Spinoza's tactic was to concede the right to religion to say what is moral. He didn't mean it. Because man is part of nature and subject to the "laws of nature" his conclusions about morality must conform to what "divine reason" tells us through science.
Actually he meant it. It's a false dichotomy, science are not opposed. How could they be with the same author?
That's what I gathered from the article. Spinoza would have played Jack Nicholson against Tom Cruise and shouted to us weak humans: "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"