|
Scientists
and Belief in God
by John P.
Pratt
There
are as many scientists who believe in God today as there were a
century ago, and more scientists are now studying the marvels of
nature to copy them in order to improve our lives. Louis Agassiz,
perhaps the greatest natural scientist of the nineteenth century,
declared, "It is the job of prophets and scientists alike to proclaim
the glories of God."
Throughout
history, most scientists have been believers in God, but during
the last few centuries the scientific trend has been toward atheism.
God's laws are so effective that the universe seems to just run
itself. Scientists have been very successful explaining many phenomena
without the need for any intervening hand from deity. But now the
trend toward atheism may be reversing.
By 1914 only
40% of scientists stated that they believed in God, according to
a poll quoted in Scientific American. It had been assumed
at that time that as scientists discovered more and more of the
laws of nature that the trend would increase until virtually all
scientists were atheists. The authors of the 1999 article note that
recently there has been a trend reported in the news that a reconciliation
between science and religion is underway:
"Now,
at the turn of the millennium, comes a movement bent on reconciling
science and religion. New books hail the divine in physics, biology,
even computer information theory. Last year 'SCIENCE FINDS GOD'
emblazoned the cover of Newsweek, and other leading news magazines
picked up on the theme. More conferences than ever feature dialogues
between 'the two ways of knowing.' By one report, US higher education
now boasts 1,000 courses for credit on science and faith, whereas
a student in the sixties would have long dug in hardscrabble to
find even one. Scientists who are older and tenured, it is said,
feel it is time to give witness to their once closeted or newly
found faith."[1]
The authors
of that article set out to determine whether the atheistic trend
in science had increased or not. They repeated the questions of
the 1914 poll to the same level of scientists and discovered that
today there are still 40% of scientists who believe in God. They
conclude, "scientists today no more jettison Christianity's 'two
cardinal beliefs' than their counterparts did in 1914. Gallup surveys
suggest the same about the general population." They go on to report
that among scientists in the top positions the atheistic trend does
appear to be increasing, but they also note that it has been pointed
out that, "There's a reward system to being irreligious in the upper
echelons." Thus, it has been suggested that the extreme atheism
at the very top is probably more of a result of "200 years of marketing
that if you want to be a scientific person you've got to keep your
mind free of the fetters of religion."
This recent
poll may have detected the bottom on the cycle and the percentage
of hard scientists who are believers may well now begin to increase.
Before looking at evidence supporting this position, let's consider
the thoughts of two of the greatest scientists on their belief in
God. Sir Isaac Newton is often considered to be the greatest physicist
of all time. He really did "write the book" on the laws of physics.
While Newton is known principally for his work in physics, he also
produced many volumes on the subject of religion. He wrote a commentary
on the book of Daniel and the book of Revelations, and he wrote
on the chronology of ancient kingdoms.[2] As an example of his seeing
no problem whatsoever in using science to discover truth about religion,
he used his own newly discovered laws governing the motion of the
moon to reconstruct the Judean calendar at the time of Christ in
order to calculate the exact date of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.
He was about two hundred years ahead of his time with this idea.
His work was repeated with the same results in the early 1900's
by scientists who thought they were doing it for the first time,
and his method is still the best way known to make this determination.[3]
Here are a
sample of the religious writings of Sir Isaac Newton:
"And
the gospel is that Jesus is the Christ. 'Whosoever believeth that
Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him
that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.' I John v.I.
... And all this is the Gospel which Christ sent his disciples to
teach all nations ...
"Repentance
and the remission of sins relate to transgressions against the two
first commandments. We are to forsake the Devil, that is, all false
gods and all manner of idolatry, this being a breach of the first
and great commandment. And we are to forsake the flesh and the world,
or as the Apostle John expressed it, the lust of the flesh and the
lust of the eye and the pride of life, that is, unchastity, covetousness,
pride and ambition; these things being a breach of the second of
the two great commandments. And we are to believe in one God, the
father, almighty in dominion, the maker of heaven and earth and
of all things therein, and in our Lord Jesus Christ, the son of
God, who was born of a Virgin and sacrificed for us on the cross,
and the third day rose again from the dead and ascended unto heaven...
