Science and Religion Are Not So Different

It is common in today’s “scientific” establishments to claim that science and religion are completely opposite or diametrically opposing concepts. There are of course some differences between theology and science; but religion, especially Christianity, and even theology, and science, are all interconnected.

God created the universe. God created science. Our entire world is based on the interconnectivity between the material and the spiritual (non-material) worlds. Without “religion”, in that context, there would be no science.

So-called scientists claim that they are different because they are “coming at things from different angles, even different starting points”. From different angles, you could say the same thing about even different areas of science, but yet both are science. For example, astronomy and quantum physics are very different, they are coming at things from different angles and different starting points. Yet, both are science.

Meanwhile, nothing comes from a different starting point. The ultimate starting point is God. Theology, religion, and everything under the Sun all start with God. The idea that science and religion are “very different” is frankly, absurd. They are exactly the same thing in many senses.

Science consists of observing the world by watching, listening, observing, and recording.” Does not religion do the same? No one is expected to believe in God with blind faith. We are expected to read and know the scriptures, watching and listen to God, observe God’s creation in the world and His work in our lives.

1 Peter 3:15 says, “always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you”. If we were supposed to have blind faith, how could we always have an answer? The truth is our faith is not blind. It’s based on evidence and logic, not blind faith.

Satan is the master of deception. Satan uses a false meaning of “science” as meaning “naturalism”, which effectively states (falsely) that “only the natural, observable world exists”. Science by definition was never so restricted. Science is merely a method. It is a method of coming to a conclusion, and it is by practically this same method (the method from which the scientific method derives, as in, the natural order of things) that we also come to our “religious” faith.

When people say the word “science”, they fail to describe what they are talking about, and they use different terms interchangeably with the same word “science”. It is scientific to say that God created the universe if that is what we observe as the only logical conclusion when we look at the science.

But, most people when discussing this false dichotomy, mean “naturalism”, which is religion, not science. Yet, they call this science. Naturalism, the idea that only the physical world exists, is not supported by science. It is supported only by a religious view that is unfounded. Meanwhile, Christianity is supported by science, and 100% of the Bible is supported by science. Why? Because God wrote the Bible, and the same God made the universe, including science.

Now, if you are talking about other [false] religions, then the same is not still true. False religions use mystical views and fantasies to deceive people into blindly accepting them as true, or on unfounded premises.

The only way that science and Christianity would be “very different” would be if Christianity was a false, mystical religion. Since Christianity is true, then science and religion are one and the same when it comes to Christianity, which is the belief in the God who created science, by means of the scriptures that we read and observe to come to the conclusion that the scriptures are factually correct, which is, by definition, the scientific method.

Now, is theology different from science? Somewhat, but no more than other fields of science are different from each other. Theology is the study of God. It is blasphemy in today’s “science” establishment which is anti-God to suggest that you can empirically observe God, but yet, we can use science to prove the existence of the wind? How so? If you can prove the wind exists, even though you cannot see it, then you can prove God exists, even though you cannot see Him.

In the same way that the scientific method can be used to prove the existence of wind, it can be used to prove the existence of God (although not as easily, since God is not part of creation, but the Creator). We can look at the evidence shown by the Bible and then observe our universe and we can determine that the Bible is true, and then we can use statistics to prove the statistical improbability that God doesn’t exist, proving thereby beyond a reasonable doubt that God does indeed exist. This is science, and yet it is being called religion. Religion is dangerous if it is not based on the Truth. When it is based on the Truth, it is science, and fact, and truth.

Therefore Christianity is hardly different from science in any way whatsoever, unless you do not believe in God, in which case if you are an atheist, then you do not believe in science, you believe in the atheistic religion of naturalism. If you believed in science, you would have no choice but to believe in God, because all science points to God. This is the general revelation.

Look at this definition of the general revelation: “In theology, general revelation, or natural revelation, refers to knowledge about God and spiritual matters, discovered through natural means, such as observation of nature (the physical universe), philosophy, and reasoning.” Sound familiar? “Science consists of observing the world by watching, listening, observing, and recording.” Theology sounds a lot like science, doesn’t it!

Share this:



Share your thoughts

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


0 Shares
Share
Share
Reddit