"GOD IS DEAD... WE HAVE KILLED HIM..."
The above statement, credited to Frederick Nietzsche, has generated a lot of questions, misconceptions and controversies among scholars. For Christians, it is blasphemy!
What I intend to achieve here is to table before the readers the alternative conceptions to Nietzsche's quote above, and to provide grounds for them to draw their own conclusions about its meaning. I shall examine the first part of the quote (GOD IS DEAD), before the second (WE HAVE KILLED HIM).

Landing this excerpt upfront should guide our curiosity. Mclleland (1996) claims thus:
"What we do in fact know about what the ancients did think about is largely the result of the accidents of historical survival of manuscripts; and it is perfectly possible that what has come down to us is a distorted fragment which gives us a very misleading picture of what was going on inside the head of the ancients". (P.14).
That is to say, your interpretations of the thoughts and/or the writings of an author, may not be what the author had in mind. It may not be what you think.

PART 1: GOD IS DEAD
EXPLICATION 1
Mclleland, in his work "History of Western Political Thought" (1996), While analysing Plato's "Republic", (implicitly) dismissed the primacy of the gods. [Plato wrote "The Republic" in the form of a long conversation between Socrates and others]. Mclleland reveals that even while sacrificing to the gods, Cephalus, an old man, reputed as a devout worshipper of the gods, could not adequately and sufficiently define "Justice". For Cephalus, Justice had two principles: "Helping friends, and Paying debts". Socrates who quickly noticed the lacuna in his definition "points out that it could not be justice to return a knife borrowed from a friend if the friend had gone mad in the meantime. That would be paying the debt, but it could hardly be called helping a friend".

The way of Cephalus was soon replaced with that of Thrasymachus, a renowned sophist. The Sophists taught about alternative ways of approaching the human phenomenon. For them, by relying on their senses and apprehending through subjective impressions, humans will open their own way for creative abilities to fully develop. Humans should then leave mythological explanations and superstitions (which were harmfully repressive) behind. They must become children of curiosity, wonder and adventure for a consequent break through in sciences, the liberation of our minds, and the making of new discoveries and inventions.

Mclleland further suggests, following the above, that the dismissal of Cephalus and approval of the sophists meant the rejection of ancestral wisdom and the wisdom of the gods- because the "gods can no longer be relied on to provide answers to questions about how we ought to organise our lives. Religion is no longer centre-stage; it has lost the moral authority it once had. What old men and the gods have to say is still worth listening to, but what is said has to be examined on its merits. Nothing is to be taken at face value". (p.25).
In other words, the GODS ARE DEAD . Let us look for: reason instead of faith; pragmatic ways of solving our problems; testable and verifiable truths; the things that are within immediate understanding. Old men as the voice of the gods, and even the gods themselves cannot be relied on for answers to our troubling questions.

EXEGESIS ||
The events of medieval Europe such as the capturing of the Holy Roman empire by the Turks was significant in history. Ogar (2011) notes that "It stood as a symbol in which the church put a final nail on Greek Philosophy. From this year onwards, monasteries took monopoly of education, reflection and meditation". (in Asouzu, T. E. Ed.). Christianity then became an absolute which must be accepted. To put it simply, in this era, the church, papacy reigned or controlled political power in the state. Matters of the state and/or politics were approached through the laws, precepts and ordinances of the Bible. The core of that time was whether the Christian truth should be accepted at face value, or whether this truth should be tackled with reason. This era marked the debate between "the sacredotium (sacred) and regnum (secular)" or if you like "Faith vs Reason", "the church vs the state".

Marsillius of Padua at the terminus of the medieval epoch spearheaded the debate for Reason as against Faith. Importantly, Marsillius centered his argument around the state and politics. For him, both are too distinct from each other and should not or cannot be reconciled. They(politics and religion) represent what is secular and what is sacred respectively. The Papacy and/or the church should be divorced from the state because religion has nothing to do with politics. For him, the issues of the state should be tackled pragmatically. For instance: where there is scarcity of human basic needs, humans should not say "God is angry with us; He has decided to punish us". They should employ the techniques of men trained in the field of the observed challenge- say employ political scientists and economists to counsel authority on how to tackle an issue as the case may be.

