Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Religion & Science: A balanced view for my kids.



piersa

Well-known member
Apr 17, 2011
3,155
London
My wife has taken the kids to church, which is nice for me because I get the morning to myself. However, in the interest of giving them a balanced view, does anyone know any groups where I can take the kids so they can make an informed choice about atheism and religion. They only get one side of the coin at school and I believe it is important to let them know there is a choice.
 

Wilko

LUZZING chairs about
Sep 19, 2003
9,921
BN1
When you say they only get on side of the coin, do you mean it is a faith school or not? I went to a Roman Catholic school but am now a complete atheist as are the vast majority of school friends so I would not be too bothered, the majority of people work out it is utter guff in the end.
 

beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,239
you could start by setting out the separation of faith and science, and that atheism has nothing to do with science. many people that follow religions are involved in science without conflict, aside from a few areas (cant really be into evolutionary biology or astrophysics with a strong religious faith). i see religions as a branch of philosophy, so let them see the ethics aspect. though highlight the outright hypocrisy, contradictions and outright malevolence of the old testament.
 

Igzilla

Well-known member
Sep 27, 2012
1,639
Worthing
you could start by setting out the separation of faith and science, and that atheism has nothing to do with science. many people that follow religions are involved in science without conflict, aside from a few areas (cant really be into evolutionary biology or astrophysics with a strong religious faith). i see religions as a branch of philosophy, so let them see the ethics aspect. though highlight the outright hypocrisy, contradictions and outright malevolence of the old testament.

Unfortunately, nut jobs get everywhere...

http://creation.com/dr-jason-lisle
 

piersa

Well-known member
Apr 17, 2011
3,155
London
When you say they only get on side of the coin, do you mean it is a faith school or not? I went to a Roman Catholic school but am now a complete atheist as are the vast majority of school friends so I would not be too bothered, the majority of people work out it is utter guff in the end.

Yes, it's a faith school but i'm concerned that they are going to get brainwashed. When I was at school, I had to go to church 3 times a week and there was no other side of the coin.
 


The important thing for kids to learn is that "religion" isn't a set of alternative explanations for the things that are well explained by "science". Religion is about how to live one's life, how to interact with other people, good behaviour and stuff like that. And make sure that kids realise that you don't have to think of yourself as "religious" in order to live a good life. Science is about explaining how things have come about and how they work. Religion and science aren't incompatible.

And, if your kids can start to think about why and how religion and science aren't incompatible, they will be taking the first step towards wisdom.
 

One Love

Well-known member
Aug 22, 2011
4,336
Brighton
My wife has taken the kids to church, which is nice for me because I get the morning to myself. However, in the interest of giving them a balanced view, does anyone know any groups where I can take the kids so they can make an informed choice about atheism and religion. They only get one side of the coin at school and I believe it is important to let them know there is a choice.

How old are your kids?

My experience of having to go to church on a Sunday morning was a complete boring chore and I couldn't wait to be old enough to have a choice and not go.

No chance of brainwashing there.
 

hart's shirt

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2003
10,096
Kitbag in Dubai
For a balanced view for your kids, it's worth remembering that there have been many famous scientists who believed in God.

Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)
Copernicus was the Polish astronomer who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun. He attended various European universities, and became a Canon in the Catholic church in 1497. His new system was actually first presented in the Vatican gardens in 1533 before Pope Clement VII who approved, and urged Copernicus to publish it around this time. Copernicus was never under any threat of religious persecution - and was urged to publish both by Catholic Bishop Guise, Cardinal Schonberg, and the Protestant Professor George Rheticus. Copernicus referred sometimes to God in his works, and did not see his system as in conflict with the Bible.

Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1627)
Bacon was a philosopher who is known for establishing the scientific method of inquiry based on experimentation and inductive reasoning. In De Interpretatione Naturae Prooemium, Bacon established his goals as being the discovery of truth, service to his country, and service to the church. Although his work was based upon experimentation and reasoning, he rejected atheism as being the result of insufficient depth of philosophy, stating, "It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity." (Of Atheism)

Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)
Kepler was a brilliant mathematician and astronomer. He did early work on light, and established the laws of planetary motion about the sun. He also came close to reaching the Newtonian concept of universal gravity - well before Newton was born! His introduction of the idea of force in astronomy changed it radically in a modern direction. Kepler was an extremely sincere and pious Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the heavenly bodies represent the Trinity.

Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo is often remembered for his conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. His controversial work on the solar system was published in 1633. It had no proofs of a sun-centered system (Galileo's telescope discoveries did not indicate a moving earth) and his one "proof" based upon the tides was invalid. It ignored the correct elliptical orbits of planets published twenty five years earlier by Kepler. Since his work finished by putting the Pope's favorite argument in the mouth of the simpleton in the dialogue, the Pope (an old friend of Galileo's) was very offended. After the "trial" and being forbidden to teach the sun-centered system, Galileo did his most useful theoretical work, which was on dynamics. Galileo expressly said that the Bible cannot err, and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the biblical texts.

Rene Descartes (1596-1650)
Descartes was a French mathematician, scientist and philosopher who has been called the father of modern philosophy. His school studies made him dissatisfied with previous philosophy: He had a deep religious faith as a Roman Catholic, which he retained to his dying day, along with a resolute, passionate desire to discover the truth. At the age of 24 he had a dream, and felt the vocational call to seek to bring knowledge together in one system of thought. His system began by asking what could be known if all else were doubted - suggesting the famous "I think therefore I am". Actually, it is often forgotten that the next step for Descartes was to establish the near certainty of the existence of God - for only if God both exists and would not want us to be deceived by our experiences - can we trust our senses and logical thought processes. God is, therefore, central to his whole philosophy. What he really wanted to see was that his philosophy be adopted as standard Roman Catholic teaching. Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon (1561-1626) are generally regarded as the key figures in the development of scientific methodology. Both had systems in which God was important, and both seem more devout than the average for their era.

Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
Pascal was a French mathematician, physicist, inventor, writer and theologian. In mathematics, he published a treatise on the subject of projective geometry and established the foundation for probability theory. Pascal invented a mechanical calculator, and established the principles of vacuums and the pressure of air. He was raised a Roman Catholic, but in 1654 had a religious vision of God, which turned the direction of his study from science to theology. Pascal began publishing a theological work, Lettres provinciales, in 1656. His most influential theological work, the Pensées ("Thoughts"), was a defense of Christianity, which was published after his death. The most famous concept from Pensées was Pascal's Wager. Pascal's last words were, "May God never abandon me."

Isaac Newton (1642-1727)
In optics, mechanics, and mathematics, Newton was a figure of undisputed genius and innovation. In all his science (including chemistry) he saw mathematics and numbers as central. What is less well known is that he was devoutly religious and saw numbers as involved in understanding God's plan for history from the Bible. He did a considerable work on biblical numerology, and, though aspects of his beliefs were not orthodox, he thought theology was very important. In his system of physics, God was essential to the nature and absoluteness of space. In Principia he stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being."

Robert Boyle (1791-1867)
One of the founders and key early members of the Royal Society, Boyle gave his name to "Boyle's Law" for gases, and also wrote an important work on chemistry. Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "By his will he endowed a series of Boyle lectures, or sermons, which still continue, 'for proving the Christian religion against notorious infidels...' As a devout Protestant, Boyle took a special interest in promoting the Christian religion abroad, giving money to translate and publish the New Testament into Irish and Turkish. In 1690 he developed his theological views in The Christian Virtuoso, which he wrote to show that the study of nature was a central religious duty." Boyle wrote against atheists in his day (the notion that atheism is a modern invention is a myth), and was clearly much more devoutly Christian than the average in his era.

Michael Faraday (1791-1867)
Michael Faraday was the son of a blacksmith who became one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century. His work on electricity and magnetism not only revolutionized physics, but led to much of our lifestyles today, which depends on them (including computers, telephones, web sites). Faraday was a devoutly Christian member of the Sandemanians, which significantly influenced him and strongly affected the way in which he approached and interpreted nature. Originating from Presbyterians, the Sandemanians rejected the idea of state churches, and tried to go back to a New Testament type of Christianity.

