The Definition of Life

In my travels over the past year, I spoke of the coming persecution on Christians in America.  While presenting that lesson to various audiences I have first asked about who felt persecuted now and then I followed up with who felt that persecution was coming our way soon.  The difference in response was astounding.  Almost no one raised their hand saying that they felt persecuted now.  Almost.  There was one.  

You might think that one person was a preacher from another country where governments have routinely oppressed Christians.  You’d be wrong.  He wasn’t a preacher and he wasn’t from another country.

The one person who raised his hand was a scientist in the South.  In his field, I was told, there is intense pressure to deny Creation and God.  His career and livelihood feel like they depend on doing so.  Fortunately, he is standing firm in his faith.  However, wouldn’t you agree that it has felt for some time that the science community in general is opposed to the idea of a Creator?  And that, by extension, they think of us as dimwitted fools for believing in God and the Bible?  They may not always come right out and say it, but that is how I have felt.  I’m sure many young people have been influenced into thinking that Christians are ridiculous for their beliefs.

The scientific community has certainly done nothing major to dismiss the ongoing mistakes of media and documentaries when they speak of Evolution as fact rather than theory.  The sense is given that the idea of life coming from non-life is a proven and established truth (and only a blind, ignorant person would believe otherwise).  The message is given with such authority and repeated with such consistency that it would cause any Creationist to pause and wonder if they are wrong in their beliefs.

Maybe we have been duped.  No, not the Creationists, but the world that has accepted Evolution as established scientific fact.  Because, it seems to me, the scientific world has just confessed to being wrong.

As mankind delves deeper and deeper into space, scientists have run into a problem.  How will we recognize alien life?  It could look so different from carbon-based life on earth.   To fix this problem, a better way of defining life was needed.  A recent article declared that two scientists have come up with a “radical new theory” to define all life.


“Arizona State University astrobiologist Sara Walker and University of Glasgow chemist Lee Cronin think they've found a way.


They argue that chance alone cannot consistently produce the highly complex molecules found in all living creatures.”


Did you catch that?  Their radical new discovery is that life is recognizable by being complex and beyond chance.  Life doesn’t just happen on its own.  The scientists go on to explain that the chemical makeup of living things is far more complex than those of inanimate objects.  Life is complex.  But more than that, life has a complexity of such a nature that chance cannot adequately explain its existence.

That’s the radical new theory.  Sounds like they just agreed with what Creationist and Intelligent Design advocates have been saying all along.