A scientist who believes the Bible?

Question

I see so much on here about scientists and Christians. So let me tell you about me and ask a question.

I have a bachelors and masters degree in biology. I am over half done with a PhD in the same. My degrees are from a secular state university. Let me ask you this. Why does the fact that I accept the supernatural make me a bad scientist? It doesn't affect me in the least in my research. Do you know what type of research I do? I work in a molecular evolution lab. Some of my research has been published in the Journal of Molecular Biology and Evolution. I am a scientist. I can do all of my research and not have a bit of problem with it. The difference is when I look at DNA and the complexities of the cell I see God's handiwork rather than billions of years of evolution. I see an ability to adapt coded into our genome that is absolutely amazing. But I attribute this ability to God. What is so wrong with that?

Let me clear something up. I fully believe God created all life. However I also know beyond a doubt He gave us the ability to adapt to our environment.

Corrosion EAC - It was peer reviewed research. True scientific research in molecular evolution.

Corrosion EAC - I accept the part of evolutionary biology that is important to my research. Which is basically environmental adaptation.

Brendan G - Sorry but talking too much about my research could easily lead to my real name. In case you don't know science can be an unfriendly field for Christians at times. I am not yet at the point in my career where I am willingly to take the chance of my colleagues knowing my exact beliefs. But I basically look at adaptations in bacteria on a genomic level.

Answer 1

He is Master Craftsman, Engineer, and Artist all in one. Praise the God of our salvation.

Answer 2

You're not alone, Edge -- I'd say you're in good company:

"Evolution is neither more nor less than the result of respecting the reality and consistency of the physical world over time. To fashion material beings with an independent physical existence, any Creator would have had to produce an independent material universe in which our evolution over time was a contingent possibility. A believer in the divine accepts that God's love and gift of freedom are genuine - so genuine that they include the power to choose evil and, if we wish, to freely send ourselves to Hell. Not all believers will accept the stark conditions of that bargain, but our freedom to act has to have a physical and biological basis. Evolution and its sister sciences of genetics and molecular biology provide that basis. In biological terms, evolution is the only way a Creator could have made us the creatures we are - free beings in a world of authentic and meaningful moral and spiritual choices."

-- Kenneth Miller, Professor of Biology, Brown University; "Finding Darwin's God"

Answer 3

It might not matter at all, or it might, it just depends. I am curious about how you interpret your results and how you regard the finer points of evolutionary theory (adaptation theory if you wish).

At what point in the history of, say, the time between one of our primate ancestors and modern Homo sapiens did God stick his finger in the gene pool and make the first human? Or do you believe literally in Adam and Eve?

Alternately, do you believe that God set evolution up very early on and has just been letting it "run" without interference?

Why it matters is this:
If God sticks his finger in the gene pool and changes things around sometimes, then how can you trust that he won't (or didn't) do some fiddling with your own molecular biology projects? If he fiddles randomly with science at all, how can anybody's experimental results be trusted to be accurate?

Answer 4

Many competent and talented scientist find fulfillment in spiritual endeavors. There are in fact to many to quote in this forum. Most Mystics believed in both a rational outlook as embodied now by science and actively followed spiritual understanding.

The only incompatibility occurs when you use a LITERAL interpretation of scriptures which is intrinsically irrational from a literal viewpoint and make an article of faith ignorance of the billions of pieces of evidence to deny the undeniable.

True faith and spiritual development isn't threatened by truth of any kind. Superstition and manipulation propaganda of the type we see on Television and hear in Radio broadcast obviously is there no so much out of concern for your well being as they are to earn money by guilt and intimidation.

In short you are not only fine, you are a part of God, and may you discover that all manner of things in your life will inspire you in body mind and spirit.

God bless you.

Answer 5

Well, you're obviously eminently more qualified than me to speak on this subject, but I don't think ANY educated Christian doubts the validity of adaptation. It's not even a theory, but can be proven (and is occuring every day all around us.)

It's the notion of God as the Creator of the universe using EVOLUTION where we "fundamentalists" and others who follow the trendy crowd that says "God used the processes of macro evolution to create man from lower forms of life," where I jump ship and stay with a literal interpretation of the Bible.

I'm not saying YOU believe in macro evolution as a biblical concept... just responding to some of the earlier answerers.

God bless you. You, a believer in a Creator God, must be in the minority amongst your peers?

Answer 6

Since you mentioned that you were working on a Ph.D I was curious as to what your area of expertise was. Thank you for being vocal about it.

Ever heard of Kent Hovind? Or www.answersingenesis.org?

By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible. Heb. 11:3

I'm sorry that you have to work with people who believe we come from monkeys, soup, or a big bang.

Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Rom. 1:24-25

I was never really bright in science and math, but I've always known that I had a creator. I'm glad that you can understand the complexities of how wonderfully and fearfully made we are.

"In the beginning God...." Gen 1:1

Answer 7

As a 'scientist' how do you justify making an assumption without any evidence? Saying you see gods handy work in DNA is a crap argument.... Which god? You are adding something (your preconceptions of what a god is and what its handy work would look like) without having an outside basis for the assumption that a god exists. The only evidence of a god are religious texts written by unscientific, superstitious peoples as a way of explaining the world around them as well as morality. You violate Occam's Razor when you add an assumption without evidence.

Just out of curiosity, how do you explain the formation of amino acids out of carbon molecules under intense pressure in space? Does your god just poof those into existence as well or does it suggest to you a natural law we are as yet unfamiliar with?

Once you allow that we are natural and evolution occurs you are left with a 'god of gaps'. In case you are unfamiliar with the term, a 'god of gaps' is a concept of the divine that is used to explain the gaps in human knowledge... "We don't know how it occurs so god did it".... "I don't know but we can figure it out" is much more scientific.

Answer 8

You state you do NOT accept evolutionary biology.

Ok, so by submitting a scientific paper, I infer you accept evolutionary biology.

As my retired entomologist friend says of Robert Waltzer "I can't imagine living so conflicted." Neither can I.

My father was a cultural Christian, applied physcist and aerospace engineer who left all beliefs in the parking lot, well before he reached the lab. He worried about his own handiwork, since lives were at stake.

Have you submitted any papers on god's handiwork to any of the academic journals? Or did you publish peer-reviewed work rather than an editorial?

I remember someone citing Andrew Weill being published in JAMA, and when I read it, I laughed. The editors made it clear it was an editorial.

My final question: are you Jonathan Wells? No, you can't be, since he's never been published but, like you, does not accept evolution.

Answer 9

Bible does not contradict science. Bible denies the non-scientific assumption of scientists and does not quarrel with their scientific reasoning. Bible does not contradict the claims of science, but only the hypothesis of scientists, which is not science at all.

Science does not claim billions years history of the world. Such a claim is beyond its scope. It only claims that, if we assume that the present laws of nature were always in force, then the world is that old.

Answer 10

I don't think it is wrong at all! As a health care worker (with a degree in biology and almost 20 years experience), I find the human body the most fascinating invention ever...and I attribute it all to God.

Further, it makes much more sense, logically, to me that a supreme being (God) put it all together than it does to believe that it all just "happened" with a big bang...that it all came together accidentally.

Answer 11

You're the exception to the rule. Religiosity is negatively correlated with educational attainment. As long as you don't allow your beliefs to interfere with your scientific methods, there's no problem. Believing in God and the Bible makes you somewhat of an unusual scientist, but not a bad one.