Gregor Mendel (1822-1884)
Mendel was the first to lay the mathematical foundations of genetics, in what came to be called "Mendelianism". He began his research in 1856 (three years before Darwin published his Origin of Species) in the garden of the Monastery in which he was a monk. Mendel was elected Abbot of his Monastery in 1868. His work remained comparatively unknown until the turn of the century, when a new generation of botanists began finding similar results and "rediscovered" him (though their ideas were not identical to his). An interesting point is that the 1860's was notable for formation of the X-Club, which was dedicated to lessening religious influences and propagating an image of "conflict" between science and religion. One sympathizer was Darwin's cousin Francis Galton, whose scientific interest was in genetics (a proponent of eugenics - selective breeding among humans to "improve" the stock). He was writing how the "priestly mind" was not conducive to science while, at around the same time, an Austrian monk was making the breakthrough in genetics. The rediscovery of the work of Mendel came too late to affect Galton's contribution.

William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907)
Kelvin was foremost among the small group of British scientists who helped to lay the foundations of modern physics. His work covered many areas of physics, and he was said to have more letters after his name than anyone else in the Commonwealth, since he received numerous honorary degrees from European Universities, which recognized the value of his work. He was a very committed Christian, who was certainly more religious than the average for his era. Interestingly, his fellow physicists George Gabriel Stokes (1819-1903) and James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) were also men of deep Christian commitment, in an era when many were nominal, apathetic, or anti-Christian. The Encyclopedia Britannica says "Maxwell is regarded by most modern physicists as the scientist of the 19th century who had the greatest influence on 20th century physics; he is ranked with Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein for the fundamental nature of his contributions." Lord Kelvin was an Old Earth creationist, who estimated the Earth's age to be somewhere between 20 million and 100 million years, with an upper limit at 500 million years based on cooling rates (a low estimate due to his lack of knowledge about radiogenic heating).

Max Planck (1858-1947)
Planck made many contributions to physics, but is best known for quantum theory, which revolutionized our understanding of the atomic and sub-atomic worlds. In his 1937 lecture "Religion and Naturwissenschaft," Planck expressed the view that God is everywhere present, and held that "the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is conveyed by the holiness of symbols." Atheists, he thought, attach too much importance to what are merely symbols. Planck was a churchwarden from 1920 until his death, and believed in an almighty, all-knowing, beneficent God (though not necessarily a personal one). Both science and religion wage a "tireless battle against skepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition" with the goal "toward God!"

Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Einstein is probably the best known and most highly revered scientist of the twentieth century, and is associated with major revolutions in our thinking about time, gravity, and the conversion of matter to energy (E=mc2). Although never coming to belief in a personal God, he recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "Firmly denying atheism, Einstein expressed a belief in "Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists." This actually motivated his interest in science, as he once remarked to a young physicist: "I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details." Einstein's famous epithet on the "uncertainty principle" was "God does not play dice" - and to him this was a real statement about a God in whom he believed. A famous saying of his was "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html
 




Wilko

LUZZING chairs about
Sep 19, 2003
9,921
BN1
How do you know that?

Because I teach religion and sociology, in the most recent questionnaire 93% of members in the national academy of sciences do not believe in god, in the UK it is even higher than that.
 

easynow

New member
Mar 17, 2013
2,039
jakarta
For a balanced view for your kids, it's worth remembering that there have been many famous scientists who believed in God.


“This life of yours which you are living is not merely a piece of this entire existence, but in a certain sense the whole; only this whole is not so constituted that it can be surveyed in one single glance. This, as we know, is what the Brahmins express in that sacred, mystic formula which is yet really so simple and so clear; tat tvam asi, this is you. Or, again, in such words as “I am in the east and the west, I am above and below, I am this entire world.” Erwin Schrödinger, Austrian physicist, one of the founders of quantum theory

“Everything is determined, the beginning as well as the end, by forces over which we have no control. It is determined for the insect, as well as for the star. Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper.”
― Albert Einstein

“As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.”
Max Planck, German theoretical physicist who originated quantum theory

