Published by Molecular biology has recently become a passion along with physics,computer science,and communication studies. One may be asking themselves “why the sudden interest” let me just start by saying it is not a “sudden interest” thing. I have always had an interest in sciences, it became a passion though after I did some interesting reading.
Some that know me seem to think I am “against” science, I am not against science in and of itself. What I am against however is some so called scientists manipulation of science. True science adapts its hypothesis or “theory” to fit the facts, scientific charlatans on the other hand try to skew fact to fit their theories.
Recently I wrote an article called “God is the Great Architect” a specific reader has since left several comments on it. He had a lot to say, but much of what he said falls apart under scrutiny.
In my article I stated that DNA is a blueprint, and any human architect will tell you a blueprint needs a designer. I stated that Charles Darwin said the human eye was one of the most compelling challenges to his theory of evolution.
While the reader acknowledged that Darwin referenced the eye, the reader also said that “some eyes are significantly more well designed than others,” and then asked basically “what of that.”
What the reader failed to take into account is the fact that the complexity of the eye is dependent on the complexity and needs of the organism, for example a human eye is more complex than that of a less complex organism.
Therefore,just because some organisms eyes are not as complex as that of a human doesn’t change the fact that the eye was designed. Again anything that exists, small or complex, needs a designer to get it going.
The reader also challenged the statement by Lee Strobel (and others) that DNA is language. His “basis” for challenging the statement was that language needs an interpreter, again though, the reader and his reference failed to take into account that DNA does have an interpreter.
Just like a computer designer uses a computer chip to store and read pre-programmed information, God designed our cells to store and read our DNA. Our cells(like a computer memory chip) contain the information (DNA) God programmed into them.
The reader’s reference seemed to be trying to say our cells don’t read, that they just copy templates. What his reference failed to take into account (are we seeing a pattern yet friends?) is that even though our cells do copy templates (which I do not dispute is why children “take after” parents) ,to transcribe them properly our cells do have to “read” them, just as a typist trying to re-type something has to read it.
Also, The reader forgets that templates before they can be copied first have to be made.
(that anything made needs a maker is common sense and anyone that thinks something can come to be without a maker is contradicting themselves)
The reader said
“The claim “DNA is a language” is a meaningless allusion, even if construed as metaphorical. DNA is no more a language than a telephone book is a computer. DNA is a cipher, that is to say that it is a direct substitution representation of the sequential structure of another unbranched polymer, polypeptide (some DNA, however, codes for RNA genes), constructed of a different monomer class, amino acids. The order of the amino acids will determine the structure and function of the final product for which the DNA codes, the protein. In this regard, DNA does not function, even analogously, as a language, it is a substitution cipher. A substitution cipher is one in which one set of functional expressions is replaced with another.”
Here’s a second readers response “your quotes prove nothing, all they attest to is that DNA doesn’t follow HUMAN linguistics, that however does not prove that it “isn’t a language” DNA is a cipher yes,and a cipher is still language( the hieroglyphs of Egypt attest to this) DNA is God’s ciphered language just as the glyphs of Egypt were Egyptians ciphered language, and our cells are programmed by God to decipher it”
The first reader, the skeptic said:
“please provide some evidence (or an example) of non-human linguistics that prove dna is a language. please provide evidence that dna is gods own ciphered language. please provide evidence to support your claim that “our cells are programmed by God” to decipher dna. “
To him I say, The evidence is that it is obviously FUNCTIONAL EXPRESSION, anything that is a functional expression is by definition language.
The skeptical reader said, “there is no deciphering being done. the cells simply “see” the sequence of the 4 letters in the dna code (or alphabet if you like though this does not mean it is a language) and make chemicals based on the sequence. no linguistic ability required, cells dont “read” it and “understand” it or “decipher” a code. cells get a sequence and simply act on it. sometimes they mutate and some dna is actually non-coding. no designer required. computers dont “understand” code they just follow instructions. computers dont see Java and recognise a language – they just follow the instructions. a computer does require a programmer but dna is not a computer and no programmer is required. evolution explains everything such as why we share the same dna with every living thing on earth.”
He is basically saying that like a computer, cells just follow pre-programmed instructions, even so, what he fails to acknowledge is someone had to have given the ORIGINAL instructions. Even in automation, the 1st “prototype” has to be programmed by a designer.
