# Christians: Why are scientists more likely to be non-believers? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 1, 2013, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322 "2013-07-01T06:22:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 23
**Author:** ![dougie\_monty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@dougie\_monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougie_monty)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/441 "2013-07-14T04:25:45Z")
> [@Cyros](#): > > I’m not the one who is taking the conclusions from experimental results far beyond where they can reasonably be taken. Let me put it this way: Pasteur’s hay-infusion containers were put on display in a Paris museum. According to the text, as of the date the textbook went to press, “spontaneous generation is yet to begin within them.” Pasteur also published a dissertation in which he presented divine creation as the only possible initiator of life on earth. Not long after this, a meteorite containing some kind of bacteria or microbes–eventually found to be a fake–was announced as a “scientific” discovery. ---
**Author:** ![Schism](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/97f17d/32.png) [@Schism](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Schism)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/442 "2013-07-14T06:13:11Z")
My father graduated from Northeastern U. with a degree in nuclear engineering and went on to be head of Nuclear Safety at General Electrics Vallecitos Reactor facility in Northern California. He quit this well paying career to go to seminary school and become an Episcopal priest. He said he had “been called” by God to do this. Since I know my father to be sane I have no choice but to believe that this is true. After 25 years or so he retired. I have always tried to reconcile his scientific background with his belief in God. (With me it didn’t take.) How could this man whose education and job dealt with hard science put so much faith into something as squishy as religion? We never really talked about it and I regret not knowing the answer. I suppose the Church satisfied his need to affect people in a positive way. He certainly was no bible-thumping, scripture spouter. After church it was the 49er game and a martini. So, I know this is a one-off but my personal experience is that science and religion are not mutually exclusive. ---
**Author:** ![Bozuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/edb3f5/32.png) [@Bozuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bozuit)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/443 "2013-07-14T12:00:19Z")
> [@dougie\_monty](#): > > Let me put it this way: Pasteur’s hay-infusion containers were put on display in a Paris museum. According to the text, as of the date the textbook went to press, “spontaneous generation is yet to begin within them.” > > Pasteur also published a dissertation in which he presented divine creation as the only possible initiator of life on earth. Not long after this, a meteorite containing some kind of bacteria or microbes–eventually found to be a fake–was announced as a “scientific” discovery. What’s your overall point? Does any of this lead you to a particular conclusion? ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 12:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/444 "2013-07-14T12:29:09Z")
> [@huck](#): > > Yes, I do know that people have hallucinations; I haven’t had any that I know of. But I don’t and never have argued that anyone else should be convinced by the experience I had (I’ve never even described it to anyone and likely never will). That seems to be de rigueur among liberal Christians. You know you don’t have objective evidence to support your claims, so you all go back to your personal experience, for which most of you are too embarrassed to mention. “Hide it under a bushel” seems to be the liberal Christian mantra. > [@](#): > > As I’ve said, accepting it as truth has made my life better… How do you know? Did you watch those video’s yet? You sound like the person who says they wouldn’t want to live in a world without a diamond the size of a refrigerator buried in their backyard. Maybe you didn’t like the video because Harris tagged you so perfectly. > [@](#): > > Certainly there are going to be differences of opinion about Christianity, lots who disagree with me, quite a number particularly in the US at present who want to use Christianity and the bible as weapons in causes I consider unjust and unwise. See, you do get it! You help prop up weapons that are unjust and unwise! > [@](#): > > I assure you that in general fundamentalist Christians think at least as badly of me and my ilk as you and Kable do. Without a doubt. I bet they think you are a phony Christian who’s love of worldly morals is leading to societal decay. Based on scripture, I think they have a good point. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/445 "2013-07-14T12:38:13Z")
