Of course, this is all oversimplified, but here goes:
- Religions are worldviews, such as having a Biblical worldview (which I'll use for the duration of these thoughts)
- Viewing the world non-religiously is a worldview.
- Typically I think when people see a conflict of religion vs science, they are really using the term "science" loosely, and are (unintentionally?) including a non-religious worldview along with science.
- Science is merely what is known through observation and experiment. Worldviews should not conflict with science, and should try to explain and be compatible with scientific knowledge.
- For example, science doesn't tell us the age of the earth. It only tells us what can be observed. Worldviews can take that data, and combine it with their worldviews to come up with conclusions, that may or may not "sound" scientific.
- A Biblical worldview should use the belief formed around the Bible and the knowledge of science to form its view of our world.
- A non-religious worldview can use the belief of the non-supernatural and the knowledge of science to form its view of our world.
- If presented in this way, then the conflict would be either between worldviews, or between a worldview and pure science.
- Generally, a person doesn't like to separate their worldview from the facts. Christians blur facts with Biblical beliefs. The non-religious blur facts with their beliefs.
- In the realm of a Biblical worldview, such as in a church, one might hear "God made the earth in 6 days" or "Jesus rose from the dead", belief stated as fact.
- Whereas in the realm of an non-religious worldview, such as in a venue of mainstream education or media, etc., one might hear about the big bang or "Millions of years ago" or of macro evolution presented factually, belief stated as fact.
- And since the non-religious worldview wins in the U.S. where we need separation between church and state, and where one religion can't be forced on people, it is easy to see how almost everywhere is the realm of the non-religious worldview, and that's how "science" becomes loosely used to represent both science and the non-religion worldview. And hence, you've got a conflict between religion and science, because most people slip in worldview stuff into the term "science".
- And this makes sense, since typically what makes up the details behind the conflicts are actually between the worldviews or conclusions involving the worldviews, and not purely science itself.
- Basically, the position that there is conflict between religion and science is effectively an admission that the person either doesn't understand how to take what is lumped into "science" and separate it back out into facts and beliefs, or that the person is zealously pushing these beliefs as facts and using the acceptance by the mainstream of the worldview to attack other worldviews by only allowing its worldview to insert belief into the "science" realm.
- In the old days in the U.S., before the roles were flipped, it was the Biblical worldview that imposed its beliefs into the "science" realm.
- I believe it is tragic that "separation between church and state" isn't "separation between worldview and state", as it forces separation of all faiths except that of the non-religious.
