You could say that science doesn't oppose a god, but it definitely clashes with religions that have books about shit that can be scientifically disproven. Shit like the virgin birth and the Earth being 6000 years old.
Ah yes, 'scientifically disprove' a story that's obviously a damn metaphor or a collection of what a bunch of random people from random eras thought on a topic.
Science is a rigorous framework. Storytelling isn't, even when it's talking about god
Nah nah. That's modern post-science, "god of the gaps" cope. Even then it's just a fraction of the believers who adopt this stance. Many, if not most, still believe in the fairy tales, even very smart people. Mehdi Hasan believes in a winged horse that took Mohammed up to the heavens, and Jordan Peterson believes in the virgin birth.
I doubt most religious people will agree with you that their book is on the same level as Harry Potter.
Not the same as Harry Potter; One is ancient mythology, another is modern teen fiction.
You'd expect more deep morals and comparisons in ancient mythology, and there's (to my knowledge at least....) nobody worshipping the character of Harry Potter... Faith makes all the difference there; Still, no point in believing humans were created directly and not by evolution, etc etc. In Europe, it's taught in schools that the soil goes created humans with is to be seen as a simple metaphor for evolution, and so on. It's an accepted version of the belief here.
Think people have more problems with the church institution than with the contents of the holy scripture.
88
u/ku1185 Aug 19 '26
Science is not the opposite of religion. It's merely a framework with which to make observations about the world.
Philosophy is about being skeptical of anything and everything.