>>2713961Well I don't mean it as if science is bad, just that it has built-in limitations.
If you define science, you'll come up with something similar to
Science: the observation and modeling of the natural world.
Anything supernatural, weather true or false, cannot even be touched by science. (unless it interacts with the natural world with some proxy)
Some of mathematics has real world representations like adding and geometry, but lot's of higher mathematics only exists in our books because we thought about it. Pi as a pure real number has no real world circle round enough to represent it.
Likewise, the God of creation cannot, by definition be constrained to the creation He created. The only evidence we could find of Him is evidence He intended to leave for us, like the Bible.
It's like Hamlet trying to understand Shakespeare. Shakespeare controlled every aspect of that world. He would have to write himself into the story to meet Hamlet.
