A Quote by Russell M. Nelson

There is no conflict between science and religion. Conflict only arises from an incomplete knowledge of either science or religion, or both. — © Russell M. Nelson
There is no conflict between science and religion. Conflict only arises from an incomplete knowledge of either science or religion, or both.
This much I can say with definiteness - namely, that there is no scientific basis for the denial of religion - nor is there in my judgment any excuse for a conflict between science and religion, for their fields are entirely different. Men who know very little of science and men who know very little of religion do indeed get to quarreling, and the onlookers imagine that there is a conflict between science and religion, whereas the conflict is only between two different species of ignorance.
There is some conflict between religion and science in my world, but that's nothing new. Science, at its root, is a rational discipline. Religion, on the other hand, is fundamentally trans-rational. Both of them attempt to solve problems, but since their methodology is vastly different, they can't help but come into conflict.
I don't think there is any incompatibility between science and mysticism . . . Immanent religion is the only form of religion in which there is no conflict at all, that I can see, between science and religion.
I see no conflict between science and religion. When you take truth in either one of these realms, science or religion, they match perfectly.
The person who thought there could be any real conflict between science and religion must be either very young in science or ignorant of religion.
Is there any conflict between science and religion? There is no conflict in the mind of God, but often there is conflict in the minds of men.
I do believe that there is a conflict between science and religion ... the spirit or attitude toward the facts is different in religion from what it is in science. The uncertainty that is necessary in order to appreciate nature is not easily correlated with the feeling of certainty in faith.
The very idea that there is some kind of conflict between science and religion is completely mistaken. Science is a method for investigating experience... Religion is the fundamental, necessary internalization of our system of more permanent values.
"The Theory of Everything" is an extraordinary story because [Jane Hawing] was incredibly religious and [Stephen Hawking] was an atheist, so you have this conflict both on a domestic level between a couple in a difficult situation but also this bigger conflict of science versus religion, so it's a really fascinating project.
Trouble arises when either science or religion claims universal jurisdiction, when either religious dogma or scientific dogma claims to be infallible. Religious creationists and scientific materialists are equally dogmatic and insensitive. By their arrogance they bring both science and religion into disrepute.
There is no conflict between religion and science.
But my favorite of Einstein's words on religion is "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." I like this because both science and religion are needed to answer life's great questions.
Conflict between science and religion a dangerous foe.
There is superficial conflict but deep concord between science and theistic religion, but superficial concord and deep conflict between science and naturalism
The conflict between religion and science is inherent and (very nearly) zero-sum. The success of science often comes at the expense of religious dogma; the maintenance of religious dogma always comes at the expense of science.
There may be a conflict between softminded religionists and toughminded scientists, but not between science and religion.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!