We all know how science has always been portrayed as an opposing force to faith. However, this is not really the case. Many scientists and believers have different views regarding the relationship between science and relation. Some scientists have claimed that God is nothing but just a natural force occurring in the universe. Others have settled with the idea of a “God-of-the-gaps” — a belief that the existence of God depends on the things that science cannot explain and therefore, it must be God.
A year ago, Stephen Hawking, a renowned quantum physicist, posited a theory that God is unnecessary to start off the creation of the universe. For some people, such developments in science and technology have led them to believe that God is unnecessary. Thus, in this day and age, what then does it mean to believe in God? Is it to be based on science alone? Or should we neglect what the world of science says and the people that contradict to our faith and continue believing? However, it’s not a matter between which is more dominant because despite the many proofs and evidences by science contradicting to our faith, both different entities are still able to reconcile and prove both the existence and belief of God together
Throughout the years, Science and Faith have both been contradicting each other by proving the other wrong in whether God exists or not. Science has definitely presented valid evidences in its defense. One such evidence is from Stephen Hawking who claims that the existence of God is not necessary as physics is responsible for everything we see now. Therefore, according to the article, there is no need for God because science has it all sorted. To further expound this notion, Hawking’s explains that because of the law of gravity wherein the universe can and will create itself from nothing, it is safe to believe and conclude that God is not the reason for everything that exists in this world. In my own honest opinion, I tend to disagree with this notion. Why? I believe that everything, even nothing, must come from something. Thus, if I, and everybody else who believes in the same thing that I do, is to analyze this notion, this notion has a flaw for there was no evidence that stated where did the “void” or “nothingness”, that is responsible for the creation of the universe, came or originated from.
It has also been said and believed that science and faith cannot co-exist together. These two are entirely different entities. For one, science seeks to explain what cannot be understood. It develops explanations and rationalized perspectives that would answer the question “why” . Faith, however, is based on the bible and teachings from the people around us that has developed and strengthened our belief. Our faith does not seek to answer the question “why” ; it is not based on proof and evidences but is solely based upon our trust, hope and belief on our religion. Thus, people should weigh their belief more on the evidences presented by Science for it makes more sense. Both may be truly different, but it is wrong to believe that Science is more evident than our faith for science does not have the full capacity to turn what we know is right incorrect. Science could be right, but our faith could also be right even though we don’t have much proof, so who is to say that one must over power the other when in fact, both are just equal?
Science has not always been contradicting our faith in contrast to what most people would believe. Although there are many philosophers or scientists in the field of science that have contradicted our faith, there have also been scientists that have tried to support the existence of God. One of which is Newton. During his research about the work on gravity and orbits, there was one planet that was peculiar from the others. He then realized that there was something missing in his calculations and that resulted to him thinking that this was God’s power because he couldn’t explain the peculiarity himself. Therefore, there must be a God because what else can define this uncertainty?
Although several claims and proofs have been presented to try and explain such uncertainties, there is no definite truth on the evidences presented by science. Many have claimed that science is more believable than our faith, for we do not have enough support or evidences to prove ourselves right unlike science. Science has provided itself with definite explanations and such unlike our faith which is just solely based on the teachings of the bible and the people around us such who believe in God too. However, it is not right to solely depend on science as a basis on whether or not God truly exists. Although science does provide itself with definite explanations, science also has its flaws. They just “claim” that their explanations are correct but however, how are they really sure that their evidences and explanations are actually accurate? A Catholic won’t easily give in or believe the contradictions presented by science.
In conclusion, although science is able to present itself well with its proposed claims of evidences and while faith is just based on our own perception with both having entirely different perspectives, both of them are still able to go hand in hand. If you only have faith, then you’re just blinded by your perceptions and belief. When you only believe in science then it’s dry, it’s so limited only to facts. Ergo, if they’re together, they’d be the perfect combination to prove evidences that will convince everybody about God’s existence and whether or not, He is to believed. Science does not have sufficient evident proof to explain the uncertainties; our faith also does not have sufficient proof in our defense. But don’t you think that some uncertainties are proven better by our faith with the help of science and vice versa? Hence, in contrary to what people may think, say or believe, science and faith can be reconciled and complement each other for a common goal.