And
as for the Christian worship, we are authorized in scripture to
give glory and honour to God the Father, because he hath created
all things, and to the Lamb of God, because he hath redeemed us
with his blood and is our Lord, and to direct our prayers to God
the Father in the name of Christ ..."[4]
Another excellent
example of a great scientist who had a strong belief in the existence
of God was Louis Agassiz, who "is acknowledged even by current researchers
as the greatest natural scientist of his day."[5] He discovered
the Ice Age, founded both the Museum of Comparative Anatomy at Harvard,
and with his wife established the great women's college Radcliffe.
Here are a sample of his outlook on how science should bring us
closer to God:
"In
our study of natural objects we are approaching the thoughts of
the Creator, reading his conceptions, interpreting a system that
is His and not ours."[6]
"Facts
are the words of God, and we may heap them together endlessly, but
they will teach us little or nothing till we place them in their
true relations, and recognize the thought that binds them together."[7]
Agassiz was
a champion of divine creation and devoted the last years of his
life to defending it. He declared that "It is the job of prophets
and scientists alike to proclaim the glories of God," and he spent
his life as a scientist doing exactly that. He died in 1873, and
when the St. George temple was dedicated only four years later,
he was one of the eminent men who came there with the signers of
the Declaration of Independence to request of President Wilford
Woodruff that his temple work be done.[8]
After Agassiz,
the scientific trend shifted as a majority of scientists began to
feel they understood the laws of nature well enough to explain their
observations without requiring a belief in God. However, as noted
above, a core of scientists who do believe in God has persisted,
and does not show any signs of decreasing in percentage. These scientists
continue to see the hand of God reflected in all of his creations.
As Ralph Waldo Emerson stated, "The true doctrine of omnipresence
is that God reappears with all his parts in every moss and cobweb."[9]
Today there
is another interesting trend. It is that the number of inventions
based on copying nature is now beginning to be systematically exploited.
In so doing, one need not even bring up the argument over whether
"nature" refers to the handiwork of God or millions of years of
mindless evolution; all that matters is that nature is incredibly
successful at solving problems with which we have struggled for
years.
This trend
began by noticing that many inventions were discovered from observing
how "nature" had solved problems. Inventors spent centuries trying
to invent the airplane after watching birds fly. The book Serendipity:
Accidental Discoveries in Science chronicles several of these
observations which led to inventions. It also includes some discoveries
that really appear to have been accidents, but many came from simply
noticing the invention already working in nature, and using scientific
inquiry to discover just how they work. Examples of such inventions
include Velcro, which resulted when George deMestral looked to see
why burs stuck so tightly to his clothing. Electric current was
discovered in animals when it was noticed by Luigi Galvani that
a dissected frog leg twitched as it lay near an electrostatic generator.
Many colors appeared only in nature. For example, the color purple
is associated with royalty partly because the natural dye Tyrian
purple could only be extracted from small mollusks in the Mediterranean
Sea. It was very expensive because it took 9,000 of them to produce
a gram of dye. The synthesis of this color by William Perkin led
to the birth of the synthetic dye industry. Certain peptides which
are highly effective in fighting a variety of bacteria were discovered
when it was observed that some African frogs would heal perfectly
in murky water filled with lethal bacteria. The list goes on and
on.[10]
Now a trend
is beginning to strengthen to systemically copy nature. The word
"biomimicry" has been coined to refer to the idea of purposely copying
nature to discover new inventions. The author of a book with that
title sees this emerging field as the result of centuries of trying
to fight nature as gradually succumbing to a trend to acknowledge
nature's ways as best. She points out that not only has nature already
invented everything we have, it has many more inventions whose workings
still evade us:
"We
realize that all our inventions have already appeared in nature
in a more elegant form and at a lot less cost to the planet. Our
most clever architectural struts and beams are already featured
in lily pads and bamboo stems. Our central heating and air conditioning
are bested by the termite tower's steady 86 degrees F. Our most
stealthy radar is hard of hearing compared to the bat's multifrequency
transmission. And our new 'smart materials' can't hold a candle
to the dolphin's skin or to the butterfly's proboscis. Even the
wheel, which we always took to be a uniquely human creation has
been found in the tiny rotary motor that propels the flagellum of
the world's most ancient bacteria.
