9. Jesus, the Science Denier?: The Exploration Fallout
If a man is drawn towards honor and courage and endurance, justice, mercy, and charity, let him follow the way of Christ and find out for himself. No findings in science hinder him in that way.
—WILLIAM HENRY BRAGG
A scientific discovery is also a religious discovery. There is no conflict between science and religion. Our knowledge of God is made larger with every discovery we make about the world.
—JOSEPH H. TAYLOR JR.
“Any idea when the tests will return from the crime lab?” I asked. Another compelling line of evidence from the fallout of Tammy’s disappearance came to light as we were finishing our investigation of Frank Webb.
We located the recipients of Frank’s letters and drawings. Not a single one had the kind of relationship Frank had imagined, nor had any of them been harmed in any way. We were now convinced that Frank was unconnected to Tammy’s case. With that part of our investigation concluded, we were currently focused on a new development.
“Maybe two more weeks,” replied Kyle, tapping on his desk calendar.
New evidence surfaced when we interviewed Tyler Boswell, a man who worked with Steve at the auto shop. He told us that Steve hired him for a job about a week after Tammy disappeared. Tyler had a side business as an auto detailer, and Steve asked him to clean his 1996 Chevy Lumina. The request surprised Tyler because he didn’t consider the Lumina worthy of an expensive detailing, given its age and the way Steve had treated it. But Steve knew that Tyler had steam-cleaning equipment, and he wanted the car detailed inside and out.
Tyler remembered a notable feature of the Lumina. While vacuuming the trunk, he noticed dark brown stains in the carpeting and what looked like a small acid burn. He steam cleaned the carpet and took extra time to repair the burn. Steve seemed pleased with the results, but he refused to pay Tyler for the additional work. It ruined their friendship.
FORENSIC SCIENCE
“Forensic scientists examine and analyze evidence from crime scenes and elsewhere to develop objective findings that can assist in the investigation and prosecution of perpetrators of crime or absolve an innocent person from suspicion.” Forensic science is used to study past events (like crimes), but it can also be used to examine past historical events (like the origin of the universe or the resurrection of Jesus).
Using DMV records, we found the Chevy Lumina. We wrote a warrant for the car and brought it to the crime lab. Technicians examined the trunk and found residue from the stains Tyler described. Although he washed the stain from the top of the carpet, Tyler was apparently unable to completely remove the residue from the carpet’s backing. Our criminalist collected a sample and determined that the stain was human blood.
Now we were waiting for a DNA comparison. By searching the county foster records, we were able to identify and locate Tammy’s biological father. We submitted his DNA along with the carpet residue. A familial DNA comparison would tell us—to within a range of certainty—if this was Tammy’s blood.
“Sometimes these cases are solved with good old-fashioned detective work, and sometimes they’re solved with science,” said Kyle.
“Sometimes it’s a little of both.”
THE INCOMPATIBLE JESUS
Cold cases are cold for a reason. Detectives tried their best to solve the case the first time around, and even though technology has improved over the years, these advances in forensic science haven’t typically aided my cases. That’s why I was eager to test some of the techniques we learned about in the seminar. If the stains in Steve’s trunk were Tammy’s blood, this evidence (along with the evidence of the acid burn) would corroborate our suspicions. I’m not opposed to using science to determine the truth.
My Christian coworker Jason seemed to hold a different view.
When he told me about his frustration with his kids’ schools, he focused on one aspect of public education that he and his wife found particularly objectionable: the theory of evolution. He rejected the hypothesis and opposed the way it was taught in the public schools in his area.
“They teach it as though it’s a fact, when it’s just a theory,” he said.
“Do you also reject the theory of gravity?” I asked.
As an atheist, I couldn’t believe that Christians still rejected what I considered to be established science. Christianity seemed incompatible with scientific discovery, and Christians seemed entirely unwilling to abandon their irrational belief in the supernatural.
SCIENCE, GALILEO, AND THE CHRISTIAN DENIERS
I suspected that all Christians held a view like my friend Jason, resisting the advances of science as though every new scientific discovery put another nail in God’s coffin. Back then I believed there were already many nails in that casket. I expected science would someday solve all the questions once answered by primitive theologians— if stubborn Christians like Jason would just stop opposing science at every turn. I resonated with the statement of Catherine Fahringer, a social activist and officer at the Freedom from Religion Foundation, who once said, “We would be 1,500 years ahead if it hadn’t been for the church dragging science back by its coattails and burning our best minds at the stake.”
I’ll admit that my view about stubborn Christians and primitive theologians was based mostly on what little I knew about the work of Galileo Galilei, his advocacy for heliocentrism (the astronomical model that proposes the earth and planets revolve around the sun), and his treatment at the hands of Catholic leadership.
