Studies on the Origin of Life

(Under Construction)

A Biochemical View of Life

Jerry Albert

Mercy Hospital Medical Research Facility
San Diego CA

From the Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation 29
(June 1977): 76 - 84.

BIOCHEMICAL EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION

Unity and Continuity in the Moleculnr Logic of Living Matter

A biochemist attempts to understand the origin, development, and functions of biological life by studying the nature and functions of the molecules found in living matter (biomolecules), the physical and chemical principles governing the behavior of inanimate matter, and axioms in the molecular logic of the living state These latter axioms are unique set of ground rule that govern the nature, functions, and interactions of the biomolecules and endow them with the capacity for self-organization, self-regulation, and self-replication.

Very simple, low molecular weight precursors obtained from the environment (carbon dioxide, water, nitrogen) are converted via sequences of metabolic intermediates of increasing molecular size into the bio molecules (amino acids, nucleotides, sugars, glycerol, and fatty acids). "The sizes, shapes, and surface characteristics of there biomolecules are exceedingly important in the specificity of their biological interactions and also in their role as building blocks in the structural elements of cells."¹ The biomolecules are ordered into a hierarchy of increasing complexity. These building blocks of the same type are linked together to each other covalently to form the macromolecules of the cell: proteins, nucleic acids, polysaccharides, and lipids, respectively. The cell macromolecules are non-covalently associated into super-molecular assemblies, and these, in turn, into cell organelles (mitochondria, chloroplasts, Gorgi complexes, etc.), the structural components of living cells. Unity is expressed in the general cellular (organelles, nucleus, membranes, ribosome's) and chemical (proteins, nucleic acids, lipids, carbohydrates, coenzymes, minerals, oxygen, water) composition of all life. The major types of macromolecules have identical functions in all species of cells and are distributed in about the same proportions in all cells.

Recent studies of the chemical of the composition of the simplest cells suggest that the first cells to have been built from only 25-30 different biomolecules. "It appears likely that these primordial biomolecules were particularly suited to be the components of living matter, not only because of their intrinsic structure but also because fiesable pathways existed for their enzymatic interconversion" through consecutive reactions having common intermediates.¹These primordial biomolecules may be regarded as the ancestors of all other biomolecules. New biomolecules of greater complexity and variety evolved into more highly differentiated and complex forms. Nearly all of the 150 different biologically occurring ammo acids are derived from the 20 common ammo acid building blocks of proteins. The dozens of different nucleotides known are all descendents of the five major nitrogenous bases found in nucleic acids. Over 70 simple sugars derive from glucose and from these a large variety of polysaccharides are formed in different organisms. There are many different fatty acids, which are all descended from palmitic acid. Recent research on the biogenesis of the extremely complex and specialized biomolecules (pigments, waxes, essential oils, alkaloids, antibiotics) shows that they can be classed into a few different types, all of which are ultimately derived from the pnmordial biamolecules or their breakdown products.¹

All living things synthesize, utilize, and store the same high energy compound, adenosine triphosphate (ATP), to drive biochemical reactions required for synthesis (repair, growth, and development or reproduction), ,~tio, imuscle mntractlon), ..d active transport of substances In general, all life shares across membranes into cells.

common metabolic pathways, common enzyme and coenTyme catalysts fo,biochemi cal reactions, common nucleic acid replicsting mech-

IUNE 1P~7

more hi~hiv

of the extremely

"' I'LW Vr LIFE

Twenty aminoacids and eight mon,nu. cleotides are identical in all species and each ser~es multi-functions. This underlying simplicity i, molecular organiza. ,N~enf cellr implies common ancestry

ancestry

anirms for storage a.d banrmisrion ~f information a,d hereditary Characterisb~u, common ~tein s)ntheur1:g mechamsms lea~lng to Species-specific phenohnir "laracrens6cs, mmmon mec"anlIms hr regulation of S)nthesis. Gmpler organisms share internal municadon routes

mffhan"m…'hr ,,gr;i~~

internal com-

li2e acetylcholine ~llllllaYr Ulth nerve Danrmiss BDd Cho~nerterases. S~ong Sonhly'elatlanships eait be"een th. blood

proteins of humans and other pnmates. goup rUI life depends onphotosynthes"… directly m ,~ ~Tt~y_;Eaph~nng wergy from the sun ~ia mmnl,

~'~""""'"1 reacSonr leading to carbohydrates.~i;ie^ depends on oxldative phOrpliaylation, another senes of biochermcal ,ac500~ fD~ building new life and PTDV'l~p enqgy fo' life's processes. i~ biochemist s~,

an Irlrerrelatplne~s ..d interdependence i, all life. ~tfh~sh~li~n~ formr h8e Obviaus morphological m

r……………ypre ~yt.re,~~ molecular similaiarr abound st the subcellular level. Small chemical changes in

proteins mal;e radicalEha"ges in biological~ pDssible. The similarities ,, shuctures .f

macmmalendes haYing the same functions divergent spenes ir a u"ifying feahue of life.