"Humbling
also are the horders of organisms casually performing feats we can
only dream about. Bioluminescent algae splash chemicals together
to light their body lanterns. Arctic fish and frogs freeze solid
and then spring to life, having protected their organs from ice
damage. Black bears hibernate all winter without poisoning themselves
on their urea, while their polar cousins stay active, with a coat
of transparent hollow hairs covering their skins like the panes
of a greenhouse. Chameleons and cuttlefish hide without moving,
changing the pattern of their skin to instantly blend with their
surroundings. Bees, turtles, and birds navigate without maps, while
whales and penguins dive without scuba gear. How do they do it?
How do dragonflies outmaneuver our best helicopters? How do hummingbirds
cross the Gulf of Mexico on less than one tenth of an ounce of fuel?
How do ants carry the equivalent of hundreds of pounds in a dead
heat through the jungle?
"These
individual achievements pale, however, when we consider the intricate
interliving that characterizes whole systems, communities like tidal
marshes or saguaro forests. In ensemble, living things maintain
a dynamic stability, like dancers in an arabesque, continually juggling
resources without waste.... Studying these poems day in and day
out, biomimics develop a high degree of awe, bordering on reverence."[11]
No wonder that
these marvelous creations inspire awe and reverence; they are the
work of the Almighty. When we look on any or the least of these,
we are looking at God moving in his majesty and power.
One final note
is the following. While the above book assumes, as do most scientists,
that these wonders of nature just "happened" by themselves, there
is also a growing group of scientists who recognize that no random
processes could have resulted in many of these inventions. The natural
inventions which must have been "designed" rather than occurring
by chance are those in which each of the many parts would have been
useless to the creature unless they all just happened to spring
into existence at the same time.
An example
of such an inventions include the mechanism which clots our blood
when we are cut. The system contains a series of inhibitors which
prevent blood from clotting when it shouldn't, which would cause
a stroke. There are a whole series of complicated chemicals in the
system which are only useful as part of the blood clotting mechanism.
All of them are necessary for the system to work, and in forty years
of attempts, no one has been able to explain how the system could
have evolved by chance.[12]
The new millennium
promises to provide many new and wonderful inventions as scientists
recognize the hand of God in nature and begin to understand the
principles behind so many inventions which are found everywhere
in His creations.
Notes
1. Larson, Edward
J. and Witham, Larry, "Scientists and Religion
in America," Scientific American 281 No. 3 (Sep
1999), pp. 88-93.
2. Newton,
Isaac. The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended, [1728],
reprinted in Histories & Mysteries of Man , London, 1988.
Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse
of St. John, London, J. Darby and T. Browne, 1733.
3. Pratt, J.P.,
"Newton's Date for the Crucifixion,"Quarterly
Journal of Royal Astronomical Society 32, (Sept. 1991),
301-304.
4. McLachlan,
H., Sir Isaac Newton: Theological Manuscripts, Liverpool,
1950, pp. 29-35.
5. Gould, Stephen
Jay, "Agassiz in the Galapagos," Natural History, 90, no.
12 (12 Dec 1981).
6. Agassiz,
Louis, Methods of Study in Natural History, Boston: Ticknor
and Fields, 1863, p. 14.
7. Agassiz,
Louis, "Evolution and Permanence Type" reprinted in The Intelligence
of Agassiz by Guy Davenport, Westport, Conn., Greenwood Press,
1983, p. 231.
8. Anderson,
Vicki Jo, The Other Eminent Men of Wilford Woodruff, 1994,
pp. 9-18. The quotes referenced in notes 5-7 were also quoted herein.
9. Emerson,
Ralph Waldo, "Compensation," from Essays:
First Series Vol. II.
10. Royston
M. Roberts, Serendipity: Accidental Discoveries in Science,
Wiley & Sons, New York, 1989.
11. Benyus,
Janine M., Biomimicry, William Morrow, New York, 1997, pp.
6-7.
12. Behe, Michael
J., Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution,
Free Press, New York, 1996, pp. 74-97.
Click
here to sign up for Meridian's FREE email updates.
© 2001 Meridian
Magazine. All Rights Reserved.
|
