God vs. Science TIME.
Interesting quote from Richard Dawkins, who is usually called an atheist, but actually has a more nuanced view…
My mind is not closed, as you have occasionally suggested, Francis. My mind is open to the most wonderful range of future possibilities, which I cannot even dream about, nor can you, nor can anybody else. What I am skeptical about is the idea that whatever wonderful revelation does come in the science of the future, it will turn out to be one of the particular historical religions that people happen to have dreamed up. When we started out and we were talking about the origins of the universe and the physical constants, I provided what I thought were cogent arguments against a supernatural intelligent designer. But it does seem to me to be a worthy idea. Refutable–but nevertheless grand and big enough to be worthy of respect. I don’t see the Olympian gods or Jesus coming down and dying on the Cross as worthy of that grandeur. They strike me as parochial. If there is a God, it’s going to be a whole lot bigger and a whole lot more incomprehensible than anything that any theologian of any religion has ever proposed.
…captures how I often feel when faced with Christianity’s colloquialisms. However I think there’s sufficient reason to think that the life, death and New Life of Jesus means more than a personal antidote for sin, a mandate for a Church, or any other particularistic agenda. It includes those things, but is much, much more too. I hope, and have to believe.