S~ee the prote~nr of all li\ing forms today possess

smmo acids having one ofhVo possible as~,~~ie Co"figuraSans, the derivation of all organisms from one "II or a closely relatedPopuiation of cells is suggested. Biolog~cal rtereorn~rin~~: nuclmtider. … r~"""…r is also possessed by~poly Cantmuity i, impliedin the development Of all life from simple ongmsto … In reproduction ..d dlfferentiaton D~n~~,t~~

pDssible. The similarities i; ~acmmalendes having the

shucturesof ho;n~j~h~

in widely

F~,,~.a~l…s~ll~a;~h……~~0,~o~

wolugoup

maturity all ~~"'~UYlrnjnoanon,, developmen;to multicellular organism, ~gnate from single, simpler ceU1.

h;volu6qna~ aspects are li"Led t, the ong~n or

~~~~r~mrsls ot nahral products, e.e.. alkaloids in .ady evolutionary pathways (polyacetates derived from relatively simple enl)micpathways)are simpler in chem. ical structures than a'*aloids p,Muced from later e"'u~0"a~y pathways ("h*imate 1, Mmp]U enzymic pa'hwayr). Candnuity of life is also implied i, the u"derl~mg pnnnple of molecular

ammo aadr and eight mo,,,~,cleorid~OnDmy… Twenty all spent…s a,d each server

Suggest selectionti,~ for the dunng the course of chemical evolu-

cap~dtyto serve several functions. This U"d~dp…p simplicity h molecular organization ~f cells implies common anceshy of life.

"A liliing cell is a JeNasrpmhlc~ perpctuntink irothenwi ~~~~~"~6. 8elfddiusting, selfconsecurive. Ope"sYstemonsistingof,,u linlrcd .rgonic ""etions plomofed b; ~p~f~tolystspmduccd by the cell onpnri,.~ .r-

0"8~, or

"A lir;in~ cell is a

perpcfuntink irothenwi Co"s"curive. linlrcd nr.

p"cip2e of marimum cesscs."l

~ ' "lr ceu operating o, thk conomy ,f ports and pm-

IERRY r

Ene.gy TransformaD~ons in Living Cells and SelfRegulation of Cell Reactions

"The living cell ir 8" isothermal chemical engine,,, containing catalyrtl (e"zymes) capable of ~eatly ennanFmr: me rates Of Specific chemical reactions. The high degree of rpecl8ci?v of en'ymes results from ~eration of the pnnciple of dNcturol complementnrity. the active site of an e"zyme fits its substrate with a near-perfect complementarihi Enzyme-catalFed ,. actions are li~ed into mady different sequences of consecutive reactions having common intermediates. The formation or brealdown of ATP, the mzlor carrier of chemical energy in the cells of all living species, is the mnnectmg link beheen the two large~nerworll Of enryme-catalyred "eactoonr-mmetaooirm ..d bios)nthesls. TheJe mnsecutively lir*ed networls of en~yme-eatalyz…d "actions are essentially identical in as living species.~'' 'The linling of enryme-catalped reactions into sequences of consecutive reactions malter possible the O'derly drannelling of the thousands of chemical reac6ons taldng place m cells (simultaneourlv from Simple ~reeurrorr), so that all the specific biomolecules reqwrea in cell sbucture and function are produced in "9p'0p"ate amounts and rater (Ve'y rapidly) to mainruo me normal steadu rtrr. characteris6e of the living, functioning cell: ~he~rme of a specific reY"ion of one portion of the complex networlr of eniymatrc reactions in the cell con be contral~d or modulated by the rotes Of reactions in another pori of the net~ork.u Certain e"2ymer. ~particularly there at 'he beginning of reaction sequences or at branch pomts, function as regulatory e"lymes: they are inhibited by the end product of that reaction sequence. Living cells possess the ~ow~:' tO'e~late the synthesir of their own catalysts. Thqv CB" turn off the synthesis of the enZymer required to ,~~ , g~ven product from its precursorr whenever that product bavailable, ready made, from the envlmnment. Such self-regulating and Jelf-adjust~ng properties are fundamental in the mam.

cell and are essential to its Ziuhg organisms create and mnintain their essen"I orderliness at fhe e*pe~-e of the environment Which they cnuse to become more d~ordered and random The cell is a nonequilihrium open system (steady state), a machine fD' extrac6ng free energy from ihe envlonment, which it causes to increase in entropy Another reflection of the principle of maximum economy ir that liring cells are highly efficient in handling energy and matter.,,'

Enzyme-catalFed,

essential to its

~m~Replication and Adaptation of Living Orgao-

The geneSe information is compressed into the nuclcur o~ cells, in the nucleotide sequence of a very small amount of deo3ribOnucler acid (DNA) The one-dimensional informaSon Of DNA is translated into the three-dimenrional information inherent in the macromolecular and Supramolecular components of living organisms by ha"da6an of DNA shuchue into protein rbuc~ure."' The common genetic code (~inucieotide~ammoacid) for all life puts the mechanism for wolutjan on, chemicalb"h… The events that tate place in ONA molecules to g~" nse to molecular eve-

