Science Vs Religion

These are the thoughts of my 12-year-old self on the debate of science vs religion – I thought it’d be handy for lower school students who may be covering this topic.

Science says it was the big bang that created the Universe.

Christianity says it was god.

However, are Genesis and the big bang theory saying the same thing?

Can science and Christianity sit hand in hand?

Or are they saying completely different things?

Can you be a scientist and still believe in God?

Or is science going to find the answer alone?

This is a conversation between two scientists. The first scientist is an atheist, so he does not believe in God. The second scientist is a theist so she believes in God. You will here their views on whether science and religion can be as one.

As a scientist, I cannot understand why you believe in God. Science has proven it was the big bang and not god. There is no evidence for god to exist, so therefore one must assume there is not a greater power outside our universe.

Although there is no proof for God, God is the answer to the problem of how the big bang started. Science has proven how it happened but not why. How can there be nothing and all of a sudden, everything needed to create our universe existed! It is impossible, unless there was an input of information.

How do you know the Bible is telling the truth though? The person who wrote it had no clue about science and could have written down an imaginative story that people decided to believe because there was no other evidence. Remember, they thought the earth was a dome, with a fire pit underneath and then below that a huge volume of water with pillars to support the Earth.

You do not know if it is the definitely the truth, but science cannot prove why everything happened and this is the only other answer. Although it is a story, it holds the answer. Science did not exist then, so they would not have written down a complicated, scientific theory, a story would have been the only way for them to communicate their knowledge.

The Bible does not mention things we have proof of, like dinosaurs. We have hundreds of fossils and skeletons to prove they exist, yet there is no hint of them in the Bible, so therefore it is just a story.

Actually, if you look, the Bible dose not mention any specific animals whatsoever, except humans. If you look carefully, all it says about animals is sea creatures, birds and mammals were created before humans, so it does not matter that dinosaurs are not mentioned.

The big bang has lots of evidence. Genesis has not been proven. How can you believe in something with no proof, when there is a greater explanation with all the evidence you need.

Although no one has tried to prove Genesis, in many ways it is saying the same thing as science. Science says first there was a big bang, then planets, then water, then simple life forms in the water, then reptiles and amphibians, then mammals, and finally humans. The Bible says first, there was light, which would have been caused by the explosion, then heaven and earth, then land and sea, then the sun and moon, then sea creatures and birds, then mammals and finally humans. Although there are a few differences, there are also many similarities.     

There is lots of evidence to back up Darwin’s theory of evolution. God could not have made humans separately. Humans evolved from apes. Science has proven it.

Science has not proven it. There is still the missing link in the chain. Science thinks it has found the answer, but there is still a skeleton missing, and without it, the stage of evolution the missing link came from and the stage it went into, are too far apart to use as evidence. Until you find that skeleton, you cannot prove it.

Well, science has proven the Earth was created in around 6 billion years. Genesis claims it was six days, or only 144 hours to create something like the Earth. It is impossible, so Genesis is not true.

Look at it this way, Genesis is a simple version of creation. I do not take it literally. Six days could stand for six periods of time; it does not necessarily mean six lots of 24 hours. If you think back to the similarities between Genesis and Science, the order of creation is the same; just Genesis is not a highly complicated theory with tons of evidence to support it.

Genesis says creatures that did not exist existed. It says there was once a walking talking snake. That is impossible, snakes cannot and could not walk or talk, they only hiss, so Genesis cannot be a true story.

The story is not literal, it may say one thing but it really stands for another. If you look back through evolution, ancestors of the snake did have legs to walk around with, which they have now lost. Many scientists also believe they had some sort of voice box, so although it would not have talked like a human, it would use some noises, like talking.

Genesis also says there was light before the sun. That could not happen so once again, Genesis is not telling the truth.

If you think about it, the big bang theory also says there was light before the sun. The explosion from the big bang would have created lots of light and hest before the sun formed.

I still do not think there was an input of information. You do not need to believe in God when you have science. Science may still be working on a few of the harder problems, but one day, whether it is soon or in hundreds or thousands of years, the explanation will be found, we just have not found all the pieces of the puzzle yet. 

You do need God. There must have been some input of information to kick-start everything. Look at DNA for example.

To unravel and stable DNA to find the code you need three proteins. Now, inside the code it tells you how to make the proteins to unravel and stable it. You cannot have the DNA without the proteins yet you cannot have the proteins without the DNA.

All you are doing is giving another example of what came first, the chicken or the egg. DNA could have developed through evolution and some of the chemicals on the earth could have come together and made the proteins.  

I see your point but you can logically explain the answer to whether the chicken or the egg came first, but unless you went back in time, you would not be able to prove it. How can you explain logically how to find the answer to the problem of DNA? You cannot solve it. Without God that is.

Although I now see the Bible and science have some similarities, I still strongly believe that one-day science will come up with the answer, and religion will fall.

Well, I am not going to stop believing in God until you find the answer, and I seriously doubt you will find it out. God is the answer sitting right next to you but you are choosing to ignore it. Religion holds the key to unlocking the mysteries of creation.    

Who created God then?

God has no creator. God does not need a creator. God’s existence is eternal, never ending. 

Everything has a beginning and end. Nothing is eternal.

Prove it then.


In my opinion, you can be a Christian, or a member of any other religion, as well as a scientist because science and religion say very similar things. The orders of creation have few differences and both agree about the order of evolution.

Although science automatically decides everything is a consequence of something else, and everything has an answer, religion has a stronger argument.  God makes more sense than nothing existing then suddenly everything exists.

Science has not found out why, but only how and its evidence is not sufficient. There are huge gaps in its evidence and might never solve the problem.

Religion has stronger evidence because not only can it say how, it also says why.

There are three ways of reading the bible. The first way is taking it literally. The second way is thinking that it is not literal but stands for something similar. The third way is to not believe a word of it.

The people who only agree with one side of the argument do not have enough evidence to be certain. Yet the group in the middle take both sides and come up with a more logical explanation that makes more sense.

So if you think parts of the Bible can be taken metaphorically you can be a scientist and believe in God.


2 thoughts on “Science Vs Religion

  1. Bible contains some scientific facts, as I know. So the two can sit hand in hand.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s