Why do religious people get upset when I talk about the beginning of the universe & technology/science?

Question

Earlier today, I brought up the subject of the advancement of science & technology as well as the beginning of the universe. The person I was talking to got upset and said that our future should be determined by God and not by science or technology. They also said that if I truly believed in God, I would only believe what the bible says. But science makes lots of sense in terms of validity, replication, experimentation, etc. Why can’t I believe in both science and God?

Answer 1

Real Christians don't think or talk that way. This person was a member of one of the fundamentalist cults. He/she has been indoctrinated into a religious ideology that demands a total surrender of self to the dictates of whatever cult leader has him/her in thrall.



As for the Bible part--I do know the Bible--and these poor souls honestly don't realize that what they've been indoctrinated with does not come from the Bible--and don't know that what they've been told about science is mostly wrong.



Here's a couple of examples, just to make the point:



1) the Bible does not give any date for the creation of Earth (much less that it was 6000 years ago)

2) Darwin's work was not attacked by Christians when it was published--it was welcomed because it gave insight as to how God went about bringing life to its current stage of development.

3)John Calvin--one of the great leaders of the Reformation--condemned those who tried to "take the Bible literally"--pointing out that Genesis, in particular--was written in terms (i.e. metaphor) that the people of the time couldgrasp.



There is no comflict between science and religion--as long as you remember tha tmuch of the Bible (or other faith's religious texts) are metaphors intended to convey spiritual/moral truths, not literal renditions of events.



BTW--the converse is also true. You see people running around claiming "science disproves religion." That is false. Science deals only with empirical (measurable) realities. It does not deal with or have anything to say about morality or spirituality. Those are matters of philosophy and religion, not science. Both sorts of ideas are valid--in their proper context.

Answer 2

Nobody knows EXACTLY how the universe was created. Especially now that scientists have found that phyisical matter only accounts for a small part of the universe. But think about this: The uncontrolled conversion of matter into energy in the explosion of a nuclear bomb causes chaos, as was seen in Japan in the total destruction of Hiroshima and much of Nagasaki by such bombs in 1945. However, far from being chaotic, the universe is harmonious and beautiful! Consider, too, this marvelous earth with its amazing variety of life. Clearly, it could not have come into existence without some intelligent direction and control! Newsweek magazine of November 9, 1998, reviewed the implications of discoveries regarding the creation of the universe. It said that the facts “suggested that matter and motion originated rather as Genesis [in the Bible] suggests, ex nihilo, out of nothing, in a stupendous explosion of light and energy.” Note the reasons Newsweek gave for comparing the beginning of the universe with the Bible’s description of the event. “The forces loosed were—are—remarkably (miraculously?) balanced: If the Big Bang had been slightly less violent, the expansion of the universe would have been less rapid, and would soon (in a few million years, or a few minutes—in any case, soon) have collapsed back on itself. If the explosion had been slightly more violent, the universe might have dispersed into a soup too thin to aggregate into stars. The odds against us were—this is just the right word—astronomical. The ratio of matter and energy to the volume of space at the Big Bang must have been within about one quadrillionth of 1 percent of ideal.” Newsweek suggested that there was, as it were, a “Tuner” of the universe, observing: “Take but degree away (see above, the one quadrillionth of 1 percent margin for error), . . . and what follows is not just discord but eternal entropy and ice. So, what—who?—was the great Tuner?” Astrophysicist Alan Lightman acknowledged that scientists “find it mysterious that the universe was created in such a highly ordered condition.” He added that “any successful theory of cosmology should ultimately explain this entropy problem”—why the universe has not become chaotic. This is why i know there is a God.

Answer 3

you can. (but what is god?)



don't believe the bible though. it was the tool that was used to train / brainwash the person you where talking to.



the church has never accepted ideas that take credit away from god.

they even killed and punished those who challenged the idea of god



including the argument over whether the earth is flat or round.



strange how Christians attitudes have not changed over years. --- not really, thats how the bible is designed to work.



its called brain washing and/or creating "mind" slaves



I believed both as a child, turned more to religion as a teen, grew disgusted and let down by all christians I knew and by God, then at 18 I turned hard atheist and I turned more to the big bang and epigenetics.



now I'm 31 and I find string theory tied with black holes very interesting. mostly because string theory has a realm of infinite possibilities.

