Building Blocks in Life Science

Clear biological answers for how science and Scripture fit together to honor the Creator: that is the tagline from Gary Parker’s new book Building Blocks of Life Science: From Genes & Genesis to Science and Scripture. Dr. Parker has a Ed.D in biology and lectures for the Institute for Creation Research and Answers in Genesis.  The book, as you may have guessed, reads much like an academic biology book, except that rather than giving glory to Nature for the slow evolution of life, Dr. Parker gives glory to God as the creator. 

He has some interesting theories about bacterium and viruses that I had not thought about before, but otherwise it’s pretty straight-forward biology.  And biology alone doesn’t lead to an evolutionary explanation to the origin of life, in fact as we discover more about the cell and DNA; it’s harder to imagine natural causes for life’s origin on the planet.  So much so, that evolution’s grand champion, Richard Dawkins, believes it was probably aliens that kicked evolution off.  He refuses to believe in God, but he believes in aliens?

With that said, I don’t think you’ll find anything in here that’s going to revolutionize the debate between creation and evolution.  What I mean by that is that there are no facts presented that any educated atheist wouldn’t have already heard in debate and considered to be a faulty interpretation of the information available.  And short of Jesus rending the sky and descending, I don’t think there ever will be a consensus on that debate.  In fact, the Bible makes it clear that even when Jesus returns, the world will go to war with Him, so even that might not be enough to convince the atheists that God exists. I’ve met a few who could spend eternity in hell and still maintain that it’s all from natural causes.

Anyway, I don’t want to start off a huge rant on this issue and start arguing with people about it.  If you want some of that action, I’d suggest visiting the site The Poached Egg.  There are lots of people over there that love to argue about this sort of thing.

I will say if you are looking for a simple biology book that gives a good argument against evolution, this book is a good place to start. 

A free copy was provided by the publisher for review.  All opinions are my own.

Buy it now for $11.99

Were Jesus' Prayers Answered: Sanctification

Part 3 in a 5 Part Series

In this series, we’ve been looking at Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and whether certain parts of it were answered because it doesn’t really seem like they were, or at least not in the ways we imagine they ought to be.  Isn’t that always the case?

In this post I want to look at verses 17-19: “Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth. As You sent Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. For their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they themselves also may be sanctified in truth.”

I once heard a pastor tell a story that went something like this, “Every morning I get up and shower and shave, then I have a cup of Sanka coffee, and my wife toasts some cinnamon raisin bread.  I don’t care much for raisins, so I spend a few moments poking them out of my toast before slathering on some butter and eating my breakfast.  I guess you could say that I’m shaved, sankafied, and filled with the holy toast.”

Humor aside, a lot of times the word “sanctification” is used to describe the process by which we are continually conformed into the image of Christ.  We sin less and less until we die, and then when we see Him face-to-face, we become fully sanctified and don’t sin anymore. If this is what sanctification is, why does Jesus say, “for their sakes I sanctify Myself”?

Why would Jesus, the One who never sinned, need to be sanctified if sanctification is a process of perfecting the saints?  Wouldn’t He already have been sanctified?  Also why would He pray that the Father sanctify us in the Truth of His word as we’re sent into the world if our finished sanctification only comes at death?

 A little digging shows that the word sanctification is never used in this context, at least not that I can find.  In fact the word is really just the verb form of holy, which means “to be set apart for God’s work.”  In that context, Jesus’ sanctification of Himself through obedience even to death on the cross makes perfect sense.  Our complete sanctification as saints through belief in Christ makes complete sense; we are set apart for God’s work:

“For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds. (Titus 2:11-15)

When we sin as believers, we are not showing that our sanctification is incomplete; boo hoo for us; rather we are quite literally dragging the holiness of God through the mud.  His Truth has set us free, His Truth has sanctified us, and His Son Sanctified Himself and us through the cross.  Sin is not a bad habit that sneaks up on us; it’s a slap in the face to God Himself. 

Why do you think Paul says, “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own?

For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body” (1 Corinthians 6:18-20).

Jesus’ prayer was answered just as He prayed, not as a process.  Sin ought to be viewed more seriously than a process of sanctification allows for.  If we are sanctified, our response to sin can’t be, “oh well someday I’ll stop even if it’s in eternity.”  We must strive to protect the holiness of God within us that Christ’s sanctification made possible.  Flee from sin, and repent with tears when it catches you unawares, but don’t be flippant about God’s holiness.

Next in the series: Joy

Forget Going Green! Go Light!

Back in 2005, before I was even born-again, a group of evangelical leaders got together to talk about that all-important issue that has got every Christian on their toes and ready for action. No, no not evangelism.  It’s that other “E” word:  Environmentalism.

The New York Times quoted the Rev. Rich Cizik as saying, "I don't think God is going to ask us how he created the earth, but he will ask us what we did with what he created."

Now I don’t know about you, but I’ve never read that verse in the Bible.  Maybe I missed it.  Maybe somewhere in there Jesus said, “Even as you’ve done to the planet, so shall it be done to you,” or maybe it was even something like “And on that day many will come to me and say Lord, Lord, I recycled my bottles and cans in your name, I gave money to save the wetlands in your name, I even ran a half-marathon to raise awareness for the near extinction of the rainbow toad in New Zealand.”

Of course, I’m being completely facetious here, but on judgment day God will inquire of us something that is true.  It will not be how environmentally conscience we were.  It will not be how many species we saved.  Rather He will ask, even tell, us how we treated our fellow man and by proxy Jesus (Matthew 25:35-46)

People are the conditional of eternity, not the environment.  We are not called to Go Green.  We are called to be light in the world.  Addressing environmental issues that adversely affect people like polluted drinking water is definitely part of that, but it is not the over-arching focus for the Christian.

To be honest, I was so amused by the prospect of evangelical leaders presenting environmental issues in this fashion.  I started another blog with this topic as its focus.  Visit the link below to read more: