<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>PALLAYI &#187; Scientists</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pallayi.com/focus/scientists/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pallayi.com</link>
	<description>Intelligent Designs In The Heart</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Sep 2010 01:28:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>God vs Science</title>
		<link>http://www.pallayi.com/2009/11/19/god-vs-science/</link>
		<comments>http://www.pallayi.com/2009/11/19/god-vs-science/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:00:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeejo Pallayi</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christianity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bible]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charles Darwin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judeo-Christian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientist believes in God]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[True Christianity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[truth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pallayi.com/?p=100</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;LET ME EXPLAIN THE problem science has with Jesus Christ.&#8221; The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand. &#8220;You&#8217;re a Christian, aren&#8217;t you, son?&#8221; &#8220;Yes, sir.&#8221; &#8220;So you believe in God?&#8221; &#8220;Absolutely.&#8221; &#8220;Is God good?&#8221; &#8220;Sure! God&#8217;s good.&#8221; &#8220;Is God all-powerful? Can God do [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;LET ME EXPLAIN THE problem science has with Jesus Christ.&#8221; The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand. &#8220;You&#8217;re a Christian, aren&#8217;t you, son?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Yes, sir.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;So you believe in God?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Absolutely.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Is God good?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Sure! God&#8217;s good.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Yes.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Are you good or evil?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;The Bible says I&#8217;m evil.&#8221;<br />
The professor grins knowingly. &#8220;Ahh! THE BIBLE!&#8221; He considers for a moment. &#8220;Here&#8217;s one for you. Let&#8217;s say there&#8217;s a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help them? Would you try?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Yes sir, I would.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;So you&#8217;re good&#8230;!&#8221;<br />
&#8220;I wouldn&#8217;t say that.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Why not say that? You would help a sick and maimed person if you could&#8230;in fact most of us would if we could&#8230;.God doesn&#8217;t.&#8221;<br />
[No answer]<br />
&#8220;He doesn&#8217;t, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?&#8221;<br />
[No answer]<br />
The elderly man is sympathetic. &#8220;No, you can&#8217;t, can you?&#8221; He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax. &#8220;In philosophy, you have to go easy with the new ones. Let&#8217;s start again, young fella. Is God good?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Er&#8230; Yes.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Is Satan good?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;No.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Where does Satan come from?&#8221;<br />
The student falters. &#8220;From&#8230; God&#8230;&#8221;<br />
&#8220;That&#8217;s right. God made Satan, didn&#8217;t he?&#8221; The elderly man runs his bony fingers through his thinning hair and turns to the smirking student audience. &#8220;I think we&#8217;re going to have a lot of fun this semester, ladies and gentlemen.&#8221; He turns back to the Christian. &#8220;Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Yes, sir.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Evil&#8217;s everywhere, isn&#8217;t it? Did God make everything?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Yes.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Who created evil?&#8221;<br />
[No answer]<br />
&#8220;Is there sickness in this world? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness. All the terrible things &#8211; do they exist in this world? &#8221;<br />
The student squirms on his feet. &#8220;Yes.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Who created them?&#8221;<br />
[No answer]<br />
The professor suddenly shouts at his student, &#8220;WHO CREATED THEM? TELL ME, PLEASE!&#8221; The professor closes in for the kill and climbs into the Christian&#8217;s face. In a still small voice, he asked, &#8220;God created all evil, didn&#8217;t He, son?&#8221;<br />
[No answer]<br />
The student tries to hold the steady, experienced gaze and fails. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace the front of the classroom like an aging panther. The class is mesmerized. &#8220;Tell me,&#8221; he continues, &#8220;How is it that this God is good if He created all evil throughout all time?&#8221; The professor swishes his arms around to encompass the wickedness of the world. &#8220;All the hatred, the brutality, all the pain, all the torture, all the death and ugliness and all the suffering created by this good God is all over the world, isn&#8217;t it, young man?&#8221;<br />
[No answer]<br />
&#8220;Don&#8217;t you see it all over the place? Huh?&#8221; Pause. &#8220;Don&#8217;t you?&#8221; The professor leans into the student&#8217;s face again and<br />
whispers, &#8220;Is God good?&#8221;<br />
[No answer]<br />
&#8220;Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?&#8221;<br />
The student&#8217;s voice betrays him and cracks. &#8220;Yes, professor. I do.&#8221;<br />
The old man shakes his head sadly. &#8220;Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;No, sir. I&#8217;ve never seen Him.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Then tell us if you&#8217;ve ever heard your Jesus?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;No, sir. I have not.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus&#8230; in fact, do you have any sensory perception of your God whatsoever?&#8221;<br />
[No answer]<br />
&#8220;Answer me, please.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;No, sir, I&#8217;m afraid I haven&#8217;t.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;You&#8217;re AFRAID&#8230; you haven&#8217;t?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;No, sir.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Yet you still believe in him?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;&#8230;yes&#8230;&#8221;<br />
&#8220;That takes FAITH!&#8221; The professor smiles sagely at the underling. &#8220;According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn&#8217;t exist. What do you say to that, son? Where is your God now?&#8221;<br />
[The student doesn't answer]<br />
&#8220;Sit down, please.&#8221;<br />
The first Christian sits&#8230;defeated.<br />
Another Christian raises his hand. &#8220;Professor, may I address the class?&#8221;<br />
The professor turns and smiles. &#8220;Ah, yet another Christian in the vanguard! Come, come, young man. Speak some proper wisdom to the gathering.&#8221;<br />
The Christian looks around the room. &#8220;Some interesting points you are making, sir. Now I&#8217;ve got a question for you. Is there such thing as heat?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Yes,&#8221; the professor replies. &#8220;There&#8217;s heat.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Is there such a thing as cold?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Yes, son, there&#8217;s cold too.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;No, sir, there isn&#8217;t.&#8221;<br />
The professor&#8217;s grin freezes. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The second Christian continues.<br />
&#8220;You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don&#8217;t have anything called &#8216;cold&#8217;. We can hit 273 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can&#8217;t go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold, otherwise we would be able to go colder than -273°C. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.&#8221;<br />
Silence. A pin drops somewhere in the classroom.<br />
&#8220;Is there such a thing as darkness, professor?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;That&#8217;s a dumb question, son. What is night if it isn&#8217;t darkness? What are you getting at&#8230;?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;So you say there is such a thing as darkness?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Yes&#8230;&#8221;<br />
&#8220;You&#8217;re wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something, it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light&#8230; but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it&#8217;s called darkness, isn&#8217;t it? That&#8217;s the meaning we use to define the word. In reality, Darkness isn&#8217;t. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker and give me a jar of it. Can you&#8230; give me a jar of darker darkness, professor?&#8221;<br />
Despite himself, the professor smiles at the young effrontery before him. This will indeed be a good semester. &#8220;Would you mind telling us what your point is, young man?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with and so your conclusion must be in error&#8230;.&#8221;<br />
The professor goes toxic. &#8220;Flawed&#8230;? How dare you&#8230;!&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Sir, may I explain what I mean?&#8221;<br />
The class is all ears.<br />
&#8220;Explain&#8230; ohhhhh, explain&#8230;&#8221; The professor makes an admirable effort to regain control. Suddenly he is affability himself. He waves his hand to silence the class, for the student to continue.<br />
