Changes

It is an apologetic put forward by [[liberal]] evolutionist [[Stephen Jay Gould]].<ref>[http://www.ling.rochester.edu/~feldman/philosophy152/gould.htm Nonoverlapping Magisteria], Stephen Jay Gould, March 1997</ref> Gould described NOMA as "a blessedly simple and entirely conventional resolution to ... the supposed conflict between science and religion."

It is an apologetic put forward by [[liberal]] evolutionist [[Stephen Jay Gould]].<ref>[http://www.ling.rochester.edu/~feldman/philosophy152/gould.htm Nonoverlapping Magisteria], Stephen Jay Gould, March 1997</ref> Gould described NOMA as "a blessedly simple and entirely conventional resolution to ... the supposed conflict between science and religion."

Magisterium is defined as "a domain where one form of teaching holds the appropriate tools for meaningful discourse and resolution" and the NOMA principle is "the magisterium of science covers the empirical realm: what the Universe is made of (fact) and why does it work in this way (theory). The magisterium of religion extends over questions of ultimate meaning and moral value. These two magisteria do not overlap, nor do they encompass all inquiry (consider, for example, the magisterium of art and the meaning of beauty)."

[[Magisterium]] is defined as "a domain where one form of teaching holds the appropriate tools for meaningful discourse and resolution" and the NOMA principle is "the magisterium of science covers the empirical realm: what the Universe is made of (fact) and why does it work in this way (theory). The magisterium of religion extends over questions of ultimate meaning and moral value. These two magisteria do not overlap, nor do they encompass all inquiry (consider, for example, the magisterium of art and the meaning of beauty)."

This theory is demonstrably faulty because it is obvious that the [[Intelligent Design|intelligent design]] of the universe would leave behind perceptible evidence allowing the existence of God to be inferred without reference to faith. Furthermore, the NOMA principle would directly contradict Biblical evidence of miracles which if observable by scientists would be demonstrably true.  

This theory is demonstrably faulty because it is obvious that the [[Intelligent Design|intelligent design]] of the universe would leave behind perceptible evidence allowing the existence of God to be inferred without reference to faith. Furthermore, the NOMA principle would directly contradict Biblical evidence of miracles which if observable by scientists would be demonstrably true.