We will also be on track to examine the position of Niccolo Machavelli- LET THE END JUSTIFY THE MEANS. Machavelli, being a core realist knew that ideological forms soon conceal the realities of power. He preached that a leader should separate his personal morality from public success. A leader should do whatever was necessary, including being dishonest in an attempt to keep the order in the state. He must apply force and coercion (if necessary) in order to command obedience from the citizens. For him, these citizens will later do willingly that which ab initio they did reluctantly. Thus understood: in order to purge a state off its "iniquities", a leader will most likely get his hands dirty. In the end, when order is actualized, people will forget the method which he used to achieve it.

Yet again, we may observe that that GOD IS DEAD in this case may mean: GIVE TO CAESAR WHAT BELONGS TO CAESAR AND TO GOD WHAT BELONGS TO GOD, because the things of God (such as morality, virtue etc) are dead to the state; and are not amenable to real politics.

PART ||: WE HAVE KILLED HIM
I wish to state without mincing words that we have killed God with: our lies, our consciencelessness, our vindictiveness, our inhumane attitude towards fellow humans- a total disdain for the lives of others, our criminal activities done with impunity, our artificially pioneered SCARCITY etc.

FURTHER EXEGESIS
What Nietzsche might be concerned about is the degeneracy in the morality among his contemporaries- "... That God is dead in the hearts and minds of his own generation of modern men - killed by an indifference that was itself directly related to a pronounced cultural shift away from faith and towards rationalism and science". (Google search: Frederick Nietzsche's - God is dead- quote).
Nietzsche, puzzled about this asks: "What are these churches now if they are not tombs and sepulchres of God?". This is something you already know- We have turned our churches into a den of thieves; We emphasize numbers, population over commitment; we have forgotten the ancient paths; we no longer care that He came and died for our sins. We have killed Him! Yes We have!
Nietzsche may have also favoured the relinquishing of: faith, the belief in God, the long-established standard of (christian) morality, and subscribed to rationalism & science.


CONCLUSION
The death of God which was caused by us(humans) is a way of saying that humans no longer believe in any such cosmic order since they themselves no longer recognize it. The Christian doctrine(s) is no longer a credible source of absolute moral principles. Humans have re-evaluated the foundations of their values- to that which is seemingly deeper than Christian values .
This belief flows from the fountain of Nihilism, the belief that: there is no objective knowledge; no absolute which should be relied upon to explain man's phenomenon; Truth, morality is relative (a yes can become no).

Now, before you draw your own inference, examine the original quote by Frederick Nietzsche:
"God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?".
— Nietzsche, The Gay Science, Section 125, tr. Walter Kaufmann (in Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, God is Dead).

The writer- Okereke, Obinna Emmanuel is a human being. He studies political science at the University of calabar Calabar, crossriver state, Nigeria.

REFERENCES
Google search: Friedrich Nietzsche's -God is dead-
quote.
Www.age-of-the-sage.org/philosophy/
Friedrich_Nietzsche_quotes. Html.

Mclleland, J. S.(1996). History of Western Political
Thought. New York: Routine.

Ogar (2011). "The Medieval Era" in Asouzu, I. Ed.
PHILOSOPHY AND LOGIC TODAY .
Calabar: University of calabar press.

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. God is Dead.
Https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GodIsDead

. If you understand anything in the Op , please mention me and explain

KingEbukaNaija, the underlying idea behind my piece is that Europe has bequeathed religion and faith for rationalism and science.
I have also tried to show how it might have happened from the period of ancient philosophers (plato and Aristotle), to medieval Europe, and finally to our modern and contemporary European society in particular and the world in general.
Do you understand it now?

In addition to that, I also pointed out at the preamble-that your interpretation of something someone said may not be what the person had in mind. "it may not be what you think".

PINES:
KingEbukaNaija, the underlying idea behind my piece is that Europe has bequeathed religion and faith for rationalism and science.
I have also tried to show how it might have happened from the period of ancient philosophers (plato and Aristotle), to medieval Europe, and finally to our modern and contemporary European society in particular and the world in general.
Do you understand it now?

