religion and science

Question 1

what does science say?

Answer 1

*cosmos - origins of the universe - 13.7bill yrs old
* all space-time begins with the big bang and all matter and energy in the universe originates from it.
* universe continues to expand by inflation even today and scientists detected this by studying redshift in the night sky - GUT (grand unifying theory)
* homo-sapiens - 250,000yrs old
* ellis, penrose and hawkings reworked eninsteins theory of relativity to create time and space had finite beginnings and this corresponded with beginning of matter and energy
*comes from a zone of singularity
* evolution - origins of species darwin (1859)
natural selection and survival of the fittest - removes the need for an intelligent designer

Question 2

Creationism

Answer 2

• general term to describe the beliefs of a range of Christians who are usually conservative and evangelical
• believe literal word of God (no interpreting)
• reject evolution and darwin - challenges the notion/image of God, suggests theres not ineligible designer and we came from animals
• science rejected when it doesn’t accord with scriptures.
• some believe the earth is flat - idea of Columbus, sailing to the edge of earth to see if you fall off - also take literal view on genesis which says earth is flat and covered with firmament or solid dome and therefore believe noah ark is a fact - the Flat Earth Society still exist today.
• Young earth creationists - say the earth is 6-10,000 yrs old and all life was created in 6 days aka 6 24 hours - they count the generations back from adam and eve. Archbishop Usher tied it down to a particular date 23 Oct 4004BC
• Omphalos argument - associated with Philip Gosse - argues the appearance of age was put on the world by God despite the earth actually being young e.g. fossils - is this to test our faith?
• progressive creationists - most popular/more modern
• old creationists - accepts BB-God
• intelligent designer
• irreducibly complex

Question 3

intelligent design

Answer 3

• The universe is irreducibly complex (objects and organisms in the world are so complex that the complexity of these things cannot be explained by the blind process of evolution)
• the complexity of organisms and the universe is so great that the only possible explanation of it is that it has been ‘specified’ by God
• physical laws of universe just right - all work together - if just slightly different there would be no life - must be designer
• DNA shows some sort of purpose/design and world is irreducibly complex- made for purpose of human life
• purpose could have been made by intelligent designer (paley)

Question 4

Religious responses (can work together)

Answer 4

Ockhams razor - accept the simplest explanation that resolves a question)=GOD

McGrath - believe in both science and religion - scientists are always clergy - help prove God not pose an issue

Copleston - The only explanation in the world is God - god is self-evident and his existence is necessary

Gould - NOMH (Non Overlapping Magesteria) science =how religion=why

Polkinghorne - only a small chance the BB could have created conditions for life - god is a sustainer - use aeroplane analogy

Swinburne - humans make machines to make machines, God make plants and animals to make other plants and animals

Question 5

Scientific responses (cannot work together)

Answer 5

Richard dawkins (1941-) atheist and scientist - says theres evidence for science but no evidence for God - God of the gaps, used when science have no current explanation

Chemist Peter Atkins - one day we will find one theory that explains everything without the need for god - god is a lazy hypoyhesis and a way for people to hide their ignorance

Bertrand Russel - 1947 - the universe is a brute fact and hence there is no explanation for God - doesn’t need a specific purpose

Question 6

b questions

scientists are the only ones who can explain why the universe is here

Answer 6

e.g
Chemist Peter Atkins - one day we will find one theory that explains everything without the need for god - god is a lazy hypoyhesis and a way for people to hide their ignorance

counter McGrath - believe in both science and religion - scientists are always clergy - help prove God not pose an issue

Richard dawkins (1941-) atheist and scientist - says theres evidence for science but no evidence for God - God of the gaps, used when science have no current explanation

Polkinghorne - only a small chance the BB could have created conditions for life - god is a sustainer - use aeroplane analogy

conculsion
Gould - NOMH (Non Overlapping Magesteria) science =how religion=why