Galileo (an Italian astronomer who lived in the sixteenth and seventeenth century) was correct in his description of the solar system, but the Catholic Church at the time held to a geocentric view of the sun and planets (with the earth at its center). Galileo was investigated as a heretic by the Roman Inquisition in 1615, which rejected heliocentrism as contradictory to the Holy Scripture. Galileo was convicted and spent the rest of his life under house arrest.
OBJECTION: CHRISTIANITY IS ANTI-SCIENCE
Christianity isn’t anti-science, but it is anti-scientism. Scientism is the belief that science is the only way to know anything. But there are many things we know without the benefit of science at all, like logical and mathematical truths (which precede scientific investigations), metaphysical truths (which determine if the external world is real), moral and ethical truths (which set boundaries for our behavior), aesthetic truths (like determining beauty), and historical truths. Christians believe that science can tell us many important things but not all of the important things.
This historic episode, along with Jason’s statements, seemed to solidify—at least for me—a long-standing Christian tradition of science denial. It seemed to start early, and it appeared to continue today.
But the truth about Galileo and Pope Urban VIII (the man who opposed Galileo’s theory) is much more nuanced than I was originally led to believe. The pope was a fan of Galileo many years earlier (when Urban was known as Cardinal Maffeo Barberini) and even defended Galileo on one occasion on an unrelated scientific proposal.
But by the time Galileo published his findings on the heliocentric planetary model, Barberini was Pope Urban VIII. He interviewed Galileo several times after ascending to the position and gave him permission to write about the Copernican heliocentric theory if he treated it as a hypothesis . But Galileo eventually published his treatise as more than that, and to make matters worse, he included a mocking conversation between characters representing an astronomer and the pope. Galileo’s portrayal of the pope’s character (named “Simplicio,” or “Simpleton” in English) was . . . less than flattering. Urban VIII was not pleased, and Galileo found himself judged as much for his delivery as his content . By comparison, years earlier, Tycho Brahe and Copernicus also proposed heliocentric systems of their own, but neither suffered the same fate as the obstinate and evocative Galileo.
Any apparent conflict between Roman Catholic leadership and Galileo, therefore, does little to prove that Christianity was (or is) hostile to science. It proves only that these two men had a complex relationship and that the timing of history did not happen to favor Galileo’s proposal.
Throughout this conflict with Galileo, Catholic leadership did not see themselves as science deniers. Rather, Pope Urban VIII agreed with the reigning scientific consensus of the time. Urban embraced Ptolemy’s view of geocentrism, an understanding of the solar system historically held by natural philosophers as far back as Aristotle. Galileo, Brahe, and Copernicus disagreed with this dominant view of the cosmos and therefore opposed current scientific thinking as much as they opposed the religious leadership of their day.
The Catholic Church had historically been interested in the latest scientific discoveries and supported the natural sciences at the university level. Remember that the first universities were Christian institutions, and “about thirty percent of the medieval university curriculum covered subjects and texts concerned with the natural world.” In the centuries leading up to Galileo and Pope Urban VIII, Christian universities, supported financially by the Catholic Church, exposed more people to science than any prior institution or civilization. And the church provided “more financial and social support to the study of astronomy . . . than any other, and probably all , other institutions.”
Perhaps that’s why Galileo, while holding to heliocentrism to the end of his life, never rejected his Catholic identity. He saw no contradiction between his beliefs as a Catholic and his findings as a scientist. Galileo once quoted Cardinal Caesar Baronius, agreeing “that the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how heaven goes.” Galileo believed the Bible had much to say about the nature of the real world, even though it was not intended to provide an exhaustive description of the universe. He was therefore content to live out his life as both a Jesus follower and a scientist: “Whatever the course of our lives, we should receive them as the highest gift from the hand of God, in which equally reposed the power to do nothing whatever for us. Indeed, we should accept misfortune not only in thanks, but in infinite gratitude to Providence, which by such means detaches us from an excessive love for Earthly things and elevates our minds to the celestial and divine.”
A COINCIDENCE OR A CATALYST
Galileo believed it was possible to pursue science while following Jesus, but after examining the role Jesus followers played in advancing the cause of education, I couldn’t help but wonder if Jesus was a coincidence or a catalyst in Galileo’s pursuit.
Let me explain. There’s a relationship between the progress of science and the appearance of Jesus in history. First, let’s chart scientific developments and significant scientists (using their portraits) from 2022 BCE to 2022 CE. Science advanced slowly in the first two thousand years, as the ancients laid the foundation for mathematics and natural philosophy.
