[103] how they enter their life, continuously, again and again, in all great and important moments; how they direct reality. In the Old Testament, God^a appears in special moments--in the Prophets^b; He appears in special historical events--in the crowning of kings, in the judgment about them, in battles, in salvation of cities, in destruction of kingdoms--"the world is full of gods." In this whole kind of thinking, there is no possible conflict because the supernatural and the natural are on one and the same place. The world is full of divine-sacred, numinous power. Trees and stones and clouds are not what they are for us--things--but they are filled with the awe-inspiring presence of that which is the Ultimate. Now let's suppose that such a worldview, which is often hardly distinguished from magical techniques, although logicall [sic.], the distinction is clear--that such a worldview has still its "residua," in all of us in every- body; that the human race is not completely beyond this stage, and that for many people this is not the form in which the divine MUST be present if they can accept it at all; and that for others the divine cannot be seen in any other way, and that for this reason they reject it altogether. This is the large ten- and perhaps hundred-thousands of years' background to the problem of Religion and Science. And without this background, we simply wouldn't be able to understand the sharpness of the conflict, the emotional elements connected with it all the time. The conflict started with the interpretation of the natural as natural, with the Greek concept of "phusis," "natura" in Latin, both words meaning "that which grows by itself." When the early Greek philosophers wrote their poems "peri phuseos" ("about nature"), they tried to describe and to calculate what was observable and calculable. But this was an attitude of a quite different character from the character of the immediate experience of the numinous, the divine, in everything. They didn't intend to deny the presence of the divine in reality, they are rightly called "the old theologians"-- meaning that there was much theology^c still in their philosophy^d--but the APPROACH was different. And out of this approach, out of the method, some fundamental change of man's relationship to reality