1. Hello Guest! You are browsing the forums as a guest; you will have limited permissions as a guest so we advise registering to enjoy the forums fully. Remember: we are a Christian ONLY site - any user who is not Christian will not be approved. Blessings, Christian Forum Site Staff
    Dismiss Notice

Can I Be A Scientist And A Christian?

Discussion in 'General Discussions' started by daily devotion, May 2, 2014.

  1. Years ago, when I pastored a church in Hawaii, I met a young woman named Mary, who was working on her Ph.D. in biology. On the one hand, Mary felt drawn to Christianity. But on the other hand, she struggled with the issue of science and faith, especially evolution. She told me, "I want to believe in God, but I cannot forfeit my mind in the process." She then asked me a question I will never forget. She said, "Dr. Thielen, can I be a scientist and a Christian?"
    People answer that question differently. Some say science and faith don't mix, that you have to pick a side. Others argue science and faith are not mutually exclusive, that one can be both a person of faith and science. Two months ago, during the premiere episode of the remade TV show,Cosmos, this tension between faith and science was vividly portrayed. Perhaps the best example of this long-standing faith/science tension is the ongoing debate over evolution.
    Although an oversimplification, three major options exist when it comes to evolution. The first option can be called "atheistic evolution." For example, Bill Nye, "The Science Guy" argues that we live in an evolving universe that began with the Big Bang, with no need or evidence for a creator. According to a2012 Gallup Poll, 15 percent of Americansaffirm this view.
    The second option is called "scientific creationism." This view, held by many conservative Christians, insists on a literal reading of Genesis 1-2 to explain the details of creation. Proponents of scientific creationism argue that evolution is a myth, a lie and an enemy of faith. It may surprise you to learn that large numbers of Americans affirm this view. In the Gallup Poll mentioned above, 46 percent of Americans said they believed that God created human beings, fully-formed, not evolved, less than 10 thousand years ago.
    In spite of a large following, scientific creationism presents major problems. First, it has scientific problems. It denies virtually every branch of modern science including physics, chemistry, cosmology, geology, anthropology, genetics and biology. From a scientific perspective, creation science is hopelessly flawed. Not only does this position have scientific problems, but it also has biblical problems. Contrary to what this view teaches, the Bible is not a science book. The book of Genesis was never written to give us a scientific explanation of creation. In fact, Genesis has two completely different creation stories, one in Genesis 1:1-2:3 and another in Genesis 2:4-25. The two accounts don't agree with each other and cannot be reconciled. For example, in the first account man is created last, but in the second account man is created first. So what's the deal? The deal is that the Bible cares little about science and very much about theology. Beyond the obvious scientific and biblical problems with scientific creationism, its biggest flaw is that it forces people to make an either/or choice between science and faith, a totally unnecessary choice.
    A third, more promising Christian position concerning creation is called "theistic evolution." Theistic evolution affirms, along with science, that the universe was created by some kind of evolutionary process. However, unlike atheism, this view believes that God directed that process. This position claims that God created the universe but did so through the process of evolution. Theistic evolution is the overwhelming position of scientists who are also believers. It's also the position of most mainline Christians. Theistic evolution provides a satisfying synthesis of science and faith that makes sense for millions of Christian believers.
    Years ago a conservative pastor asked me, "Do you believe in creationism, or do you believe in evolution?" I said, "Yes." He gave me a strange look and said, "What do you mean, 'yes.'" I said, "Yes, I believe in creationism. And yes, I believe in evolution. I believe God created the world, but I believe God created through evolution." He was not happy with that answer, and you may not be happy with that answer either. But, for millions of Christians, theistic evolution is the only option that makes both spiritual and scientific sense.
    Several years ago, the state of Kansas fought a major battle over the teaching of evolution in the public school system. Of course, that battle is not new. Way back in 1925, evolution was hotly debated in a Tennessee courtroom. A public school teacher named John Scopes was put on trial for violating a state law against teaching evolution in public schools. They called it the "Scopes Monkey Trial." During the proceedings battle lines were drawn; no middle ground existed. You either believed in godless, atheistic evolution; or else you believed in God, Christianity and the Bible.
    Hollywood made a movie about that trial, which became a classic, calledInherit the Wind. In the closing scene of the movie, the attorney who defended John Scopes for teaching evolution was picking up his things from a table, including two books. The first book wasThe Origin of Speciesby Charles Darwin, which first laid out the theory of evolution. The second book was the Bible. The attorney picked up Darwin'sOrigin of Speciesand then set it down. Then he picked up the Bible and set it down. Back and forth he went, holding one book, then the other. Which to choose? Biology or Genesis? Reason or faith? Science or Spirit? Finally, the attorney picked up both books, Darwin'sOrigin of Speciesand the Bible, tucked them under his arm, and walked out of the courtroom.
    And so Mary, the young biology Ph.D. student asked me, "Can I be a scientist and a Christian?" The answer is yes -- a thousand times yes!

