I think it is something of the same sort of security we should seek in our relationship with God. The most flawless proof of the existence of God isno substitute for it; and if we have that relationship, the most convincing disproof is turned aimlessly aside.If I may say it with reverence, the soul and God laugh together over so odd a conclusion.
What would have to occur or to have occurred to constitute for you a disproof of the love of, or the existence of, God?
Science has only two things to contribute to religion: an analysis of the evolutionary, cultural, and psychological basis for believing things that aren’t true, and a scientific disproof of some of faith’s claims (e.g., Adam and Eve, the Great Flood). Religion has nothing to contribute to science, and science is best off staying as far away from faith as possible. The “constructive dialogue” between science and faith is, in reality, a destructive monlogue, with science making all the good points, tearing down religion in the process.jerry coyne