lution are of three general tYp": (1) duplication of DNA double strandr, as gene duplication followed by a functional differentiation, via mechanisms of crossing over or recombination; (2) rhortening or deletions of portions of DNA strands; (3) point mutations or replacements of one ba.ePat in DNA.2 DNA changes are then translated into changed proteins by means of the common messengrr-ribonucleie add, ribosamal ribonucleic acid, ammo acid-transfer-ribonucleiF acid mechanisms. These changed proteins, especially if they are enzymes, are often capable of changing some properties of the cell and lead to pheno~vpic changes in the organism.s "it now appears certain that, even in the intact cell, the DNA molecule may brea~ fre4Uently. Usually it is quiclly repaired, bui such errors mutations are not always deleterious and may possess advantages in enabling organisms to better adapt to their environment" Adaptation af!lving organisms to their changing environment enables conditions inside the cells to ~lte; '"'espanse to the e~temal pressures. Adaptation is a result of biomacromoleculer changing to enable organisms to survive in a changed environment. Although these molecular events may be statistically random the net result is not, since the environmental p'essure is the final determmant in the e.pression of new or changed DNA (genes) ar evolutionary changes Perpetuation or disappearance of the phenotypic consequences of these DNA changes is decided by classical natural releeSon.' The remainder of the evohitionary P'O"SS is concerned with various mmplexities arising trom morphological, ecological, and other results of translation of the molecular changer among populations of organismr.

Biological Fihe.s of Organic Compounds

"Carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen are far more undant in living matter than in the earth,s crust. e may therefore presume that compounds of these possess unique molecular fitness for the processer that collectively constitute the living state..l The four most abundant element. maling up about 99a of the mars of most livine cells (carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen) resdilv~form covalent bonds by eleftron-pair;haring, readily react with each other to fill their outer electron shells, and are the lightert elements capable of farming covalent bonds. ~Smce the s~enah of a covalent bond is inversely related to the atomic weights of the bonded atoms, it appears that living organisms have .elected those elements capable "i "rming the sbongert (and mast stable) covalent bonds.~'' Carbon is unique as an element, because no O'her chemical element can form stable moleculer of such widely different she. and shapes, nor with ruch a vanety of functional groups with oxygen, lu~ogen. and rulfur. "We may therefore conclude that organic carbon compounds mYlt be especially well suited for ~"( p~~"'~' ,i ~np o,gv,,,. luli. t~bm~:: selected despite the relative sparseness of the earth's erust and derpite the fact that energy must be erpended to reduce organic carbon,,' "Cu~ent evidence supports the concept that the biomolrmles we Lnaw today were selected from a much larger number of available compounds because of theL special fitness, which gave cells containine 'hem superior survival value.~' "Since several hundrea

IOURNAL OF TnE *MERlt*N SCIENTl~lt AFFIIIATION

abundant We may elements processer

A BIOCHEMICAL

organic compounds have been isolated during erperiments on the abiotic origin of organic molecules'. and only some 25 or 30 ~different compounds may have been required to form the first cells, it a~e~f~ …erv likely that a process of reledian took ~P;erumab~ly the biomoleculer are the simplest, most versatile, and mast fit molecules for theY multiple functions in cells."

PREBIOTIC SYNTHESIS OF BIOMOLECULES AND CELL STRUCTURES

Chemical Origin of Biomolecules

"Recent research suggests that early in the history of the earth, condiSon;fauored the existence of many different organic compounds in relatively high concentration m the surface waters of the ocean and that the frrrt living cells arose in this warm soup of organic compounds.' H~oUleses stunulated experiments on the prebiotic origin of biomolecules, and experimental demonstrations have verified these h~otheses. Much progess has been made in the brief 20-year period of this young science.

Most of the chemical reactions from which life ir thought to have begun could not have taken place in the present oxidiring atmosphere. The biolog;cal systemr that emerged both contributed to and adapted to the oxidation of the atmosphere. "That the gaseous components (methane, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, hydrogen, nitrogen, ammonia) thought to be present in the primitive atmosphere can be precursors of organic compounds is now well supported by laboratory rhldier."l Plausible prebiatic conditions have yielded several hundred different organic compounds, including representatives of all the important typer of biomoleculer (all the common amino acids present in proteins, the five ni~ogenous baser of nucleic acrds, and many biologically occurring arganic acids and sugarr). "in view of these results, it now appears quite plausible that there may ha\e mcluded many or all of the basic building-block molecules we recognize in liv~ng cells today.'' Most of them originated in the primitive atmosphere and oceans as the energy of runlight, heat of volcanic action, and hghtning acted on the chemicals of the reducing atmosphere.