&#8220;You are working on the premise of duality,&#8221; the Christian explains. &#8220;That for example there is life and then there&#8217;s death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science cannot even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism but has never seen, much less fully understood them. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, merely the absence of it.&#8221; The young man holds up a newspaper he takes from the desk of a neighbor who has been reading it. &#8220;Here is one of the most disgusting tabloids this country hosts, professor. Is there such a thing as immorality?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Of course there is, now look&#8230;&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Wrong again, sir. You see, immorality is merely the absence of morality. Is there such thing as injustice? No. Injustice is the absence of justice. Is there such a thing as evil?&#8221; The Christian pauses. &#8220;Isn&#8217;t evil the absence of good?&#8221;<br />
The professor&#8217;s face has turned an alarming color. He is so angry he is temporarily speechless.<br />
The Christian continues, &#8220;If there is evil in the world, professor, and we all agree there is, then God, if He exists, must be accomplishing a work through the agency of evil.1 What is that work God is accomplishing? The Bible tells us it is to see if each one of us will, of our own free will, choose good over evil.&#8221;2<br />
The professor bridles. &#8220;As a philosophical scientist, I don&#8217;t view this matter as having anything to do with any choice; as a realist, I absolutely do not recognize the concept of God or any other theological factor as being part of the world equation because God is not observable.&#8221;<br />
The Christian replies, &#8220;I would have thought that the absence of God&#8217;s moral code in this world is probably one of the most observable phenomena going, Newspapers make billions of dollars reporting it every week! Tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?&#8221;<br />
The professor makes a sucking sound with his teeth and gives his student a silent, stony stare.<br />
&#8220;Professor. Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;I&#8217;ll overlook your impudence in the light of our philosophical discussion. Now, have you quite finished?&#8221; the professor hisses.<br />
&#8220;So you don&#8217;t accept God&#8217;s moral code to do what is righteous?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;I believe in what is &#8211; that&#8217;s science!&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Ahh! SCIENCE!&#8221; the student&#8217;s face splits into a grin. &#8220;Sir, you rightly state that science is the study of observed phenomena. Science too is a premise which is flawed&#8230;&#8221;<br />
&#8220;SCIENCE IS FLAWED..?&#8221; the professor splutters.<br />
The class is in uproar. The Christian remains standing until the commotion has subsided. &#8220;To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, may I give you an example of what I mean?&#8221;<br />
The professor wisely keeps silent.<br />
The Christian looks around the room. &#8220;Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor&#8217;s mind?&#8221; The class breaks out into laughter. The Christian points towards his elderly, crumbling tutor. &#8220;Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor&#8217;s mind&#8230; felt the professor&#8217;s mind, touched or smelt the professor&#8217;s mind? No one appears to have done so.&#8221; The Christian shakes his head sadly. &#8220;It appears no one here has had any sensory perception of the professor&#8217;s mind whatsoever. Well, according to the rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science, I DECLARE that the professor has no mind.&#8221;<br />
The class is in chaos.<br />
The Christian sits.<br />
&#8212;-</p>
<p>If you didn&#8217;t get it, here is a brief synopsis. The atheist argument is that since God created everything, He is responsible for the creation of evil. However, &#8220;evil&#8221; is a word that we use to describe certain things that happen to us (most of which are caused by other people). In reality, it is not a physically created thing at all and, therefore, does not fall within the realm of something created by God. So, the argument is fundamentally flawed. As stated on this site, evil is allowed by God so that free will beings can choose between good (i.e., God) or evil (absence of God). Without evil, it is not possible to choose between good and evil, and the universe would have no ultimate purpose.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.pallayi.com/2009/11/19/god-vs-science/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>29</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What is Apologetics</title>
		<link>http://www.pallayi.com/2009/09/07/what-is-aplogetics/</link>
		<comments>http://www.pallayi.com/2009/09/07/what-is-aplogetics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 21:43:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeejo Pallayi</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christianity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[God]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jesus]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pallayi.com/2009/09/07/what-is-aploogetics/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You walk up to the man on the street and tell him that Jesus Christ loves him and died so he could receive forgiveness of his sins. You explain that everyone should obey Jesus because He is the Son of God. The man wants to know how you know this information. You inform him that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You walk up to the man on the street and tell him that Jesus Christ loves him and died so he could receive forgiveness of his sins. You explain that everyone should obey Jesus because He is the Son of God. The man wants to know how you know this information. You inform him that the Bible, the inspired Word of God, declares it to be true. He wants to know two things: (1) How can you prove that there is a God?; and (2) How can you prove that the Bible is His Word? He is not being belligerent or cantankerous; he simply wants some good evidence that would warrant the total overhaul of his life you are asking him to make.</p>
<p>It is now your responsibility to present solid, rational arguments that prove the things you have affirmed. You must defend the propositions you have presented. You are appointed for the defense of the Gospel (Philippians 1:17, NKJV).</p>
<p>The term “apologetics” derives from the Greek word apologia, which means “to defend” or “to make a defense.” Thus, apologetics is a discipline dedicated to the defense of something. There can be as many different types of apologetics as there are beliefs in the world: atheistic apologetics, Hindu apologetics, Buddhist apologetics, Christian apologetics, ad infinitum. However, generally when the discipline is discussed, most people associate it with Christian apologetics. Therefore, for the remainder of this discussion, when I use the term apologetics, I will be referring specifically to Christian apologetics.</p>
<p>What is apologetics? Christian philosopher Dick Sztanyo has suggested: “Apologetics is the proclamation and defense of the gospel of Christ regardless of whenever, wherever, and by whomever it is challenged.” The apostle Peter used apologetics when he appealed to the empty tomb on Pentecost. Paul used apologetics when he quoted the stoic poets to draw attention to God’s existence as he addressed the Athenians. Christ used apologetics when He appealed to a Roman coin to prove that Jews should pay taxes. We can see, then, that the word apologetics carries no hint of “apologizing”—in the sense of being sorry or ashamed. On the contrary, the word houses the exact opposite idea of intelligent vindication by vigorous argument. In fact, Paul stated in 2 Corinthians 10:4-5: “For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.” Apologetics vigorously defends the truth by refuting arguments that exalt themselves above God’s Word.</p>
<p>What tools, then, can apologetics use to “cast down” faulty arguments? Its toolbox is as endlessly deep as it is long. Any discipline—from astronomy to zoology—can be called upon to come to the aid of apologetics. Just as Peter used the physical evidence of the empty tomb, just as Paul used contemporary literature, and jut as Jesus used an inscription on a coin, modern apologists can use archaeology, literature, science, morality, technology, and countless other facets of human life to defend Christianity. A small child can watch ants hard at work and testify to the wisdom of the book of Proverbs. An astrophysicist can contemplate the Second Law of Thermodynamics and maintain that the world will not last forever. An archaeologist can find an ancient inscription about a people known as the Hittites and assert that the Bible has accurate information about this ancient group of people. A professor of literature can read poetry from ages past and ascertain that mankind always has desired to worship a Creator Who is infinitely higher than humanity. From the heights of the mountains to the depths of the oceans, facts surface that provide an ample array of ammunition that can be fired from the cannon of apologetics.</p>
<p>However, the machinery of apologetics can operate only on the fuel of reason, for without reason apologetics has no sure foundation. The Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary defines reason as “the power of comprehending, inferring, or thinking, especially in orderly, rational ways.” Paul contrasted reason with insanity in Acts 26:24-25: “Now as he thus made his defense, Festus said with a loud voice, ‘Paul, you are beside yourself! Much learning is driving you mad!’ But he said, ‘I am not mad, most noble Festus, but speak the words of truth and reason.’ ” God and His spokesmen always have spoken rational, reasonable truths. God employed reason to convince Isaiah’s listeners of their sin: “ ‘Come now, and let us reason together,’ says the Lord, ‘Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow’ ” (Isaiah 1:18). When Samuel spoke to the Israelites at the coronation of Saul, he said: “Now therefore, stand still, that I may reason with you before the Lord concerning all the righteous acts of the Lord which He did to you and your fathers” (1 Samuel 12:7). From the dawn of time, God presented man with the facts, and then allowed man to use reason to reach correct conclusions. Thus, Romans 1:20 states: “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made….” Reason provides for the removal of all contradictory and fallacious arguments, leaving only those facts that are consistent and correct.</p>