> [@huck](#): > > I don’t feel I’m in a position to say what they “should” believe about it, only that if the bible is used to promote hatred and unkindness, or to force one’s religion on others, it is used wrongly. What makes you think that’s the wrong use of it? The Bible gives plenty of examples of forcing religion on others. Maybe a bit more of just killing those others, and taking the land for yourself. Haven’t you read it? > [@](#): > > It is so odd to see such hostility expressed here (not by you, Voyager) against liberal Christians. I wish some of you (maybe even Harris and Grayling) could come along to my church and meet the folks–not to convert you, just so you could see and talk to people who do their very best to promote the welfare of others and oppose actions that are unjust. I think those who denounce them would have a harder time despising them in person than as straw people on the internet. That’s a nice appeal to emotion. There are lots of kind fundamentalists out there who help people too. That don’t make their views correct either. Though if they are right and the Bible is true, they are probably doing a lot more for the eternal souls of others than your group is. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/446 "2013-07-14T12:44:56Z")
> [@Ulfreida](#): > > There is no other kind. Just different cherries is all. The difference is one of quantity rather than kind. Huck seems to have picked just one cherry/verse from the Bible to live off (and even got that wrong) while Amish and Quakers for example tend to grab their cherries by the bucket and actually know what their verses means. The fundamentalists however do have the strength of believing in miracles based on a book that is, to them, inerrant. I’ve always thought it particularly nonsense to believe in miracles described in a book you know to be inaccurate. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/447 "2013-07-14T12:49:00Z")
> [@Schism](#): > > My father graduated from Northeastern U. with a degree in nuclear engineering and went on to be head of Nuclear Safety at General Electrics Vallecitos Reactor facility in Northern California. He quit this well paying career to go to seminary school and become an Episcopal priest. He said he had “been called” by God to do this. I wonder why God called him to the Church of England? > [@](#): > > So, I know this is a one-off but my personal experience is that science and religion are not mutually exclusive. Generally I think the two are just compartmentalized. ---
**Author:** ![johnmont](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a8b319/32.png) [@johnmont](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/johnmont)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/448 "2013-07-14T13:52:03Z")
This from a book written by ignorant people who sexually mutilated their male babies, wiped their asses with their hands, sold their daughters like cattle.Yep!I want to guide my life from them. NOT!!:dubious: ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/449 "2013-07-14T15:10:23Z")
> [@JohnClay](#): > > I USED to be a fundy. And I am quite sincere in my inquiries - I was after the responses of Christians. Keep telling yourself that and perhaps one day you will come up with a question or comment which does not display your continued reliance on Fundamentalist styles of thought. The content and wording of your posts show clearly that you are still deeply a Fundamentalist. ---
**Author:** ![huck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5a626/32.png) [@huck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/huck)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/450 "2013-07-14T17:24:15Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > That seems to be de rigueur among liberal Christians. You know you don’t have objective evidence to support your claims, so you all go back to your personal experience, for which most of you are too embarrassed to mention. “Hide it under a bushel” seems to be the liberal Christian mantra. > How do you know? Did you watch those video’s yet? You sound like the person who says they wouldn’t want to live in a world without a diamond the size of a refrigerator buried in their backyard. Maybe you didn’t like the video because Harris tagged you so perfectly. > See, you do get it! You help prop up weapons that are unjust and unwise! > Without a doubt. I bet they think you are a phony Christian who’s love of worldly morals is leading to societal decay. Based on scripture, I think they have a good point. De rigeur? Really? I’ve spent many years around liberal Christians and never once has one shared such an experience with me. You must be acquainted with quite a few to have so many confiding in you. I’m still waiting for your explanation as to why and how the assertion that by believing as I do I am helping the religious right works. Again, you are entitled to believe that this is true, but you can’t really expect me to accept it just because you say so. Sorry for appealing to your emotions. With your very reasoned, objective approach to debate that must be quite distressing … ---
**Author:** ![dougie\_monty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@dougie\_monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougie_monty)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/451 "2013-07-14T18:57:28Z")
> [@Bozuit](#): > > What’s your overall point? Does any of this lead you to a particular conclusion? I think my “overall conclusion” is ensconced within the second paragraph that you quoted; I came to the same conclusion Pasteur did. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/452 "2013-07-14T21:49:38Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#): > > Keep telling yourself that and perhaps one day you will come up with a question or comment which does not display your continued reliance on Fundamentalist styles of thought. The content and wording of your posts show clearly that you are still deeply a Fundamentalist. BTW I don’t believe in God and I believe the Bible says that humans don’t suffer eternally in hell - they die after a while. > **[Believe What the Jewish Apostles Taught -- Why Conditional Immortality Is...](https://www.jewishnotgreek.com/)** > > Why hell is destruction, not eternal torment. Absolute Biblical proof of conditional immortality. What was taught in the Old Testament? What did Judaism teach? In-depth discussion on Conditional Immortality, Annihilationism, Traditionalism, and... I’m also interested in the Framework interpretation: > **[Genesis creation narrative](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_interpretation_(Genesis))** > > The Genesis creation narrative is the creation myth\[a\] of both Judaism and Christianity, told in the book of Genesis chapters 1 and 2. While the Jewish and Christian tradition is that the account is one comprehensive story, modern scholars of biblical criticism identify the account as a composite work made up of two different stories drawn from different sources.\[b\] > The first account, in Genesis 1:1–2:3, is from what scholars call the Priestly source (P), largely dated to the 6th century BC... It is very rare for a fundy to believe that hell is not eternal as far as I know. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/453 "2013-07-14T21:51:44Z")
> [@huck](#): > > Assuming you are an atheist, I think we agree on what is a just cause based on principles of equal rights, caring for the poor and disadvantaged, that religion should not interfere with government and vice-versa ,etc (though there are doubtless specific causes we would not agree upon. I think my faith reinforces those principles but I held them before I went back to the Church. I’ve frequently said that all morals are fundamentally atheistic, in that you determine your moral set and then find a religion to go with them. This only applies to those who actually think about such stuff. You didn’t go to a Baptist church because they clash with your intelligently derived morals. > [@](#): > > I happen to view the bible approximately the same way you do, but it’s the “should” that troubles me in your statement. I know lots of people who view scripture as the word of God (to be interpreted and understood, not to be taken literally as written) who are extraordinary, spending virtually all the time and money they can spare working for others. I don’t feel I’m in a position to say what they “should” believe about it, only that if the bible is used to promote hatred and unkindness, or to force one’s religion on others, it is used wrongly. Being Jewish I come from a tradition which definitely believes in interpretation . But people can think that their interpretation of the word of God allows them to impose things on others. Few have attempted to pass laws based on the interpretation of _Ulysses_. So I still contend that the coming from God part is the problem. ---
**Author:** ![Bozuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/edb3f5/32.png) [@Bozuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bozuit)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/454 "2013-07-14T21:56:33Z")
> [@dougie\_monty](#): > > I think my “overall conclusion” is ensconced within the second paragraph that you quoted; I came to the same conclusion Pasteur did. 🙂 Does that mean you believe life could not have started without divine intervention, and Pasteur’s experiments go some way towards proving that? Or have I misunderstood? ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/455 "2013-07-14T23:14:15Z")
> [@huck](#): > > De rigeur? Really? Yes. Falling back on one’s personal revelation when a Christian knows reason is lacking is an absolute cliche. > [@](#): > > “I’ve spent many years around liberal Christians and never once has one shared such an experience with me.” My guess is that you don’t make it a habit of challenging your Christian friends on why they believe what they do. > [@](#): > > You must be acquainted with quite a few to have so many confiding in you. I wouldn’t say they confide. In spite of what the Bible says about sharing one’s reason for believing, most liberal Christians like to keep the detail of their revelation to themselves. I always ask though. > [@](#): > > I’m still waiting for your explanation as to why and how the assertion that by believing as I do I am helping the religious right works. Based on comments you have made, I think you understand the argument just fine. However I’ll make you a deal. You talk about the details of your personal revelation, and I’ll talk as long as you want about how you liberal Christians help empower fundamentalists. > [@](#): > > Sorry for appealing to your emotions. With your very reasoned, objective approach to debate that must be quite distressing … It’s cool, I’d be happy to hear more about your claim that your life was made better because of your beliefs. 12 steps or something? ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/456 "2013-07-14T23:42:48Z")
