Planetary Fine-Tuning and Ancient Chinese Language Point to the Truth of the Origins of Life

     Despite widespread disagreement of those in the sciences, it seems several realities in the sciences point toward the reality of a Being fitting Scripture’s description of God. One subset of such realities is evidence of fine-tuning regarding the origins of life in the cosmos generally, on the earth specifically, and in earth’s history both non-human and human.

    Dr. Drake originally postulated vast numbers of planets in the cosmos being suitable for life. Though many followed in supporting him, numbers regarding planets capable of life plummeted as greater information of the universe is gained. Earth seems an immeasurable anomaly. Fine tuning regarding Jupiter for example. If Jupiter was smaller, it’s gravitational protection of earth would be lost. Yet if more massive (or closer), earth’s orbit would move beyond what supports life. The relative exception of the number of metal-rich stars in the Milky Way is another example of fine-tuning.

    Fine-tuning for life on earth specifically includes life requiring limited amounts of beneficial poisons such as arsenic, iron, chlorine, potassium, etc., which earth has. Additionally, life’s origin requires amino acids and nucleotides. But the presence of oxygen and ultraviolet radiation prevents synthesis. And, all options for earth’s early condition had either or both of these, which explains  the lack of evidence for prebiotics theorized by naturalistic approaches. Further, no amino acids, nucleotides, or even building blocks of nucleotides have been discovered in space (there are certain regions where oxygen and ultraviolet radiation might be absent). 

    Further, the Miller-Urey experiment has been hailed as “proof” of abiogenesis, yet the fact that highly-

trained scientists from varying fields designed and carefully regulated the conditions involved contradict the conclusion that chemical evolution is reasonable and no intelligent mind  was necessary for the beginning of life from non-life.Besides, the building block of life produced are a far cry from life itself. Take the fine-tuning of the complexity of the earliest life. Parasites need 250 functioning gene products, photosynthetic bacteria need over 2,000. And it’s not merely life’s origin requiring fine-tuning, but its sustaining as well. For example, certain sulfate-reducing bacteria transform certain poisons into mineable and useable materials for humanity (zinc, lead, silver, etc.). Even plate tectonics, which are required to maintain proper planetary temperature due to the sun’s light and heat on its surface, requires at least seven other finely tuned factors regarding the core, abundances of certain elements, planetary size ratios, magnetic and gravitational particulars, etc. As Dr. Ross keenly observes, “Each new discovery and more detail to the picture of an intentional, anticipatory, carefully orchestrated plan—a plan that prepared earth for life, which prepared earth for humans.” (Creation as Science, p. 147).

    Archaeological evidence also agrees with the biblical account supported through other sciences. One example involves writing more ancient than the Old Testament (ca. 2700BC). Hundreds of Ancient  Chinese characters aptly depict creation of life paralleling the Bible’s account. For example, characters for create, covet, garden, and more reveal peculiar similarities. Create involves characters for speak/breathe, dust, life/living, and walk. Covet is constructed from a woman and two trees (the most ancient form shows her turning from one tree to the other). Garden involves dust, breathe, two persons (one coming from the side of the other), and an enclosure.  There are hundreds of instances like this. Though none of the evidences presented briefly here are likely sufficient in themselves, they begin to reveal a cumulative case which will grow as one honestly investigates.

__________________________

*For information regarding Chinese language and God in Ancient China, see Chan Kei Thong with Charlene L. Fu, Finding God in Ancient China: How the Ancient Chinese Worshiped the God of the Bible (Zondervan, 2009); Ethel Nelson and Richard E. Broadberry, Genesis and the Mystery Confucius Couldn’t Solve (Concordia Publishing House, 1994); and Ethel Nelson, Richard E. Broadberry, and Ginger Tong Chock, God’s Promise to the Chinese (Read Books Publishers, 1997).

The Conundrum of the “Modern Scientific Outlook”

   In the ABC TV Series Numb3rs, cosmologist professor Dr. Larry Fleinhardt displays the conundrum 

of the “modern scientific outlook.”[1] Bultmann and others seemingly believe science has proven “the universe is a closed system– that is, it is sealed off from any interference from outside the web of cause-and-effect.”[2] But how does avoidance of data increase pertinent information? How can ignoring even investigation of disputed theories be scientific? While the sciences do in fact help identify supernatural events (more on that later), how could a study of only the natural prove nature is sealed off from the supernatural? That’s not a job for the natural sciences; that’s theology’s job.[3]