Further, in order to “get the sequence and act on it” the cells do have to be able to “interpret” the instructions to know how to make chemicals based on the sequence. The sequence is merely the instructions,the cells again are the reader.
As for his assessment that “evolution explains everything such as why we share the same dna with every living thing on earth” the fact is it doesn’t, That we share the same dna with every living thing on earth actually shows not evolution, but that we do nonetheless have a Common “ancestor”.
The common “ancestor” if you will is the dust of the earth.
Keep in mind scripture states, God created All living things from the earth. That is why our bodies are made up of chemicals found where? The earth. Just as a plastics company recycles plastic, God obviously used the same building block (or ancestor as evolutionists like to call it) to make a multitude of things.
From dust we are made and to dust our bodies return.
The skeptical reader quoted an article which states “Evolution is certainly an area that generates debate although the scientific community at large is confident in the theory of evolution and it is mandated in the United Kingdom curriculum as well as most other places in the world. The discovery of DNA has supported evolutionary theory and our continued understanding of this molecule can help scientists to make predictions about the direction of evolution in the future.”
What he failed to quote was another part from the same article which states
“At the same time, scientists are still aware that the DNA document of history, so to speak, is one that has gaps and is somewhat fragmented. This means that there must be awareness regarding the genetic changes that occur, otherwise we can become biased regarding how evolution occurred”.
There is a reason for “fragments” and the “gaps” and also a reason why “missing links” have not been found (hard as evolutionists try.) What the DNA document actually shows is all “species” of living organisms were created separate from one another (this explains the “fragmentation”) and distinct (explaining the “gaps”.) Although overall the same building block was used.
The reader also quoted the sciencejournal
Even the reader’s quote from the sciencejournal which says the following
“DNA sequences usually involve local construction rules that affect different scales…Indeed, analysis of many DNA sequences suggests that no linguistic connections to DNA exist and that even though it has structure DNA is not a language. Computer simulations and a biological approach to this problem further support these results.”
fails to take into account the fact that someone had to set those “local construction rules” in place.
God used DNA to create every living species, each species,and each individual member of that species while designed from a template (the first of that species, in humanities case Adam and Eve,) is still distinctive
The reader said “Science supports evolution not biblical creationism. Sorry if that is hard to swallow but it is none-the-less true”
Science however as I have outlined,supports creation, are your prayers always “instantaneously” answered? No, even though God knows what you need you FIRST have to ask. The spoken word is powerful even in the physical what you say has a big impact on what occurs.
If you cuss at someone for example, the obvious consequence is their feelings get hurt, however if you say “I Love You” to someone, they smile and usually respond positively.
Anyone familiar with the Bible knows everything happens first in the spiritual realm ( In the case of creation, God spoke,then it happened)
The only thing human science can really attempt to do is explain how what God spoke into existence became physically manifested. No matter how many times or how many ways it tries though, it cannot disprove creation because common sense says anything that exists at all has a creator and the “finished product” attests to that creator.
Good points! Everyone has the right to their opinion. Great thought provoking information.
check this out for a fuller treatment of the eye:
http://www.scienceray.com/Philosophy-of-Science/Did-God-Design-the-Human-Eye.513201
G♥d bless you John for making your public stance. I do not claim to understand all of the content in your article, nor in the refute, but do not need to understand to know the God that lives within my heart.
I do know that wikipedia is not a site to reference in an argument over facts, as we were not allowed to use it while preparing our term papers for college. I have added information there (me with only 55 college credits to my name)so it not a site I would use in an argument.
Some like to argue for the sake or arguing. My life is way to hectic to delight in such meaningless pastimes. I embrace each day as a gift from God and attempt to live it to the fullest. We know that even Satan fears God and trembles at His presence (James 2:19). We also know that William J. Murray has written a best seller “My Life without God” where he speaks of growing up in a home without God. His mother was the outspoken atheist who went to the Supreme Court and fought to have prayer removed from school. I would challenge anyone to compare schools with prayer to those we have today, and can site many violent rampages that have taken place since prayer was removed.
G♥d bless, John. Do not grow weary. If God be for you who can be against you?
Teachersmith,I’m not sure if you know this but Lee Strobel was at one time an atheist, God changed His heart,I pray God works on yours as well…. as for me, I have seen God work in my life for 22 years, faith is not a matter of debating and angst, God makes Himself known to those who have a tender heart to hear.
