A Message from
Pastor Jason Dunham

“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters”. Genesis 1:1-2 

Young Sheldon Cooper, who is not a faithful believer in God, makes a scientific case for an intelligent designer for the universe to help restore his mother's faith in Christ. In this scene, Mary’s faith is tested by her grief from wondering how God could have taken a young child from her mother. Then, her son Sheldon brings a fresh perspective to ensure her faith in God. Sheldon quotes that if the universe's gravity were slightly more powerful, the universe would collapse like a ball, and if gravity were less powerful, the universe would fly apart. There would be no stars or planets.  Sheldon then stated that gravity is precisely as strong as it needs to be and that if the electromagnetic force to the strong force were one percent off, then life would no longer exist. Mary then asks Sheldon why are you trying to convince me that there is a God when you do not believe in God? Sheldon made the most powerful statement of all - One cannot logically and scientifically rule out an intelligent designer.  As a pastor, when it comes to science, I think logically about the universe and how things must be  precise for life and the universe to function. This article will answer the theological and scientific question about the origin of life: is intelligent design true? Despite the clanging noise of today’s atheists in our society, many scientists have a strong biblical faith in God. W. A. Dembski (a scientist and a faithful believer in Christ), is a well-known mathematician who holds a Ph.D. in Mathematics and Philosophy, stated that students today are taught that there is no evidence for intelligent design and that neo-Darwinian evolution is an unassailable fact. This leaves the unresearched student to accept some of the theories of abiogenesis, spontaneous generation, or the idea of scientific materialism as facts when, in fact, there are many flaws.  Dembski stated that the most common objection to an intelligent designer/ God is that it has nothing to do with the reality of science but that of religion. To understand the complexity of “The Origin of Life” from a scientific and theological point of view, I want us to view and understand some scientific vocabulary words that will be useful in explaining why           intelligent design is true.

​

These definitions below came from Biologyonline.com and Britannica.  

1. Abiogenesis: The idea that primitive life originated from nonliving matter (e.g., simple organic compounds) over a span of millions of years.  
 
2. Spontaneous Generation: The previously popular notion that living organisms could spontaneously arise or develop from nonliving matter.

​

3. Scientific Materialism: In philosophy, the view that all facts (including facts about the human mind and will and the course of human history) are causally dependent upon physical processes or even reducible to them. 

4. Intelligent Design: An argument intended to demonstrate that living organisms were created in their present forms by an “intelligent designer.”   
 
With a working scientific definition, we can begin to examine some common scientific questions about the origins of life. Did life happen by chance? How did life begin? Is God the intelligent designer of the universe? Let’s break these subjects down together. 

​

First, let's look at the subject of “Spontaneous Generation.” There are scientists and many individuals who once believed that life could come from nothing.  B. Jahns (a not-so-famous scientist) stated in his blog that individuals believed at one time that fleas could come to life from the dust in the air and that maggots could    spontaneously appear in rotted meat. However, this goes against the “Biogenesis Law,” which states that life can only create life and that life can only come from a   pre-existing or some other existing life form. In 1859, L. Pasteur's scientific experiment showed and proved to the world that life can only come from a living organism. Through this experiment, he disproved the theory of spontaneous generation.

 

Next, the subject of “Abiogenesis” sounds a lot like spontaneous generation, but it differs because this       Abiogenesis Theory is proposed as a chemical pathway to life. The Miller-Usrey experiment that was conducted in 1952-53 was celebrated as a huge breakthrough in the search for a chemical pathway from gases that were   assumed to be present in the early Earth atmosphere that helped produce and create amino acids that led to life. This was an attempt to show how living cells could reproduce naturally and not by an intelligent designer. Like spontaneous generation, the Miller-Usrey experiment had flaws. Here are the major flaws of the Miller-Urey experiment. First, most scientists who analyzed and studied this experiment believed that the Earth’s atmosphere did not resemble the mixture of gases that Miller used. Second, life requires many different complexes of proteins, and these amino acids must be organized precisely to function, just like a cell phone. The question would be, how could these proteins and amino acids organize themselves to form a living cell that is required to create life? Dembski stated that because of these difficulties, many theorists have      abandoned the primordial soup/chemical pathway for life known as the Miller-Usery experiment. The bottom line is that the experiment failed to produce any amino proteins that are required for life.

 

Scientific Materialism is more in the realm of philosophy than it is science.  This subject needs to be discussed   because the subject of Scientific Materialism comes into conflict with the law of nature. It also tries to ignore how individuals should think about the Doctrine of Creation.

 

According to R. Avent, Scientific Materialism takes an approach to studying the origins of life with the           assumption that life originated from a natural process, a sequence of events consistent with natural laws. In other words, Scientific Materialism assumes a cosmic imperative where the physical universe and its energy preexist, thus eliminating an intelligent designer. Scientific Materialism only considers what things exist, can be measured, analyzed, and since an intelligent designer cannot be seen the reality for these theorists is that an intelligent designer cannot possibly exist. The problem with this cosmic approach to scientific materialism is that it ignores the natural laws of science, specifically The Law of Biogenesis. Earlier in this article, we concluded that only life could come from life.

 

Lastly, Dembski stated that Intelligent Design is the most decisive theory that explains the possibility that the origins of life were created in their present forms. It points to an intelligent cause rather than pure speculation or an undirected process like natural selection. Genesis 1:27 reads: "So, God created mankind in his own image; in the image of God, he created them; male and female, he (God) created them." Every theory about the “origin of life” starts with a thought process that is a simple idea or concept and then moves on to become more complex. The fact is that the creation of anything in life requires high levels of intelligence. There is a process to design.  When observing how intelligent agents act when they design things, we learn that these intelligent agents generate high levels of information that create complex things or products, such as smartphones. I use this example because it takes high levels of intelligence to create a device like a smartphone. Logic will tell us that living cells that are designed to create life are extremely complex. Smartphones require a designer to make and produce mechanical parts to make them function. Logic will tell us that an intelligent designer would have to know a lot about the subject of biochemistry and how the process of chemicals works and functions within the human body. It is possible that an intelligent designer creates that life. Sheldon, in his discussion with his mother, said that for life to function, gravity must be   precise. Dembski stated that if the laws of physics were not just the way they are, we couldn’t be here at all. What are the odds if the biochemistry in our DNA were off by just one percent; would life be possible?

 

In conclusion, it is reasonable to believe that a supreme creator created the heavens, the world, and life. When we examine the universe, we can honestly see an intelligent designer at work. This is because the origin of life is about science, and it links our faith to God. The concept of intelligent design, as it points to the origins of life, has never conflicted with science; it has only conflicted with the scientist who has an agenda to prove that God does not exist. In fact, religion in its purest form does not threaten science. Truth be told, when it comes to intelligent design, as it reflects the origins of life, the Scientists who believe in God have always accepted the best evidence that mainstream science offers. This is what makes the possibilities of an “Intelligent Design” true regarding the subject of the “Origin of Life.”  Do you think it is possible that God is the Intelligent Designer who created life?

​

                                                                                                                                       Pastor Jason Dunham