But in the next two thousand years, scientific developments progressed at an exponential rate, with several key “bursts” of activity, including the scientific revolution of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries:
Where does Jesus fall in this timeline? Interestingly, he appears right before the growth curve.
This did not have to be the case. The chart of scientific development could have been different. Jesus could have appeared in the middle of the curve or at the end.
But instead, Jesus appeared just before the growth curve began. Was this a coincidence or was Jesus somehow a catalyst ? The incremental steps in the curve may provide us with a few clues. The first small increase in scientific activity just happens to occur after the Edict of Milan and Edict of Thessalonica. After the Roman Empire ended its persecution of Christians and adopted Christianity as the religion of the empire, science began to advance.
The next “bump” on the chart occurred at the same time monasteries and cathedral schools were being established.
The next increase on the chart appears to have nothing to do with any development within Christianity. Instead, it was caused by Muslim thinkers and scientists who led the sciences in the Middle Ages.
This rate of Muslim involvement ended prior to the scientific revolution, primarily because of a theological view of Allah that appears to have inhibited scientific discovery within the global Islamic community. Christians, however, did not adopt such a view.
The next increase in activity happened to coincide with the Christian founding of the first universities at Bologna, Oxford, and Paris.
Another increase in scientific activity occurred at about the same time a Jesus follower (Johannes Gutenberg) invented the printing press.
The last impressive explosion of scientific activity occurred at the scientific revolution, and this historic period of discovery happened to coincide with the Protestant Reformation.
Jesus followers dominated this burst of activity in which modern science emerged and developments in mathematics, physics, astronomy, biology, and chemistry changed the way humans thought about themselves and their world.
Christian scientists dramatically outnumbered all other contributors combined. Why? Was it a coincidence or was there something about the worldview Jesus established that served as a catalyst for this historic Christian contribution? The latter seems to have been the case. Jesus matters to the progress of science, and scientific exploration as we know it is yet another piece of Common Era fallout pointing back to Jesus of Nazareth.
JESUS’S SCIENTIFIC WORLDVIEW
Princeton professor Diogenes Allen once wrote, “We have begun to realize that for its very birth science owed a great deal to Christianity.” Why was this the case? What about Jesus’s worldview served as the catalyst for science? How did Jesus ignite a scientific uprising?
Igniter #1: Christ Followers Believed Matter Was Good and Worthy of Study
Christ followers believed that matter was worthy of study. As simple as this truth may seem today, ancient thinkers didn’t always hold matter (or the material world) in high regard. Pythagoras (a Greek mathematician in the fifth century BCE) believed that numbers, rather than matter, represented the true nature of things. Heraclitus (the fifth century BCE Greek philosopher) believed that everything in the universe was in “flux,” making matter impossible. Plato (a Greek philosopher in the fourth century BCE) argued that “forms” (such as beauty) were more real than the material objects that imitated them. Philo (a Jewish philosopher in the first century CE) held that matter was the basis of evil. Gnostics (religious and philosophical believers who flourished in the first and second centuries CE) also believed matter was innately vile.
Given that scientific exploration involves the examination of matter, these views weren’t likely to ignite the scientific explosion that followed Jesus’s appearance. Instead, Jesus expressed a worldview that held matter in high regard and invited the study of the material world, even as an approach to studying the nature of God:
The heavens declare the glory of God;
the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
Day after day they pour forth speech;
night after night they reveal knowledge. (Psalm 19:1–2)
Since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. (Romans 1:20)
Igniter #2: Christ Followers Believed Their World Was the Product of a Singular, Orderly, Rational God
Ancient polytheistic cultures worshiped a pantheon of erratic, prideful, and chaotic gods. Artistic depictions of these gods typically portray them drinking and carousing in a human, rather than divine, manner.
If our world is ruled by gods such as these, lacking order, discipline, and rationality, why try to explain natural phenomena by way of orderly laws? Worse yet, if we are the creation of such gods, how could we ever be certain of our rational capacities to determine the truth about the world around us?
Jesus followers, on the other hand, believed one God ruled the universe in an orderly, rational manner and created us as rational beings in his image. This view led to the birth of science as Christians explored their world, identifying the orderly laws that governed the universe and employing the rationality they received from their Creator.
Igniter #3: Christ Followers Believed God Was Distinct from His Creation
Jesus taught that God transcended the material world. Many ancient people groups believed that nature was an extension of the gods, reflecting their moods and proclivities. But if Zeus, for example, was to blame for every incidence of lightning and Poseidon was at fault for the behavior of the ocean, why would we try to explain these phenomena with science? A better explanation would simply be: “Zeus (or Poseidon) did it!”
But Jesus endorsed a worldview that described God as greater than but distinct from his creation, working through predictable natural processes in such a way that humans could study these processes. This view of the world allowed Jesus followers to study and investigate their environment without simply attributing every phenomenon to an unpredictable deity.
