Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Conflict between Christianity and Science- GROUP 5

268

Published on

Conflict between Christianity and Science

Conflict between Christianity and Science

Published in: Spiritual, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
268
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
12
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. CONFLICT BETWEEN CHRISTIANITY AND SCIENCE
  • 2. CONFLICT  Strong agreement between people, groups that result of angry argument  Disagreement between ideas and feelings. SCIENCE  acknowledges reason, empiricism, and evidence
  • 3. RELIGIONS  include revelation, faith and sacredness  Biologist Stephen Jay Gould, other scientists, and some contemporary theologians hold that religion and science are non-overlapping magisteria, addressing fundamentally separate forms of knowledge and aspects of life.
  • 4.  Scientists Francisco Ayala, Kenneth R. Miller and Francis Collins see no necessary conflict between religion and science. Some theologians or historians of science, including John Lennox, Thomas Berry, Brian Swimme and Ken Wilber propose an interconnection between them.
  • 5. IS THERE A CONFLICT?  There is no conflict between Christianity and science itself. This is because the Christian worldview, which believes that God created the world with natural 'laws' and orderliness, is what undergirds the entire scientific enterprise. For example, inductive reasoning and the scientific method are based on the assumption of the regularity of the laws of nature.
  • 6. FOUR WAYS OF RELATING SCIENCE AND RELIGION (IAN BARBOUR) 1. Conflict. (Warfare)  The conflict model posits science vs religion and claims that, a priori, either science OR religion is true and the other is necessarily false.
  • 7. FOUR WAYS OF RELATING SCIENCE AND RELIGION (IAN BARBOUR) 2. The Independence Model (Separation)  This model assumes that each is an independent, autonomous field of study or sphere of reality, with its own unique rules and language. Science has very little to say about religious beliefs, and religion has very little to say about scientific study.  “The natural sciences are concerned with asking the „How‟ questions, where theology asks „Why‟ questions” Langdon Gilkey, Maker of Heaven and Earth.
  • 8. FOUR WAYS OF RELATING SCIENCE AND RELIGION (IAN BARBOUR) 3. The Dialogue Model (Respect) A third position on the relationship between science and religion is that they are best understood in dialogue with each other. There are issues in both religion and science which impinge upon each other and the insights of each are important in reaching truly human conclusions and responses
  • 9. FOUR WAYS OF RELATING SCIENCE AND RELIGION (IAN BARBOUR) 4. Integration (Harmony)  This model takes dialogue and conversation much further and posits that the truth of science and religion can be integrated into a more complete or full “whole”.
  • 10. ROBERT K. MERTON  -focuses on English Puritanism and German Pietism as responsible for the development of the scientific revolution of the 17th and 18th centuries. He explains that the connection between religious affiliation and interest in science is a result of a significant synergy between the ascetic Protestant values and those of modern science. Protestant values encouraged scientific research by allowing science to identify the God influence on world and thus providing religious justifications for scientific research.
  • 11. HISTORY OF SCIENCE
  • 12.  Europe of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was witness to an explosion of discoveries about the natural world — an explosion known as the Scientific Revolution, in which modern science was born. What emerged from this intellectual transformation of Europe was the Enlightenment — an era marked by a supreme confidence in the power of the rational mind together with an antipathy for superstition and dogmatism. It became increasingly acceptable to criticize Christian dogmas such as the Trinity or the role of the sacraments.
  • 13. DR. COLIN A. RUSSELL IN THE CONFLICT OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION  - outlines the weakness of the conflict thesis as follows:  1) The thesis hinders the recognition of other relationships between science and religion  2) it ignores the many documented examples of science and religion operation in close alliance.  3) it enshrines a flawed view of history in which “progress” or “victory” has been portrayed as inevitable.
  • 14. DR. COLIN A. RUSSELL IN THE CONFLICT OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION  4) It obscures the rich diversity of ideas in both science and religion.  5) it engenders a distorted view of dispute resulting from other causes than those of religion versus science  6) it exalts minor squabbles, or even differences of opinion, to the status of major conflict
  • 15. PROF. JOHN HEDLEY BROOKS’ SCIENCE AND RELIGION  To understand them, one has to see the local contingent factors in order to understand the particular social and intellectual situation and its effects.
  • 16. WHAT IS IN CONFLICT? Do we compare 'science' with:  Religion?  Christianity?  Theology?  The Bible?
  • 17. WE SUGGEST:  Bible with nature (data)  Theology with theoretical science (method)  Exegesis with experimental science (interpretation)
