If a religion has the dogma that the earth was created in six days, it has certainly a big problem with science.
Why? How many days does it take to create the Earth?
On the other hand, modern Protestantism for instance does not contain dogmas and thus is compatible with science
Thats because 'modern Protestantism' does not believe the Bible literally. Don't you think it is a weak and cowardly for a religion to throw out whats contained in its Holy Book in order to 'modernize' and fit with science or to fit with society?
Some people consider Atheism a religion. If that is the case, then it's a religion that is also compatible with science.
I have more respect for any sincere atheist then I would for a Protestant who would conform simply because its the easiest, most appeasing way.
If there is a God, and
if He did inspire the Bible then it might very well conflict and become incompatible with mainstream science. Of course. Specifically the segment of Christianity which actually believes that the Bible is the Word of God. And those that believe the Genesis report of Creation. But this incompatibility poses no problem.
this is based on his own unproven belief that science can disprove religion
correct.
no one thinks faith == proof. faith is belief without proof.
I do. But this way:
Faith is belief based on internal, personal proof.
Science is belief based on external, impersonal proof.
Prepare to have your mind blow a gasket:
Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Like to make an attempt at interpreting that verse? Instead of coming up with individual ideas about what faith might or might not be...why not check out the manual where it is defined? I don't suppose this will fit with 'modern Protestantism' but I like to read the Bible simply for what it says.