Igniter #4: Christ Followers Were Motivated by Their Desire to Worship the God of the Universe
Most secular scientists today are driven by their sincere love of science and discovery. While this is a noble motivation, it pales when compared with the inspiration of early Christian scientists who saw their work as an act of divine devotion and holy worship.
Johannes Kepler (the German mathematician, astronomer, and theologian who was a key figure in the scientific revolution) described his work in the following manner: “I was merely thinking God’s thoughts after him. Since we astronomers are priests of the highest God in regard to the book of nature, it benefits us to be thoughtful, not of the glory of our minds, but rather, above all else, of the glory of God.”
Jesus followers were driven by more than professional desire or personal interest. Their scientific enthusiasm was inspired by a holy devotion.
Igniter #5: Christ Followers Believed They Could Better Understand God by Observing His Activity in the “Book of Nature”
Let’s return for a moment to the statement of Galileo: “The intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how heaven goes.”
The first part of his statement (“The intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven”) describes special revelation (that is, the “book of Scripture.”) But the second part of Galileo’s statement (“how heaven goes”) describes the natural revelation observed in our world (the “book of nature,” so to speak).
Christian scientists held both books in high regard. They wanted to read these books correctly, understand them clearly, and share them precisely. They considered their scientific findings to be revelations about the nature and activity of God in the natural world. Wernher von Braun (the “father of space science” and the primary scientist involved in the development of the US space program) described this effort: “Although I know of no reference to Christ ever commenting on scientific work, I do know that He said, ‘Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.’ Thus, I am certain that, were He among us today, Christ would encourage scientific research as modern man’s most noble striving to comprehend and admire His Father’s handiwork.”
Igniter #6: Christ Followers Pursued Physical and Intellectual Investigations of Their Environment
Much of science in antiquity was intellectual rather than physical . Long before the word science was used to describe the endeavor, it was known as “natural philosophy.” Most Greeks and Romans, for example, considered manual labor fit only for slaves. If ancient scientific theories were to be tested, empirical research (involving manual activity) would be required.
OBJECTION: THERE ARE NO GOOD REASONS TO BELIEVE IN MIRACLES
A miracle is commonly described as an event “that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws.” Given that definition, most cosmologists (even atheist cosmologists) already believe in at least one miracle. The standard cosmological model for the origin of the universe (the theory most astrophysicists accept) is big bang cosmology. This model describes a universe that came into existence from nothing . If all space, time, and matter came into existence from nothing, the cause of the universe must itself be nonspatial, nontemporal, and nonmaterial. That means the cause of the universe is not explicable by natural or scientific laws . Since the cause and the origin of the universe already falls into the definition of “miraculous,” why would anyone doubt the veracity of other miracles?
This kind of empirical research (involving physical experiments) emerged quickly, however, in the earliest Christian educational facilities. The University of Bologna, for example, began dissecting human cadavers regularly in the Middle Ages.
This shift from purely intellectual reasoning toward physical experimentation is unsurprising given that many of the earliest university professors and lecturers were Christian monks who had been steeped in a tradition of physical labor and didn’t view matter as inherently evil. These monks weren’t afraid to get their hands dirty, and they saw empirical research as an extension of their physical work and divine duty.
Igniter #7: Christ Followers Created a Place to Advance the Sciences
Finally, scientific experimentation and discovery blossomed when like-minded scholars and students gathered in the context of modern universities. These institutions were the invention of Jesus followers (as described in the last chapter). Without this educational advancement, scientific discovery would not have flourished, nor would scientific information have been transmitted effectively from one generation to the next. When Christians established modern universities, they ignited the progress of science.
These seven attributes of the worldview Jesus initiated account for an obvious truth: Jesus followers have had an oversized impact on the sciences.
THE RICH HISTORY OF JESUS FOLLOWERS
While the truth that Jesus followers had a huge impact on science is clear to me today, it wasn’t when I was an atheist. Growing up, I never associated historic scientists with Christianity, largely because my teachers and professors failed to describe the Christian identity of key scientific figures.
But anyone willing to do a simple online search will discover the shockingly robust contribution of Jesus followers in the sciences. Don’t trust me for this claim; do your own investigation. Begin by simply searching for the foremost scientists in every century of the Common Era. Compile your list, then take the time to investigate the religious beliefs of each figure. It won’t be easy, as their Christian identity has often been removed from their online profile. But if you’re diligent, you’ll assemble a massive collection of key Jesus-following contributors—a “hall of fame” of Christian scientists.
Your list would just be the tip of the Christian scientist “iceberg.” For every well-known Christian scientist you find, thousands more worked in relative anonymity.