  • 18. SCIENCE: METHOD OR GOAL?
  • 19. METHOD?  Explanation without recourse to miracle?
  • 20. GOAL?  Trying to understand what really exists?  Methodologically, 'science' and 'exegesis' are very similar. No distinctive method divides various scholarly disciplines in such a way as to make science unique.
  • 21. HISTORY OF SCIENCE & CHRISTIANITY As Brooke shows, the relations between the two have been a complex mixture of the three models:  Conflict  Complementarity  Interaction
  • 22. IS THEOLOGY NEVER RIGHT? This is rather unfair: Nature (general revelation) provides enormous detail.  The Bible (special revelation) does not. Nature keeps showing us new pages every few years, as technology develops new instruments. We have had all of the Bible for centuries. Still, if the Bible is what it claims to be, then we should see some evidence it is right about nature. 
  • 23. SOME EVIDENCE  Matthew Maury, 'pathfinder of the seas'  S. I. Mc Millen, None of These Diseases  John W. Montgomery, Evidence for Faith  Robert C. Newman, The Biblical Firmament  My PowerPoint Astronomy and the Bible
  • 24. MATTHEW MAURY (1806-1873)  US Navy oceanographer, he was the first to recognize oceans as system of circulating currents.  Got this idea from biblical picture of 'paths in the seas' (Psalm 8:8).  Thinking through what a path does on land (makes travel easier, faster), he began to investigate travel time by sea.  His massive examination of ships' logbooks led to making charts for winds and currents.  Came to be called 'the pathfinder of the seas.
  • 25. NONE OF THESE DISEASES BY S.I. MCMILLEN AND DAVID STERN  God had Moses record guidelines to protect againts microorganisms long before they were known to cause disease.  Contagion and Quarantine Leviticus 13:46  Cleanliness and spread of disease Numbers Chapter 19
  • 26. NONE OF THESE DISEASES BY S.I. MCMILLEN AND DAVID STERN  Circumcision and cancer Genesis 17:12 "For the generations to come every male among you is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner-those who are not your offspring."  Life style and health Deu. 23: 12-13 -proper disposal of human waste Ephesians 5: 17-18 "Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the Lord's will is." 18 "Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with spirits.
  • 27. EVIDENCE FOR FAITH BY: JOHN WARWICK MONTGOMERY MISTAKEN  Are the historical records of Jesus solid enough to be relied on? -Do the resurrection accounts establish Jesus claims of divinity?
  • 28. THE BIBLICAL FIRMAMENT BY: ROBERT NEWMAN  often claimed that the mistaken about the nature of the sky as solid dome.  it is true that belief in the sky as a solid dome was common in the ancient world.  the early Greek philosopher Anaximenes of Miletus saw the sky as a crystal sphere to which the stars were nailed.
  • 29. NEWMAN, ASTRONOMY AND THE BIBLE Compares Bible with ancient ideas and modern science re:  Size of the Universe  Number of Stars  Support of the Earth  Shape of the Earth
  • 30. CHRISTIANITY AS A BASIS FOR MODERN SCIENCE  Without claiming any intellectual superiority for the scientists of the Renaissance and Baroque periods over their ancient and medieval European predecessors or over Oriental philosophers, one has to recognize as a simple fact that 'classical modern science' arose only in the western part of Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries .... from this point on, anyone with the necessary talent may help build up science on solidly established foundations.
  • 31. CHRISTIANITY AS A BASIS FOR MODERN SCIENCE  Scientists from nations whose own culture did not give birth to anything like modern science have already made valuable contributions to it. Western people who have lost all contact with the religion of their forefathers continue in their scientific activities the tradition inherited from them. R. Hooykas, Religion and the Rise of Modern Science, 161
  • 32. CHRISTIANITY AS A BASIS FOR MODERN SCIENCE  The confrontation of Graeco-Roman culture with biblical religion engendered, after centuries of tension, a new science. This science preserved the indispensable parts of the ancient heritage (mathematics, logic, methods of observation and experimentation), but it was directed by different social and methodological conceptions, largely stemming from a biblical worldview. Metaphorically speaking, whereas the bodily ingredients of science may have been Greek, its vitamins and hormones were biblical. Hooykas, Religion and the Rise of Modern Science, 162
  • 33. CREATION & MODERN COSMOLOGY  For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been there for centuries. Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers, 116.
  • 34. SOME CONCLUSIONS  Yes, there has been conflict between science & Christianity, just as there has been conflict within Christianity and within science.  No, there is no need to see this as necessary conflict, so long as one does not define science so as to rule out the supernatural and miraculous in the history of the universe.
  • 35. UNIVERSITY OF MAKATI PROF. TESSIE TAPIADOR SAGADRACA
  • 36. PREPARED BY: GROUP 5 Bautista, Christxia  Bantilan, Karen  Carmona, Dennise Ysabel  Eltanal, Gerald  Liton, Kimberly  Yago, Roselie   III-H BSE Soc Stud

×