Teachersmith, the infection of which you speak is an illness caused by bacteria, and sickness and death did not enter the equation till after sin did, so… that bacteria would never have been harmful to humans had sin never entered the equation.
It would have just been another organism, pestilences/illnesses and so on,both the temporary and the terminal are mankind’s own fault.
Anyway, there are ways to prevent vaginal infections, if people stay clean.
dear food for thought, what you have said is that sin causes illness which is in no way verifiable and does not appear in any medical book anywhere. your statement is unfounded and complete nonsense – just ask any medical professional. i am fed up with those of faith trying to make modern science fit into their own view of the world. it is bad science and blatant dishonesty. the facts simply do not fit, the claims are invented and the constant desire to twist everything to fit is infuriating. i have repeatedly asked those of you who make these claims and statements to furnish me with some evidence and you have repeatedly failed to do so every single time. please stop now as you are merely embarrassing yourselves.
teachersmith,Nothing was being twisted, I just made a statement. You are not looking for evidence you are looking to attack ANY STATEMENT made by a person of faith, and that is abundantly clear.
Just because modern medical texts do not say sin is how pestilence originated does not change the fact that sin IS how pestilence came to be. It is spread by bacteria, but as I have already stated, before the fall there was NO illnesses,Mankind as a “species” if you want to call it that brought it on ourselves, I am actually quite surprised that all evidence you ARE given you spit upon, for someone that claims to be “seeking answers” you sure don’t seem like it.
just because you believe it does not make it so. i do not spit upon evidence. what you offer as evidence is mere conjecture and faith statements. you offer nothing to support your beliefs and wonder why the rest of us don’t believe them. no evidence has yet been provided by anyone, anywhere, at any time that sin causes illness. even jesus told his disciples that a man whose ailment from birth was not caused by any sin or fault of his own or his parents. why can you not accept the fact that these are your beliefs and not medical facts? i am actually quite surprised that you continue to offer nothing and then wonder why your arguments are unconvincing in the extreme.
Teachersmith, arguing solves nothing take a look around you, see the wonder of all that you behold. The Earth itself is evidence enough of God’s craftsmanship. Our bodies are made up of elements found in the earth (How you overlook this I don’t understand for the life of me)
This is my final comment in regards to you, Take care
In regards to Teachersmith’s comments, Adam and Eve were the first humans, they sinned, that is what made Salvation necessary, it is not a myth, it is fact, as was pointed out in the article, What the DNA history shows is a common “ancestor” but NOT evolution. The ancestor is the dust from which we were created (why do you think it has eluded evolutionists? they don’t think to look at the dust of the earth)
If evolution were fact, there would not be gaps and fragments in the DNA history, the only thing that accounts for the gaps and fragments is, as the article pointed out, that each species was created separate and distinctive from the same building block.
Evolution has been propagated as “fact” since Darwin’s death even though he himself stated it was a theory.
Darwin would be appalled at how atheists have abused and skewed his work to support their own humanistic agendas. They take bits and pieces of his theories, add their own spin and call it “science” but the fact remains that anything that has a beginning needs a beginner, therefore as was pointed out in the article, nobody can disprove creation because the finished product itself testifies of the creator.
Atheism is humanistic,self-loving nonsense.
The Bible says in the last days there will be people who are blasphemous,boastful,rebellious,lovers of themselves.
Atheists are fulfilling that prophecy and are too blind to see it.I am not here to judge, just to make a point, Bible prophecy is coming to pass, wake up and turn to God, It is not His will that any perish, but that all would come to repentance
When Jesus returns, I pray he has mercy on those that have been decieved by false teachings.
you fail to understand the scientific definition of a theory. your knowledge comes from intelligent design pseudo scientific babble. where are the prophecies regarding atheists? nobody can disprove creation? i think you will find that only the deeply religious believe in creation these days. evolution provides a much better, more coherent explanation that is supported by all the facts. your beliefs are beliefs about the world and therefore should be open to revision as new discoveries about that very world are made. strangely you continue to believe a myth from an ancient book written by men with less scientific knowledge than the average school child. why is that? does jesus condemn you for using your brain, examining the evidence and making your own mind up?
Teachersmith claims we have “failed” to present him with evidence, yet this article and a multitude of others, not to mention creation itself, present plenty of evidence of God.
