] vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace [be] with thee. Amen. Paul thereby suggests to Timothy science is "falsely so called" opposition, which is as erring from the faith, since "now faith" (of then/now faiths) is the "evidence"(Heb 11). Selah. Paul also makes note in Galatains that it's the evidence which makes something "evident" to him: "that no man is justiied by the law in the sight of God, [it is] evident". The "grace" of our Lord Jesus Christ with you all. Amen. GodShew: www leader for "the evidence does not lie"

Science is a broad term. Definition: Science (from Latin scientia - knowledge) refers to a system of acquiring knowledge – based on empiricism, experimentation, and methodological naturalism – aimed at finding out the truth. The basic unit of knowledge is the theory, which is a hypothesis that is predictive. The term science also refers to the organized body of knowledge humans have gained by such research. Most scientists maintain that scientific investigation must adhere to the scientific method, a process for evaluating empirical knowledge under the working assumption of methodological materialism, which explains observable events in nature as a result of natural causes, rejecting supernatural notions. Less formally, the word science often describes any systematic field of study or the knowledge gained from it. Particular specialized studies that make use of empirical methods are often referred to as sciences as well. This article concentrates on the more specific definition. Science as defined above is sometimes termed pure science to differentiate it from applied science, the application of research to human needs. So, by definition science is a way to gather information that should be done with total neutrality. Of course, all hypothesis are biased, but true science will prove or disprove them without judgement. I think SOME religious peopel are afraid of science because of what it can do. To SOME, it represents a force that is contradicting what they believe is true from their religious upbringing. That is a huge shock. If you findamentally think one way and see solid information showing you are wrong, it is hard to accept. Think of how the peopel of the world felt when they learned the Earth was not flat. For hundreds of years thsi was the official thinking. Great minds concurred it was so. So one day, someone published a scientific reatise proving the Earth was round. Shocking. I think that science scare SOME religious people because it insults their beliefs in this manner. In general, the majority of religious folks accept science to some extent. Since most are not scientists, they are right to be skeptical of what they cannot understand. But I am confident most people are not argueing that the heart pumps blood, theat sodium and chloride make salt, and that gravity is a force that affects things with mass. There are plenty of religious scientists in all aspects and disciplines. Even those that study fossils, geology, evlution and stem cell reseacrh. Many of them can easily reckon what the observe empiracally with what they are taught in church. We were given the MIND. It is powerful and we can use it to interept lots of data. In the case of evolution, many scientists feel that God has set the stage and had made it his plan to have evolution take place. So, while evolution is an earthly process, it was part of the big plan. If you belive in an all knowing and all powerful God, it certainly seems reasonable. If you look at Genesis, you have the world created in a 7 day window. Well, if you skew time and say God made the worls over a few millenia, you can also accept this. Afterall, early Earth was a ball of fire and gas and over many millions of years became more stable and after a few billions years, here we are. To a God, what is a day or 1 billion years? So to the majority of religious folks, they can accept science within reason and be comfortable with it. To a minority, they feel it is an assault on their beliefs and strict interpretation of the bible. To that there is no answer. They are passionate about what they believe, and no amoount of prooof will sway them. They can distory facts all they want to reach their own conclusions and will continue to live in deluded lives. But that is their choice. We all have a choice and that is the one they made, and it is their right. As it was my right to be a scientist. I live by the scientific method and empircal observation. While I am an atheiest, I would welcome substantiated proof of a higher power. That is the nice thing about science. You can adapt and if you trust the method you can accept the outcome. **** In response to: Titan 27 minutes ago Report Abuse Physics is a science, chemistry is a science, biology is a science, and astronomy is a science “do I need to continue”? The Big bang is a possibility “It is not proven yet” Evolution is just a theory it is yet to be proven, and therefore can not be considered as a science. So, where is your problem? ------------ Most of physics is theorey. In biology we cannot still explain many aspects of genetics, molecular biology or pahrmokinetics. Chemistry has fuzzy points to. Is it really an element if it exists for a fraction of a second? In science a theorey is a well substantiated collection of provable data. In science, you start with a hypothesis. That could be the sun is red. You then make empiracal observations and draw your conclusions. In the case of tghe sun, it can be shown to be yellow, not red. So they hypothesis was false. Another example, the surface of mars once had water. It began as a hypothesis. After mahy expeditions and data collection, the hypothesis is now a theorey. Why? because the body of available evidence to date only shows that water used to be there. There is nothing to contradict that. Was water found? No, so it is not a fact yet. But all available data sugests that it was there, so it is a solid theorey. Evolution is based upon many proable facts. While no one can trace all creatures lineage to the origin, we have extensive knowledge of hwo the process works. It is science FACT that we are closely related to primates like chimps and Gorillas. In fact, we all share a common ancestor in our recent past. It is science fact that life started in the water as simple creatures and becase more specialized. The entire body of work to date suggests that evolution was a consistent process that led to what we observe today. Nothing can dispute this to date. While it cannot yet be proven beyond a shadow of doubt, it is well proven to be the most accurate model to explain what we can observe. Science is neutral, it will not allow for emotion to get in the way. You must prove everything at every step to be true. It safeguards us from falsehoods this way. For all the anti-evolution proaganda, I can disprove their assumtptions, yet you cannot disprove evolution. You decide.