Religion and Science 

"The function of prayer is not to influence God, but rather to change the nature of the one who prays." *- Søren Kierkegaard*

Many people unfortunately think that religion is there to undermine science, and science is there to dismantle religion, but true Christianity is about faith and reason, that God as Creator of everything there is (well, except Himself), will have His truths undiminished by true and objective scientific discoveries. Nonetheless, the Truth of God ultimately comes from divine revelations, faith, and rational understanding.🙏

For 24 years I held this opinion and dismissed Religion because it was "disproved" by science. There is zero conflict between the two and religion has strengthened science, science has strengthened Religion.

Friends, I am from Philippines, sorry to bother you but we need your prayers.

I have never had an issue holding onto both. I've never seen either as a dichotomy in the strictest sense, rather that one unveils the other in its purest form.

Praise Be God 🙏❤️

Thank you Bishop Barron for instructive talk on science and religion. Did not know about how many priests have also been scientists. Truly wonderful! Asking as a resident of New Mexico for prayers as we prepare for potential evacuations from wild fires.

I was watching the alpha series about faith and all, and I really like how they explained faith and science come together and answer different questions. Science answers the how, and faith answers the why. Their example was, with science, you can find out what a cake was made out of and what procedures it went through, but you cannot find out who it was made for and why unless the baker tells you. Just like knowing our purpose is impossible based on evolution, unless God revealed it to you through the Bible or what u believe in.

1. Science comes from religion 2. Religion and science as fields are not in competition 3. Scientism is not science 4. Galileo is only a small part of the story 5. The kalam (word, speech) argument

I just love to hear Bishop Barron he really knows how to bring it across in a interesting and understandable way 😍😍

"God is the reason why there is an empirically verifiable world at all." *- Bishop Robert Barron*

For me it comes down to the observation that Science and Religion answer to different and separate questions. Science seeks to answer the question of HOW an thing happened. Religion seeks to answer the question of WHY a thing happened.

Thank you Brandon , you’re very good at what you do. Bishop Barron, this is exactly what is needed to bring people in , open them up. This is the argument, this should be the root of Word on Fire. Everything I feel , sense, and think about so often is what you are able to put into words. I can’t stress enough how important this topic is.

I love the "No, no, no!" Makes me smile every time.

This should be required viewing for every Catholic school, CCD programs, and parish adult education programs. Really, this message, so beautifully expressed, is greatly needed. Thank you.

Praise the Lord

Thank you Bishop Barron and Brandon, i love listening to both of you on Word on Fire show. Thank you and GOD bless you. Stay safe ➕❤

I really like Bishop Barron's answer to Nina the caller about opening yourself up to belief in God. He says to her that even if it feels stupid to pray, do it anyway. I would add to that answer as well that what do you have to lose if God doesn't exist anyway? You have nothing to lose in everything to gain by praying.

Thank you for spreading Gods Word and pointing out that religion and science completely compatible.👍🙏

Excellent examples to relate to teenagers. You have the explanations down. Being the same age we understand how we got here. We need to change how to get back to not leaving 12 to 24-year-olds not knowing the cardinal, theological virtues. Don’t only talk to them, but talk to them while they are performing justice and social action so that they feel like they belong. That age group needs them belong-To a higher purpose and a greater good. Your course teaches them to see God in everything. Teach them to respond. Research shows that if you want to change behavior you include environmental justice and social action.

Thank you, bishop Baron, I enjoy your talks 👍😇🤗🙏

A man I worked with came to me and out of the blue asked me “if a being from another planet plopped down in front of me and said hi, would you still believe in God?”. All I said was “why would that change anything?”. It takes a bit of mental work to take big picture subjects like religion and science and view them at a micro level so as to put them in proper perspective. It’s the same reason so many young people have left the Catholic church. They’re lazy! They don’t want to do the mental exercises that it takes to gain understanding.

Thank you so much Bishop Barron. I have learned and experienced joy listening to Word on Fire.

Pray for the grace to believe. Father help my belief.

