Are not the practical human outcomes of a belief more important than any religious doctrine used to create or support a belief? If not, then your
god is religion, itself, and not ultimate truth or God.
Religion cannot refute scientific fact and science cannot explain what is not knowable. We humans seem to do a poor job trying to discuss that which lies beyond our understanding. Both religion and science are efforts to understand the unknown. Bottom line, we realize there is ultimate truth, but we steadfastly refuse to accept the fact that we don’t know it and will probably never grasp it through either science or religion.
Religions are constructed around human ideas meant to help us explain the meaning of life and the destiny of
humanity. There is no reason religious beliefs cannot progress in synchrony with scientific knowledge. They are both anchored to the same realities. Trying to separate the two leads to religious apologetics that stretch far beyond the most distant limits of plausibility.
Myth, symbols, and allegory appear to be the primary tools of religion, which, of course, do not have to be literally true to be divinely inspired or spiritually meaningful. Religious hierarchies (human beings) can decide church doctrine and dogma, but they cannot dictate ultimate truth. Religious leaders and congregants can gather together in meetings or councils all they want to vote on doctrine and dogma, but their votes or the divine pronouncements of their highest ranking leaders' have no impact on what truth is and has always been. Both religion and science should be used to support the development of spiritual awareness within individuals and never used to bury the developing human spirit under sanctified tenets of human intolerance.
Myth, symbols, and allegory appear to be the primary tools of religion, which, of course, do not have to be literally true to be divinely inspired or spiritually meaningful. Religious hierarchies (human beings) can decide church doctrine and dogma, but they cannot dictate ultimate truth. Religious leaders and congregants can gather together in meetings or councils all they want to vote on doctrine and dogma, but their votes or the divine pronouncements of their highest ranking leaders' have no impact on what truth is and has always been. Both religion and science should be used to support the development of spiritual awareness within individuals and never used to bury the developing human spirit under sanctified tenets of human intolerance.
Science is a procedure for gradually discovering truth, objectively, but the truths we understand at this moment based on scientific findings
are very primitive when compared to what ultimate truth must be. As with
religion, it is not at all clear that humans are capable of scientifically
determining ultimate truth and we may have to rely on spiritual awareness and
inspiration to stretch our minds towards its highest understandings.
Science is heavily dependent upon what we know
from the past and on the rational examination of new concepts, now. Despite what is known, any idea about what is
yet to be discovered is pure conjecture. Anyone who is interested and wants
to learn research methods can participate in scientific investigations and many
do. However, no one, no committee, no profession, no organization controls the
advances or direction of scientific discoveries. They progress one proof
at a time, worldwide.
Since ultimate knowledge is beyond
our cognitive abilities, it is futile to pit religion and science against one
another. Neither can lead us beyond our
limits of understanding. However, as we approach
our own limits, if we maintain integrity between our scientific knowledge and our
religious beliefs, then our spiritual senses at that moment would serve as the most accurate compass pointing toward the threshold of God, the source of all being, life, and consciousness.
Both religion and science are different approaches to the same reality, so any conflict between the two can only arise from human error.
