Science says you can use electricity to turn water into oxygen and hydrogen and then burn them to get water again. It further says what the flame will look like and how much heat it will produce etc etc. Now, if any of that seems unlikely it’s fairly cheap to verify, if something else bothers you then verify that.
Sure, verification of every idea is impossible, but pick a few at random and that should logically give you more confidence in the others.
On the other hand with matters of faith you can’t verify any of it. Which should then give you some pause.
but you can verify if it does make your and everyone elses life better or not.
those that claim to be messengers of god should be recognized by their fruits, that is, by the effect they have on society.
Religious people often asks me if I only believe in things that I can prove. I reply that I can prove nothing other than my own existence, and I can't even prove the nature of that existence. I accept things that are useful to me and abandon them when they are no longer useful. I may later come back to accept them if they return to being useful (as they are likely to do).
Like most other people in the world, I believe in lots of things. Life is pretty uncomfortable without belief. I don't happen to believe in the things that major religions believe in, but I don't see it as a problem. Believing something, or not believing something is neither here nor there. I am 100% OK with the idea that my beliefs may be wrong. In fact, I rather suspect they are. Why should that worry me?
How important is our belief of something vs the acceptance of something that appears to work? Are we invested in the unknowable truth? Does it matter to us if we are wrong?
I feel that it's the importance we assign to being right in our beliefs that defines our religions.
in the end both depend on the absence of evidence contradicting the claims.
but that also means that science and religion can co-exist if they do not contradict each other.
we should accept on either side that anything with contradictory evidence can obviously not be true, and stop to pit one side against the other.
any contradictions we find on either side are a sign of misinterpretation of either the scientific evidence or of the religious claims. and on both sides we then need to make an effort to find a better interpretation.
i believe that doing that is possible. even if we remove everything from religions that contradicts current scientific theories there is still a whole lot left for a spiritual belief.