I think that nowadays there is a basic confusion about what we mean when we say “I believe”. The Greek and Latin equivalents mean “I trust” (i.e. I cannot prove it, but I have reason to accept it as true). In modern times, however, it has come to be used as “I know” (i.e. I have proofs, therefore I am certain it is true). On the other hand, in conversation we still use “I believe” to mean “I think it is so, but I’m not entirely sure” - while “to give the benefit of doubt” actually expresses the positive choice to trust a person or an idea we’re not entirely sure about… To believe in God is not simply to believe he exists - but to trust in his love.

Ive been looking forward to this one. I would like the see the Bishop talk some time about the Catholic teaching on divine inspiration for scripture & how that specifically ties into science in a way that some ecangelical protestant teachings on divine inspiration fails to.

I heard William Lane Craig's health has deteriorated badly a week or so ago so let's all pray for him.

A clear rebuttal of foolishness that, seems to me, can only be explained by a base human desire to "do what you want, whenever you want". I got a degree in Electrical Engineering and marveled at how all the formulas and laws reflected an ingenious design of the world.

Thanks for bringing up this topic again!! It would be great if the videos were subtitled in Spanish! There's a huge Spanish speakers' community that follows the work of bishop Barron and Word on Fire; many times I feel like sharing a video with my friends, but not all of them understand English. :)

Thank you bishop Barron. Topics like this are very useful.

Newton wrote more theology papers than science.

It seems only Bishop Barton is intelligent enough in Philosophy and Theology to explain what the world needs to know about our our faith and it applies to the World. I think a lot of people fudge the issue of God because we presume it may be an uncomfortable relationship we have with the Devine being and that we presume we are not good enough so we half heartily deny God exists and go for our half understood belief in what we presume is Science as an answer to all.

Excellent! I'm going to share this discussion with my family and colleagues.

Always worth repeating

Jesus had many critics. Many people said things that were untrue and hurtful. He could have straightened them out, spent time arguing, trying to change their minds. But the scripture says, “He answered them not a word.” He didn’t give them the time of day. Don’t waste your time trying to change your critic’s mind. Don’t argue with people that don’t matter. What they think of you is not going to stop your destiny. Their opinion is not going to keep you from your purpose. Thanks for reading this comment, I hope you are blessed and uplifted by it. We are a new and growing channel, your support and blessings is much appreciated. Thanks and God bless you. Amen

Amen, Bishop. If God's will is what shaped the universe & sustains it, why should we fear seeking to understand our world through the sciences? What we've learned through the sciences may conflict with a fundamentalist interpretation of Scripture, but hopefully that only teaches us to take more care when reading the Bible so as to not apply a single lens from the first page to the last. I hope it isn't ego, but understanding the mechanisms of physics & biology seems to me a bit like taking a peek under the hood of the universe & perhaps getting an understanding of some small aspect of the mind of God. Then again, I was a lifelong atheist who converted two years ago. I can't pretend to have all (or many) of the answers.

Scientific discovery begins with God. God is the author of science. Master the truth in Science and you walk in the path of God.

To others who are interested in this topic, I would also recommend some of the works of Arthur Eddington ("The Nature of the Physical World", "The Philosophy of Physical Science", and "Why I believe in God") he was also a contemporary of Einstein and was one of the first people to help confirm the Theory of Relativity. His work will help show how there is no conflict at all between Science and Religion, or there at least doesn't have to be.

To add to the response to Nadene, there is a quote by Einstein that addresses her question: "Coincidence is God's way of remaining anonymous".

Bishop Barron is a treasure and a gift for the Catholic Church.

Exactly! Thank you!

I found it very sad that in my private, Catholic school, the majority of students were atheists and so few were actually raised Catholic. Coming from an intelligent Catholic family, I was very much in the minority. We were taught science well, and religious education, yet we were never taught a defence of the faith or good reasons to believe in God - I had to do my own research to justify my faith. I can’t help but feel like we were let down educationally, because showing God’s existence is far more important for people’s lives than any one academic topic or subject.

Good discussion- thanks!

Great as usual, Bishop. I (and countless others I'm sure) would like to hear what you have to say on the German bishops' commotion. I know you probably don't want to fan the flames of what's already a messy controversy, but it would be very nice to hear what you have to say on the matter.