> [@JohnClay](#): > > BTW I don’t believe in God and I believe the Bible says that humans don’t suffer eternally in hell - they die after a while. > [http://www.jewishnotgreek.com/](http://www.jewishnotgreek.com/) > I’m also interested in the Framework interpretation: > [Genesis creation narrative - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_interpretation_(Genesis)) > It is very rare for a fundy to believe that hell is not eternal as far as I know. “Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name” You are absolutely precious. (Consider this - if you “don’t believe in God,” then why does it matter to you at all what the Bible may say?) ---
**Author:** ![huck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5a626/32.png) [@huck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/huck)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/457 "2013-07-14T23:55:29Z")
No, thanks, Kable, your comments are really not interesting enough to be worth any sort of trade. I would be interested in hearing the answer from others who hold this view and are able to articulate the reasons. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/458 "2013-07-15T00:13:00Z")
> [@huck](#): > > No, thanks, Kable, your comments are really not interesting enough to be worth any sort of trade. I’m sure that’s why you never share your revelation with anyone. They’re just not interesting enough.:rolleyes: > [@](#): > > I would be interested in hearing the answer from others who hold this view and are able to articulate the reasons. You watch those videos yet? ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/459 "2013-07-15T02:07:28Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#): > > (Consider this - if you “don’t believe in God,” then why does it matter to you at all what the Bible may say?) A better question is, if you believe in the god of the Bible, does the Bible matter so little to you? ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 6:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/460 "2013-07-15T06:45:27Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#): > > “Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name” > > You are absolutely precious. The auto-link didn’t include the last bracket in the link. This time it worked: > **[Genesis creation narrative](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_interpretation_%28Genesis%29)** > > The Genesis creation narrative is the creation myth\[a\] of both Judaism and Christianity, told in the book of Genesis chapters 1 and 2. While the Jewish and Christian tradition is that the account is one comprehensive story, modern scholars of biblical criticism identify the account as a composite work made up of two different stories drawn from different sources.\[b\] > The first account, in Genesis 1:1–2:3, is from what scholars call the Priestly source (P), largely dated to the 6th century BC... > [@](#): > > (Consider this - if you “don’t believe in God,” then why does it matter to you at all what the Bible may say?) What about Richard Dawkins? The same is true for him… he spends a lot of time discussing the Bible. Anyway, personally I find it interesting and most people I’m around believe it including everyone in my work place and home. Also there is “Pascal’s Wager”… even though I don’t find that compelling. Talking to them about my thoughts might weaken their faith… though sometimes the opposite happens. BTW about the duration of hell - I was talking to a pastor about it on facebook and in a recent sermon he only talked about “the wages of sin is death” and about “eternal life” just for the saved - he no longer mentioned anything to do with eternal torment. It has been interesting being able to ask some questions in front of the congregation… I feel like I’m being diplomatic. The pastor didn’t have much of an answer to this thread’s topic so I was giving him ideas - like maybe the devil is involved, etc. My wife is happier when I go to church and seem to be open-minded. I think my behaviour is showing that I am trying to believe but I’ve got honest difficulties. It seems odd that you are apparently a Christian yet you discourage me for being somewhat open-minded about Christianity. BTW just because I’m considering something doesn’t mean I’ll end up believing in it. On the other hand some Christians such as my fundy sisters won’t even look at that duration of hell website even though it was written by a Christian. They’re sure that their current beliefs are all correct. (I asked them that) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322.md?page=22) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322.md?page=24)