Science is the best for getting facts but all religion gives is opinion

Some contend that science is fact and religion is opinion. To this it is answered by believers that when you are given facts you must interpret them. You can interpret them wrongly. Believers are saying then that what is called scientific fact is really just scientific interpretation. If so then it's not really fact as far as science is concerned. We are told that the need for interpretation means that what science says is not necessary fact. But religion must have a bigger problem with interpretation than science does for it does not use tests and methods to get at the truth and no religion agrees with the next religion. Science cares about evidence which gives it little scope for misinterpretation. Science does all it can to avoid interpretations being imposed on its findings. It aims for what speaks for itself and avoids the need for interpretation. If it misses that aim it does not want to. Religion is really exaggerating science's danger of misinterpreting. Is science misinterpreting or could it be when it says a cancer tumour that is easy to remove must be cut away? Science tests and retests in order to minimise the need for interpretation.

If science has a handicap in the area of interpretation, then why does science have a greater level of agreement than religion has? The answer is that science's claims are testable and religion's are not.
 
What is not testable should be treated with caution - if you get involved then do not get too involved!  Religion is a call for deep commitment.  Tell it where to go.