Make no mistake: what I’m about to describe is only a fraction of the oversized impact Christians have had on the sciences.
THE CHRISTIAN “HALL OF FAME”
Even in the earliest, least active centuries of the Common Era, Jesus followers contributed to scientific discovery. If there were a Christian Scientist Hall of Fame (similar, say, to the Pro Football Hall of Fame in Canton, Ohio), filled with sculpted busts for each honoree, the rotunda honoring the most ancient contributors would celebrate several important Jesus followers:
Christians in the earliest period of the Common Era, when science was in its infancy, contributed to the physical sciences, medicine, mathematics, physics, and philosophy. This group of twelve “hall of famers” also includes a standout: John Philoponus, the Byzantine Christian philosopher who theorized about the nature of light and stars and is now known as the “father of the modern kalam cosmological argument.”
As subsequent scientific thinkers built on the discoveries and advancements of their predecessors, the number of Christian scientists grew. In our imaginary hall of fame, the rotunda dedicated to scientists in the Early Middle Ages would include nearly twenty contributors in the disciplines of medicine, astronomy, physiology, mathematics, toxicology, surgery, horology, geography, and cosmology:
This group has three standouts of its own: Theophilus Protospatharius (the “father of urology”), Anania Shirakatsi (the “father of the natural sciences in Armenia”), and Paul of Aegina (the “father of early medical books”).
Many of these early scientists were physicians. The impact of Christ followers on the medical sciences (and the formation of modern hospitals) cannot be overstated. Hospitals, as we know them today, emerged from the efforts of Christ followers. Most of the oldest hospitals operating in the world were formed by Christians, and institutions formed by Jesus followers are still recognized as the “largest non-government provider of health care services in the world.”
Scientific activity blossomed in the Middle Ages, and while Muslims were active during this period, they weren’t the only group engaged in these disciplines. Christian activity exploded as well. Our hall of fame rotunda dedicated to this period of history celebrates the activity of over fifty Jesus followers.
Christians contributed to every area of scientific exploration, and many of them revolutionized their respective disciplines.
Special honorees in this room include the “fathers” of evidence-based medicine, experimental science, geometry, trigonometry, computation theory, chemistry, anatomy, and many other scientific disciplines.
Although Muslim contributions diminished in the next period of history, Jesus followers continued to shape scientific thought at a rapid pace, especially as Christian universities multiplied. Our hall of fame rotunda representing the Early Renaissance is filled with the busts of over sixty key contributors:
New scientific disciplines emerged, and older disciplines advanced. In addition to the scientific fields already described, Christians contributed to pathologic anatomy, anthropology, geology, botany, ichnology, paleontology, cartography, meteorology, zoology, and mineralogy. Many of these contributors are still considered “fathers” in their fields:
But the collective work of Christian scientists through the Early Middle Ages, Middle Ages, and Early Renaissance was dwarfed by the degree to which Jesus followers contributed to the scientific revolution of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Christians dominated this period of scientific advancement in which every modern discipline emerged. With well over two hundred busts honoring the scientists of this period, this rotunda wouldn’t even have room for visitors:
This hall of fame rotunda would be very crowded. Fathers and co-fathers of every major school of science are in this historic group of Jesus followers.
Whatever your fascination with science, your area of interest was probably founded by—or owes a huge debt of gratitude to—a Christian who worked during the scientific revolution. These founders and “fathers” transformed the landscape of scientific discovery, and many of them established the first scientific societies and academies.
These societies eventually started issuing awards for excellence in science, and this continues, even today. Several of the Christian honorees in the scientific revolution rotunda at our hall of fame were among the first recipients of these awards.
The disproportionate contribution of Jesus followers during the scientific revolution is undeniable. But if you would have described this for me when I was an atheist, I would probably have been unimpressed. I would likely have responded, “Well of course Christians were involved in the sciences back then. Almost everyone in Europe was a Christian in those days!” (I hadn’t yet seen the evidence that Christianity was the catalyst for the explosion of science, rather than a coincidence .) “But once humans discovered the power of science to explain the universe, I’ll bet Christians didn’t influence science anymore.”
My suspicion was that Darwin changed the religious landscape of science. His theory of evolution eliminated the need for God, didn’t it? As Richard Dawkins wrote, “Darwin made it possible to become an intellectually fulfilled atheist.” Given this reality, I was sure the number of Jesus followers involved in the sciences would decrease once naturalistic evolution replaced God as a driving explanation.
I was wrong.