👋 I am All Saints Anglican Episcopal Church today. ⛪ 😍😍❤Love Mother💁‍♀️

Totally agree with Bishop Barron. Two subjects were not mentioned: the Bible and the topic of evolution. In my experience, at least in English speaking countries, one of the biggest problems is how to interpret the Bible. I know, Bishop Barron has addressed that topic in other videos, but the apparent controversy around evolution is probably the biggest issue in this apparent tension between religion and science. I recommend watching Francis Collins videos on that topic. He is an evangelical Christian and a top scientist on the field of evolution.

Posted a video yesterday about a book were a physicist explains how faith is necessary in science!

Both men so educated and a joy to listen to

Bishop Barron begging educated STEM Catholics to not give up the faith again 🥱 It sure is hard losing the donations of high earning Catholics.

Why do so many people receive holy communion and Saturday afternoon Confession is almost “empty “……..every Saturday……?

I'm happy to have joined the live stream

Excellent! Good work.

Where can I find this Air Force talk ? Thank you Bishop for evangelizing all of us. May the Holy Spirit blessed you always

The 5 Steps to Critical Thinking: What is critical thinking? In general, critical thinking refers to actively questioning statements rather than blindly accepting them. Critical thinking results in radical free will. 1. The critical thinker is flexible yet maintains an attitude of healthy skepticism. Critical thinkers are open to new information, ideas, and claims. They genuinely consider alternative explanations and possibilities. However, this open-mindedness is tempered by a healthy sense of skepticism (Hyman, 2007). The critical thinker consistently asks, “What evidence supports this claim?” 2. The critical thinker scrutinizes the evidence before drawing conclusions. Critical thinkers strive to weigh all the available evidence before arriving at conclusions. And, in evaluating evidence, critical thinkers distinguish between empirical evidence versus opinions based on feelings or personal experience. 3. The critical thinker can assume other perspectives. Critical thinkers are not imprisoned by their own points of view. Nor are they limited in their capacity to imagine life experiences and perspectives that are fundamentally different from their own. Rather, the critical thinker strives to understand and evaluate issues from many different angles. 4. The critical thinker is aware of biases and assumptions. In evaluating evidence and ideas, critical thinkers strive to identify the biases and assumptions that are inherent in any argument (Riggio & Halpern, 2006). Critical thinkers also try to identify and minimize the influence of their own biases. 5. The critical thinker engages in reflective thinking. Critical thinkers avoid knee-jerk responses. Instead, critical thinkers are reflective. Most complex issues are unlikely to have a simple solution. Therefore, critical thinkers resist the temptation to sidestep complexity by boiling an issue down to an either/or, yes/no kind of proposition. Instead, the critical thinker expects and accepts complexity (Halpern, 2007). Critical thinking is not a single skill, but rather a set of attitudes and thinking skills. As is true with any set of skills, you can get better at these skills with practice. In a nut shell, critical thinking is the active process of minimizing preconceptions and biases while evaluating evidence, determining the conclusions that can be reasonably be drawn from evidence, and considering alternative explanations for research findings or other phenomena. CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS >Why might other people want to discourage you from critical thinking? >In what situations is it probably most difficult or challenging for you to exercise critical thinking skills? Why? > What can you do or say to encourage others to use critical thinking in evaluating questionable claims or assertions?

Would love to have a link to the articles and books Bishop Barron and Brandon referenced

13:09 fantastic analogy!

Science will never explain why all people have inherent worth. If there is no universal truth then nothing is good and nothing is evil. It's simply a matter of whose beliefs win out in the long-term.

