The purposes of science are not theological. They do not seek to extract meaning from natural phenomena, rather, to explain them. Religion seeks to answer all the "why" questions. Religions create meaning by attempting to answer all these profound, largely metaphysical questions and in doing so, offer believers meaningful pathways to follow. Scientists are not really interested in what kind of life you are leading (moral questions), nor whether there is a meaning to life. Religion and science are different systems with different purposes. Their methods of working are entirely different. They are, in a sense, mutually exclusive.

So it is always unsettling for me when the two systems clash. Most violently in the last two centuries, the clash over the evolution of species, including humans, has continued down to this day. When I was a young Christian I had no problems with Evolution. How God created the Earth seemed largely irrelevant to my faith. Science was clearly a manifestation of God's creative purposes in Mankind, so science was perfectly welcome to figure it all out. The Christian Church had been terribly wrong in the past when it had taken on science, particularly the pioneers such as Copernicus and Gallileo. Such a project today seems equally misguided. There is no battle to be fought. God as Creator is perfectly compatible with evolution.

I do not advocate for the kind of bullish arrogance of Richard Dawkins and his ilk, no matter how brilliant they are. People of faith who are skeptical, despite whatever overwhelming evidence to the contrary that may be presented to them, should be treated respectfully. Only a reasonable discussion, in which their faith is acknowledged, can lead towards a mutual understanding. If only to agree to disagree.