# scientists who are christian? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [July 13, 2014, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979 "2014-07-13T05:26:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Sigene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df788c/32.png) [@Sigene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sigene)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/1 "2014-07-13T05:26:05Z")
I don’t really follow how high caliber and highly respected research scientists like Francis Collins can be Christian. I think I can parse being religious and generally ‘spiritual’ as a scientist…but I can’t grasp the concept that the basic requirements of Christianity are held by such scientists. I’ve briefly read the Wiki on Francis Collins, and while I see his spirituality, I don’t find a lot about ‘Christianity’ specifically. How does a highly respected research scientist with a great deal of training in gathering empirical evidence for something to be accepted as true, rectify such natural law defying occurances as the divinity of Jesus. How do they account for the virgin birth, the resurrection and the miracles attributed to Jesus? ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 5:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/2 "2014-07-13T05:31:45Z")
> [@Sigene](#): > > I don’t really follow how high caliber and highly respected research scientists like Francis Collins can be Christian. I think I can parse being religious and generally ‘spiritual’ as a scientist…but I can’t grasp the concept that the basic requirements of Christianity are held by such scientists. > I’ve briefly read the Wiki on Francis Collins, and while I see his spirituality, I don’t find a lot about ‘Christianity’ specifically. > How does a highly respected research scientist with a great deal of training in gathering empirical evidence for something to be accepted as true, rectify such natural law defying occurances as the divinity of Jesus. How do they account for the virgin birth, the resurrection and the miracles attributed to Jesus? Its quite logical. If an omniscient God exists, then He can bend the natural laws of the universe. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/3 "2014-07-13T05:37:15Z")
For those that believe, no explanation is necessary. For those that don’t, no explanation will suffice. ---
**Author:** ![Absinthe\_Anecdote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f6c823/32.png) [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absinthe_Anecdote)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/4 "2014-07-13T05:43:01Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > Its quite logical. If an _ **omniscient** _ God exists, then He can bend the natural laws of the universe. If an omniscient God exists he would know about bending the natural laws of the universe, and would be able to narrate about it. It would take an omnipotent God to actually bend them. 😉 Sorry, I couldn’t help being a smarty pants, those are two of my favorite words. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Ranger\_Jeff](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ranger_jeff/32/2065_2.png) [@Ranger\_Jeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ranger_Jeff)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/5 "2014-07-13T05:44:53Z")
Didn’t I read in “A Brief History Of Time” that Hawking was asked to explain the Big Bang Theory to a Pope who told him that as long as Hawking didn’t speculate on conditions BEFORE the BB, the Pope (and therefore, the RC Church) had no problem with it? ---
**Author:** ![Absinthe\_Anecdote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f6c823/32.png) [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absinthe_Anecdote)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 5:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/6 "2014-07-13T05:49:58Z")
@Sigene Many people call themselves Christians, but if you question them on what they actually believe, they don’t truly support all the Christian doctrine. I know plenty of people calling themselves Christian, that are much closer to the definition of a Deist. I don’t know if that is the case with Collins, but it could explain what is baffling you. ---
**Author:** ![Sigene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df788c/32.png) [@Sigene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sigene)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/7 "2014-07-13T05:50:06Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > Its quite logical. If an omniscient God exists, then He can bend the natural laws of the universe. when does one know that the natural laws are being bent or not? Also, I’m really asking for insight on how Research Scientists rectify these occurances. It would be great if an actual Ph.D. type research scientist who is Christian could clear this up a bit. ---
**Author:** ![Sigene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df788c/32.png) [@Sigene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sigene)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 5:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/8 "2014-07-13T05:52:08Z")
> [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](#): > > @Sigene > > Many people call themselves Christians, but if you question them on what they actually believe, they don’t truly support all the Christian doctrine. > > I know plenty of people calling themselves Christian, that are much closer to the definition of a Deist. > > I don’t know if that is the case with Collins, but it could explain what is baffling you. This would, in fact, clear up much of my confusion. Though I find it oddly distasteful that such a person would really call themselves Christian. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/9 "2014-07-13T05:58:29Z")