🙏🙏🙏

I'm very fortunate, my parents were Christian _and_ scientists. My mom was a geologist and my dad was a biologist. There was no conflict between religion and science in my house, so I grew up with a great appreciation of science and the natural world. However, because I was homeschooled, I didn't have much socialization and I desperately wanted to attend a "real" school. My mom was afraid that a public school would corrupt me, so she decided to enroll me in a high school run by an Independent Fundamental Baptist church. Those people were militant young earth creationists, and it was baffling to see their contradictions. They taught that the earth was only 6 to 10 thousand years old and that Satan planted fossils in the ground to trick people into believing the earth was old. But at the same time, they taught the periodic table of elements as factual truth. So chemistry was real, yet somehow carbon dating was false. It's because of people like them that so many Christians grow up thinking that science and God can't coexist. It also makes it very easy for atheists to point to Christians and say we're a bunch of uneducated backwards idiots. It may be an unfair generalization, but when you have well-known things like the Creation Museum in Kentucky, it's hard to fault them for the assumption.

Word. Science came from religion.

God Bless Bishop Barron and Brandon 🙏🏽❤️

I’m saying the Rosary for the members of the Supreme Court …..they must be fearful…..

There is still one point where my faith is in conflict with science -- and this really bothers me and stresses me out. It is the most important message of all -- that Jesus Christ has risen from the dead. We say this is evidenced by the gospels and the tradition, including many people that have seen the Lord after He died and has risen. When we analyse non-religious historical texts that may or may not report about actual, historical events, we implicitly use science to limit which interpretation could at least be true. If one was to investigate whether or not Ulysses was a historic person, we may refer to the Odyssey, but we know for sure that poseidon has not caused any storms because he doesn't exist. What is possible, however, is that there were many natural storms after the Trojan war that made sailing home very hard. I agree that the gospels and the testimony of the early church lead to the conclusion that something extraordinary has happend in Jerusalem. There are many extraordinary things possible within the rules of science, but these rules do not allow for exceptions. Just like no apple has ever fallen upwards and no apple will ever fall upwards, no man can walk after he suffered the injuries that were reported and "dies". As we know from the conversation around cryogenics, what actually is biological death is tough to define, but we don't want to weasel out of this by assuming that the Lord was just in a deep coma. So if we assume that He died just like men die, that is in a way that muscle and neuron cells break within minutes, he can't walk and talk two days later. I could be OK with an explaination that believing means suspending science here for once, but we have to be absulutely honest. In Providentissimus Deaus, Leo XIII teaches: "Let [scholars] loyally hold that God, the Creator and Ruler of all things, is also the Author of the Scriptures - and that therefore nothing can be proved either by physical science or archaeology which can really contradict the Scriptures. If, then, apparent contradiction be met with, every effort should be made to remove it. Judicious theologians and commentators should be consulted as to what is the true or most probable meaning of the passage in discussion, and the hostile arguments should be carefully weighed. Even if the difficulty is after all not cleared up and the discrepancy seems to remain, the contest must not be abandoned; truth cannot contradict truth, and we may be sure that some mistake has been made either in the interpretation of the sacred words, or in the polemical discussion itself; and if no such mistake can be detected, we must then suspend judgment for the time being." So, do we have to suspend judgement on the biological nature of the Lord's death and resurrection?

Is the same the mist and most huge came from the Glory from God from the LOVE of God Father self for be share it for we and with us cause God is sharing his Happiness! 😇👼🥰😘

Looking at this again , so so good. “ The doctrine of creation “!

Faith and Science go together because they are apart of Reality.

The scientific study of "beauty" is begotten from coupling the studies of geometry, aesthetics, art, psychology, sociology, and anthropology. Instead of getting angry about the existence of scientism, use it to your advantage. "Ologies" are branches of study that extend our knowledge through intensive, independent study that must, at some point in the process, be entertwined and related to the other branches of study that vine within the greater social landscape to make and govern rational sense. It's no different for how science/scientism is to relate to religion. To understand religion, faith, belief systems, spiritual experiences, how God moves and exists in and outside of the natural universe we must study different branches of His creations, His cultures, societies, environmental influences, operations of perception, human behavior, economics, the intricacies of subatomic matter, anatomy, cosmological events, etc. So, don't bother getting upset with it, with "scientism" I mean, as it is nothing more than one trying to be objective in a subjective experience. We, as religious people, as subjective persons, as biased individuals need ppl to be objective in their studies so that we can see outcomes as objectively as possible- for unveiling truth, God's truth. My point: it's better to teach ppl where and how objective approaches in science prove religion rather than trying to prove static religious practices are in step with objective truth (non-believers can't wrap their heads around this as it appears to them an oxymoron, smh).

