Christian scientists...

[Orsorum]

I've been noticing, there seems to be a lot of criticism on this board that most Christians aren't trusting of the scientific process, or that they try to stifle scientific studies... etc. I'm just curious if anyone knows of any prominent scientists throughout history that were Christian.

I realize that the Catholic Church has done a great deal, throughout history, to stifly that process...Copernicus, etc. OTOH, you have men like Luke, a prominent and very intelligent historian.

Any thoughts? I would appreciate people not flaming... this is an honest question, one that I'd like to avoid turning into a flame war. Thanks!

 

[Kadarin]

From Rotten dot com's "Today in Rotten History":

May 9 1983

The all powerful and infallible Pope John Paul II reverses the condemnation of Galileo, issued by another all powerful and infallible Pope Urban VIII in 1633. The Church tried the scientist for heresy and forced him to recant basic facts of science, an error that the institution took 350 years to admit.

Speaks for itself...

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Actually the take I get is somewhat different. Many seem to want to force a division between science and religion. I personally see no automatic contradiction between religious faith and science. One just needs to keep an open mind about both.

 

[Optimus]

Popes aren't infallible about science, or about Galileo. JPII simply apologixed on behalf of the WRONG actions of a former Pope.

Same as if President bush issued an apology today on behalf of the Presidency for a past President's wrongdoings.

There have been bad Popes, Priests, and Cardinals in the past. There are some today as everyone knows with the scandal.

No bearing on infallibility or the truth/merit of the Church.

If Rotten, the bastion of truth and freedom that it is, wishes to take potshots, they should at least take EDUCATED ones. Saying that the Pope is "infallible" about things like Galileo is simple ignorance, and easily corrected with a simple search on the internet.

 

[Orsorum]

<< Actually the take I get is somewhat different. Many seem to want to force a division between science and religion. I personally see no automatic contradiction between religious faith and science. One just needs to keep an open mind about both. >>



That's pretty much what I've come to conclude, although that's still not set in stone for me... I think that, as much faith as people place in the scientific process, it can't explain everything - there are some things science will, by its nature, never be able to explain... i.e. the Big Bang (it's mostly speculation, despite the evidence... there's nothing that's been directly observed, including competing theories)... Evolution - show me the transitionary life forms. Etc. But faith without reason, logic or evidence is just as faulty.

 

[Optimus]

BTW, as a Catholic I am very much into science, etc.

I believe in evolution, ancient earth, dinosaurs, possible alien life, etc - none of which is out of tune with official Church teaching.

 

[Orsorum]

<< BTW, as a Catholic I am very much into science, etc.

I believe in evolution, ancient earth, dinosaurs, possible alien life, etc - none of which is out of tune with official Church teaching. >>



Aren't there quite a few Scriptures actually referring to a supposed aquatic dinosaur - leviathan?

 

[Nightfall]

The church seemingly has to stand up against scientists claims if they contradict their beliefs. I believe that you have to keep an open mind about both religion and science. There is no way one can totally find the other false. Not unless we invent the time machine to find out what really happened.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

<< From Rotten dot com's "Today in Rotten History": May 9 1983 The all powerful and infallible Pope John Paul II reverses the condemnation of Galileo, issued by another all powerful and infallible Pope Urban VIII in 1633. The Church tried the scientist for heresy and forced him to recant basic facts of science, an error that the institution took 350 years to admit. Speaks for itself... >>




Actually, you ought to do some research about the noble Galileo. Galileo was an ass and an opportunist. Indeed, he was vicious and paranoid. What he did to poor Kepler was terrible. Anyway, Urban was NOT against Galileo or for automatically discarding his work. Galileo forced the issue and demanded that the church accept his conclusions because after all he was Galileo. When he didnt get his way, he wrote a rather foolish play about the Pope. Urban was forced to take action against Galileo only after compromise could not be reached. All most ever know is how this little snippet of history ended.

 

[pulse8]

<< I believe in evolution, ancient earth, dinosaurs, possible alien life, etc - none of which is out of tune with official Church teaching. >>

How do you believe in God and evolution all at the same time?

 

[Orsorum]

<<

<< I believe in evolution, ancient earth, dinosaurs, possible alien life, etc - none of which is out of tune with official Church teaching. >>

How do you believe in God and evolution all at the same time? >>



There's nothing that inherently negates it. Personally, I believe in guided evolution... I don't think that current evolutionary theory can fully explain the changes that have occurred throughout the eons.

 

[Optimus]

<< How do you believe in God and evolution all at the same time? >>



Evolution is a method. God is a cause.

i.e., what is the one main Q science alone can't answer about the Big Bang (start of evolutionary process)?

What was there before that?

Whatever it was, it is eternal (had no beginning), infinite (contains all known existance), and able to ACT, without having been acted on (violation of the Laws of Thermodynamics).

So the question becomes - was this eternal, infinite, causeless causer sentient or not?

Thats a matter of belief... sentient = 'god", non-sentient = some kind of super-energy (a non-sentient 'god').

 

[pulse8]

<< There's nothing that inherently negates it. >>

Doesn't the Catholic church teach that God made Adam and Eve? I would imagine that negates it.

I don't want to come accross as a religion hater. I feel people can do as they please. I simply don't understand the thought.

 

[Optimus]

pulse8: Honest questions are always good!

The Catholic Church teaches that man could have evolved physically. The only rule is that the soul is created. God 'made' Adam and Eve but ti doesn't say HOW.

Here's the theory:

God set evolution in motion at the Big Bang. Over eons, it reached the point where apes evolved to a point where God endowed them with a created soul ("Adam" and "Eve").

