Can a scientist be saved?

[Doveaman]

Jesus said, “It is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.” (Matt 19:23).

I say, it is hard for a scientist to enter the kingdom of heaven.

Why?

Because to be saved requires us to believe in things for which there is no scientific evidence, or to believe in things which the scientific evidence suggests did not happen and cannot happen.

Every Christian’s hope is in their future resurrection from death. Some of them would have died thousands of years ago.

Is it scientifically possible for a person who died, say, five thousand years ago to be restored to life with all their memories intact?

Yet, this is what every Christian must believe in order to true to their faith:

“If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.” (1 Cor 15:13-14).

So where does this leave the scientist whose view of reality is determined by systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation?

Can he or she be saved having such a myopic view of reality, or do scientists have a double standard?

How can they relate to a God who was born to a virgin, died, came back to life and flew off into the clouds, leaving us a promise to come back and restore to life every human being that has ever died?

“Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear His voice and come out” (John 5:28-29).

 

[TeddyReceptus]

I say, it is hard for a scientist to enter the kingdom of heaven.

If heaven is run by the Biblical Literalists then you may have a point. Hopefully God loves people more than many fundamentalists seem to.

Why?

Because your religious faith tells you you are right and everyone else is wrong?

Because to be saved requires us to believe in things for which there is no scientific evidence, or to believe in things which the scientific evidence suggests did not happen and cannot happen.

This might come as a big shock to you, but there's a LOT of scientists out there who believe in God just as much as you and who know in their heart of hearts Jesus died for their sins and that they are granted salvation through God's Grace.

Is there more that is needed?

Can he or she be saved having such a myopic view of reality, or do scientists have a double standard?

"Myopic"? "Double standard"? Not all that is part of the faith comes from a simplistic ultra-literal view. Some people have a deep and abiding faith that comes from a different view of the spiritual teachings of the Bible.

How can they relate to a God who was born to a virgin

Depending on how they translate "almah"? Is that "virgin" part really all that important? Does it "make or break" Christianity?

, died, came back to life and flew off into the clouds, leaving us a promise to come back and restore to life every human being that has ever died?

I can't speak for most people who are not fundamentalists, but maybe there is a sort of "double mindedness", but who are you to critique their faith in God?

Are you God?

Did God appoint you to judge the quick and the dead?

 

[Elendur]

If god is that unforgiving I'd rather go to hell. How bad can it be?

 

[David Jerome]

I think it's impossible for any rational person, scientist or not, to be part of any religion.

 

[AlexBP]

I think it's impossible for any rational person, scientist or not, to be part of any religion.

Well good, I'm glad we finally got that settled!

Because to be saved requires us to believe in things for which there is no scientific evidence, or to believe in things which the scientific evidence suggests did not happen and cannot happen.

I got a B.S. from one of the world's best schools of science and engineering, went through grad school in math at a top-twenty university, and now teach science and math. Some people I meet seem to think that because of this, I must have sworn an oath saying that I would let scientific viewpoints rule everything that I think and do in my life. Oddly enough, I don't recall any such oath. I don't even know when I was supposed to take it. End of freshman year? During my thesis test? Perhaps during P-Chem?

The scientific community is a collection of people that have, intellectually, both strengths and weaknesses. They promote and have promoted some truths and also some falsehoods. A proper scientific education exposes a person to both the strengths and the weaknesses, the truths and the falsehoods. It does not leave us deferential to scientific authority in all matters.

It's worth recalling that numerous great scientists have been Christians, from oldies such as Galileo and Newton and Pascal to moderns like Karl Landsteiner and Norman Borlaug. There's nothing that excludes scientists from being religious.

 

[selfinflikted]

There's nothing that excludes scientists from being religious.

^ this.

/thread

 

[JustMeSee]

This comes across as an attack on Christian scientists.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

Oddly enough, I don't recall any such oath. I don't even know when I was supposed to take it. End of freshman year? During my thesis test? Perhaps during P-Chem?

In my experience, there are no atheists in P-Chem. Prayer is the only way to get through it.

 

[Elendur]

^ this.

/thread

 

[CaliforniaSun]

Saved from what, exactly?

 

[Elendur]

Saved from what, exactly?

Probably damnation.
Or is it saved to heaven?

 

[selfinflikted]

Saved from what, exactly?

You know, hellfire and brimstone. Gnashing of teeth. The usual.

 

[Lillen]

Ok, here goes my insight. You only die because you are confronted with the insight that you are dead. Death is an eternal insight of being dead. It is this insight that seperates the body from the soul and the body goes to the grave. If death would just be a cloud of nothingness, then PET scanning of the brain would show activity in similar to 4 degree sleeping patterns. - Deep sleep. But since it is not, since the PET scan shows no activity in the brain of a dead person, we must have come to another conclution. The conclution "I am dead" is my theory.

 

[Lillen]

With this in mind, cognitive psychologist, could supposingly ressurect the dead, Simply by convincing the dead person that he lives. How exactly is a fair quesiton

 

[Trogool]

Jesus said, “It is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.” (Matt 19:23).

I say, it is hard for a scientist to enter the kingdom of heaven.

I'm fine with that as the esteem in which I hold God's statements and your statements on the salvation of man are very different.

 

[Lillen]

The ethymological inhertance of the word Demon means "knowing one" and is according to the majority of Christian schoolars a fallen angel. Angels who did not keep their domain but rebelled against God. I do not oppose knowledge in that sense of what you actually do with your brain. I oppose knowledge in the sense what you actually know. For instance if i know that the big bang is true, if i supposingly would know that, It is basically meaningless if i cannot apply that science into something I do. If i know that gold is worth this and that much money, it is practically meaningless if I am not familiar with metallurgy and can refine gold.

Demons are for real, and according to Genesis 6 they even can breed children with humans. A demon can have sexual intercourse with a woman, and breed giants, This is what caused the wickedness seen before the flood, according to some christian schoolars.

 

[RickG]

I can see how creationist scientists might have to push on the door a little harder when they meet St. Peter at the pearly gates due to problems with the 9th commandment.

 

[Lillen]

Whats the 9th commandment now again?

 

[CaliforniaSun]

You know, hellfire and brimstone. Gnashing of teeth. The usual.

So, when I die, I get new teeth, only to gnash them?

 

[CaliforniaSun]

Whats the 9th commandment now again?

Thou shall not write incoherent posts.