The Shroud of Turin is science not yet understood. Young people should study it and be inspired !

I again blame John William Draper and Andrew Dixon White for unknowingly starting this myth of warfare between the two. I also blame pop scientist like Sagan, Tyson, Dawkins, Carroll, Greene, Cox and others for keeping this myth going.

The Liturgy of the Hours sounds great, but it is completely impractical if one does not live in the USA. A book from the USA takes 2-3 months, if not longer, to arrive here (South Africa). Isn't there an electronic means of transmission/acquisition for us out-of -towners? Thanks.

✨🙌🏼✨ … ✨💯✨… Amen 🙏🏼

Love the Harry Potter analogy....Anyone (I think) who is intellectually honest can reach the conclusion that there has to be a God. But coming to a belief in Jesus requires the intervention of the Holy Spirit.

❤️

Discuss Tielhard DeChardin.

great

Agree

• what is the difference between: *A Mammal that can speak, think, and have preferences ←vs→ The Ideal Mammal Also seeks to alleviate suffering and participate in joy when it happens?* • and then, well, what's the result when you combined them? is my typed comment made up of: matter or what matters, or both?

Science can never explain the human mind, free will, emotions, sensibilities , sensitivities, , abstract attributes of humanity...

Yeah no competition between faith and science please. The only scientific advances we have to watch out for are the ones that repeat the same mistake of the tower of babel where we try to become God. The biggest offenders I can think of are birth control, invitro, and transgender procedures. But other than that the sciences are great, especially science fueled by faith. Thanks for the wise words Bishop!

I'm reading Stephen Kotkin's "Stalin: Part I". YES...we need religion. A world without religion and that which transcends is so brutal and meaningless because there is no Good or Evil, but Power. And, evidence of God is all over the place if we simply would pause and take a close look.

2nd law of thermodynamics: energy is neither created nor destroyed. As Christians we believe God is neither created nor destroyed. If ur a scientist who does not believe, u can’t bash Christians for believing in the same truth. In many ways God is an intelligent energy who is neither created or destroyed. And that is currently my way of marrying both science and spirituality!

I love how animated the good Bishop gets about this subject.

Thank you for the video :)

I am a great fan of Bishop Barron, and have been for many years. Being a philosopher myself, I really appreciate his knowledge in philosophy, arts and history. And theology, of course! But in a 30-minute discussion on the "war" between religion and science, the topic of evolution cannot be glossed over. Nor the topic of the age of the universe. Bishop Barron always mentions Georges Lemaître and the billions of year-old universe. But there are more than 40% of Americans who believe that the universe is 6,000 years old. One should speak out against this type of fundamentalism, which greatly contributes to this religion-science conflict. I think these people do as much damage, and chase as many young people away from our churches as do the atheists. The age of the universe is not a big issue in Catholic circles, but it still is with many prominent evangelical churches. It should also be stated clearly that the process of evolution simply is the way God has chosen to create this wonderful diversity of life. In my opinion there are only two ways religion clashes with science: (1) If you want to take the Bible literally, and (2) if you want to use science to 'prove' that there is a God.

Why it’s not a podcast anymore?

Science…God thought into being.. through the wondrous study of science we can see the face of God.

Everything about this that drives you crazy drives me crazy too!! I don’t understand why there is this problem! All the great Saints and intellectuals come to the Truth that faith and science are not opposed. If a person studies on their own they come to see it. There comes a point where people have decided not to believe and this nonsense provides a convenient excuse.

