Science as Religion and Vice Versa *debate*

[Ariadoss]

The Bahá'í teachings stress the fundamental harmony of science and religion. This view derives from the belief that truth (or reality) is one. For if truth is indeed one, it is not possible for something to be scientifically false and religiously true. 'Abdu'l-Bahá expressed forcefully this idea in the following passage:

If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science, they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible, and there is no outcome but wavering and vacillation.

Bahá'u'lláh affirmed that man's intelligence and reasoning powers are a gift from God: "This gift giveth man the power to discern the truth in all things, leadeth him to that which is right, and helpeth him to discover the secrets of creation." Science results from our systematic use of these God-given powers. The truths of science are thus discovered truths. The truths of prophetic religion are revealed truths, i.e., truths which God has shown to us without our having to discover them for ourselves. Bahá'ís consider that it is the same unique God who is both the Author of revelation and the Creator of the reality which science investigates, and hence there can be no contradiction between the two.

Contradictions between science and traditional religious beliefs are attributed to human fallibility and arrogance. Over the centuries, distortions have gradually infiltrated the doctrines of many religious systems and diluted the pure teachings originally given by the Manifestation who was their Founder. With time these distortions become increasingly difficult to distinguish from the original message. Similarly, unsupported speculations of various schools of scientific thought have at times become more popular and influential than the results of rigorous scientific research, and have further blurred the picture.

'Abdu'l-Bahá affirmed that religion and science are, in fact, complementary:

Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's intelligence can soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone he would also make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of materialism.

In another passage from the same work, He affirmed that the result of the practice of the unity of science and religion will be a strengthening of religion rather than its weakening as is feared by many religious apologists:

When religion, shorn of its superstitions, traditions, and unintelligent dogmas, shows its conformity with science, then will there be a great unifying, cleansing force in the world which will sweep before it all wars, disagreements, discords and struggles--and then will mankind be united in the power of the Love of God.[/i]

[Avatar]

Interesting post Ariadoss. Interesting indeed.

I particularly like that last quote. Whether I agree with the principle or not, I'll have to think about.

Of course, because I dispute that original "manifestation," I have an automatic problem. But I like the idea that nothing that be believed which is contradictory to reason.

--Avatar

[ur-bane]

It certainly is an interesting post. But it also furthers the argument that religion is NOT science. Religion and science being in "harmony" is not saying that religion is science.

In fact, the entire post is based on the supposition that there is a god. Without proof of god, religion itself cannot be science. Religion does not require "proof."

So where does that post take us in the absence of a god? Bahá'u'lláh is predisposed to taking a position based on existence of God. While certainly truth is truth, science remains science in the absence of god, but religion loses its essence.

[Ariadoss]

So where does that post take us in the absence of a god? Bahá'u'lláh is predisposed to taking a position based on existence of God. While certainly truth is truth, science remains science in the absence of god, but religion loses its essence.

Great point, religion does lose credibility when not believed in for logical reasons rooted in truth as opposed to blind faith. I believe it is better to have no religion at all if it is unfounded in science or if it creates disunity among the people of the world. Of course you can always debate that those reasons are illogical, but my own reasons make sense to me. To me believing in God is like placing a name on an inexplicable feeling that way others can relate to what you are talking about. For those who can't feel it is difficult to understand why others believe this feeling exists. Does my line of reasoning make sense?

PS: I can't always check my grammar, I have a lot of other stuff to worry about, just look at my signature .