Nonsense , religious people started rationalism and science in Europe not atheists . So you are not making any sense

KingEbukaNaija:

Nonsense , religious people started rationalism and science in Europe not atheists . So you are not making any sense

Mr man, I am sure there is a better way to pass information or make an observation other than cursing. I also have every reason to believe that you don't understand the core of the piece.
By all means, re-study it, especially the preamble- to get the core.

Absorb this. @KingEbukaNaija
Who do you think persecuted these persons?- atheists or religious people

PINES:
Absorb this. @KingEbukaNaija
Who do you think persecuted these persons?- atheists or religious people

Lol , funny dude . How am I supposed to know ? And how are you supposed to know who ? Atheists killed 250 million people - over 90 percent of them simply because they were religious . Prospective scientists , doctors , lawyers , engineers , mathematicians . Not just prospective , even people whose occupations were noble , their lives ended by the atheist just because of the wickedness of their hearts . God forbid ! Tufiakwa !

Now pay attention to this picture and cogitate on the information

PINES:

Mr man, I am sure there is a better way to pass information or make an observation other than cursing. I also have every reason to believe that you don't understand the core of the piece.
By all means, re-study it, especially the preamble- to get the core.

Why worry your head, that jobless guy never read the article up there. He just wants a theist vs atheist argument.

KingEbukaNaija:


Nonsense , religious people started rationalism and science in Europe not atheists . So you are not making any sense

I think you should be banned again for violation of rule 8.

Freiburger:

I think you should be banned again for violation of rule 8.

Even after I posted that picture about clerics who where involved...

oh forget it ... All atheists are ignorant people so I don't expect you to know these things . I'm going to push 5 different topics on the sections's front page that I think you should read .

DeSepiero:


Why worry your head, that jobless guy never read the article up there. He just wants a theist vs atheist argument.

I'm a student , am on vacation and I'm a Christian . Now the problem is that you are the jobless one who always discuss about a non existent being day and night . You are way older than me and should be concerned about getting a job . Stop fighting against an imaginary being . Only mad people do that

This article is just to serve as a reminder that science is being hijacked by naturalists and evolutionists. Nowadays you have to disbelief in God to be a "real" scientist. Science is no longer defined today as a branch of study which seeks to observe, discover, and understand the nature and principles that govern our universe, our world, and ourselves, but a branch of study which consistently reaffirms that there is no God. Nowadays, atheists are forcing us to choose between science and the Sovereign Creator of science. But not to worry, we know how desperate they want to be heard. We can always remind them that religion has contributed immensely to the scientific growth of our world. This article focuses on some christian scientists alone. Other discoveries and inventions by scholars and scientists from other religious groups are not mentioned here.



One of the self-serving arguments of modern evolutionists is their rather arrogant claim that creationist scientists are not real scientists. No matter that a large number of creationists have earned authentic Ph.D. degrees in science, hold responsible scientific positions and have published numerous scientific articles and books—if they are creationists, they are not true scientists! In a Letter-to-the-Editor, Steven Schafersman, of Rice University's Department of Geology, says, for example: "I dispute Henry Morris's claim that thousands of scientists are creationists. No scientist today questions the past and present occurrence of evolution in the organic world. Those ‘thousands of creationists' with legitimate post-graduate degrees and other appropriate credentials are not scientists, precisely because they have abandoned the scientific method and the scientific attitude, criteria far more crucial to the definition of scientist than the location or duration of one's training or the identity of one's employer" (Geotimes, August 1981, P. 11).

Thus modern creationists are conveniently excluded as scientists merely by definition! Science does not mean "knowledge" or "truth," or "facts," as we used to think, but "naturalism" or "materialism," according to this new definition. The very possibility of a Creator is prohibited by majority vote of the scientific fraternity, and one who still wishes to believe in God must forfeit his membership.

Well, no matter. At least we creationist scientists can take comfort in the fact that many of the greatest scientists of the past were creationists and for that matter, were also Bible-believing Christians, men who believed in the inspiration and authority of the Bible, as well as in the deity and saving work of Jesus Christ. They believed that God had supernaturally created all things, each with its own complex structure for its own unique purpose. They believed that, as scientists, they were "thinking God's thoughts after Him," learning to understand and control the laws and processes of nature for God's glory and man's good. They believed and practiced science in exactly the same way that modern creationist scientists do.

