As you may have already noticed, there exists a smorgasbord of philosophies concerning existence. There also seems to be a fair amount of agreement that not all of them can be completely right. This would imply that no matter what you believe you are most likely wrong, which is an important thing to remember. Once again, the animosity between science and religion has ignited a fire of disagreement between the two camps. Not to burden an old argument, but science and religion propose two distinct questions that only come into conflict when people force them. Science seeks to answer how things happen, while religion searches for the meaning or reason for occurrences.

It is therefore rather pointless to disprove religion using science or vice versa. Science is not a bad episode of “Bloopers and Practical Jokes.” It does not make things up and then laugh at people who buy into them. This is called advertisement. Although the people who wrote the Bible may have been divinely inspired, they were still people from 2,000 years ago. They would not be likely to write about spontaneous RNA formation, fossil hominids or the implications of quantum mechanics at the Big Bang. These missing details do not in any way alter the message of Christ. I would argue that if you actually believed in a god, the mysteries of science would inarguably enhance the magnificence of the deity.

On the same token, there is no evidence for the non-existence of God. While many events in the Bible would appear to be rather unlikely, we cannot profess to know so much about the universe to say with one hundred percent certainty that they did not happen. It is rather immaterial anyway. The focus of the Bible is to teach people to be decent to each other, using the stories as a means to accomplish the goal.

I would say that anyone who attempts to disprove science or religion is defeating their own purposes. We can argue all day about the details of absolute truth, but it is probably safe to assume that one of these truths is to be good to fellow folks. It is mean spirited and obnoxious to try to disprove someone’s faith, which undermines the absolute truth science seeks.

At the same time, Jesus accepted prostitutes, tax collectors and other assorted riff-raff, and never once showed malice for his own persecutors. He was willing to share his truth with those who wanted to listen. He did not kick down doors to tell people they were on the five o’clock express train to hell. For his true followers to do anything else is pure hypocrisy and the ultimate sin to use Jesus’ name for personal satisfaction.

As a society, we need both science and religion to work together. Next weekend we will witness what people do with the fear of god in them. I personally would not want to see what would happen without it. Still, I would take a kidney transplant over praying any day of the week. Pascal would tell you that a little praying never hurts, either.

The conflict between religion and science should be a non-issue. While religion may be fundamental in your life, it should not affect daily discourse with others. Such rigidity stagnates congress, kills people and makes us miserable on a daily basis. Doubt in your faith does not make you a hypocrite, but rather a human being. To have complete faith in anything requires complete stupidity or omnipotence.

Perhaps there is a lesson to be learned from advertising after all. Dogma can both taste great and be less filling too.

Erik Hoversten

Sophomore

Mathematics