Fear Mongering
Ex- Atheists
R. Dawkins
B. Russell
D. Hume 
Atheists and Divorce
The Greatest Minds and God
Nobelists and God
Is God Cruel?
Is Christianity Evil?
Bible Contradictions?
About God and Jesus Christ
Great Theistic Works
God's Existence Sites
C. Hitchens
S. Harris
P. Pullman
Open Letter to Atheist/Agnostic-Jews
Open Letter to Christians Who Embraced Atheism
Free Literature
The Author


"We Believe in God" -- The Greatest Minds Believed,204,203,200_.jpg


 Is God Cruel?

The Dawkins Delusion?

There Is a God

Mere Christianity  C.S. Lewis

Darwin on Trial

The Edge of Evolution

Intelligent Design

The Fingerprint of God

The Creator and the Cosmos

Creation As Science

The Cell's Design

Understanding Intelligent Design

Icons of Evolution

The Language of God

What's So Great About Christianity






     In 1998, Edward Larson published a study which has become a banner of victory for atheists around the world. According to this study, we are told, the vast majority of "superior" scientists in America are either atheists or agnostics. Is that, they say, not compelling evidence that high intelligence leads invariably to unbelief? Here is our perspective.

     To start, the reader should be informed that Edward Larson asked NAS scientists if they believed in ...a God in intellectual and affective communication with humankind.(1) This is clearly a belief in the “Personal God” that Christians, Jews and Muslims believe in. Unfortunately, this question does not include a belief in a “Creator” who is not involved in human affairs, such as the divinity that Deists” and Pantheists believe in. Without doubt, a number of scientists would describe themselves as such. Einstein, in fact, defined himself as a Pantheist; British physicist, Hawkins, professes a belief in a Creator but, reportedly, not a “Personal God” and is, therefore, either a Pantheist or a Deist.  Consequently, if Deists and Pantheists had been factored in, the number of believing NAS scientists would have been higher. (A few years ago, in our correspondence, Edward Larson encouraged me to do a study that would ask a more all-encompassing question. I have not done so yet, but I am sure it would be quite revealing.)

     In a 1998 article published by the National Centre for Science Education, the foremost defender of teaching evolution in public schools in America, admitted that Larson's conclusions were premature. In fact they refer to a Gallup study which supports the view that about 40% of  "prominent" scientists in fact do believe in a "somewhat-personal" God who "directed" evolution.

The Gallup questions, which deal with views of God's role in evolution, rather than general belief or disbelief in God, are far less ambiguous. When these questions were used (Larson and Witham 1997), the answers showed that a large proportion (40%) of prominent scientists believe in a God that is sufficiently personal or interactive with humankind that human evolution is guided or planned.

     They objectively also added that Larson's conclusions could not be seen as definitive. "The title of the recent Larson and Witham article in Nature, 'Leading scientists still reject God' is premature without reliable data upon which to base it."(2)

     It is significant, nonetheless, that the vast majority of NAS scientists do not believe in the Judeo-Christian God. The reasons may not be hard to deduce. First of all, the American education system has, for decades, taught an anti-Christian message saturated with a materialist bias. Some university professors consistently ridicule the Bible as a work filled with myths, fictional accounts of miracles and outright lies. Some also  dismiss religious believers as ignorant, bigoted and stupid. Furthermore, atheistic and agnostic Philosophy professors manipulate the minds of impressionable students and turn many into new disciples every year.

     Also significant is the power of Science departments in demanding allegiance to their core belief in evolution -- the heart and core of scientific orthodoxy. In the science world brain washing into materialistic/evolutionistic thinking is continual, persistent and unrelenting. Publicly deviating from orthodoxy means opening oneself to ridicule and ostracism. In some American universities' Science departments deviating from orthodoxy would mean certain professional suicide.

     Materialists/evolutionists in positions of influence in institutions of higher learning, whether because of malicious intent or plain ignorance, fail to inform their students that the greatest minds that have shaped our world believed in God, and that most of them were practicing Christians (Click here for documented evidence). They also fail to inform them that several modern Nobel Prize winning scientists, and other influential modern  scientists were/are firm believers in God, and that several were/are practicing Christians.  (Click here for documented evidence).

     Most of all, Science departments fail to remind their students that Science rests upon the shoulders of giants like Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Kepler, Einstein, Pasteur and  Planck who openly acknowledged God's existence (Click here for documented evidence). The scientists who have deviated from the path of their founding fathers have rejected the Author of all the laws of science and all the wonders that they behold every single day.

     But is there more? As one grows "great" within academia, what happens to one's ego? Could it be that some so-called "superior" scientists are so filled with their own self-importance that it would be agonizing for them to  acknowledge the existence of a Being that is actually greater than themselves, who demands obedience, worship and humility?

      At the highest echelons of Science, one finds a rigid allegiance to a materialistic world view. At that level, many are committed to the Scientific Method as the "only" way to discovering truth. The Scientific Method demands "observation" and "measurement." But God can only be "deduced" by His works and cannot be observed or measured. But truth, according to rigid Science, must be observed and measured. The inevitable result is, obviously, doubt, or worse still, rejection of an "un-measurable" God.

     God's reality is present everywhere. He is continually manifesting His presence through the titanic energy that emanates from Him that transforms itself into atoms, the building blocks of everything in existence. The Creator is also present in every new mutation that lead to new brilliant variations. His creative power and His artistic brilliance is manifest in every stunning detail of creation. Scientists study God's creative power every day. They study the paint brush, the paint and the canvas and can tell us what each is made of, but they cannot study the Painter. But the Painter is there, painting continually, and brilliantly. Many objective scientists see His presence clearly in His works, and marvel at His greatness. Some, instead, are content with believing that the brush can paint on its own, and that it, the paint and the canvas came out of "nothing."

     The great paradox is that many brilliant scientists totally accept this world view, thus giving living proof to the paradoxical reality that scientific brilliance and foolishness can co-exist, and that one can be exceptionally intelligent and yet believe the most absurd and ludicrous idea ever conceived by men: mind-less energy can produce mind.


1) "Leading Scientists Still Reject God, Steven Jay Gould Web Site. <> (5 October, 2008)

2)  Scott, Eugenie, "Do Scientists Really Reject God?", NCSE Web Site. (17 December, 2008)


50 Nobel Laureates and Other Great Scientists Who Believe in God
Leading Scientists Still Reject God
National Academy of Science is godless to the core–survey
'Science cannot provide all the answers' | Science | The Guardian
Famous Scientists Who Believed in God
God of Science, The: Behe, Michael
Bible-Believing Scientists of the Past
Why Scientists Must Believe in God
Science Does Not Need God. Or Does It?
Do real scientists believe in Creation? - ChristianAnswers.Net



eXTReMe Tracker