And somehow this attitude did not hinder them in their commitment to the "scientific method." In fact one of them, Sir Francis Bacon, is credited with formulating and establishing the scientific method! They seem also to have been able to maintain a proper "scientific attitude," for it was these men (Newton, Pasteur, Linnaeus, Faraday, Pascal, Lord Kelvin, Maxwell, Kepler, etc.) whose researches and analyses led to the very laws and concepts of science which brought about our modern scientific age. The mechanistic scientists of the present are dwarfed in comparison to these intellectual giants of the past. Even the achievements of an Einstein (not to mention Darwin!) are trivial in comparison. The real breakthroughs, the new fields, the most beneficial discoveries of science were certainly not delayed (in fact probably were hastened) by the creationist motivations of these great founders of modern science.

TABLE I

SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES ESTABLISHED BY CREATIONIST SCIENTISTS
DISCIPLINE - SCIENTIST

ANTISEPTIC SURGERY - JOSEPH LISTER (1827-1912)
BACTERIOLOGY - LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895)
CALCULUS -ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727)
CELESTIAL MECHANICS - JOHANN KEPLER (1571-1630)
CHEMISTRY - ROBERT BOYLE (1627-1691)
COMPARATIVE ANATOMY - GEORGES CUVIER (1769-1832)
COMPUTER SCIENCE -CHARLES BABBAGE (1792-1871)
DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS - LORD RAYLEIGH (1842-1919)
DYNAMICS - ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727)
ELECTRONICS - JOHN AMBROSE FLEMING (1849-1945)
ELECTRODYNAMICS - JAMES CLERK MAXWELL (1831-1879)
ELECTRO-MAGNETICS - MICHAEL FARADAY (1791-1867)
ENERGETICS -LORD KELVIN (1824-1907)
ENTOMOLOGY OF LIVING INSECTS -HENRI FABRE (1823-1915)
FIELD THEORY - MICHAEL FARADAY (1791-1867)
FLUID MECHANICS -GEORGE STOKES (1819-1903)
GALACTIC ASTRONOMY - WILLIAM HERSCHEL (1738-1822)
GAS DYNAMICS - ROBERT BOYLE (1627-1691)
GENETICS - GREGOR MENDEL (1822-1884)
GLACIAL GEOLOGY -LOUIS AGASSIZ (1807-1873)
GYNECOLOGY - JAMES SIMPSON (1811-1870)
HYDRAULICS - LEONARDO DA VINCI (1452-1519)
HYDROGRAPHY - MATTHEW MAURY (1806-1873)
HYDROSTATICS - BLAISE PASCAL (1623-1662)
ICHTHYOLOGY - LOUIS AGASSIZ (1807-1873)
ISOTOPIC CHEMISTRY- WILLIAM RAMSAY (1852-1916)
MODEL ANALYSIS - LORD RAYLEIGH (1842-1919)
NATURAL HISTORY - JOHN RAY (1627-1705)
NON-EUCLIDEAN GEOMETRY- BERNHARD RIEMANN (1826- 1866)
OCEANOGRAPHY -MATTHEW MAURY (1806-1873)
OPTICAL MINERALOGY - DAVID BREWSTER (1781-1868)
PALEONTOLOGY - JOHN WOODWARD (1665-1728)
PATHOLOGY - RUDOLPH VIRCHOW (1821-1902)
PHYSICAL ASTRONOMY - JOHANN KEPLER (1571-1630)
REVERSIBLE THERMODYNAMICS -JAMES JOULE (1818-1889)
STATISTICAL THERMODYNAMICS -JAMES CLERK MAXWELL (1831-1879)
STRATIGRAPHY - NICHOLAS STENO (1631-1686)
SYSTEMATIC BIOLOGY - CAROLUS LINNAEUS (1707-1778)
THERMODYNAMICS - LORD KELVIN (1824-1907)
THERMOKINETICS - HUMPHREY DAVY (1778-1829)
VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY- GEORGES CUVIER (1769-1832)


