It is common for atheists to cry "religion!" when they feel that "religion" has trumped science.
Firstly, what is the error in "religion" trumping science?
The error is that there is no way to verify the accuracy of religious so-called explanations. Remember, the metaphysicist has no laboratory.
Secondly, "religion" does not clarify that which science has failed at; "religion" makes it possible for science to clarify anything! (by the way, that was a very lengthy argument compacted into one sentence, so I can give more details if you wish)
Please do so: that sounds like poppycock to me.
God is the immaterial, infinite, eternal, holy, just, merciful, loving being who is the focal point of this universe, and upon whom, and by whom, the universe is based and created.
Evidence, please? Impressive gobbledygook is still gobbledygook.
My use of the word "heart" was not meant to be equated with the muscle in my body. Just like if you told your spouse that you "love them from the bottom of your heart", you would not expect them to actually think you meant the blood-pumping muscle in your body...
I would not use the phrase. I dislike ancient errors. Why not just say what you mean? Preaching is offensive to those of us who are not religious.