The Conundrum in Action

    Studied before Darwin, and featured more recently as a cover story,[4] the Cambrian Explosion provides an excellent case study for this conundrum. Evolutionary theory claims identical structures among organisms (convergence) must share common ancestry.[5] Yet, the lack of fossil evidence troubled Darwin and Buckland –particularly regarding the Cambrian Explosion. To address this, Darwin waxes eloquently regarding possible

incompleteness of the fossil record attempting to validate evolutionary arguments based on nothing –which actually confirms the lack of evidence.[6] Yet, even in the massive increase in fossil discoveries since Darwin –not insignificantly the discovery of less-complex life forms much older, today just as then, the aptly called “missing link” is still missing.[7]

    Evolutionary theory claims identical structures among organisms must share common ancestry.[8] However, problems persist. DNA sequencing now reveals that similar structures among diverse organisms, like wings of birds and bats, are genetically distinct.[9] Further, their structures themselves are fundamentally different despite the superficial similarities.[10] An additional problem is the issue of “repeatable” evolution. “No finale can be specified at the start; none would ever occur a second time in the same way;” there are simply too many variables for the thousands of improbable stages.[11] If evolutionary processes produced life, one should expect few, if any, cases of “repeats.” But this is simply not the case.[12] If evolution is responsible for life’s diversity, expectations of convergence would be extremely low.[13] That is not the case either.

Final Thoughts

    Given that even biologists embracing methodological naturalism regard occurrences of repeatable evolution as “unexpected and remarkable,”[14] biological convergence is an important component in arguing that throughout history, life is a result of supernatural activity by a Creator.[15] In fact, the sciences as a whole help identify supernatural events.[16] How? Say science discovers that so-and-so is what happens due to the properties of a thing. Then, imagine an event occurs that “exceeds or overrides the natural properties of the things involved.”[17] Such an event merits the conclusion that something supernatural occurred in that event. This is NOT the “god of-the-gaps fallacy. It’s not about ascribing something to God because we do NOT know or understand properties of things; it’s about ascribing something to God because it’s contrary to what we DO know of things.[18]

    With all this in mind, certain questions remain: What authority  should the “modern scientific outlook” have in what one believes? Is this outlook separate from the practice of science itself –to be a good scientist must you have this outlook?[19]

_______________

[1] C. John Collins, Science and Faith: Friends or Foes? (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2003), 217.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Time Magazine, Dec 4, 1995.

[5] Fazale Rana, “Repeatable Evolution or Repeated Creation?”

[6] Fazale Rana “Cambrian Explosion: Biology’s Big Bang”.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Fazale Rana, “Repeatable Evolution or Repeated Creation?”

[9] Ibid.

[10] Fazale Rana, Convergence: Evidence for a Single Creator.

[11] Stephen J. Gould’s Wonderful Life in Fazale Rana, “Repeatable Evolution or Repeated Creation?”

[12] Ibid.

[13] Fazale Rana, Convergence: Evidence for a Single Creator.

[14] Fazale Rana, “Repeatable Evolution or Repeated Creation?”

[15] Fazale Rana, Convergence: Evidence for a Single Creator.

[16] C. John Collins, Science and Faith: Friends or Foes? (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2003), 218.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Ibid., 219.

[19] Ibid., 216.

Dragons, Curses, and How God Conquers

Introducing 2 Dragons

    Bruce Lee was often called "The Dragon." In the Chinese zodiac and the martial arts community, the dragon is a symbol of creative unpredictability, wisdom, strength, and power. Bruce Lee was born in the year and hour of the dragon. All that the dragon represent in the east was found in Bruce. He was strong, quick, philosophical, had a genius desire to help people, and yearned to unlock beauty. Whatever it was found.

    Tragically, he died at age 32 while in the peak of health, and on the cusp of international superstardom. Why? They were rumors of a family curse. The cursed rumors resurfaced when Brandon, Bruce's son, died amid strange circumstances in 1993. While making a movie, Brandon was shot with an unchecked prop gun. Was it the "curse of the Dragon" as many believe? Is there a curse of the dragon at all?

    Well, there is a curse, and there is a dragon. The Bible mentions those. That dragon is much different from the one in the east and martial arts communities, although the evil dragon has made his way into those places…and into the whole world. Through the curse came things like suffering, sorrow, diseases, and death. The dragon in the Bible is Satan, the devil. He uses this courage to accomplish his goals, which are to deceive, steel, kill, and destroy those who persist in following his example will be thrown into the lake of fire with him for eternity (see Revelation, 12:9 & John 10:10). Has he a deceived you into bringing this curse upon yourself?