TABLE II

NOTABLE INVENTIONS, DISCOVERIES OR DEVELOPMENTS BY CREATIONIST SCIENTISTS
CONTRIBUTION - SCIENTIST
ABSOLUTE TEMPERATURE SCALE - LORD KELVIN (1824-1907)
ACTUARIAL TABLES - CHARLES BABBAGE (1792-1871)
BAROMETER - BLAISE PASCAL (1623-1662)
BIOGENESIS LAW -LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895)
CALCULATING MACHINE - CHARLES BABBAGE (1792-1871)
CHLOROFORM - JAMES SIMPSON (1811-1870)
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM - CAROLUS LINNAEUS (1707-1778)
DOUBLE STARS - WILLIAM HERSCHEL (1738-1822)
ELECTRIC GENERATOR - MICHAEL FARADAY (1791-1867)
ELECTRIC MOTOR - JOSEPH HENRY (1797-1878)
EPHEMERIS TABLES - JOHANN KEPLER (1571-1630)
FERMENTATION CONTROL - LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895)
GALVANOMETER -JOSEPH HENRY (1797-1878)
GLOBAL STAR CATALOG - JOHN HERSCHEL (1792-1871)
INERT GASES - WILLIAM RAMSAY (1852-1916)
KALEIDOSCOPE - DAVID BREWSTER (1781-1868)
LAW OF GRAVITY - ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727)
MINE SAFETY LAMP - HUMPHREY DAVY (1778-1829)
PASTEURIZATION - LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895)
REFLECTING TELESCOPE - ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727)
SCIENTIFIC METHOD - FRANCIS BACON (1561-1626)
SELF-INDUCTION - JOSEPH HENRY (1797-1878)
TELEGRAPH - SAMUEL F.B. MORSE (1791-1872)
THERMIONIC VALVE - AMBROSE FLEMING (1849-1945)
TRANS-ATLANTIC CABLE - LORD KELVIN (1824-1907)
VACCINATION & IMMUNIZATION - LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895)


Nor should anyone suppose that their commitment to theism and creationism was only because they were not yet acquainted with modern philosophies. Many were strong opponents of Darwinism (Agassiz, Pasteur, Lord Kelvin, Maxwell, Dawson, Virchow, Fabre, Fleming, etc.). Even those who lived before Darwin were strong opponents of earlier evolutionary systems, not to mention pantheism, atheism, and other such anti-supernaturalist philosophies, which were every bit as prevalent then as now.

To illustrate the caliber and significance of these great scientists of the past, Tables I and II have been prepared. These tabulations are not complete lists, of course, but at least are representative and they do point up the absurdity of modern assertions that no true scientist can be a creationist and Bible-believing Christian.

Table I lists the creationist "fathers" of many significant branches of modern science. Table II lists the creationist scientists responsible for various vital inventions, discoveries, and other contributions to mankind. These identifications are to some degree oversimplified, of course, for even in the early days of science every new development involved a number of other scientists, before and after. Nevertheless, in each instance, a strong case can be made for attributing the chief responsibility to the creationist scientist indicated. At the very least, his contribution was critically important and thus supports our contention that belief in creation and the Bible helps, rather than hinders, scientific discovery.

In each case, the scientists listed were strict creationists, unreservedly believing in the Bible and the God of the Bible. Some were "progressive creationists," but none were theistic evolutionists, so far as can be determined. They came from a variety of denominational backgrounds and doctrinal persuasions, but all were at least professing Christians, committed to the basic doctrines of Christianity. Additional biographical data concerning both their Christian convictions and their scientific contributions have been compiled recently by the writer for a chapter in a future book and it has been a great personal blessing to share in their lives and studies in this way. The mere listing of their names in these summary Tables may seem impersonal, but even this bare compilation is impressive.

The scientific achievements of modern creationist scientists do not yet measure up to those of these earlier creationists (neither do the attainments of modern evolutionists for that matter), but we at least have the same beliefs, the same motivations and the same spiritual resources. There is a much greater weight of establishment prejudice to overcome today, but the God of Robert Boyle and the God of Clerk Maxwell is still the same "Creator, who is blessed for ever" (Romans 1:25), "Lord, it is nothing with thee to help, whether with many, or with them that have no power: help us, 0 Lord our God: for we rest on thee, and in thy name we go against this multitude. 0 Lord, thou art our God; let not man prevail against thee." (II Chronicles 14:11).


