Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
has religion contribute to scientific revolution
Relationship between religion and science
science and christianity essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: has religion contribute to scientific revolution
The relationship between science and the Christian Church has never been viewed as a positive one. The Christian Church has often been ostracized for their role in the history of science, and to some degree is most commonly held responsible for most, if not all the struggles that science had to undergo to achieve it's status today. In David Lindberg's article titled "Science and the Christian Church" Lindberg explores this idea by not taking sides with the Christian church, or the sciences, but by examining other possible explanations as to why the scientific struggle was so hard.
Throughout Lindbergs article, he offers many additional possible explanations for the struggle of science then the rise of Christianity. Though he does not entirely dismiss the idea that the Christian Church had anything to do in hindering scientific achievement, he does not entirely blame them either. Lindberg even goes as far as to state that Christianity "did little to alter the situation."
Lindberg primarily takes the pressure off the Christian church by emphasizing the fact that science in the antiquity was not the same as modern science today. This is a very important point because it is a common misconception that the sciences have always been viewed as a primary source of study, when in truth, it was not always so. Lindberg points out that in antiquity during the rise of Christianity the major disciplines of science did not exist, and mostly all scientific study was categorized under the term of natural philosophy, which did not have a clearly defined social role or profession." This was caused by the fact that the roman empire was diminishing, intellectuals did not have a primary location in which to study, and people were more concerned with the basic needs for survival, thus, limiting their interest in natural sciences, and enhancing their interest in the hereafter.
Lindberg's article is very complete because though it points out many other issues that had a role in the lack of scientific popularity, it addresses the fact that the church did not entirely embrace natural science, and in many cases rejected much of what was being studied.
One of the most visible critics of science today, and the progenitor of the anti-science sentiment is the religious community, specifically the conservative Christians. One can hardly read the newspaper without reading of one religious figurehead or another preaching on the "fallacy of science," pushing their own brand of "truth" on whoever would hear them. As Bishop writes "It is discouraging to think than more than a century after the publication of Charles Darwin's Origin of the Species (1859), and seventy years after the Scopes trial dramatized the issue, the same battles must still be fought."(256) And the loudest rallying cries to these battles can be heard issuing from the throats of the ranks of zealots and their hordes of followers.
First, I will demonstrate Stephen Jay Gould’s argument against the overlapping between science and religion, which is as follows:
Helweg, O. J. (1997, March). Scientific Facts: Comparatible with Christian Faith? USA Today, 125, 84.
The essay starts off by stating, “One could say that the dominant scientific world-view going into the 16th century was not all that “scientific” in the modern sense of the
In his Letter to The Grand Duchess Christina, Galileo challenged the widely accepted religious beliefs of the time, claiming that the conflict lies in their interpretation, not the context. In Galileo’s eyes science was an extremely useful tool that could and should have been used in interpreting the Scriptures. He argued that “the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven not how heaven goes” (Grand Duchess). The purpose of science was not to counter what the bible teaches; rather its purpose was to help explain the teachings of the scriptures. Furthermore, it was “prudent to affirm that the holy Bible can never speak untruth-whenever its true meaning is understood” (Grand Duchess). However, because of the terminology in which the bible was presented the perception of what the Scripture defined as truth was skewed. The Bible was written so that the common man could understand it and follow its commandments. The people also showed a greater inte...
Throughout the Renaissance Era, the Christian faith was looked up upon highly and was followed by a majority. Scientist’s of that era recognized the church as the one thing that was the truth. “[It’s] as well to say that Christ was not born a virgin”(Bellarmine p.g. 34). “The motion of the heart was only to be comprehended by God” (Harvey p.g. 45). Both Bellarmine and Harvey believed in God. So when they found evidence that proved what the church said, they tread carefully. “The universe is a mechanical system in mathematical terms.” (Descartes p.g. 46). Descartes found proof that the earth was not the center of the universe but the sun was. This caused these men to proceed with caution.
The condemnation of Galileo by the Catholic Church is a prime example of the vast dispute between religion and science. It is widely believed that his support of Copernicanism, the theory that the earth rotates on its own axis, led to his condemnation by the Catholic Church. However, modern historians disagree with this belief and as a matter of fact they do not believe that indeed there is warfare between religion and science. Under the content of condemnation of Galileo are subjects such as Copernicanism, Eucharist, Popes Paul 5 and atomism.
Christian Science is a new religious movement that was founded by a lady named Mary Baker Eddy, born Mary Baker Rose on July 16, 1821 and sadly left this world December 3, 1821. Eddy continuously studied the Bible throughout her life and took a great liking to reading and understanding the sacred text. Growing up, she frequently stayed ill and highly emotional until one day she grew so very life-threatening sick that she simply asked for her Bible. After reading two of Jesus' healings, Eddy miraculously recovered from a severe fall on an icy sidewalk and became well again. After doing this...
Steven Shapin’s book entitled Scientific Revolution begins with the provoking statement that “there was no such thing as a Scientific Revolution” (197). However, he incorporates the stories about the frontiers of scientific tradition and discovery such as Galileo, Boyle, Newton, Copernicus, Bacon, Descartes, and Huygens. Nonetheless, Shapin organizes the book into two parts with the first concerning its organization. It is divided into three sections that ask three essential questions: what was known? (15); how was it known? (65); and what was the knowledge for?(119). Shapin’s claim is that the period of the ‘Scientific Revolution’ was a time in which new answers to these questions were brought up. The second part of the book becomes central to illustrating Shapin’s view.
Barbour, Ian G. Religion in an Age of Science. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1990. Print. (BL 240.2 .B368 1990)
...wever, in the best interest of advancing education and an enlightened society, science must be pursued outside of the realm of faith and religion. There are obvious faith-based and untestable aspects of religion, but to interfere and cross over into everyday affairs of knowledge should not occur in the informational age. This overbearing aspect of the Church’s influence was put in check with the scientific era, and the Scientific Revolution in a sense established the facet of logic in society, which allows us to not only live more efficiently, but intelligently as well. It should not take away from the faith aspect of religion, but serve to enhance it.
...eveloped, and especially during the Enlightenment, God and religion were relegated to a lesser role because it was thought that science could explain everything. Now, though, the farther we plunge into science, the more questions we find that can only be answered by religion. When science and Christianity are both studied and well understood, especially in the context of their limitations, it is possible to integrate them, or at least for them to complement each other, in my view of the world.
As Europe began to move out of the Renaissance, it brought with it many of the beliefs of that era. The continent now carried a questioning spirit and was eager for more to study and learn. Throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, many discoveries were made in subjects all across the realm of science, but it was the doubting and testing of old traditions and authorities that truly made this time into a revolution. The Scientific Revolution challenged the authority of the past by changing the view of nature from a mysterious entity to a study of mathematics, looking to scientific research instead of the Church, and teaching that there was much knowledge of science left to be discovered.
Stenmark, Mickael. How to Relate Science and Religion. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2004.
Over the course of the years, society has been reformed by new ideas of science. We learn more and more about global warming, outer space, and technology. However, this pattern of gaining knowledge did not pick up significantly until the Scientific Revolution. In the sixteenth and seventeenth century, the Scientific Revolution started, which concerned the fields of astronomy, mechanics, and medicine. These new scientists used math and observations strongly contradicting religious thought at the time, which was dependent on the Aristotelian-Ptolemy theory. However, astronomers like Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, and Newton accepted the heliocentric theory. Astronomical findings of the Scientific Revolution disproved the fact that humans were the center of everything, ultimately causing people to question theology’s role in science and sparking the idea that people were capable of reasoning for themselves.