Religion is belief in the existence of a supreme being while science is a study to explain the how. The main conflict of these two disciplines begins with the concept of life. Religion explains that God is the creator and giver of life, whereas scientists argue that life evolved from a microorganism. The debate between religion and science is highly controversial but I choose to take the stand of the integrative advocates who believe the two are one and only different artificially. This is through an attempt to understand God and His works through reason. Chardin, 1955 argues that science shows that there has been a progressive evolution from the simplest life forms to humans today. This means that history blends with a Christian vision to see future development to even higher development like the Omega Point.
Human beings are free individuals who chose to have faith in a supreme being. They are also at liberty to choose what action to take concerning what they believe in. Religion expresses the concept of freedom where human beings are free to believe in a supreme being or not. Spinoza explains the omnipresent attribute of God and says that the freedom to make choices is meaningless when applied to the divine being. This is because God cannot make a choice since it would mean that there is something He lacks which would contradict His perfect nature. This therefore means that God does not infringe the free will of human beings because He is determined and entirely fulfilled. It is then correct to say that the omnipresent attribute of God can be reconciled to the free will of human beings. This is to mean that human beings can still do as they please despite the fact that God is omnipresent. This is because He does not need human beings to fulfil some part of Himself but is instead helping human beings fulfil themselves.
Atheism is the theory that God does not exist. Many people believe that religion is a sham and God is merely a fraction of people's imagination. The fact is that religion is purely theory and based on belief. Individuals who have been unable to grasp some of the concepts of life have chosen to imagine a supreme being and attribute all that they cannot understand to Him. The reality is that God is an imagery that has no body. For example, when we say that a mother loves, we are referring to her actions of love to her child. When we say that God loves, it is not a definition of action because God has no body. Another example is the claim that God loves and yet there is so much natural evil all around. If God is unable to make the world all good in His supernatural power, then He is either not good or not supernatural. The idea of atheism is especially agreeable to people who once believed in God but felt that He let them down. These people have every right to believe that God does not exist. An example is the question of why there is so much evil and pain if God really exists. His inability to control the situations like disasters and death pours water to the idea that He is "all powerful." It is therefore possible that God does not exist and human beings have been lying to themselves for generations. It is also possible to believe that God does not exist and feel comfortable in that belief. The only challenge is that it is impossible to believe in nothing. Atheists are in a dilemma if they would be to claim that they do not believe in anything. Religious people also argue that it is better to believe in something and realize that it never existed than to fail to believe and realize that it actually existed.
In conclusion, Christian theism entails an epitome of true religion. It briefly compares Christian theism and neoclassical theism. In the two arguments, the existence of God is constant and true but the difference is in His nature and attributes. It goes on to prove the theory of Christian theism as the strongest theory. It is important to prove God's existence because it gives purpose to life, and if He did not exist then living would be meaningless. The definition of the universe entails both the physical and metaphysical dimensions and explains how God created it. It goes on to express that it is impossible to uphold morality and completely separate oneself from God. The work also explains that science and religion can be reconciled by agreeing to the fact that God sustains science and science helps understand God. It also proves that God's omniscient nature can be reconciled with human free will because God gives man free will of choice and oversees to ensure that humans do not go wrong. This work finally discusses atheism and brings out that it is possible depending on the perspective of one's approach. Religion is, however, a core part of society and in beneficial as it gives purpose to life.
Stringer, M.D. (2011). Contemporary western ethnography and the definition of religion.
Platvoet, J.G., & Molendijk, A.L. (1999). The pragmatics of defining religion: Contexts, concepts and contests. Leiden: Brill.
Hare, J.E. (2009). God and morality: A philosophical history. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Wright, C. (2003). God and morality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Birnbaum, D. (1989). God and evil: A unified theodicy/theology/philosophy. Hoboken, N.J:
Ktav Pub. House.
Nietzsche, F.W., & Zimmern, H. (2008). Beyond good and evil: Prelude to a philosophy of t he future.…