It depends upon what one believes science is supposed to do (and if one views science to be truth-telling or simply pragmatic; and it also depends upon which religion is being discussed.
For the moment, let us assume that science is not merely concerned with a pragmatic approach, but that science is capable of bringing one closer to the truth of the way in which things are.
Now, from the Christian faith perspective, there ought be no discord at all between what science finds to be true, and what the Christian faith declares to be true – as, of course, both are actually trying to describe reality as it really is. On this view, it is obviously clear that, in principle, there may be not be any discord between the two – so long as the two are in agreement . This qualification, then, is also why we see that it is possible, in principle, for there to be “conflict.” For instance, if the Scriptures were to declare that the universe began at some point in time (which it does), and science were to affirm that the universe is eternal (which it did for some time) then one readily notices a conflict between the two. Again, this is only possible if both the religion in question and science are both making objective claims concerning reality as it really is. At this point, it should be said that, in principle, if both are making accurate claims concerning the way in which reality is, then there should be no conflict at all – and if there is, then the theologian is mistaken in his interpretation of the scripture, or the scientist is mistaken in his interpretation of his own data. The point being that if God has written both the book of nature and the book of Scripture, then it is an impossibility for a true conflict to arise.
Now, at this point, we must return to the first statement that was made: What if the view of science, again, is supposedly bringing one closer to the truth of the way reality actually is and a major faith system/religion claims that “reality” is merely an illusion, such as Buddhism, Hinduism, and many ‘New Age’ systems? I believe that one would be very hard-pressed to deny that a conflict is present between the two systems – seeing as to how both are apparently trying to describe reality. It would seem that the best “science” could do in this comparison is reduce itself to merely the pragmatic (though all of this an illusion, our theories, medicines, etc. still “work” within the illusion), but must drop the claim that science is discovering, or explaining the nature of reality. However, on the other hand, if the scientist is attaining the truth of the way reality actually is, then the belief of the Hindu, Buddhist, or “New Ager,” is just simply false – reality, as such, is not an illusion – pathogens, germs, and speeding bullets are deadly whether you believe them to be “non-real” or not. Meaning that, in principle, one could never ‘overcome’ them by ‘attuning oneself’ to their ‘non-real’ status. I would be willing to say that this is somewhat of a conflict.
Obviously, much more could be said if only by going back to the initial statement itself and making another comparison: But what if, as some scientists believe, ‘science’ does not claim to describe and evaluate reality as it is but claims instead that, science is only that which works, while it is up to philosophy and religion to decide what reality actually is? But let us leave this comparison for now and go back to make a last point on the comparison that both science and religion – specifically the Christian religion – are trying to describe reality as it actually is. It would seem that, if this to be the case, and to make a final point, the unmasked conflict is actually between science and an imported naturalistic framework, as opposed to Christian religion, as such.
In conclusion, there ought not be a conflict between the Christian religion and science – if, fundamentally, 1) both are claiming to describe reality as it is and 2) both are correct in their interpretations of the available evidence/data, whether it be Scriptural or natural.
But, there is actually a terrible conflict between a science that declares itself capable of bringing one closer to the truth of the way in which things are and the pure forms of the religions of Buddhism, Hinduism, and New Age belief systems that claim our understanding of reality to be “illusory.”