While I am sure that there are many people working in scientific fields who would claim to be religious, it always seems to me that there really is a basic conflict here, rather than a “misunderstanding”.
How can any ultimately “supernatural” explanation (whatever that means) for a phenomenon ever be a “scientific” answer? At what point can any dedicated scientist investigating a difficult problem decide that there is no scientific answer to it and that it can be explained only as an act of God? How would such results be presented for scientific peer review and in what terms would they be couched?
Exactly what “specific steps in the universe’s history must be the direct result of divine intervention” (quote: Rowan Williams – my emphasis)? Isn’t this supernatural view just a resort to mystery? And isn’t it the job of science to defy, examine and explain mystery?
Read More: The Guardian