> [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](#): > > @Sigene > > Many people call themselves Christians, but if you question them on what they actually believe, they don’t truly support all the Christian doctrine. > > I know plenty of people calling themselves Christian, that are much closer to the definition of a Deist. > > I don’t know if that is the case with Collins, but it could explain what is baffling you. That’s not the case with Francis Collins who is an evangelical Christian. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/10 "2014-07-13T06:01:30Z")
Francis Collins is a member of BioLogos which subscribes to the following creed: [http://biologos.org/about](http://biologos.org/about) ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/11 "2014-07-13T06:07:50Z")
The central tenet of Christianity - that Jesus was the manifestation of God made into man - is not a normal part of anyone’s experience. There’s no reason why a lawyer or a plumber or a secretary would have an easier time accepting it than a scientist. The Christians who believe this accept it as an extraordinary unique event and they accept it on faith not on reason. There’s no reason a scientist can’t do the same. ---
**Author:** ![chacoguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/50afbb/32.png) [@chacoguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chacoguy)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/12 "2014-07-13T06:07:52Z")
[The guy that proposed the Big Bang Theory was a priest.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre) I’ll leave it to the reader as to what was going on just before the Big Bang or as to what triggered the event. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/13 "2014-07-13T06:09:21Z")
> [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](#): > > Many people call themselves Christians, but if you question them on what they actually believe, they don’t truly support all the Christian doctrine. The exact definition of “all the Christian doctrine” is, of course controversial, unless by “Christian” you mean “those people who agree with my version of Christian theology”. Which of the people who “call themselves Christians” are being excluded here from being “Christians”? ---
**Author:** ![Absinthe\_Anecdote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f6c823/32.png) [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absinthe_Anecdote)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/14 "2014-07-13T06:13:19Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > That’s not the case with Francis Collins who is an evangelical Christian. If this Wiki entry is correct, he doesn’t sound like a traditional evangelical that believes in intelligent design. Actually, what is described below, sounds much more like something a Diest would come up with. Especially the idea that God set everything in motion, and is now non-interventionist. _Francis Collins describes theistic evolution as the position that “evolution is real, but that it was set in motion by God”,[3] and “Theistic evolution, which accepts that evolution occurred as biologists describe it, but under the direction of God”.[4] The term was used by National Center for Science Education executive director Eugenie Scott to refer to the part of the overall spectrum of beliefs about creation and evolution holding the theological view that God creates through evolution. It covers a wide range of beliefs about the extent of any intervention by God, with some approaching deism in rejecting continued intervention._ > **[Theistic evolution](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_creation)** > > Theistic evolution (also known as theistic evolutionism or God-guided evolution), alternatively called evolutionary creationism, is a view that God acts and creates through laws of nature. Here, God is taken as the primary cause while natural causes are secondary, positing that the concept of God and religious beliefs are compatible with the findings of modern science, including evolution. Theistic evolution is not in itself a scientific theory, but includes a range of views about how science rel... ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/15 "2014-07-13T06:29:28Z")
> [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](#): > > If this Wiki entry is correct, he doesn’t sound like a traditional evangelical that believes in intelligent design. > > Actually, what is described below, sounds much more like something a Diest would come up with. Especially the idea that God set everything in motion, and is now non-interventionist. > > _Francis Collins describes theistic evolution as the position that “evolution is real, but that it was set in motion by God”,[3] and “Theistic evolution, which accepts that evolution occurred as biologists describe it, but under the direction of God”.[4] The term was used by National Center for Science Education executive director Eugenie Scott to refer to the part of the overall spectrum of beliefs about creation and evolution holding the theological view that God creates through evolution. It covers a wide range of beliefs about the extent of any intervention by God, with some approaching deism in rejecting continued intervention._ > > [Theistic evolution - Wikipedia](http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_creation) See the link I provided. Additionally, plenty of evangelicals/orthodox Christians have been open to evolution such as the Princeton theologians BB Warfield and AA Hodge or even Billy Graham. Additionally Collins isn’t a non-interventionist since he does believe in the various miracles recorded in Scripture. ---