    The Bible says, "those who depend on the law to make them right with God are under his curse, for the Scriptures say, 'Cursed is everyone who does not observe and obey all the commands that are written in God’s Book of the Law,'" (see Galatians 3:10). Have you obeyed God's commands? Let's glimpse at the 10 Commandments and see. Have you ever told a lie (white lies, fibs, etc.)? If so, that would make you a liar. Ever stolen anything, even once? If so, that would make you a thief. Ever looked with lust? Jesus said lust is committing adultery in your heart. He also considers those who hate to have committed murder in their heart. Have you made a "god" to suit yourself (making your own beliefs about God, apart from the Bible), have you dishonored your parents, kept the sabbath holy, been greedy? Have you use the holy name of the God who gave you life, breath, and every good thing flippantly or as a curse word? Do you love God more than everything else?

    Bruce Lee often spoke of "expressing yourself honestly." Be honest with yourself. I'm guessing you're    guilty (like the rest of us).  On judgement day God will be forced to give you justice. Don't count on the "goodness" or "love" of God to save you from hell on that day. If God is good, he will punish murderers, thieves, liars, and all sin wherever it is found– and give injustice to those who love him (see Revelation 21:8, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

How God Conquers Dragons

    The only way escape his wrath is to repent (grieve and turn away) from your sins as best you can, and put your faith and trust in Jesus Christ to forgive you and make you into a new person. The Bible says, "God demonstrates his own love toward us in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us," and, "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law having become a curse for us." When he suffered and died on the cross, he paid the penalty that we deserve. Then he rose from the dead, defeating death. Bruce Lee, arguably the greatest fighter in the world, couldn't defeat death. But, Jesus of Nazareth did. There's no guarantee of tomorrow for any of us. For peace with God, pray something like this: "God, please forgive my sins (name them). Cleanse my heart. I repent. I turn away from my sins, and I put my faith and trust in the Lord Jesus Christ, my savior." Now, read the Bible daily and obey what you read (John 14:21) – God will never let you down. The gospels of Mark and John are great places to start.

    By the way, you may find this parallel in the Chinese language itself interesting (and there are hundreds more that align with the Bible). The word for righteousness (at the right) appears to have been derived from this original act of worship, asking forgiveness for sin. A sheep is found in this figure, and beneath it, me, kneeling before the Lamb of God, who alone covers me and brings righteousness. Further dissection of the character for me reveals a composite of hand and a lance or spearhead. This seems to indicate that the slaying of the Lamb is by my own hand using a spearhead, suggesting that my sins would bring death to the innocent Lamb of God.

In the Race to Reinterpret Title IX, Women Lose :(

It seems, whether intentionally or unintentionally, our society is determined that women lose. It wasn't always this way. There was a time when the dignity, honor, and unique preciousness of women was fought for and defended. Though there were ill-conceived battles over women's right to vote, etc., women were always seen as unique, precious, and worth defending and even dying for. Beyond the right to vote, Title IX was adopted. Title IX was meant to ensure equal access to athletics and relevant facilities, scholarships, etc. for women. Such laws as suffrage and Title IX assume that there are objective realities of maleness and femaleness. After all, how could such a law apply to women without there being such realities as women?

Times have changed. And, we are no longer on the path of progress but regression. We are no longer defending and fighting for women, but instead, stripping them of their unique dignity, honor, and privacy, as well as opportunities. Now, there are battles regarding biological males who identify as female having access to women's sports activities and facilities under a new interpretation of Title IX. Women lose.

Women Losing Their Present, Potential, & Privacy

What I mean is that "identities" do not compete with each other, kick or throw balls, etc., bodies do. And, the vast majority of women cannot athletically compete with the vast majority of biological males – it’s not good or bad, just reality. If the reinterpretation of Title IX flies, biological males who want to compete but don't have the stuff to make the cut among males, can just claim to be a female and dominate the field. And, teams wanting to win would logically allow or even recruit such persons on their women's teams, thereby eliminating spots for females. Women lose. If biological males want or need an athletic scholarship but are not at a proper athletic level, they could simply identify as female and more easily gain a scholarship – a scholarship that really belongs to a female. And, as a result, any future personal growth, gain in skills, or increase in income women could gain from an education through scholarship dollars would be up for grabs to biological males as well. So, it's not only about present privacy or the field, but women's futures and families. In the name of female equality, must we now hand over their opportunities to males? Women lose.  