<p>The Christian religion, at its core, is based upon historically verifiable facts. The Bible is not a sourcebook of wise proverbs that somehow stand upon their own merit. Without an establishment of the facts concerning the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, the Word of God as we know it—even with all of its sound wisdom and practical guidance—is nothing more than a devotional book full of helpful platitudes that deserves to be placed on the shelf next to the Chicken Soup for the Soul series. By using historical facts that are consistent and correct, apologetics makes its defense by appealing to man’s capacity to reason. God never has desired that His human creatures blindly accept unreasonable propositions postulated by perverse persons. He does not want us to be “children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness by which they lie in wait to deceive (Ephesians 4:14). On the contrary, He demands that we “test all things; hold fast what is good” (2 Thessalonians 5:21). In the end, however, apologetics can soften only the hearts of those who agree to be honest with themselves and to deal honestly and reasonably with the available evidence. There is much truth in the old adage: “A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.pallayi.com/2009/09/07/what-is-aplogetics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Famous Scientists Who Believed in God</title>
		<link>http://www.pallayi.com/2009/05/04/famous-scientists-who-believed-in-god/</link>
		<comments>http://www.pallayi.com/2009/05/04/famous-scientists-who-believed-in-god/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 22:34:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeejo Pallayi</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christianity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Albert Einstein]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Famous Scientists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gregor Mendel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Isaac Newton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Max Planck]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Faraday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nicholas Copernicus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rene Descartes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robert Boyle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientist believes in God]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sir Francis Bacon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[William Thomson Kelvin]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pallayi.com/?p=44</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543) Copernicus was the Polish astronomer who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun. He attended various European universities, and became a Canon in the Catholic church in 1497. His new system was actually first presented in the Vatican gardens in 1533 before Pope Clement VII who [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<ol>
<li id="copernicus"><strong>Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)</strong><br />
Copernicus was the Polish astronomer who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun. He attended various European universities, and became a Canon in the Catholic church in 1497. His new system was actually first presented in the Vatican gardens in 1533 before Pope Clement VII who approved, and urged Copernicus to publish it around this time. Copernicus was never under any threat of religious persecution &#8211; and was urged to publish both by Catholic Bishop Guise, Cardinal Schonberg, and the Protestant Professor George Rheticus. Copernicus referred sometimes to God in his works, and did not see his system as in conflict with the Bible.</li>
<li><strong>Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1627)</strong><br />
Bacon was a philosopher who is known for establishing the scientific method of inquiry based on experimentation and inductive reasoning. In <em>De Interpretatione Naturae Prooemium</em>, Bacon established his goals as being the discovery of truth, service to his country, and service to the church. Although his work was based upon experimentation and reasoning, he rejected atheism as being the result of insufficient depth of philosophy, stating, &#8220;It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men&#8217;s minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity.&#8221; (<em><a href="http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/ofatheism.html" target="_blank">Of Atheism</a></em>)</li>
<li id="kepler"><strong>Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)</strong><br />
