Hacker News Reader

Comment by capableweb | Hacker News Reader

That broadcast seems to even have it's own Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_8_Genesis_reading

> On Christmas Eve, December 24, 1968, the crew of Apollo 8 read from the Book of Genesis as they orbited the Moon

Seems no one was happy with what they came up with, so they ended up going with Genesis part from the bible instead. Not everyone was happy with that though:

> Madalyn Murray O'Hair, founder of American Atheists, responded by suing the United States government, alleging violations of the First Amendment

Ended up being dismissed by all the courts though.

But still, I cannot believe that people who are supposedly scientists start quoting the bible when they are themselves involved in maybe one of the greatest scientific achievements of our time. How does that resolve?

View on HN

> But still, I cannot believe that people who are supposedly scientists start quoting the bible when they are themselves involved in maybe one of the greatest scientific achievements of our time. How does that resolve?

As atheist: even if you don’t believe in christianity, the bible is still a book with some stories that have made a massive impact and which can evoke deep emotion in many readers/listeners. Especially in such an emotional context as venturing out into space.

The same would be true for the Torah, Quran or any other major religious text (including non-Abrahamitic ones) - would you have brought the same defense, if only one of those had been quoted, if you are perfectly honest?

I’m a pretty strong atheist. It’s odd to me too. However I’m answering why the Bible over other religious texts. That one at least feels obvious.

The people reading it were likely Christian. The majority of the people listening would’ve been Christian. The majority of the people that footed the bill would’ve been Christian.

Like others have said, you don’t have to believe in the existence of a diety to feel moved by words from some religious texts.

The Book of Genesis is from the Torah though, isn't it?

Genesis is common to all abrahamistic religions, so it has the widest appeal.

Personally I’d have appreciated a quote from any other text equally, but I’m going to assume that a US government official reading a non-christian text publicly might have effects on coming elections.

It may be confusing because of the attitude toward empirical science of some prominent strains of American fundamentalism (and the way the media often reduces that to a narrative of a fundamental religion vs. science conflict), but having religious belief about the metaphysical nature of reality and pursuing scientific understanding of its physical nature have often been things that go together. I mean, consider Georges Lemaître.

I'm an Atheist. At some point you will have to realize that religious people exist, and many astronauts are devout Catholic.

I don't believe in an Abrahamic creator-God but I think the reading of Genesis on Apollo 8 is extremely moving. I don't interpret it as being particularly religious or Abrahamic. "Let there be light" is, IMHO, a universal notion of our strange existence in the cosmos. Maybe it means creation to some, the big bang to others. It's 3-4000 year old poetry (likely long predating the old testament in oral tradition).

>But still, I cannot believe that people who are supposedly scientists start quoting the bible when they are themselves involved in maybe one of the greatest scientific achievements of our time. How does that resolve?

"A little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion." - Francis Bacon

And for a clearcut example of this, Isaac Newton figured out calculus and classical mechanics, but also spent an inordinate amount of time trying to find secret messages hidden in the Bible.

From my understanding, Newton eventually decided he'd figured out everything there was to figure out (which was kind of true), then he got bored, so he started to dabble in alchemy and bible things.

Being a scientist and being religious are not mutually exclusive.

True, but the intersection of the Venn diagram has only shrunk throughout history.

Has it? That would be an interesting diagram but I wouldn’t assume anything

Oppenheimer quoted the Baghavad Ghita in his first statement after the Trinity test. Scientists are humans too.

That famous Oppenheimer quote is from 1965, not 1945.

After the Trinity test he went on to work for the US government for some years on nuclear weapons, which goes against the usual "what have we done?" sentiment that quote is meant to convey.

It would be hard to be a scientist without being human

Funnily, that is probably the only religious text that is not religious.

I've read the Bhagavad Gita and it spends a significant amount of time talking about karma and reincarnation. Not sure how you could see it as non-religious unless you did to it what Thomas Jefferson did to the Bible.

There is a lot of non religious content in there.

https://michaeldevfay.medium.com/the-bhagavad-gita-for-athei...

The point of Gita's message is to NOT worry about karma and reincarnation.

And there's plenty of non-religious content in the Bible, but no one in their right mind would call it a non-religious text.

The local knee jerk reactionary downvoting is hilarious and expected given the faux intellectualism that is now rampant here. Since I can't edit my original comment, here you go.

There is a ton of wisdom in the Gita.

https://michaeldevfay.medium.com/the-bhagavad-gita-for-athei...

You'd be surprised how many scientists throughout history were motivated by the notion of better knowing the nature of god.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com