One key difference between religion and science, according to many scientists at least, is that religion posits one unchanging and absolute truth, while science produces a flow of provisional, replaceable truths. According to this view, the foundations of religious knowledge were revealed and locked in place at a particular point in time, while scientific knowledge has continued to evolve and grow over time.
Now imagine that their histories had been reversed. Imagine that scientific knowledge had been revealed once and for all in antiquity, while religious knowledge had been open-ended. In other words, imagine early science morphing into a religion. What might that have looked like, and meant for the world?
So how do you turn science into a religion? Easy. By making a great scientist divine. And how do you make a scientist divine? Again, easy. By writing a book claiming he is divine. And how do you make the book believable? Yet again, by claiming it’s divine (or
— source counterpunch.org | Paul Strutynski | Sep 13, 2021