You are 78 years old. Do you believe in for afterlife? Is there existence after death? Professor Dürr: “That is an interesting question. What we consider the here and now, this world, it is actually just the material level that is comprehensible. The beyond is an infinite reality that is much bigger. Which this world is rooted in. In this way, our lifes in this plane of existence are encompassed, surrounded, by the afterworld already. When planning I imagine that I have written my existence in this world on a sort of hard drive on the tangible (the brain), that I have also transferred this data onto the spiritual quantum field, then I could say that when I die, I do not lose this information, this conscioiusness. The body dies but the spiritual quantum field continues. In this way, I am immortal. “ - Hans-Peter Dürr, German physicist
 

Nibble

New member
Jan 3, 2007
19,238
Why would anyone send their child to a school you think will brainwash them?
 


One Love

Well-known member
Aug 22, 2011
4,336
Brighton
Because I teach religion and sociology, in the most recent questionnaire 93% of members in the national academy of sciences do not believe in god, in the UK it is even higher than that.

A well known opposer of the Dawkins brigade has said that he has been approached privately by loads of scientists who are scared of ridicule of their colleagues and so keep their beliefs to themselves.

I'm not sure a questionnaire is going to give a true reflection.
 

perseus

Broad Blue & White stripe
Jul 5, 2003
23,454
Sūþseaxna
Look out some Horrible Science books
 

hart's shirt

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2003
10,096
Kitbag in Dubai
HAVE been being the operative word, prior to scientific knowledge and understanding that contradicts the existence of god. A very small percentage of major scientists today believe in god.

Respectfully, I'm not entirely sure that 400-500 years of scientific reasoning over many different areas of study can be completely overlooked in favour of purely contemporary thinking. That's not to say that modern day scientific views should be considered less worthy of scrutiny. History will judge them as it has their scientific forefathers.

Just pointing out that, in the interests of bringing children up with fairness and balance (and as a fellow educator, I'm sure you'd echo this laudable aim), it's probably not right for the OP, when considering religion and science, to ignore scientists who saw no conflict between their studies and belief in God anymore than it would be to ignore those scientists that see a conflict.
 

Wilko

LUZZING chairs about
Sep 19, 2003
9,921
BN1
A well known opposer of the Dawkins brigade has said that he has been approached privately by loads of scientists who are scared of ridicule of their colleagues and so keep their beliefs to themselves.

I'm not sure a questionnaire is going to give a true reflection.

Likewise many of those that still say they believe in god say it is part of their culture rather than a true belief. I was just making a point that when many people note famous scientists who believe in god they are invariably from previous centuries.
 


Wilko

LUZZING chairs about
Sep 19, 2003
9,921
BN1
Respectfully, I'm not entirely sure that 400-500 years of scientific reasoning over many different areas of study can be completely overlooked in favour of purely contemporary thinking. That's not to say that modern day scientific views are less valid. History will judge them as it has their scientific forefathers.

Just pointing out that, in the interests of bringing children up with fairness and balance (and as a fellow educator, I'm sure you'd echo this laudable aim), it's probably not right for the OP, when considering religion and science, to ignore scientists who saw no conflict between their studies and belief in God anymore than it would be to ignore those scientists that see a conflict.

I agree, which I why I would also be very criticial of sending a child to a faith school, the education is clearly going to have bias.
 

perseus

Broad Blue & White stripe
Jul 5, 2003
23,454
Sūþseaxna
God is Absurd

Saint Mylor
Little Mylor was only seven when his dad was murdered. The bishops
persuaded the killer not to murder Mylor too. He didn’t. Instead he
chopped off the boy’s hand and foot. Mylor hopped along to the
blacksmith and had a metal hand and foot made. Miraculously his
flesh-and-blood hand grew back! But Mylor’s guardian cut off his
head next. The boy didn’t have a head-growing trick - or maybe the
blacksmith didn’t do heads - and he died. The murderer picked up the
head happily - and dropped dead three days later.
 

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports

Paying the bills

Latest Discussions

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Paying the bills


Top
Link Here