In our world today many believe that once one dedicates their life to the pursuit of science, they can’t take the Bible literally.
Back in 1990 I was invited to share an apologetics message and my testimony on Princeton University campus about how I was once an atheist and how I came to Christ and that I never read the Bible as a former student at Princeton. A student came up to me after my talk and asked me what could someone have said that would have made me consider reading the Bible back then.
I shared the following quote: “We account the Scriptures of God to be the most sublime philosophy. I find more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history whatsoever.”1 And I then asked the student if he knew who said this – I shared that it was Isaac Newton, perhaps the greatest scientist of all time.
Back in the early seventies when I went to Princeton my belief system, as an atheist, was that you couldn’t be a scientist and believe the Bible since I believed they were mutually exclusive. If someone would have shared that Isaac Newton quote with me back then I know exactly what I would have said to them. I would have said that they were a liar since no way Isaac Newton would have made such a statement. But I was always open-minded and if this were true, I know I would have checking it out since you would have created such dissonance in my mind because how could such a great scientist have said such a positive statement on the Bible.
About six months after giving my talk at Princeton I was invited to share another apologetics message with a church on long Island, New York. I shared some similar thoughts on science and the Bible and the incident with the student at Princeton, whom I shared the Isaac Newton quote. I also told the congregation that night how as an atheist back then I believed there was just no way a scientist of the stature of Isaac Newton could have shared such a positive statement on the Bible. My belief system just wouldn’t allow for that.
I then began to share a few more fascinating facts about past scientists and the Bible that I never would have believed to be true, if I was told them, as a student at Princeton.
For example, Robert Boyle, considered to be the founding father of modern chemistry, devoted a large amount of his own wealth to Bible translation work. As a student at Princeton I knew who Robert Boyle was but I never would have dreamed he would have spent his own funds for Bible translation work – it would have totally clashed with my belief system that the Bible and science were mutually exclusive.
Then there is the great scientist Lord Kelvin. Kelvin helped lay the first transatlantic cable, helped formulate the first two laws of thermodynamics in mathematical terms, and was elected at age 22 to Glasgow’s University youngest professor ever – it was his habit to open every one of his lectures with prayer. Back in the early seventies I just couldn’t believe that a scientist would pray because I didn’t believe that there was a God to pray to.
If you would have then told me, as an atheist college student, that Samuel Morse, who invented the telegraph used a quote from (Numbers 23:23), “What hath God wrought,” for his first message on his invention, you would have made me very uncomfortable. In addition, if you would have shared with me he once said the following: “The nearer I approach to the end of my pilgrimage, the clearer is the evidence of the divine origin of the Bible, the grandeur and sublimity of God’s remedy for fallen man are more appreciated, and the future is illumined with hope and joy,”2 you would have basically dismantled my entire belief system.
Finally, I shared with my church audience that night about Johann Kepler who is regarded as the founding father of physical astronomy. In addition, he formulated the first three laws of planetary motion, and when asked when he was searching the far reaches of the universe what he was doing said: “I was merely thinking God’s thoughts after Him.”3
Well, if someone would have told me about these five great scientists, Newton, Boyle, Kelvin, Morse, and Kepler, as a student at Princeton University, and their strong belief in the Bible, you would have totally destroyed my entire belief system. But Satan made sure I knew nothing of this when I went to Princeton.
My friends I am not saying that if I knew about these great scientists and their respect and love for the Bible as a student at Princeton that I would have become a Christian back then but I sure would have checked all of these things out. For if they were true, then I clearly would have had to abandon my belief that you couldn’t be a scientist and a believer in the Bible at the same time. And just maybe I would have begun my search toward knowing and believing in Jesus much earlier than I did.
1 https://www.christianquotes.info/quotes-by-author/isaac-newton-quotes/
2 https://www.christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/1701-1800/the-amazing-morses-sam-and-jed-11630271.html
3 https://faith-seeking-understanding.org/tag/thinking-gods-thoughts-after-him/
Thank you, Curt, for sharing your testimony again.
An inspiring, wonderful devotional.
Thank you for your ministry!
The Lab Coat and the Bible: Five Minds, One Collapse of the Myth…by the Apologist
It’s always a sure sign of confident authorship when we find the commentary’s topic is the collision of Authority (science) versus the trustworthiness of Scripture – and the tail-wag myth that “serious science” and “serious Bible” can’t coexist.
Then he makes it personal with his testimony.
Well, there is no testimony without a test, so let’s ride this buggy.
Curt snaps the false dichotomy by using scientific giants as “hostile witnesses” against the assumption that faith is for the uneducated.
Ok, by the numbers, baby.
1. Isaac Newton: flat-out treating Scripture as higher and more authentic than “profane history,” which is a direct punch to the idea that brilliant minds can’t take the Bible seriously. Duh
The critique: it’s persuasive as cognitive dissonance (especially for skeptics who respect Newton), while still an appeal to a respected authority, not a proof. The real value is that it forces the reader to ask, “Wait… why would Newton say that?” and actually go look. That’s apologetics doing its job.
2. Robert Boyle: Boyle isn’t just quoted, he’s portrayed as spending real money on Bible translation.
That matters because it’s faith with receipts, not just vibes.
Critique: It doesn’t tell us why Boyle believed, only that belief was strong enough to shape priorities. For “the masses,” that’s still huge: it reframes Christians as people who build and fund things, not just people who argue online.
3. Lord Kelvin: Curt’s point is simple, knife-sharp: Kelvin did world-changing science and opened lectures with prayer.
Critique: While prayer before class doesn’t validate every theological claim, it demolishes the cartoon narrative that scientific rigor requires spiritual amputations. For skeptical readers, it’s an invitation to stop confusing “I don’t believe” with “no smart person can believe.”
4. Samuel Morse: Curt uses the telegraph’s first message, “What hath God wrought” (Numbers 23:23), and then Morse’s late-life reflection on the Bible’s “divine origin” and hope.
The critique: this one hits the heart more than the lab. It’s not just “a scientist believed,” it’s “a builder of modern communication saw his work as doxology.”
Skeptics may shrug at piety, but ordinary readers feel the weight: faith isn’t anti-progress; it can be the reason progress stays humble 🙏.
5. Johann Kepler: “Thinking God’s thoughts after Him” is basically a one-sentence theology of science.
Critique: it’s poetic and powerful. It treats creation as intelligible on purpose, not accidental order. A hardened materialist can dismiss it, but most people hear it and instantly grasp a sane middle ground: wonder + rigor, worship + work.
Why this is good reading for the masses: Curt’s blog piece isn’t trying to win a laboratory debate.
It’s trying to crack open a locked door. He’s honest about his old assumption that the Bible and science were “mutually exclusive,” and he shows how one well-placed fact would have forced him to reconsider.
Then he stacks examples and basically says, “If these things are true, your whole stereotype collapses.”
That’s accessible apologetics: not smug, not technical, just a sand wedge that gets ordinary readers to stop outsourcing their worldview to campus clichés.
I’ll go alittle street mission style on ya:
God isn’t afraid of our questions, our past, or our mess. He meets you in truth, and He can rebuild a life that’s been burned down.
When I was living my testimony in action at the Madera Mission, my message wrapped around the science angle like a door handle.
The street sermon is this:
if God can hold up under Newton’s brain and Kepler’s telescope, He can hold up under your relapse, your shame, your doubts, and the awful things you’ve done or had done to you. The Bible isn’t a decorative book for people who already have their lives together. It’s a rescue rope for people who don’t.
Jesus doesn’t just save smart people. He saves broken people. And He’s not intimidated by either.
Thanks for leading with classic style, Mr. Blattman.