[edsheppa]

I guess I should ask you the same question.

No, I would not classify myself as religious.

I think God is non-coercive.... Is this the kind of attribute you are asking for?

That depends. Have you decided that it is true? Are the poeple who argue that He is coercive wrong?

[unlearner]

"That depends. Have you decided that it is true? Are the people who argue that He is coercive wrong?"

They are "wrong" in the sense that saying one plus one equals three is "wrong" within a particular mathematical theory. Certainly you would not say a math teacher is unscientific for grading his students' homework.

Obviously religious faith involves morality. Science also involves moral judgments. Science can describe the impact of excessive alcohol consumption on the ability to drive safely. The moral judgment based on this information is not science, but is not unscientific.

All I am asking is to judge theology on the same basis. So, I conclude that whether a person who views God as coercive is "right" or "wrong", in the moral sense, is irrelevant here.

Religious faith encompasses more than just science, it also pursues TRUTH which science cannot attain by itself. This notwithstanding, because religious faith is not unscientific, it should be possible to express it in scientific terms.

Further, would you make the same demand of an evolutionist? In other words, if a person believes the common ancestry of man and apes is TRUE, then is he no longer qualified to be a science teacher?

So, for the sake of argument, let's describe the tenet as more useful.