Not only do women lose in the arenas of ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES and SCHOLARSHIPS, but also in more personal and intimate arenas. According to the new direction of LGBT pressure groups, NOW INCLUDING THE LIKES OF THE NCAA in hypocritically bullying North Carolina, women would be required to be vulnerable to biological males claiming to be females in facilities like restrooms and SHOWERS. By the way, this is already being forced in certain high schools.

Women Losing Unique Preciousness

Even further, the battle has gone public. The idea of womanhood being an existential, objective reality beyond outward appearance is slipping away. The idea that being a woman is a unique, biological, emotional, spiritual, and scientific fact is sadly, tragically fading. The fog rising on the horizon eclipsing this reality is the idea that a "woman" is merely what one imagines it to be; and anyone can be a woman simply by claiming to be one. How can a biological male know what it feels like to be a biological female? Women lose. One result of this for the public outside academics is that anyone claiming to be a woman – according to one’s own imagination or fabrication – should be able to lawfully use women's restrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms, and even showers. Women lose.

It seems that many are more concerned with one group’s feelings than grappling with facts, more concerned with propagating an ideology than protecting the innocent. It seems our society is bent on ensuring women lose, be it athletic opportunity, academic financial aid, or personal privacy. Women lose, and I’m sick of seeing women lose. Though few and often shouted down, there are those fighting for women, like Everett Piper. I am with them. Women are worth fighting for. Join me?

"Nobody's Perfect." --Really? What Does Jesus and Scripture Say?

On Being Pure in Heart and Perfect

 “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.”

Purity of heart and Christian perfection are not so much about producing perfect people (though they are). They are about maintaining perfect relationship with the perfect God. Only through this relationship can we be pure, and perfect as God is perfect. All qualities in the Sermon on the Mount are aspects of life here-and-now, although some mean to relegate “pure in heart” to a future Kingdom Age. But note that Jesus says blessed are the pure in heart, not will be in the future. This purity is not a new idea, but appears the Old Testament in scriptures such as Ps 24:4 and Ps 51:10.[1]

There are two sides to “pure in heart”: holiness and the idea of being unmixed, undivided.[2] For example, Joseph took Jesus’ body and wrapped it in a “clean” linen cloth. This undoubtedly was made from only one material.[3] However, just as holiness is not primarily characterized by a lack of certain activities, but by faithfulness, active graciousness, unexpected kindness, ethical living, etc.,[4] neither is purity of heart simply being free from impurity. It means a complete pureness, utterly sincere, single-minded, willing one thing. The opposite of a pure heart is a divided heart trying to serve two masters.[5] R.V.G. Tasker describes people with such a heart as being “free from the tyranny of a divided self, and who do not try to serve God and the world at the same time. From such it is impossible that God should hide Himself.”[6] The connotation here is not faultlessness, but blamelessness. Jesus said, “He who has bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean.”[7] Though the feet do need to be washed, the one bathed is still “completely clean.” This purity describes both a sublimation of, and an integration of, all other things in one’s life due to the desire to live for the glory and kingdom of God.[8]

Neither objects nor people are in this state because of themselves, they have been made so. “Pure in heart” speaks only of those whom God has purified. John Wesley illustrates how this particular characteristic is a culmination of other beatitudes:

     “The pure in heart...God hath ‘purified even as He is pure’...through faith in the blood of Jesus, from every unholy affection…‘cleansed from all filthiness of flesh and spirit perfecting holiness in the [loving] fear of God.’ They are, through the power of His grace, purified by pride, by the deepest poverty of spirit; from anger, from very unkind or turbulent passion, by meekness and gentleness; from every desire but to please and enjoy God, to know and love Him more and more, by that hunger and thirst after righteousness, which now engrosses their whole soul: so that now they love the Lord their God with all their heart,...soul, and mind, and strength.”[9]

These are blessed in their ability to see God. This is not reserved for eternity, but occurs in the now as well. God reveals Himself to the pure in heart in a way not common to others. Additionally, such people see God in everything. They perceive His hand guiding and providing for them, and see God especially in His ordinances. These are they that with a “single eye,”[10] see God due to their seeking His Kingdom and His glory first, above all else.[11] They, like the kingdom of Heaven in the parable of the merchant, seek one thing, a single thing, priceless above all else.[12] Again, purity in heart pertains to motive, a perfection in heart, even though fallible in behavior. 

“Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”

Jesus proclaims the blessedness of the pure in heart, but He commands[13] His followers to “be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”[14] This perfection is not an absolute perfection in being an exact duplicate of what God is. It is a perfection concerning the fullness of a thing in proportion to its capacity and the purpose for which a thing exists. For example, all animals acceptably sacrificed in Old Testament were “perfect.” People, such as Noah, were described as perfect as well. Paul presumes such perfection even now in statements like, “Let us therefore, as many as are perfect...”[15] However, to expect finite humans to be perfect in every way that the infinite God is would be illogical and unrealistic. Furthermore, God’s holding people responsible for such perfection and punishing them for not attaining what is not possible would cast Him as an unreasonable tyrant, not the holy, loving God He is. God is perfect in all that He is to be; and we are to be perfect in all we are to be.

Leo G. Cox summarizes this in noting significance in Jesus’ description of God here: “Father.”

     “[Jesus] knew we could not be as God in His absolute attributes...Jesus was not meaning this kind of perfection.

     “But He said, ‘as your Father.’ The fatherhood of God means He is forgiving, kind, loving, and forbearing. He turns the other cheek, goes the second mile, is good to evil men as to the good ones. It is clear from the context of this verse that Jesus is talking about love, especially for those who wrong us. In this aspect we are to be as perfect as our Father.”[16]

Being perfect, in a Christian sense, and “pure in heart” are very similar. Both pertain to the heart, not necessarily the head or hand. It has to do with deliverance from sin, not from misunderstandings, temptations, mistakes, or infirmities. Nor does it absolve one from the necessity to guard one’s heart, pray, and obey in order to maintain one’s walk with God.[17] This perfection is a result of a Divine healing of the heart and an empowerment of righteousness by grace through faith, that ,by the Spirit, one has power over and freedom from volitional sinning. Christian perfection is not sinlessness, but blamelessness. Unknown violations, errors, incapacities, etc. are atoned for by Christ’s work on the cross. John Wesley called this perfection a “perfection in love.” And, the Bible is replete with illustrations and teachings that reveal the inseparableness of love and obedience.[18]

People perfect before God are pure in heart, and walk in what the Bible calls a “straight way,” free from trickery and perversion. These are perfect in a dynamic way, relative to their capacity, who are pleasing to God―even though they fall short of perfect conformity to His law and practical perfection in the eyes of others.[19] To be perfect is to live a life from a pureness of heart. Such people hunger and thirst for righteousness, partly because of mourning over their sin and understanding their poorness of spirit. They also understand the grand mercy they have received, despite their mistreatment of God, and so can offer such mercy to those who wrong them. These are the peacemakers, the salt of the earth, the light of the world. These are the meek whose power is under the control of and empowered by the Holy Spirit, who seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness. Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God; be perfect therefore, as your Father in Heaven is perfect.

---

[1]          W.T. Purkiser, Exploring Christian Holiness volume 1: The Biblical Foundations (Kansas City: Beacon Hill, 1983), 81.

[2]          David Swartz, The Magnificent Obsession: Seeking First the Kingdom of God (Colorado Springs:Navpress, 1990), 126.

[3]          Matt 27:59 (See Leviticus 19:19).

[4]          See John N. Oswalt, Called to Be Holy (Nappanee: Evangel Publishing house, 1999).

[5]          Eugene Boring in William M. Greathouse, Wholeness in Christ: Toward a Biblical Theology of Holiness (Kansas City: Beacon Hill, 1998), 181.

[6]          quoted in Purkiser, 82.

[7]          John 13:10

[8]          Swartz, 126-127.

[9]          John Wesley, Wesley’s Doctrinal Standards Part 1: The Sermons, ed. by N. Burwash (Salem:Schmul Publishing Co., Inc., 1988), 228. (emphasis mine).

[10]         Matthew 6:22.

[11]         Ibid., 6:33.

[12]         Ibid., 13:45.

[13]         This is not a prediction, gnomic future, or effect from a cause, but an emphatic, imperatival future tense having a “universal, timeless, and/or solemn force to it.” See Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics - Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Zondervan Publishing House and Galaxie Software, 1999; 2002), 569.

[14]         Ibid., 5:48.

[15]         Philippians 3:15

[16]         Leo G. Cox, Insights into Holiness, ed. Kenneth Geiger (Kansas City:Beacon Hill Press, 1963), p. 181 quoted in Purkiser, 83.

[17]         Purkiser, 85.

[18]         See especially 1 John.

[19]         William M. Greathouse, Wholeness in Christ: Toward a Biblical Theology of Holiness (Kansas City: Beacon Hill, 1998), 31.