Kepler was a brilliant mathematician and astronomer. He did early work on light, and established the laws of planetary motion about the sun. He also came close to reaching the Newtonian concept of universal gravity &#8211; well before Newton was born! His introduction of the idea of force in astronomy changed it radically in a modern direction. Kepler was an extremely sincere and pious Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the heavenly bodies represent the Trinity. Kepler suffered no persecution for his open avowal of the sun-centered system, and, indeed, was allowed as a Protestant to stay in Catholic Graz as a Professor (1595-1600) when other Protestants had been expelled!</li>
<li id="Galilei"><strong>Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)</strong><br />
Galileo is often remembered for his conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. His controversial work on the solar system was published in 1633. It had no proofs of a sun-centered system (Galileo&#8217;s telescope discoveries did not indicate a moving earth) and his one &#8220;proof&#8221; based upon the tides was invalid. It ignored the correct elliptical orbits of planets published twenty five years earlier by Kepler. Since his work finished by putting the Pope&#8217;s favorite argument in the mouth of the simpleton in the dialogue, the Pope (an old friend of Galileo&#8217;s) was very offended. After the &#8220;trial&#8221; and being forbidden to teach the sun-centered system, Galileo did his most useful theoretical work, which was on dynamics. Galileo expressly said that the Bible cannot err, and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the biblical texts.</li>
<li id="descartes"><strong>Rene Descartes (1596-1650)</strong><br />
Descartes was a French mathematician, scientist and philosopher who has been called the father of modern philosophy. His school studies made him dissatisfied with previous philosophy: He had a deep religious faith as a Roman Catholic, which he retained to his dying day, along with a resolute, passionate desire to discover the truth. At the age of 24 he had a dream, and felt the vocational call to seek to bring knowledge together in one system of thought. His system began by asking what could be known if all else were doubted &#8211; suggesting the famous &#8220;I think therefore I am&#8221;. Actually, it is often forgotten that the next step for Descartes was to establish the near certainty of the existence of God &#8211; for only if God both exists and would not want us to be deceived by our experiences &#8211; can we trust our senses and logical thought processes. God is, therefore, central to his whole philosophy. What he really wanted to see was that his philosophy be adopted as standard Roman Catholic teaching. Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon (1561-1626) are generally regarded as the key figures in the development of scientific methodology. Both had systems in which God was important, and both seem more devout than the average for their era.</li>
<li id="newton"><strong>Isaac Newton (1642-1727)</strong><br />
In optics, mechanics, and mathematics, Newton was a figure of undisputed genius and innovation. In all his science (including chemistry) he saw mathematics and numbers as central. What is less well known is that he was devoutly religious and saw numbers as involved in understanding God&#8217;s plan for history from the Bible. He did a considerable work on biblical numerology, and, though aspects of his beliefs were not orthodox, he thought theology was very important. In his system of physics, God is essential to the nature and absoluteness of space. In <em>Principia</em> he stated, &#8220;The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion on an intelligent and powerful Being.&#8221;</li>
<li id="boyle"><strong>Robert Boyle (1791-1867)</strong><br />
One of the founders and key early members of the Royal Society, Boyle gave his name to &#8220;Boyle&#8217;s Law&#8221; for gases, and also wrote an important work on chemistry. <em>Encyclopedia Britannica</em>says of him: &#8220;By his will he endowed a series of Boyle lectures, or sermons, which still continue, &#8216;for proving the Christian religion against notorious infidels&#8230;&#8217; As a devout Protestant, Boyle took a special interest in promoting the Christian religion abroad, giving money to translate and publish the New Testament into Irish and Turkish. In 1690 he developed his theological views in <em>The Christian Virtuoso</em>, which he wrote to show that the study of nature was a central religious duty.&#8221; Boyle wrote against atheists in his day (the notion that atheism is a modern invention is a myth), and was clearly much more devoutly Christian than the average in his era.</li>
<li id="faraday"><strong>Michael Faraday (1791-1867)</strong><br />
Michael Faraday was the son of a blacksmith who became one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century. His work on electricity and magnetism not only revolutionized physics, but led to much of our lifestyles today, which depends on them (including computers and telephone lines and, so, web sites). Faraday was a devoutly Christian member of the Sandemanians, which significantly influenced him and strongly affected the way in which he approached and interpreted nature. Originating from Presbyterians, the Sandemanians rejected the idea of state churches, and tried to go back to a New Testament type of Christianity.</li>
