IF I WAS asked to give my top 5 all time favourite TV programmes, QI would definitely be somewhere near the top. In my mind, Stephen Fry - with his particular brand of unashamedly highbrow and intelligent comedy - can do no wrong. His performance as General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay Melchett in Blackadder Goes Forth is still one of the funniest in any sitcom. Add to this the razor sharp, ultra naive wit of Alan Davies, and you have a hilariously funny show.

The concept behind QI, as unconventional as its cast, works as well: a game show where points are awarded not for right answers, but for being interesting. It revolves around the premise that 'curiosity' is one of the most primal, yet most underdeveloped facets of human nature and attempts, in its own unique style, to redress the balance.

The official QI website says this, 'The human brain is the most complex object in the known Universe, with as many neurons as there are trees in the Amazon rain-forest. The number of possible connections in a single human brain is said to exceed the number of particles in the universe. But what are we doing with this extraordinary organ between our ears? Reading Hello is what. Doing the lottery in the pathetic hope that things would be all right if we were on a yacht.'
The task of science is to push the boundaries of curiosity and to reach ever tentatively towards that allusive idea of truth, truth defined by fact. For this reason it has traditionally been considered as the anathema of religion, which also seeks for truth, but truth defined by faith. Science and religion: two estranged and constantly bickering siblings trying to grasp after the same cookie. The question is, which truth do we use our brains to seek after?

Jesus once said to his followers, 'If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.'

Unfortunately, the 'truths' we often seek after - especially where science and religion seem to clash - take us captive, not set us free. Was the world created in six days? Are miracles real? Was there really a worldwide flood?

Whichever side of these questions we stand on, sometimes arguing our point can become an end in itself. Jesus was referring to a greater truth, one that transcends such petty squabbles: the truth of God, of love and of resurrection.

This ultimate truth neither affirms nor denies any of the others, but reveals them for what they are in comparison: unimportant.

You see, it's a question of context. I am not saying for one moment that these issues do not matter and should not be debated, only that they need to be debated with full recognition of what they are.

As many a wise person has said before, the main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing. Sadly, some Christians do not seem able to discern between the main thing and any other thing. We need to stop wasting time, money and effort in an attempt to promote our own opinions on such contested 'truths', and instead emulate the apostle Paul, who endeavoured to preach nothing except Jesus Christ and him crucified.

Alister McGrath, professor of historical theology at Oxford University, writes that, 'The relationsihip between science and religion is complex and variegated - but it could never conceivably be represented as a state of total war.'

If we are able to achieve and maintain the correct attitude, if we are able to hold before us at all times the real goal of our seeking - that is, a deeper understanding of God's truth revealed in Christ - then far from being diametrically opposed, the debates revolving around science and religion are indeed helpful and healthy.

The Revd James Karran is assistant minister at Ararat Baptist Church in Cardiff and one of the founders of Solace ? Church in a Bar, www.solace-cardiff.org.uk