🚀 go-pugleaf

Okay, science can't tell us anything about religion; a God you can subject
to scientific study is not a God but a part of nature. The other way
around is possible; because if God knows everything, He could tell us
something we don't know, and if he is all-powerfull, the He can show his
powers, doing the impossible. And most religions tell us He did...
However, then we COULD make a scientific study about His existence,
implying that God is part of nature, and thus cannot act against nature's
laws. So all this logic adds up to nothing. My hasty conclusion: whether
you believe God exists or not, logic won't help you to convince anyone.

More important: Science can't accept religion as a part of its structure -
nor superstition of prejudice.  But religion has to accept logic and
science, and many religious people have no trouble with that - what the
pope tried to show when he apologized for the Galilei trial. Theology is
based on faith but is not a purely mystical affair. As G.K. Chesterton
made father Brown say when caught fake priest: attacking Logic is bad
theology. People can't (at least not forever) believe in something that is
clearly not true. Thus mixing religion into science is *impossible*, but
mixing science into religion is an *inevitability*. 

Yes, I know there are lots of people who refuse to mix some science in
their religion - creationists and others. But don't blame religion for
this; it's bad science AND bad theology. It is true that religion is
conservative by nature and evolves slower than science, because religious
people find it hard to admit that their beliefs are not THE thruth - maybe
because they are more important to them than Schrodingers equation to a
scientist, even an 'elderly' scientist.

E. Gustin