Jesus followers also dominated the late modern (even post-Darwin) era. This rotunda in our hall of fame would have to be the largest yet, holding nearly 450 honorees from the “tip” of the Christian scientist “iceberg”:
As Darwin’s work developed and was eventually published, Jesus followers contributed to the conversation. Some agreed with Darwin’s conclusions (to one degree or another), and some did not. Many saw no incompatibility between evolution and the claims of Christianity, and notable Christians engaged or contributed to the proposal. Several even became known as the “fathers” of evolutionary disciplines:
The number of Christ followers who founded or pioneered scientific disciplines in the late modern period (and later became known as “fathers” of their areas of expertise) is staggering.
The science “fathers” in this room of our hall of fame are too numerous to label here, and most of them earned the world’s most prestigious science awards. These award-winning “fathers” and “mothers” of science were raised as Christians and saw no contradiction between their Christian identity and their scientific endeavors, even though Darwin’s work was familiar to them.
And Christians’ enthusiastic involvement in the sciences continues to this day.
While the men and women we’ve covered so far are no longer alive, there is a new group of hall of fame inductees right around the corner. These accomplished Jesus followers (already well over one hundred standouts in the earliest years of this latest era of scientific discovery) are just as celebrated as their predecessors, and all of them are still alive.
This latest group is on pace to be the most awarded group of Christian thinkers (by percentage) in any era. They are founders of new disciplines and international award winners.
These new inductees into our hall of fame include the fathers of x-ray astronomy, nuclear reprogramming, the MRI, modern superluminal light theory, the Genome Project, and the Perl computer language, along with eleven living Nobel Prize winners. Christ followers are still initiating, elevating, or perfecting every major field of scientific study . Christians excel in scientific disciplines, devoutly studying new chapters in the “book of nature” and, as Kepler said, serving as “priests of the highest God” and “thinking God’s thoughts after him.”
Consider the following list of disciplines and categories of discovery. While it may be tempting to flip through this list quickly, resist that temptation . Take the time to examine the diversity and significance of the disciplines listed here. Jesus matters to the sciences. The history of scientific exploration was forever changed as Jesus followers studied the “book of nature.” Christians are the “fathers” and founders of these disciplines:
Scientific Disciplines
Co-Father of Modern Science
Father of Experimental Science
Father of Modern Physics
Father of Theoretical Physics
Father of Flavor Physics
Father of Atomic Physics
Father of Atomic Energy and Nuclear Physics
Father of Acoustics (Physics)
Father of Geometrical Acoustics (Physics)
Father of Theoretical Kinematics (Physics)
Father of Hydrodynamics (Physics)
Father of the Atomic-Molecular Theory (Physics)
Co-Fathers of Modern Astronomy
Father of Galactic Astronomy
Father of Southern Astronomy
Father of X-Ray Astronomy
Father of Modern Observational Astronomy
Father of Lunar Topography (Astronomy)
Father of Astrophysics
Father of Modern Theoretical Astrophysics
Father of Heliocentric Cosmology
Father of Big Bang Cosmology
Father of Biology
Father of Modern Biology
Father of Cell Biology
Father of Microbiology
Co-Fathers of Embryology (Biology)
Father of Cytology (Biology)
Father of Bacteriology (Biology)
Father of Nuclear Reprogramming (Biology)
Father of Hemodynamics (Biology)
Father of Modern Neuroscience (Biology)
Father of Centrosome Research (Biology)
Co-Fathers of Modern Genetics (Biology)
Father of the Genome Project (Biology)
Father of Modern Parasitology (Biology)
Father of Toxicology (Biology)
Father of Intelligent Design (Biology)
Father of Modern Chemistry
Father of Modern Coordination Chemistry
Father of Acetylene Chemistry
Father of Pneumatic Chemistry
Father of Lipid Chemistry
Father of Catalysis (Chemistry)
Father of Chemurgy (Chemistry)
Father of Chemical Energetics (Chemistry)
Father of Experimental Electrospray (Chemistry)
Father of Modern Human Anatomy
Father of Pathologic Anatomy
Father of Anatomical Study
Father of Modern Anatomical Pathology (Anatomy)
Co-Fathers of Physiology
Co-Fathers of Modern Physiology
Father of Comparative Physiology
Father of Physiological Optics
Father of Modern Oceanography
Father of Modern Hydrography
Father of Fluid Mechanics
Father of Modern Biomechanics
Father of Hydrostatics (Mechanics)
Co-Fathers of Quantum Mechanics
Co-Fathers of Meteorology
Co-Fathers of Modern Meteorology
Father of Tropical Meteorology
Father of Modern Zoology
Co-Fathers of Ichthyology (Zoology)
Father of Ethology (Zoology)
Co-Fathers of Modern Entomology
Father of Entomology of Living Insects
Father of American Descriptive Entomology and Conchology
Father of Botany
Father of Modern Plant Classification (Botany)
Father of Plant Pathology (Botany)
Co-Fathers of Paleontology
Father of Ichnology (Paleontology)
Father of Micropaleontology
Father of Modern Metallurgy
Father of Modern Experimental Optics and Optical Mineralogy