Ref: Dr. Henry M. Morris Ph.D. Founder and President Emeritus of ICR.

Funny some Christian atheists believe in a literal death of God, as God once existed but now dead... Christian atheism.

johnydon22:
Funny some Christian atheists believe in a literal death of God, as God once existed but now dead... Christian atheism.

Christian atheism has to do with the disbelief in the divinity of Christ and the acceptance of his teachings . That means Christ existed not as a God but a really good man who wants the good for humanity in the moral sense .


It has nothing to do with what you posted - there was no God that lived in the first place to talk of dying . In other words , Christian atheism is materialism with Christ .

So much impaired mental states people subscribe to nowadays .

KingEbukaNaija:
This article is just to serve as a reminder that science is being hijacked by naturalists and evolutionists. Nowadays you have to disbelief in God to be a "real" scientist. Science is no longer defined today as a branch of study which seeks to observe, discover, and understand the nature and principles that govern our universe, our world, and ourselves, but a branch of study which consistently reaffirms that there is no God. Nowadays, atheists are forcing us to choose between science and the Sovereign Creator of science. But not to worry, we know how desperate they want to be heard. We can always remind them that religion has contributed immensely to the scientific growth of our world. This article focuses on some christian scientists alone. Other discoveries and inventions by scholars and scientists from other religious groups are not mentioned here.
One of the self-serving arguments of modern evolutionists is their rather arrogant claim that creationist scientists are not real scientists. No matter that a large number of creationists have earned authentic Ph.D. degrees in science, hold responsible scientific positions and have published numerous scientific articles and books—if they are creationists, they are not true scientists! In a Letter-to-the-Editor, Steven Schafersman, of Rice University's Department of Geology, says, for example: "I dispute Henry Morris's claim that thousands of scientists are creationists. No scientist today questions the past and present occurrence of evolution in the organic world. Those ‘thousands of creationists' with legitimate post-graduate degrees and other appropriate credentials are not scientists, precisely because they have abandoned the scientific method and the scientific attitude, criteria far more crucial to the definition of scientist than the location or duration of one's training or the identity of one's employer" (Geotimes, August 1981, P. 11).
Thus modern creationists are conveniently excluded as scientists merely by definition! Science does not mean "knowledge" or "truth," or "facts," as we used to think, but "naturalism" or "materialism," according to this new definition. The very possibility of a Creator is prohibited by majority vote of the scientific fraternity, and one who still wishes to believe in God must forfeit his membership.
Well, no matter. At least we creationist scientists can take comfort in the fact that many of the greatest scientists of the past were creationists and for that matter, were also Bible-believing Christians, men who believed in the inspiration and authority of the Bible, as well as in the deity and saving work of Jesus Christ. They believed that God had supernaturally created all things, each with its own complex structure for its own unique purpose. They believed that, as scientists, they were "thinking God's thoughts after Him," learning to understand and control the laws and processes of nature for God's glory and man's good. They believed and practiced science in exactly the same way that modern creationist scientists do.