    http://www.believersworld.net/2014/05/can-i-be-scientist-and-christian.html
     
    KingJ and Huntingteckel say Amen and like this.
  2. The question should really be "Can I believe secular science and the Word of God?"

    The answer? No.

    Can you be a Christian and believe in macro-evolution? Sure, it's just strange why you would, considering the very first chapter of the Bible disagrees with you.
     
    Major likes this.
  3. This is a false dilemma. The question is: can a person be a scietific skeptic and a theist at the same time?
     
  4. Yes. There are many scientist that are believers.

    A lot of scientist realize that with how complicated creation is that there is/was intelligent design.

    Example: The sexes. Look at how man(and woman) and so many animals are male and female. It seems unrealistic that that happened by chance(evolution).

    Also, and I'm not sure how true this is, but scientist have taken in a controlled environment like they believe was around the time life came into existence, and they zapped ooze with electricity in many attempts to create life from non-living material, and were unsuccessful.
     
  5. Yes you can. Being a Christian means you believe Jesus was the son of God and He died for you. I'm all for science. The reason atheists think we are stupid is because Christians ignore reality when they ignore science.
     
  6. D - evolution is the exact opposite of chance.

    HT - I think that theist are intelligent. There is a huge difference between ideas and a person's abilities.
     
  7. Actually I suspect that it takes a lot more cognitive work to be a theist.
     

  8. All I'm saying is that Christians have a tendency to ignore scientific truths because they feel it is against the Bible. We shouldn't deny facts because we feel it disagrees with something that was never meant to be a science book.
     
  9. It does. The Bible calls the man who says there is no God a fool.

    I am really just scared for you, because I don't want you to wait until you're on your deathbed to finally say to yourself "Oh God, save me! I was wrong!" :(

    Because believe me its not fun being in that position.

    I would be soo happy (we all would) if you and every other atheist would just accept what Jesus did on the cross.

    The God of the Bible is the only God who says we are wicked yet offers us salvation free of charge. Hes honest, just, and graceful.
     
    ixoye_8, Ravindran and Huntingteckel says Amen and like this.
  10. I think that depends on the indvidual and the church. For example: while the catholic church accepts evolution, some individual catholics do not.
     
  11. The Catholic Church does seem way more accepting of science. Most of the churches where I live refuse to even listen to anything about science relating to evolution or the age of the earth.
     
  12. Thank you for this post.

    It is touching.

    I think it shows you have a well developed sense of empathy and morality.

    I just can't agree on the god part.

    If my presense is a cause of discomfort, I will happily leave.
     
  13. I have found that there are some welcoming and science freindly communities out there. The UUs and Sunday Assembly spring to mind.

    I have attended services of both groups.
     
  14. I think you can as long as you do not have a literal interpretation of the bible.
     
  15. Indeed they can and many are. However, if she wishes to teach, they just won't let her. The academia Nazis won't allow it. If one believes in evolution they're questioning God because evolution was designed to remove God from our conscience so they sear it with a hot iron. In fact, if science would embrace the literal word of God they'd be much further along in their knowledge.
     
  16. "In fact, if science would embrace the literal word of God they'd be much further along in their knowledge."

    That's an interesting statement to make. How so?
     
  17. Facts are facts. Interpretation of the facts ... that's something else.
     
  18. I agree. I'm not convinced on evolution for that very reason. It just seemed to be based more in faith than science to me. Maybe I'm just ignorant to some major evidence that I just haven't seen though.

    As for the age of earth though, there are so many ways that scientists have been able to tell how old it is. It's not like they are basing it on one test.
     
  19. As long as you don't have a literal interpretation of the creation text, yes. I agree. I don't know if that ever was meant to be taken at face value anyway.
     

Share This Page