Father of Modern Crystallography
Co-Fathers of Mineralogy
Father of Geology
Father of Glacial Geology
Father of Scientific Archaeology
Father of Old-World Archaeology
Father of Egyptology
Father of Optometry
Father of Anthropology
Father of Modern Cartography
Mathematics
Father of Modern Number Theory
Father of Modern Mathematics
Father of Modern Algebra
Father of Geometry
Father of Analytic Geometry
Father of Kinematic Geometry
Father of Descriptive Geometry
Father of Non-Euclidean Geometry
Co-Father of Trigonometry
Father of Calculus
Father of Differential Calculus
Father of Infinitesimal Calculus
Co-Father of Tensor Calculus
Father of Logarithms
Father of the Analysis of Algorithms
Father of the First Predictive Algorithm
Father of Modern Mathematical Analysis
Father the Fibonacci Sequence
Father of the Modern Graph
Father of Accounting and Bookkeeping
Scientific Philosophies
Father of Modern Philosophy
Father of Modern Epistemology
Father of Modern Philosophy of Science
Father of the Scientific Inductive Method
Father of Modern Analysis
Father of Dimensional Analysis and Model Analysis
Father of Modern Statistics and Experimental Design
Father of Theory-Ladenness
Father of Modern Demography
Father of the Kalam Cosmological Argument
Father of the Neo-Lamarckism School of Thought
Father of Transcendental Thomism
Regional Sciences
Father of Mathematical and Observational Astronomy in the West
Father of Russian Science
Father of the Exact and Natural Sciences in Armenia
Father of Scientific Thought in Oxford
Father of Modern Science in India
Father of Natural History in Canada
Father of Modern Natural Science in Mexico
Father of Scientific Natural History in Germany
Father of European Medicine
Co-Fathers of American Chemistry
Co-Fathers of American Botany
Fathers of Canadian Botany
Father of South African Botany
Father of East African Botany
Father of German Botany
Father of English Botany
Father of Italian Botany
Father of British Geology
Father of American Gynecology
Father of American Neurology
Father of Jamaican Ornithology
Father of Mining Engineering in Chile
Father of French Archaeology
Father of Scientific Archaeology in Suffolk
Father of Archaeology of Egyptian Antiquities
Father of Italian Rural Meteorology
Father of British Proctology
Father of English Medicine
Father of the French Experimental Method
Evolutionary Theory
Father of Evolutionism
Father of Evolution
Father of Evolutionary Genetics
Father of Conscious Evolution
Father of Evolutionary Ecology
Father of Evolutionary Economics
Medicine
Father of Evidence-Based Medicine
Father of Thoracic Medicine
Father of Preventive Medicine
Father of Physiology and Modern Experimental Medicine
Father of Nuclear Medicine
Father of Electromedicine
Father of Medical Microscopy
Father of Urology
Father of Serology
Father of Gynecology
Father of Neuropathology and Alzheimer’s Disease
Father of Surgery
Father of Modern Surgery
Father of Antiseptic and Aseptic Surgery
Father of Modern Pathology
Father of Solid Organ Transplantation
Father of Surgical Transplantation
Father of Modern Pediatrics
Father of Modern Nutrition
Father of the X-Ray
Father of the MRI
Father of the Somatic Mutation Theory of Carcinogenesis
Father of the Voluntary Health Agency Movement
Electricity, Energy, and Electromagnetics
Father of Electronics
Father of Electricity and Magnetism
Father of the Electrical Battery
Father of Battery Technology and Magnetism
Father of Energetics
Co-Fathers of Thermodynamics
Father of Quantum Electrodynamics
Father of Magnetometry and the Black Hole Concept
Co-Fathers of Electromagnetism
Father of Electromagnetics and Field Theory
Father of Statistical Thermodynamics and Electrodynamics
Father of the Dynamo and Electric Motor
Father of Wireless Telegraphy
Co-Fathers of the Radio
Father of Wireless Technology and Radio Transmission
Driving and Flying
Father of Engines
Father of the Automobile
Father of Basic Flying
Father of Aviation and Aeronautics
Father of Modern Space Flight
Computer Sciences
Father of Computation Theory
Father of Computer Science
Father of Theoretical Computer Science
Father of Modern Computers
Father of Perl Computer Language
Father of IBM OS/360
Co-Mother of the BASIC Programming Language
Father of Digital Humanities
Engineering and Technology
Father of Electrical Engineering
Father of Optical Engineering
Father of Renaissance Architecture and Engineering
Father of Hydraulics
Father of Ergonomics
Father of the Metric System
Father of Nanotechnology
Father of the Nuclear Reactor and the Nuclear Age
Other Cool Stuff
Father of Hydrogen Peroxide
Father of Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC)
Father of Sugar Processing
Father of Modern Beekeeping
Father of Modern Cattle Farming
Father of the Barometer
Father of the Spectrometer
Father of the Chronograph (Stopwatch)
Father of the Laser
Father of the Pendulum
Father of the Printing Press
Father of the Modern Parachute
Father of the Gregorian Calendar
Father of the Modern Submarine
Father of Nitric Oxide and Viagra
Father of Modern Fly-Fishing
Jesus followers didn’t simply contribute to the sciences, they founded and led the sciences. That’s why so many of them have been award winners. Christians have claimed the world’s most prestigious scientific awards, winning medals and prizes from over one hundred scientific institutions, societies, academies, associations, and universities.
