Religion is the simple answer for what we don't know.

[Tye]

One thing I personally don't like about religion is that it doesn't try to strive and try to find answers, and instead just relies on God or gods and their teachings to explain everything even if we have scientific evidence against it. The way I see religion is a way to keep people in order and for people who don't want to know what all is out there to have a sense of calmness. That's why I hate when people try to combine religion and science they are two completely different entities. Science asks why and how and will try to find the answers, while religion just says it is this way no question. So, if you're the type of person that doesn't really care about much the universe and why things are the way they are, then religion is perfect for you. But, if you're a person that wants answers, then take interest in what you want to learn and don't let religion be a barrier. Think where we would be today if we just said prayers healed people and didn't bother to develop medicine, or if we prayed our crops would grow instead of learning the science behind agriculture? What would have happened if people deemed electricity witchcraft and power like we know it wouldn't exist. At the end of the day religion has just thrived off scientific discoveries, and is just a safety net for people's fear of death.

[Raen]

Religion does have many good ideas and good intentions with a lot of the work that they do. I know personally that my local church is constantly doing events for charities and organisations that need donations and even helping out kids who have somehow become homeless so I am thankful that such a group exists in my community. But as you say, it's when science comes into the picture that is the problem. They are almost polar opposites - One: a system based entirely on what you are told and simply having faith that it is that way. The other: a system based entirely on evidence and theories constantly subject to change in order to discover the truth. However, some religious people have become rather esteemed scientists. Albert Einstein once said "Science without Religion Is Lame, Religion without Science Is Blind". Einstein was Jewish but also a remarkable physicist who uncovered many significant things such as the photoelectric effect and his theories of special and general relativity. This shows that having faith in a creator does not mean that you have to disagree with the laws of science and it is a shame that most people seem to act that way.

[Darkmatters]

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." So said Albert Einstein, and his famous aphorism has been the source of endless debate between believers and non-believers wanting to claim the greatest scientist of the 20th century as their own. A little known letter written by him, however, may help to settle the argument - or at least provoke further controversy about his views... In the letter, he states: "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this." Source

[Raen]

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. My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind. (Could be talking about the Universe here). The scientists’ religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection. God does not play dice with the universe. It could be that Albert Einstein had a different idea of "God" to most religious people, as suggested by these quotes. Isaac Newton, despite refusing to ever swear his allegiance to the church, was thought to have been a follower of deism. Joseph Priestley, Nicholas Copernicus, Sir Francis Bacon (the very person who put together the scientific method of inquiry), Galileo Galilei, Blaise Pascal, Robert Boyle, Michael Faraday, Gregor Mendel, William Thomson Kelvin and Max Planck were all believers in a God.

[TheSilverWolf]

Araishu, I get the feeling you either aren't religious, or believe in a creator, but do not necessarily agree with any of the established ideas of God that are out there--am I correct? Some of your posts, it has sounded like that, anyway. I completely agree with what you said about religion and science. I think the OP has made some very broad generalizations about religious people. Again, I don't see why so many feel that you cannot believe in a creator and still believe in science. I don't think there's many religious people who would doubt the laws of nature as we've discovered them, and think we know them. I doubt you will find a Christian, Bhuddist, Jew, or any other religious believer who will say they don't believe in gravity, or the fundamental laws that govern our solar system (i.e, our planets rotate around the sun, that our galaxy is a swirreling mess of stars and planets, among other things, etc). The real difference it seems, is that religion accepts that there are things about their beliefs science won't ever be able to explain. But I believe this about more than just religious things. Look as String Theory. I watched a documentary about science, and how they've discovered a level even below that of the atom, but at this level, the laws we believe to be true just don't work anymore. Maybe there's only so far science can go before we simply won't be able to understand. I'm not saying we shouldn't try, but I think we ought to accept the possibility. ~SilverWolf~

[Raen]

TheSilverWolf - I am not religious, but I do not deny the possibility of an intelligent designer. I look upon the universe with fresh eyes that are unbiased toward any theories that don't have any evidence to back them up or any means to be tested. However, one thing I am strongly against is the "God" described in religious books. I believe the interpretation of God has been twisted and skewed to the viewpoint of man and man's ideals almost to the point of corruption. If there is an intelligent designer with the power to create the universe, I don't think it would worry about such trivial things as in the scriptures. I just find a lot of contradictions and faults in the holy books of many religions. I am also fascinated with the sciences and I guess you could call me a truth seeker. There are certainly things that science may never be able to explain, such as the paranormal. However, the ideas about String Theory basically mean that the current models and understanding of the universe are not adequate enough to explain the behavior of certain things at a quantum level or even on a massive scale. However, we do have two theories which we tend to switch between based on what we are trying to calculate and they certainly work with predicting how things will behave under certain conditions, it just means picking a theory depending on the size. Eventually we will have enough knowledge about the universe to have a more developed understanding of how these kinds of things work. Science is an ever changing method of understanding the universe and if a theory/model does not fit perfectly, it will be investigated and remastered hundreds of times until we get it right. That's the beautiful thing about science.