I think god can live in an area like that for sure, but for some strange reason I don't think this god has much to do with the creation or thoughs of humans.

with

Answer 4

Take time to think of this from a neutral perspetive.

They belive:

The planet, solar system, and all life there in was brought into being by a supreme being. Because this is a supreme being with supreme powers, they were able to do all of this in 6 days.

You believe (From your statement):

All matter, energy, and mass was concentrated into an infitesimly small area. This created an explosion that spread out all matter and mass throughout the universe. This matter congealed into planets, stars, and other bodies. As there was no organic matter present, this must have formed, become present in reproduceable quantities, became self replicating. This self replicating organic matter then became an organism that in turn kept adding genetic material to its DNA therefor becoming all life as we know it.

What you both believe:

Something was around before anything was around (either creator or all matter that condensed to start the big bang)

Through processes that have never been observed, reproduced, or occurred again, all life was brought into existense.

That you have the only real explanation for what happened and that anyone that disagrees with you is a close-minded, unrealistic person that is afraid of the "true" facts.



At this point there is no unsurmountable evidence for either position. They are both positions that have factual evidences to support them. They both have no explanation for what happened before the beginning (Where did God come from - What came together to blow-up and where did it come from). That means that they are either both scientific theories, or they are both religious positions.



This is not a religion vs science issue. It is either scientific theory vs scientific theory, or, religion vs religion. I have no problems calling them both religions or scientific theories.

Answer 5

Perhaps you could, the point is that should you believe that the bible is not only 100% factually correct, but be the only thing to be 100% factually correct?

Religious fundamentalists think that this is the case, that the bible is perfectly right in all cases. By this, the universe was made in 6 days about 6000 years ago, and a flood that contained 3 times as much water as we presently have on the whole planet occurred and only one man and his family and two animals of each species boarded an ark and were saved and so on.

This is now your choice. To believe in what clever scientists show and demonstrate and explain in a coherent way, and to view the bible as an allegory, a book of teaching as opposed to one of true knowledge, or to follow narrow minded fundamentalists who are not that much different in their views and the desire to impose those on others than a few terrorists who thought it would be a good idea to slam a few airliners in high rise buildings six years ago.



There is a reason this is called "blind faith": because they are now blind and closed minded to anything but their religious extremism. Do not compromise your open minded view on account of bigots.

Answer 6

the Quakers believe that God is a personal experience. The Bible is very important to many people, but so is the Quran & the Talmud. And Who is to say who is right?

You can believe in God. But science is not based on belief - it is based on the Scientific Method. God may bring you faith, but please - leave faith behind when conducting science. It will still be waiting afterwards

Answer 7

Well I am a Christian, and I am not upset with your thoughts. I am a scientist as well and you know what??? I am not upset with your thoughts. You see ....people only get upset when they have a closed mind. Now there is no way science can prove the non existance of the Trinity. (my thoughts and beliefs) But I accept science in a thological light. And to me it always fits. Do you get upset when other people get upset?

Answer 8

You can believe in both if you choose to. Different denominations of Christianity each interpret the Bible in their own way, so take the preaching of others' with a grain of salt. They will all say that their way is THE way. Whatever. Given that Christians can't agree on what it's about, you shouldn't worry about what they say. Just be happy with what you believe in.

Answer 9

You can.

But that person you were talking to isn't able to accept it.

Either they're afraid (of the truth, of doubt in their fragile beliefs, or maybe something else) or they are just unwilling to accept that science and God are not mutually exclusive (most scientists are religious in one way or another).

So you've learned that some people are just not comfortable with this kind of discussion. Doesn't make them bad people - you just need to be conscious of other people's feelings.

Answer 10

You can.



Science often conflicts with religion thats why people get upset.



How can God and The 'BIG BANG' create the universe at the same time?



I ditched religion for science a long time ago.

Answer 11

Well you can. If a majority of people had that kind of attitude we'd still be living in caves.



If you need religion to know right from wrong, that's fine but to describe the universe you need to put down that bronze-age fable and pick up a scientific textbook.