 

[Orsorum]

<<

<< There's nothing that inherently negates it. >>

Doesn't the Catholic church teach that God made Adam and Eve? I would imagine that negates it.

I don't want to come accross as a religion hater. I feel people can do as they please. I simply don't understand the thought. >>



The Christian church teaches that God made Adam and Eve... read, I think, "The Problem With Pain", maybe, by CS Lewis, he talks about Adam and Eve - he was a guided evolutionist, too, he explains his thoughts on it much more eloquently than I ever could.

Nothing wrong with questions, that's how people learn.

 

[incallisto]

"Robert Boyle, James Clerk Maxwell, Blaise Pascal, Max Plank, Michael Faraday, and Sir Isaac Newton. All of which kept journals that acknowledge their beliefs in Christianity." -Dr. Hugh Ross, Ph.D., M.S., B.S., Th.D.

 

[Capn]

When I saw this thread topic I figured it was a question about the Christian Science church.

While historically at times the Church and science have had adversarial roles that is not inherent in their respective natures. Both are, at their roots, a search for the truth.

 

[Orsorum]

<< "Robert Boyle, James Clerk Maxwell, Blaise Pascal, Max Plank, Michael Faraday, and Sir Isaac Newton. All of which kept journals that acknowledge their beliefs in Christianity." -Dr. Hugh Ross, Ph.D., M.S., B.S., Th.D. >>



Never knew that Pascal and Plank were Christians... I think I'd heard about Newton. Cool, thanks!

 

[Ameesh]

<< "Robert Boyle, James Clerk Maxwell, Blaise Pascal, Max Plank, Michael Faraday, and Sir Isaac Newton. All of which kept journals that acknowledge their beliefs in Christianity." -Dr. Hugh Ross, Ph.D., M.S., B.S., Th.D. >>




link?

 

[skace]

"Evolution is a method. God is a cause.

i.e., what is the one main Q science alone can't answer about the Big Bang (start of evolutionary process)?

What was there before that?

Whatever it was, it is eternal (had no beginning), infinite (contains all known existance), and able to ACT, without having been acted on (violation of the Laws of Thermodynamics).

So the question becomes - was this eternal, infinite, causeless causer sentient or not?

Thats a matter of belief... sentient = 'god", non-sentient = some kind of super-energy (a non-sentient 'god')."

Just to throw a tidbit in here. You make it sound like there is no question that before the big bang there MUST have been something eternal. Does the thought ever enter your mind that the big bang wasn't even the beginning? Perhaps it was an end that triggered a new beginning? It is very hard for science to explain things beyond their scope of technology at the time, this goes for many things in history. And everytime an explanation goes beyond science... people turn to religion as the OBVIOUS answer. Well it isn't the answer, it is a copout.

 

[Kadarin]

<<

<< From Rotten dot com's "Today in Rotten History": May 9 1983 The all powerful and infallible Pope John Paul II reverses the condemnation of Galileo, issued by another all powerful and infallible Pope Urban VIII in 1633. The Church tried the scientist for heresy and forced him to recant basic facts of science, an error that the institution took 350 years to admit. Speaks for itself... >>




Actually, you ought to do some research about the noble Galileo. Galileo was an ass and an opportunist. Indeed, he was vicious and paranoid. What he did to poor Kepler was terrible. Anyway, Urban was NOT against Galileo or for automatically discarding his work. Galileo forced the issue and demanded that the church accept his conclusions because after all he was Galileo. When he didnt get his way, he wrote a rather foolish play about the Pope. Urban was forced to take action against Galileo only after compromise could not be reached. All most ever know is how this little snippet of history ended. >>



I am not personally defending Galileo, nor Rotten dot com. While my personal beliefs tend to lean against organized religion, I was merely having fun with the topic. I did, however, do a bit of Googlewhacking, and found this link, which (given the source) may or may not be somewhat biased. Interesting story...

 

[Optimus]

skace:

First, I love the "has an intelligent thought ever even crossed your mind?" attitude - very mature and condusive to open discussion (/sarcasm).

You mean an infinite loop of matter expanding and contracting? Of course.

At the point of full contraction and expansion (the Big Bang), matter would be energy. This is an eternally existing energy as it has always been in the cycle of collapse and expansion.

Again - it ascribes the propertes of being eternal, cause-less, and encompasing of all of creation into itself.

I covered that. One Big Bang or 2. 2 or a Billion. A Billion or a Loop.

If you'd like to respond and discuss, try not to bring the talking down, and condescending attitude, okay? Lose the "religious = idiot" assumption and we can talk.

 

[SpecialEd]

I'm with Optimus on this one... religion and science don't have to contradict each other. i'm on the list that believes both.

 

[Nefrodite]

isn't christian science the sect that wouldn't bring a kid to the hospital even if he were dying?

 

[Netopia]

<< The Catholic Church teaches that man could have evolved physically. The only rule is that the soul is created. God 'made' Adam and Eve but ti doesn't say HOW. >>

I beg your pardon? I do believe you've read Genesis more than once and the Bible explicitly says "how" God made Adam and Eve.

The other problem with some Christians (myself being one) and evolution is that the Bible teaches that death is a result of sin... i.e. before there was sin there was no death. Evolution cannot work without lots and lots of cycles of life and death, so the two negate each other. Some Christians get around this by saying that only spiritual death is caused by the occurance of sin, however, the Apostle Paul makes it clear that all of creation (the physical realm) groans under the weight of sin and the corruption it caused.

As for Christians who are/were Scientists, I would put Michael Faraday in that group. Also Carl Sagan is now a firm believer!

Joe