**Author:** ![thelurkinghorror](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7c8e57/32.png) [@thelurkinghorror](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelurkinghorror)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/16 "2014-07-13T06:40:31Z")
> [@chacoguy](#): > > [The guy that proposed the Big Bang Theory was a priest.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre) > > I’ll leave it to the reader as to what was going on just before the Big Bang or as to what triggered the event. Shit-ton of Catholics: Lemaître, yes. The name was coined by Hoyle (not religious) as maybe mockery, although he maybe disputed that. But he didn’t believe it. And Mendel. You might’ve heard of him in high school. [Pierre Teilhard de Chardin](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Teilhard_de_Chardin), who had some weird ideas, but was quite scientific even when associated with a hoax. Lots of people from the [Vatican Observatory](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican_Observatory). [Pontifical Academy of Sciences]([Pontifical academy - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifical_Academy) of Sciences), although being Catholic is not a requirement, like Collins. Pius XII’s encylical [Humani generis](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humani_generis). Plus later Popes. Maybe not trained scientists, but based on conclusions from said. Orthodox: [Dobzhansky](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodosius_Dobzhansky) and [Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_in_Biology_Makes_Sense_Except_in_the_Light_of_Evolution). I don’t know any specifically Anglican/Episcopalian sources, but I’m sure that there are quite a few. Gould was **not** religious but his [NOMA](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-overlapping_magisteria) statement was criticized by many Dawkins-types. Evolutionary creation(ism) is a dumb name and ignores that theistic evolutionism **way** closer to evolution than it is to creationism or even ID. ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 7:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/17 "2014-07-13T07:01:27Z")
> [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](#): > > Sorry, I couldn’t help being a smarty pants, those are two of my favorite words. 🙂 Be sure to mention that he probably meant “reconcile” where he has “rectify”. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 7:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/18 "2014-07-13T07:42:10Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > For those that believe, no explanation is necessary. > For those that don’t, no explanation will suffice. If someone ever asked me for the perfect example of “trite”, I think I would use this hoary phrase. It is nothing more than an unevidenced assumption of “specialness”. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 7:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/19 "2014-07-13T07:56:02Z")
> [@Sigene](#): > > when does one know that the natural laws are being bent or not? > > Also, I’m really asking for insight on how Research Scientists rectify these occurances. It would be great if an actual Ph.D. type research scientist who is Christian could clear this up a bit. I’m a PhD. (as of May 2013) and a researcher in plant biology- for privacy’s sake I’m not interested in stating my university affiliations or my work topics right here and now, but you can PM me if you want. And a Christian, though not always the most orthodox of them. What are your questions, exactly? Re: ‘creation’ vs. evolution, I don’t think Christianity requires any specific doctrinal beliefs about how the universe and life came into being. Some of the early Christians flatly denied that God had created the material universe at all. Christianity is not, in essence, about creation, but rather about salvation: specifically, about salvation through the life, work, and death of Jesus Christ. Those of us who believe in the Nicene creed accept, on faith, that God is in some sense the ultimate power behind creation, but that doesn’t mean that He supervised evolution in any _particular_ detail. The more interesting questions, to me, concern the events of the Gospels, so I’m hppy to debate those if you want. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 8:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979/20 "2014-07-13T08:02:39Z")
> [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](#): > > If this Wiki entry is correct, he doesn’t sound like a traditional evangelical that believes in intelligent design. Not all evangelicals believe in intelligent design. The fact that this fellow doesn’t do so, doesn’t mean he’s a deist rather than a Christian. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientists-who-are-christian/692979.md?page=2)