And somehow this attitude did not hinder them in their commitment to the "scientific method." In fact one of them, Sir Francis Bacon, is credited with formulating and establishing the scientific method! They seem also to have been able to maintain a proper "scientific attitude," for it was these men (Newton, Pasteur, Linnaeus, Faraday, Pascal, Lord Kelvin, Maxwell, Kepler, etc.) whose researches and analyses led to the very laws and concepts of science which brought about our modern scientific age. The mechanistic scientists of the present are dwarfed in comparison to these intellectual giants of the past. Even the achievements of an Einstein (not to mention Darwin!) are trivial in comparison. The real breakthroughs, the new fields, the most beneficial discoveries of science were certainly not delayed (in fact probably were hastened) by the creationist motivations of these great founders of modern science.
TABLE I
SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES ESTABLISHED BY CREATIONIST SCIENTISTS
DISCIPLINE - SCIENTIST
ANTISEPTIC SURGERY - JOSEPH LISTER (1827-1912)
BACTERIOLOGY - LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895)
CALCULUS -ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727)
CELESTIAL MECHANICS - JOHANN KEPLER (1571-1630)
CHEMISTRY - ROBERT BOYLE (1627-1691)
COMPARATIVE ANATOMY - GEORGES CUVIER (1769-1832)
COMPUTER SCIENCE -CHARLES BABBAGE (1792-1871)
DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS - LORD RAYLEIGH (1842-1919)
DYNAMICS - ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727)
ELECTRONICS - JOHN AMBROSE FLEMING (1849-1945)
ELECTRODYNAMICS - JAMES CLERK MAXWELL (1831-1879)
ELECTRO-MAGNETICS - MICHAEL FARADAY (1791-1867)
ENERGETICS -LORD KELVIN (1824-1907)
ENTOMOLOGY OF LIVING INSECTS -HENRI FABRE (1823-1915)
FIELD THEORY - MICHAEL FARADAY (1791-1867)
FLUID MECHANICS -GEORGE STOKES (1819-1903)
GALACTIC ASTRONOMY - WILLIAM HERSCHEL (1738-1822)
GAS DYNAMICS - ROBERT BOYLE (1627-1691)
GENETICS - GREGOR MENDEL (1822-1884)
GLACIAL GEOLOGY -LOUIS AGASSIZ (1807-1873)
GYNECOLOGY - JAMES SIMPSON (1811-1870)
HYDRAULICS - LEONARDO DA VINCI (1452-1519)
HYDROGRAPHY - MATTHEW MAURY (1806-1873)
HYDROSTATICS - BLAISE PASCAL (1623-1662)
ICHTHYOLOGY - LOUIS AGASSIZ (1807-1873)
ISOTOPIC CHEMISTRY- WILLIAM RAMSAY (1852-1916)
MODEL ANALYSIS - LORD RAYLEIGH (1842-1919)
NATURAL HISTORY - JOHN RAY (1627-1705)
NON-EUCLIDEAN GEOMETRY- BERNHARD RIEMANN (1826- 1866)
OCEANOGRAPHY -MATTHEW MAURY (1806-1873)
OPTICAL MINERALOGY - DAVID BREWSTER (1781-1868)
PALEONTOLOGY - JOHN WOODWARD (1665-1728)
PATHOLOGY - RUDOLPH VIRCHOW (1821-1902)
PHYSICAL ASTRONOMY - JOHANN KEPLER (1571-1630)
REVERSIBLE THERMODYNAMICS -JAMES JOULE (1818-1889)
STATISTICAL THERMODYNAMICS -JAMES CLERK MAXWELL (1831-1879)
STRATIGRAPHY - NICHOLAS STENO (1631-1686)
SYSTEMATIC BIOLOGY - CAROLUS LINNAEUS (1707-1778)
THERMODYNAMICS - LORD KELVIN (1824-1907)
THERMOKINETICS - HUMPHREY DAVY (1778-1829)
VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY- GEORGES CUVIER (1769-1832)
TABLE II
NOTABLE INVENTIONS, DISCOVERIES OR DEVELOPMENTS BY CREATIONIST SCIENTISTS
CONTRIBUTION - SCIENTIST
ABSOLUTE TEMPERATURE SCALE - LORD KELVIN (1824-1907)
ACTUARIAL TABLES - CHARLES BABBAGE (1792-1871)
BAROMETER - BLAISE PASCAL (1623-1662)
BIOGENESIS LAW -LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895)
CALCULATING MACHINE - CHARLES BABBAGE (1792-1871)
CHLOROFORM - JAMES SIMPSON (1811-1870)
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM - CAROLUS LINNAEUS (1707-1778)
DOUBLE STARS - WILLIAM HERSCHEL (1738-1822)
ELECTRIC GENERATOR - MICHAEL FARADAY (1791-1867)
ELECTRIC MOTOR - JOSEPH HENRY (1797-1878)
EPHEMERIS TABLES - JOHANN KEPLER (1571-1630)
FERMENTATION CONTROL - LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895)
GALVANOMETER -JOSEPH HENRY (1797-1878)
GLOBAL STAR CATALOG - JOHN HERSCHEL (1792-1871)
INERT GASES - WILLIAM RAMSAY (1852-1916)
KALEIDOSCOPE - DAVID BREWSTER (1781-1868)
LAW OF GRAVITY - ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727)
MINE SAFETY LAMP - HUMPHREY DAVY (1778-1829)
PASTEURIZATION - LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895)
REFLECTING TELESCOPE - ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727)
SCIENTIFIC METHOD - FRANCIS BACON (1561-1626)
SELF-INDUCTION - JOSEPH HENRY (1797-1878)
TELEGRAPH - SAMUEL F.B. MORSE (1791-1872)
THERMIONIC VALVE - AMBROSE FLEMING (1849-1945)
TRANS-ATLANTIC CABLE - LORD KELVIN (1824-1907)
VACCINATION & IMMUNIZATION - LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895)