The fact that people harden their hearts instead of recieving the evidence is simply due to the fact that man, due to vanity likes being the center of the universe, it is actually quite sad.
Heed your conscience my fellow people,
Dear Teachersmith, a person believing something is not what makes it truth, truth is truth whether it is believed or not, unbelief cannot disprove truth because of its very nature.
With that said,Just because some people do not believe in God does not make Him cease to exist.
I do not “fail to understand the scientific definition of a theory” a theory is a hypothesis, granted it is usually based on evidence, but it is also subject to change as new things come to light, and research has actually not proved Darwin’s theory.
The fossil record itself challenges it, and the methods such as carbon dating used by scientists are vastly unreliable.
Basic common sense says anything with a beginning needs a beginner, something cannot come from nothing.
As for your belief that the authors of the Bible had ” less scientific knowledge than the average school child” I beg to differ.
I can give you examples that disprove your assessment,
Scientific facts are in plain sight in the Bible, and they are actually accurate.
Here’s a few of the examples I promised.
#1 Science expresses the universe in five terms: time, space, matter, power and motion
The Bible did the same years before “modern” science
“In the beginning (time) God created (power) the Heaven (space) and the earth (matter) . . . And the Spirit of God moved (motion) upon the face of the waters.”
#2 Scientific fact mentioned in the Bible:Thermodynamics
“Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.”
The Hebrew word used here is the past definite tense for the verb “finished,” indicating an action completed in the past, never again to occur. The creation was “finished” — once and for all. That is what the First Law of Thermodynamics says. It states that neither matter nor energy can be either created or destroyed. There is no “creation” ongoing today. It is “finished” exactly as the Bible states.
#3 “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; it shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”
This verse reveals that a female possesses the “seed of life.” This was not the common knowledge until a few centuries ago. It was widely believed that the male only possessed the “seed of life” and that the woman was nothing more than a glorified incubator.
#4 Scientic fact:the blood is the life.
Bible statement: “For the life of the flesh is in the blood.”
The Scriptures declare that blood is the source of life. Up until 120 years ago, sick people were “bled”, and many died because of the practice. We now know that blood is the source of life. If you lose your blood, you will lose your life.
The Author’s of the Bible actually have more knowledge than you think teachersmith, need I go on to show you more proofs?
by the way, here are the scripture references for each point if you want to look them up.
Genesis 1:1,3
Genesis 2:1
Genesis 3:15
Leviticus 17:11
by the way, this is on the topic of the scientific accuracy of the bible as well. There are many who mistakenly think the Bible says the earth is flat, so if that is something you think and that is why you are trying to say it is “scientifically inaccurate,” let me dispel that notion by pointing out that The Bible actually says the earth is spherical, I can show you,
Isaiah 40:22 “It is he that sits upon the circle of the earth.”
The hebrew word used here for “circle” means in this context a sphere.
The Bible informs us here that the earth is round. At a time when science believed that the earth was flat, it was the Scriptures that inspired Christopher Columbus to sail around the world. He wrote: “It was the Lord who put it into my mind. I could feel His hand upon me . . . there is no question the inspiration was from the Holy Spirit because He comforted me with rays of marvelous illumination from the Holy Scriptures . . .” (From his diary, in reference to his discovery of “the New World”).
(Other statements in the Bible also indicate that God revealed this truth long ago. For example, David said that God has removed our transgression from us as far as the east is from the west (Ps 103:12). On a spherical surface, east and west are infinitely separated in the sense that one can travel indefinitely in either direction without ever attaining the other. However, Solomon described the wind as blowing in circuits, first towards the south and then turning toward the north. North and south are not infinitely separated as east and west, because a southward traveler on a spherical surface will be heading north after crossing the south pole.
Some Bible critics have claimed that Revelation 7:1 assumes a flat earth since the verse refers to angels standing at the “four corners” of the earth. Actually, the reference is to the cardinal directions: north, south, east, and west. Similar terminology is often used today when we speak of the sun’s rising and setting, even though the earth, not the sun, is doing the moving. Bible writers used the “language of appearance,” just as people always have. Without it, the intended message would be awkward at best and probably not understood clearly. [DD]
In the Old Testament, Job 26:7 explains that the earth is suspended in space, the obvious comparison being with the spherical sun and moon. [DD]
A literal translation of Job 26:10 is “He described a circle upon the face of the waters, until the day and night come to an end.”
