<p>This paper proposes a hermeneutic framework for reconciling scientific and religious knowledge through textual interpretation. Challenging narratives of inherent conflict, it argues that semantic underdeterminacy—the gap between literal meaning and communicative intent—permits interpretations of sacred texts that are compatible with scientific theories. The analysis unfolds in four stages. First, textual interpretation is established as an instance of inference to the best explanation (IBE), where readers construct meaning through contextual enrichment, guided by criteria such as coherence, simplicity, and explanatory power. Second, the paper argues that, from a religious perspective, there exists an epistemic parity between religious and scientific knowledge: both rely on IBE as a rational framework, and for theistic believers, both derive credibility as complementary manifestations of divine authorship. Third, drawing on Abrahamic and especially Islamic interpretive traditions, it shows how scientific theories can serve as contextual tools for scriptural understanding, enabling principled reinterpretation in the face of apparent conflict. Crucially, this approach neither subordinates scripture to science nor neglects textual historicity; rather, it leverages semantic underdeterminacy to harmonize revelation in both nature and text. Finally, the framework is tested against key objections. The analysis demonstrates that, when grounded in the philosophy of language and epistemology—rather than theological or scientific absolutism—this approach preserves intellectual integrity for religious believers while engaging scientific knowledge. The result is a theoretically rigorous and practically workable model for science-religion dialogue that respects both empirical inquiry and theological commitment.</p>