This I Believe

Chelsea - Northfield, Minnesota
Entered on April 30, 2009
Age Group: Under 18
  • Listen to This I Believe on RadioPublic

  • Podcasts

    Sign up for our free, weekly podcast of featured essays. You can download recent episodes individually, or subscribe to automatically receive each podcast. Learn more.

  • FAQ

    Frequently asked questions about the This I Believe project, educational opportunities and more...

  • Top Essays USB Drive

    This USB drive contains 100 of the top This I Believe audio broadcasts of the last ten years, plus some favorites from Edward R. Murrow's radio series of the 1950s. It's perfect for personal or classroom use! Click here to learn more.

“Science without religion is lame. Religion without Science is blind”

(Albert Einstein.)

For as long as Science and Religion have found the means to exist, they have had a strong opposition. Throughout time, as both have evolved they seem to pick up where the other lacks. Religion has captured the hearts of much of our human race. Science has proven itself capable of explanations in many aspects.

Since it has been educated by both scientists and theology experts alike that Science and Religion oppose each other, that is what much of the world chooses to believe. What makes these beliefs seem at such opposites is the prejudice of either the core belief of a higher being- or the belief of no higher being. To get beyond this prejudgment, one must look into the details. If this is done correctly, one might find the outline of a similar pattern.

Religion is able to help with the questions which are naturally and ultimately pursued throughout life- such as the meaning of life. Science provides answers to complex, yet often more easily accessible questions, in comparison with the greater picture that religion portrays.

Terms such as ‘miracles’ are often associated with religion; they are real occurrences, it is only their circumstance which makes their classification arguable. Science is far too young to begin to explain things such as miracles, which is why I find Webster’s definition misleading. Science consists of everything we know, as well as things beyond our current capable knowledge. So if a miracle defies the laws of what we know as nature- doesn’t that mean that our laws aren’t quite as developed as they could be? Once one can reach this understanding, is it not possible to believe that the end result is religion- that Science explains Religion?

Even in small amounts, Science continues to play a very large role in everything. For example: by colliding two forms of energy with great force, microscopic particles are created. These particles are made in pairs called matter and antimatter. In addition, the theory most widely accepted by scientists for the creation of the Universe is the ‘Big Bang Theory,’ which is exactly what this new set of knowledge describes (the theory being on a much larger scale.) Furthermore, since “Objects at rest remain at rest until acted upon by an outside force,” according to Newton’s first law of motion, all that would be left for someone to believe in to complete the ‘Big Bang Theory,’ would be an outside force to have collided the energy.