I don't know, susan. I don't think we can split hairs like that with science and religion (at least to a point). It is in the nature of science to search for hard answers, evidence, and an amount of error. It is in the nature of religion to take a few things on faith and allow answers to include "my God..." or "in my region...". They are fundamentally different, like Judaism and Buddhism. To combine them would mean that either science would include not-so-evidential proofs (meta-physics) or religion enter into a more skeptical arena (which is already happening to some extent). But at some level, the two are going to collide. Maybe science will come around to what religion has always said, but the point is that we must allow science to go about finding the answers with evidence. Shouldn't an unbiased search for evidence of God eventually find Him?

Along the line of that thought, I'll have to draw quarum with the "coersive devil" statement you posted. If that were true, than the opposite would be "If God really existed, wouldn't it be in His best interest to: 1) Make himself known as God to all people so that they can "know Him and love Him". (i.e. someone born on a desert island would still know about the Judeo-Christian God)

2) Provide the means by which all people at all times can say that God definitaly exists (really, then we wouldn't be here arguing His existance but how or why He does)

In the long run, these arguments must also hold true. But what I'm more concerned about is Devil vs. God battle. Okay, the devil wants to destroy God and vice versa. But neither one can exist without the other (ying and yang). So that totally destroys their motives, its not in their best interest to destroy the other. So why do they even bother in our little daily lives? Is the entire universe built as a stage for our existance and this battle? These are the kind of theological questions that come up AFTER we have proved the existance of both God and the Devil. Let's not get ahead of ourselves.