<li id="mendel"><strong>Gregor Mendel (1822-1884)</strong><br />
Mendel was the first to lay the mathematical foundations of genetics, in what came to be called &#8220;Mendelianism&#8221;. He began his research in 1856 (three years before Darwin published his<em>Origin of Species</em>) in the garden of the Monastery in which he was a monk. Mendel was elected Abbot of his Monastery in 1868. His work remained comparatively unknown until the turn of the century, when a new generation of botanists began finding similar results and &#8220;rediscovered&#8221; him (though their ideas were not identical to his). An interesting point is that the 1860&#8242;s was notable for formation of the X-Club, which was dedicated to lessening religious influences and propagating an image of &#8220;conflict&#8221; between science and religion. One sympathizer was Darwin&#8217;s cousin <a href="http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/implications.html">Francis Galton</a>, whose scientific interest was in genetics (a proponent of eugenics &#8211; selective breeding among humans to &#8220;improve&#8221; the stock). He was writing how the &#8220;priestly mind&#8221; was not conducive to science while, at around the same time, an Austrian monk was making the breakthrough in genetics. The rediscovery of the work of Mendel came too late to affect Galton&#8217;s contribution.</li>
<li id="kelvin"><strong>William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907)</strong><br />
Kelvin was foremost among the small group of British scientists who helped to lay the foundations of modern physics. His work covered many areas of physics, and he was said to have more letters after his name than anyone else in the Commonwealth, since he received numerous honorary degrees from European Universities, which recognized the value of his work. He was a very committed Christian, who was certainly more religious than the average for his era. Interestingly, his fellow physicists George Gabriel Stokes (1819-1903) and James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) were also men of deep Christian commitment, in an era when many were nominal, apathetic, or anti-Christian. The <em>Encyclopedia Britannica</em> says &#8220;Maxwell is regarded by most modern physicists as the scientist of the 19th century who had the greatest influence on 20th century physics; he is ranked with Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein for the fundamental nature of his contributions.&#8221; Lord Kelvin was an <a href="http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/creation.html#old">Old Earth creationist</a>, who estimated the Earth&#8217;s age to be somewhere between 20 million and 100 million years, with an upper limit at 500 million years based on cooling rates (a low estimate due to his lack of knowledge about radiogenic heating).</li>
<li id="planck"><strong>Max Planck (1858-1947)</strong><br />
Planck made many contributions to physics, but is best known for quantum theory, which revolutionized our understanding of the atomic and sub-atomic worlds. In his 1937 lecture &#8220;Religion and Naturwissenschaft,&#8221; Planck expressed the view that God is everywhere present, and held that &#8220;the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is conveyed by the holiness of symbols.&#8221; Atheists, he thought, attach too much importance to what are merely symbols. Planck was a churchwarden from 1920 until his death, and believed in an almighty, all-knowing, beneficent God (though not necessarily a personal one). Both science and religion wage a &#8220;tireless battle against skepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition&#8221; with the goal &#8220;toward God!&#8221;</li>
<li id="einstein"><strong>Albert Einstein (1879-1955)</strong><br />
Einstein is probably the best known and most highly revered scientist of the twentieth century, and is associated with major revolutions in our thinking about time, gravity, and the conversion of matter to energy (E=mc<sup>2</sup>). Although <a href="http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/einstein.html">never coming to belief in a personal God</a>, he recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe. The <em>Encyclopedia Britannica</em> says of him: &#8220;Firmly denying atheism, Einstein expressed a belief in &#8220;Spinoza&#8217;s God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists.&#8221; This actually motivated his interest in science, as he once remarked to a young physicist: &#8220;I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details.&#8221; Einstein&#8217;s famous epithet on the &#8220;uncertainty principle&#8221; was &#8220;God does not play dice&#8221; &#8211; and to him this was a real statement about a God in whom he believed. A famous saying of his was &#8220;Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.&#8221;</li>
</ol>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.pallayi.com/2009/05/04/famous-scientists-who-believed-in-god/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>55</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