Nor should anyone suppose that their commitment to theism and creationism was only because they were not yet acquainted with modern philosophies. Many were strong opponents of Darwinism (Agassiz, Pasteur, Lord Kelvin, Maxwell, Dawson, Virchow, Fabre, Fleming, etc.). Even those who lived before Darwin were strong opponents of earlier evolutionary systems, not to mention pantheism, atheism, and other such anti-supernaturalist philosophies, which were every bit as prevalent then as now.
To illustrate the caliber and significance of these great scientists of the past, Tables I and II have been prepared. These tabulations are not complete lists, of course, but at least are representative and they do point up the absurdity of modern assertions that no true scientist can be a creationist and Bible-believing Christian.
Table I lists the creationist "fathers" of many significant branches of modern science. Table II lists the creationist scientists responsible for various vital inventions, discoveries, and other contributions to mankind. These identifications are to some degree oversimplified, of course, for even in the early days of science every new development involved a number of other scientists, before and after. Nevertheless, in each instance, a strong case can be made for attributing the chief responsibility to the creationist scientist indicated. At the very least, his contribution was critically important and thus supports our contention that belief in creation and the Bible helps, rather than hinders, scientific discovery.
In each case, the scientists listed were strict creationists, unreservedly believing in the Bible and the God of the Bible. Some were "progressive creationists," but none were theistic evolutionists, so far as can be determined. They came from a variety of denominational backgrounds and doctrinal persuasions, but all were at least professing Christians, committed to the basic doctrines of Christianity. Additional biographical data concerning both their Christian convictions and their scientific contributions have been compiled recently by the writer for a chapter in a future book and it has been a great personal blessing to share in their lives and studies in this way. The mere listing of their names in these summary Tables may seem impersonal, but even this bare compilation is impressive.
The scientific achievements of modern creationist scientists do not yet measure up to those of these earlier creationists (neither do the attainments of modern evolutionists for that matter), but we at least have the same beliefs, the same motivations and the same spiritual resources. There is a much greater weight of establishment prejudice to overcome today, but the God of Robert Boyle and the God of Clerk Maxwell is still the same "Creator, who is blessed for ever" (Romans 1:25), "Lord, it is nothing with thee to help, whether with many, or with them that have no power: help us, 0 Lord our God: for we rest on thee, and in thy name we go against this multitude. 0 Lord, thou art our God; let not man prevail against thee." (II Chronicles 14:11).
Ref: Dr. Henry M. Morris Ph.D. Founder and President Emeritus of ICR.

Mr man, you missed it. I am a Christian too.
You argument is biased; and just as a brother noted, you are only seeking for argument: theism vs atheism.
That is not the objective of my piece. The piece is merely an objective view, as well as a conjectural interpretation of Nietzsche's quote.

PINES:

Mr man, you missed it. I am a Christian too.
You argument is biased; and just as a brother noted, you are only seeking for argument: theism vs atheism.
That is not the objective of my piece. The piece is merely an objective view, as well as a conjectural interpretation of Nietzsche's quote.

You are not a Christian . Stop the pathetic lies . No Christian will talk ignorantly and tell lies . 7 to 10 percent of Europes population are atheists , so which Europe dropped religion and faith for rationalism and science ? Why do you people have to tell lies ?

"No christian will talk ignorantly and tell lies"..................................So I guess that the pastor who told his congregation members to eat grass like demented goats, was a 'muslim kangaroo'!!!