I cannot say that I'd be happy if they left me alone to sleep, drink, eat and live in peace.... I cannot say I'd be happy

The profound foundation for science was laid our by the father of scientific philosophy Rene Descartes " God being benevolent would not deceive us through our senses " . that the problem with Catholic church imbroglio with Galileo ,TRUTH was internalized and it led to errors .Reality as experienced by our senses, some believed then was mere illusion. Lord in his discourse with Samaritan woman by the well "In future your are not going to worship God on this mountain or in Jerusalem" but worship God in spirit and truth .truth that cuts away the clutter of false assumptions, Descartes principles Those of us who have donned the lab coats know you have to suspend your ingrained hypotheses, beliefs or preclude any bias "divine mathematical equation " outside the lab and let discovery of truth lead you in your research.

One more comment on the topic of the compatibility of science with faith & religion. It is not science per se that is the difficulty or the belief in science per se that leads to disaffiliation, but the underlying assumptions about science. So scienticism as you describe is not compatible . But there are other difficulties. One of them is the belief about "matter" . It is critical to remember that matter is a construct, it is not "real" -- as it has no ontological status! Or another way to say it is, in Genesis God did not create matter as with trees and flowers and animals and other living things. In the context of science matter is a helpful construct but it gets mired in difficulties about faith once we enter into the realm of metaphysics. So the question is and always will be what grounds scientific principles? Here the basic underlying assumptions must be organic! If we got that sorted out there would be no difficulties about the compatibility of religion and science, nor would people fall away because of their belief in science. Of course, metaphysics is as much an anathema to the present world as is faith, but perhaps, Bishop Baron in your discussions on this topic of religion and faith you could dialogue with some philosophers who have actually delved into the realm of tough metaphysics and could provide us with some insights into the deeper issues on this topic. Although if they have taken on this task they are usually believers, or become so! I love that you have taken on this topic, but we need more depth about it to get to the real issues concerning the attitudes to the the assumed conflict.

LET GOD ‘S LOVE , LIGHT UP YOUR LIFE: There is One God in three persons, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Humans are ONE person (in three parts) The body, soul and spirit. The Bible says that we are all sinners. As it is written: There is none righteous no not one. Romans 3:10 For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Romans 3:23 But we are all as an unclean thing and all our righteousness are as filthy rags. Isaiah 64:6 For the wages of sin is death. Romans 6:23(the word “death” in this verse means eternal separation, from God in hell). Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow.Isaiah 1:18 Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures and that He was buried and that He rose again the third day according to the scriptures.1CORINTHIANS 15:3-8 In whom we have redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins. Colossians 1:14 For by grace ye are saved, through faith; and not of yourselves it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast. Ephesians 2:8-9 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain. Galatians 2:21 If you would like to receive Jesus as your Savior. Realize that you are a hopeless sinner and tell Jesus that you trust in Him and only Him to save you from hell. The moment you trust in Jesus and His shed blood on the cross to pay for your sins, you are saved. After people get saved , God wants them to get baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

logic = order = logic = logos

I’ve always thought that God intervened in human affairs. It’s hard to believe that a Lincoln would have been born had there been no God. Also the standing on giants in science definitely was caused by God.

This is all very suggestive, but still requires a leap of faith. The mathematics of the big bang theory and string theory both suggest the existence of multiple universes. These two theories are unrelated to each other. There is no physical evidence of another universe, but scientists tend not to ignore mathematics, especially when it comes from two separate areas. I'd rather go with the scientists who say it like they see it, rather than take that leap of faith. I agree with you about scientism.

FOR EVOLUTION TO HAPPEN IT HAD TO EXIST ONE LIVING CELL, WHO PROVIDED THAT CELL? BIOCHEMISTRY CAN CONFIRM THIS. FOR EVOLUTION TO HAPPEN IT HAS BE THE "POTENCIAL' FOR THIS TO HAPPEN WHO PROVIDED THIS POTENCIAL?

I'm pretty sure that 60% would be a lot lower if you didn't count members of Pentecostal and Evangelical churches, since their theology traditionally has undermined the paper of reason

When Barron says ”serious theist”, he is talking about someone who does not believe what the Bible teaches. 😗

I’ve had an issue with accepting evolution and Adam and Eve as real people, I still don’t understand how that can be true at the same time, I truly want to believe the doctrine but I can’t get past that one, anyone have any thoughts on this?

25:26

Science advanced era and death psychology and analysis after lab reports what is death ?