The prize of prizes is the Nobel Prize.
While it’s difficult to determine the religious affiliation of every Nobel Prize winner, statistics were gathered at the 100th anniversary of the Prize. Given the impressive collection of scientists in our hall of fame, you may not be surprised to find that most Nobel Prize winners have, in fact, been Jesus followers:
This graph represents every category of Nobel Prize winners (including, for example, the Nobel Peace Prize, 78.3 percent of which were awarded to Jesus followers). When the sciences are isolated, Christians have received 72.5 percent of the Nobel Prizes in chemistry, 65.3 percent of those awarded for physics, and 62 percent of those awarded in medicine. The worldview Jesus initiated ignited a firestorm of scientific activity, and this activity continues to win the most prestigious awards on the planet.
DO YOU TRUST THESE GUYS?
In my conversations with Jason, he seemed to trust his pastor more than he trusted scientists. I held just the opposite view, and if recent polls are accurate, most people would have agreed with me rather than Jason.
In a 2019 poll (taken before the coronavirus pandemic and the social and political unrest of 2020), Americans were asked about their level of trust in a variety of institutions and experts. Scientists topped the list of trusted authorities, ahead of the military, police officers, public school officials, religious leaders, university professors, journalists, business leaders, and politicians (in that order). If a scientist says it, most people are inclined to believe it.
Perhaps that’s why I initially rejected the claims of Christianity. I expected the primitive theologians and church fathers to have something to say about Jesus, but I didn’t trust their authority. I trusted scientists, whom I assumed had nothing to do with Jesus.
But as I researched and identified the nearly one thousand premier scientists I’ve described in this chapter, I realized that these Christ followers also had something to say about Jesus. Many of them wrote extensively about their faith and the man they believed was the Son of God.
I challenge you to take the time to read what the “science fathers” had to say about Jesus (you’ll find the details in the Case Notes ). You might be surprised to find that the central claims of Christianity related to Jesus can be reconstructed from the writings of these eminent scientists, including the following details:
That’s what you would know about Jesus if every New Testament manuscript were destroyed and all you had were the writings of the most accomplished scientists of history.
Of all the evidential summaries I’ve offered so far—including the church fathers’ writings, the claims of the Gnostics and the ancient non-Christians, the works of artists and hymn writers, and the historical documents of university campuses—this list from scientists is the most robust summary of Jesus. In every significant claim related to Jesus, the science fathers agree with the church fathers.
That’s right, men and women who founded the disciplines of physics and chemistry, biology and cosmology, evolutionary genetics and quantum mechanics also believed that Jesus performed miracles and rose from the grave. They were certain that the supernatural author of the laws they studied had the power to intervene in the natural world and that he had done so in the person of interest known as Jesus of Nazareth. As George Ellis, an astrophysicist who collaborated on the Hawking–Penrose singularity theorems, once wrote, “God’s nature is revealed most perfectly in the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, as recorded in the New Testament of the Bible, who was sent by God to reveal the divine nature, summarized in ‘God is Love.’ ”
I was shocked to discover Jesus followers’ impact on education and the sciences. The Common Era fallout is filled with educational and scientific activity that points back to Jesus as a person of interest.
Jesus matters to the history of science. At some point I found myself asking, “If I trust scientists as much as I claim, why am I unwilling to take seriously what the world’s foremost scientists have to say about Jesus?”
But as I pondered this question, others popped into my mind. If Jesus was as “divine” as these scientists claimed, why are there so many diverse world religions and alternative claims about God? If Jesus truly is the person of interest of the Common Era, wouldn’t the other world religions also recognize him in this way? What do other religious systems say about Jesus?
This last set of questions led me to a powerful conclusion.