Three times in my early years I took the Kuder Preference test. Remember the one with the pin where you punched in a series of answers to your occupational choices? Mine always came out the same way--social, scientific, persuasion-oriented.
This, of course, is not how skilled one is, but what their interests are. At one time I was a science nut, but this began to change. I remained an agnostic (I thought), really a rebellious child.
I found a book, left in our attic by a previous owner. It was quite old with chapter headings in Greek. I did not know then, but the author, Enoch Fitch Burr, had been both an astronomer and a pastor. He was also a terrific author. He had been born in 1818, so many years ago. Out of curiosity, I began to read.
Since that time, I have read many books and many authors, but outside the Bible, I have never been touched by so great a mind. He tore evolution to shreds, and made an inescapable presentation on the proofs of God--one impossible to escape. His method was gentle, civilized discourse, but he was overwhelming in his effect. He made you feel foolish to try to disagree with him. He changed my mind and life.
So, what about the Kuder test? Over the years, I came to realize that the scientific method need not be restricted to chemistry, physics, and biology. These can be the playground of unbelievers. But the Bible, beyond theology, has a science of its own. Those who would present its great truths can forget about threats or sentimental appeals, and immerse themselves and their fellows in the language and logic of God.
We need to learn how translations contain even intentional errors, aided by our own cultural limitations. As a test, look up the seven basic meanings of the word "world", before assuming that you understand John 3:16. Surprise!
So, Kuder was right, at least under "science". Only my pursuit has long been Biblical science. As for persuasion, I hold up the Word itself and its searchers to do that. What about "social". As is often said, "You can't win 'em all."