If God created the universe then it stands to reason that either:
1, He created the natural laws that rules the universe now. Or
2, He abided by the natural laws already in existence to perform His creations.

In either case there would be no conflict between true religion (properly understood) and science (properly understood). Any deviation on either side would present an apparent conflict.
Fortunately the field of science is able to continuously draw itself closer and closer to understanding truth by careful scrutiny and continued examination. False ideas can be ruled out through proper experimentation.
But as the research is conducted by humans, we can't rule out the potential for political, economic or other improper influence in 'findings'.

On the religious side there are additional challenges. Where a bad scientific theory can be outright disproved, a mistaken theological stance won't have it flaws revealed until either God Himself makes it known or an individual dies and finds out for themselves. Thus, there is little to 'thin the heard' of religious ideas. In addition the influence a person's faith can have on them makes religion a very attractive target for dictators looking to justify a war or some form of oppression.
If God created the universe then there must be truths related to Him. Either all those truths have been made known to humanity, some have been made known, or none have been made known.
If truths have been made known, they have either all been understood properly, some have been understood properly, or none has been.
Of those that had been understood properly, either all has remained understood throughout time, some has remained or none has remained.
IF there is a religion on earth that is fully correct it would not look very different than the other faulty ones on the surface. This makes it easy to discount them all as false.

The point is that there is not a short answer to that question. There are a number of incredibly intelligent people who are also deeply religious.

Religion and intellect are not incompatible and to say that they MUST be is to assume all the facts are known AND properly understood. Any reasonable person would agree that is not the case.

I apologize if I failed to express these ideas clearly. Each deserves more discussion but I am trying to keep it short for ease of reading.

I think the story of Christ is important for many people. The idea that one could be perfect yet human is interesting. The idea that you can leave defeated, yet return a King inspires me. Plus, Peterson says the Bible is important so there's more there than some credit. My two cents.

Well, I would think the question should be more one of “Faith” rather than religion ...
Religion should be completely understandable and supported by anyone professing to be an “Intellectual”.
What, after all, is “Religion”?
A Social Structure wherein a Way of Life is promoted and a structure wherein “morals” are espoused.
Faith on the other hand is also not incongruous with “Intellectualism” as there actually is loads of science that indicates that there IS “Something” that is driving everything.
Everything you see, touch, experience in any manner is simply an expression of energy which is expressed in a sine wave of various heights and lengths ... a “metronome” if you will ... each sine wave is perfect in any given aspect ... never varying ...
I admit to being puzzled by what has created these perfect, synchronous “waves” ... how some can be sound, light, smell, liquid, gas or solid ... each depending on the height and duration of the wave involved ... and yet they exist ... each one perfect.
I have “Faith” I simply don’t know “what” to attribute it to ...

I do not believe there is any separation between intelligence and belief. In fact i would debate about how you would not be intellectual at all if you did not believe. There has not been 1 single argument i have heard that disproves the existence of God.

How can it not be? Some of the wisest people I know are believers in God.

The two should be completely compatible on an individual basis. I can believe in God and science without conflict. I believe in intelligent design, and I believe God is the Intelligent Designer. Even Hawking said at the end of A Brief History of Time that we can only theorize back to within about 15 billionths of a second after the Big Bang. Then he said that if we get closer than that, there we will find God.

Man has innate curiosity within. The soul cries out for knowing what God knows. Man is frustrated at his inability to know it all, but is having fun trying to figure it all out. There may come a time when the mind of man succeeds in reasonably explaining the complete universe from the beginning to end. But we better take care of ourselves, because the end of the universe could be a long way off. If we are to have faith in the mathematical equations of cosmology, then why can't we have faith in an Intelligent Designer? Both things are theories in their own right, and require faith to accept as truth.

It is a shame that religion became tribal at its inception - dangerously tribal. Humans will be at odds with each other's religion for a long time to come, I suspect. However, the more contemplative mystics of various faiths are joining in the acceptance of all who seek spiritual one-ness. Plus, science and the Big Bang theory has been accepted by the Catholic church. I see this as progress that indicates a hope for the future.

As to the need for intellectuals and people of faith to coexist - I think they can. Just so long as arrogance is shed and open-mindedness prevails.

There is a long section of text at the bottom of the page

Religion complicates everything with commercial and sectarian politics . I do not have a religion . I have a personal , familial relationship with the Creator .

@Admin I'm seeing some javascript being displayed at the bottom of this page. Probably should check that out. Somebody forgot to close a code snippet, perhaps?

They're really not as at odds with each other as the atheist community and zealots would have you believe.

Heard a profound question asked on religion: Do we need to believe in God, or absolutely believe in God?...think that kinda falls under the umbrella of the question.

One might rephrase the question as how can ideology be compatible with intellectual life?

That insinuates it's impossible for anyone with any sort of IQ to be religeous.. Which kinda defeats the intention to be all inclusive and receptive to all stances within reason.

I'm not sure really how to approach an answer but I'll give it my best go.

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. What a person believes for their soul and world view doesn't have to contradict anything science, in it's ever changing form, has proven thus far. The only rift I see happening is when people who believe in god start thinking that all science is subjective to error no matter how many times it's proven across how many arenas of controllable reality and uncontrollable space.

That doesn't mean that science's soul purpose is to disprove god's existence either. Science rules out things like limitations placed on us by our own thoughts. Guided science isn't really science. Science is just testing what happens when a situation comes about, how it came about, and what was the result afterward. Peer review is for repeating that process and coming up with either similar, or dissimilar results and posting reviews accordingly. Science changes so fast that cures for cancer are being developed where no one thought that it would be possibly 30 years ago. Just treatment until death.

I think that the two are compatible because they go hand in hand. To oversimplify to the point of possibly losing the meaning of my argument... Faith is the why and Science is the how. Why in science changes constantly but the How stays the same most of the time, even when further steps or evolutions or developments change the direction of the steps, the hypothesis seldom flexes. Faith gives us a way to incorporate meaning in to the how, other than all of humanity simply existing because... reasons. Simply being evil to each other and bitter and nasty just because "that's the kind of person they are" rather than looking at the decisions they are making and weighing them against a grander scale of what might not be real as far as they define the term.

Problems come with the interpretations of faith and the conflicts therein. It'd be great if christians could get along with muslims in islam dominated spaces but it's insanely apparent that can't happen. They want to blame it on faith, I blame it on Wrath and Greed. IDeas of vengeance taken too far for too long by too many people who all needed to start pooling all their resources a long time ago to avoid where we are right now. But that's never happened before. Starting to think I won't get to see it in my lifetime either. Sadly enough.

Perfectly, as long as faith is used to replace evidence. There is nothing wrong with faith. I think we all have faith in things. We all desire certain theories to be true over others. And to continue our intelectual voyage, we often use faith to fill the potholes.

I could go to some significant lengths, but I will share this with you and answer any questions instead just because of the depth of the subject at hand.

[churchofreality.org]