Proverbs 8:27 also suggests a round earth by use of the word circle (e.g., New King James Bible and New American Standard Bible). If you are overlooking the ocean, the horizon appears as a circle. This circle on the horizon is described in Job 26:10. The circle on the face of the waters is one of the proofs that the Greeks used for a spherical earth. Yet here it is recorded in Job, ages before the Greeks discovered it. Job 26:10 indicates that where light terminates, darkness begins. This suggests day and night on a spherical globe. [JSM]
The Hebrew record is the oldest, because Job is one of the oldest books in the Bible. Historians generally [wrongly] credit the Greeks with being the first to suggest a spherical earth. In the sixth century B.C., Pythagoras suggested a spherical earth. [JSM]
Eratosthenes of Alexandria (circa 276 to 194 or 192 B.C.) calcuated the circumference of the earth “within 50 miles of the present estimate.” [Encyclopedia Brittanica]
The Greeks also drew meridians and parallels. They identified such areas as the poles, equator, and tropics. This spherical earth concept did not prevail; the Romans drew the earth as a flat disk with oceans around it. [JSM]
The round shape of our planet was a conclusion easily drawn by watching ships disappear over the horizon and also by observing eclipse shadows, and we can assume that such information was well known to New Testament writers.
The implication of a round earth is seen in the book of Luke, where Jesus described his return, Luke 17:31. Jesus said, “In that day,” then in verse 34, “In that night.” This is an allusion to light on one side of the globe and darkness on the other simultaneously. [JSM]
Teachersmith may be interested to know, Researchers at NASA’s Ames Research Center confirmed that every element in man can be found in the soil,supporting that we are indeed made from it.
The Bible not only has indeed more scientific knowledge than “the average school child”, but also has extensive FOREKNOWLEDGE of things “modern” scientists have only recently discovered.
Some of which was stated above in Robert’s comments, thank you ALL for the comments by the way. (Yes this includes you teachersmith,although we disagree I believe discussion is healthy even for people with such vast differences as ours)
Why do I think it is healthy? because you asked for proof,evidence,and enlightenment, and I believe God may in fact be using our discussions to provide you with the answers you seek, I read somewhere (I believe it was in a comment on one of your own articles) that said you are agnostic, I cannot change your heart, only God can do that, but I seek to always be an instrument for God’s purposes, and since it is God’s will that we know Him, I am more than happy to minister to you.
I know you are a “skeptic” but I assure you, God Loves all of us, I hope that through our discussions, you will come to know that.
Take care, by the way, despite our differences, I do not hate or condemn you, only God has a right to make judgements and I believe that for anyone with life, there is always hope.
teachersmith, you stated
“your knowledge comes from intelligent design pseudo scientific babble.” yet we have shown that our knowledge is neither “pseudo scientific” nor “babble”
As for your other belief that evolution is supported by “all the facts” I believe John has sufficiently shown otherwise,evolution has not been proven, and never will be, because we were created.
NASA’S confirmation that we are made up of the same elements as the dust of the earth puts a big hole right through the “evolution” scenario, One of NASA’s own scientists stated that this finding of man being made of dust elements supports the Biblical creation account.
that evolution is supported by “all the facts” is a bold assumption teachersmith, especially considering that even the most “scholarly” evolutionist scientists admit there are gaps, both in the DNA history and fossil record that they have not been able to explain, be very careful with your statements friend,especially those that are assumptions as bold as that.
Just a suggestion
my one incorrect and bold assumption pales into insignificance next to your dogmatic religious beliefs. the fact remains you have very specific beliefs i find to be unconvincing and unsupported. you have failed to convince me not because i am hard hearted but because when all is said and done you hold beliefs that rely almost entirely on faith. everything aside you have beliefs and nothing more. i simply hold different beliefs or no beliefs. that is all. paleys watch and pascals wager dont cut the mustard. take care good people…
To say that something can be made without having a maker is just downright ignorant and willfully,stubbornly, blind.
For something to be made, it NEEDS a maker. A cake for instance will not just “come together” on its own, it needs a baker to mix the batter etc.
Think of God as the Baker in the analogy, and all of creation as the cake.
That we Exist at all proves God’s existence, As John often says the Pot cannot deny that it was made by the Potter, anymore than a cake could deny it was made by a baker.
God Bless all future readers