A principle of organization of prebiotlc, as well as Uving, systems: Flolo of energy through n system or coupled chemical reactions lends to a greotsr degree of organbntion of the system. A more highly organized system can utilize further radiation energy more efficiently by breaking up the energy into manageable ~pacLets.

Mechanisms for protecting biomoleculer, macromolecules, and prebiotic and primitive living systems from rad~ation destmction have been hypothesized and can be readily visualized Thirty feet of water absorbs all salar ulhaviolet radiation. This meant that thirty feet of water can protect prebiotic biomolecules from dertmctian by ultraviolet radiation. After formation by radiation in the atmosphere or surface waters enough prebiotic biomoleculer can be carried by ca~vection currents to safety below this 30-foot depth where sunrlvors could concentrate. Pnmitive life formr, too, could have survived under 30 feet of water until

IUNE 1P~I

VIEW OF LIFE

The scientific theories of evolution are not inconsistent with the biblical doctrine of creation, because they are on different levels and have different purposes.

~t~~~e~d~rmed to shield the earth from high

Clorer to the wateir surface local environments where presen…aSon of prebiotle systems is favorable are provided by roelir, watery caves, and other geo logic structures which shield out the solar radiation. After formation by radiation, tider and currents can the biomoleculer to these rhielded "irlandr.. of which abound on the shorelines of bodies of

logic After

water.

Maeromoleeular Prebiotic Synthesis

The connection or polymerization of there biomolecules into the mac.omoleculer of life req~rer higher cancentraSonr which could eerily have been achieved through evaporation or partial frkerine The linlrage of primordial building-blodt molecules can ta~e place by condensing reactions driven by anhydrous conditions ~lh~ chan(rd cmdmrulg rgmu b…mcd prab~a Even though pol~eptide and polynucleotide could well have been formed prebiotically, specific sequencer of monomers in ruch chains must be recorded and replicated during the molecular evolution. PolyoerizaBon to nucleic adds ir h~othesized in one scheme to be~h with adsorption of nudeotider 0"'0 mineral ayital;and then bonding together, with condensing agents, while held together as neighbors. Recording of the nucleotide sequence, and Wrewise the amino add sequence, resides in the base-pairing pnn~l~ity~fi~rent i" the DNA double helix. There is sp the complering of certain nucleic acid barer with others and ailth cenan amino acids. Experiments have shown that polynueleosder se~e as templater for Mnenz)lT~atlc s)nthesrs of complementary polynucleotides under prebiase conditions with watersoluble condensing agents. Orgel~ natural relection with functiad. is the critical stage (the ~anrition from chemical to biological systems) of interaction of proteins and nucleic adds with one another and with their environment, forrning larger Eys'emr of molecules, the precursors of the first cellr. The central problem is to show how proteins and nucleic adds first began to wwL together, for neither could sustain a living system by itself. The nucleic acids can replicate, 6ut they would not have been effective in acting on the environment; the proteins can act on the e"vironment but could not replicate in individual unitr accurately. In living systems the two "orL together: the nucleic acids code far the praductlon of proteins, and pmteinr act or feed on the environment and to assist in the replication of more nucleic acids.

Nudeic Acid Hypothesis In order to explain "how complex energy conversion mechanisms and genetic syrtems arose in the absence

of such ryrtems, when there is a general natural tendency to go from order to disorder:" a plausible hypotherir har been needed. The most plaunble a the nucleic acid hypatheris of CricL and Orgel, which postulates that a nucleic aad molecule possesses the potential capacity to ~live" by virtue of ifs ability to code for proteins, to undergo seifrrepication and mutation Supporting thought and evidence include: (1) The molecular structure and self-replicability of viruses, which contain nucleic acids carrying their genetic Information since there nucleic acids alone are infeFtivc… The rance of sire and complexity of viruser up to very small intectious bacteria iparasitic procaryotes) indi-

cate a vague difference between the Largest viruses and the smallest bacteria. (2) The role of non-intolmational R~A in protein r~theris. (3) The wide range of biolagicalfunctions of nucleotides in cells document the Etn~i,g versatility of nucleatides. ~onomeric units of DNA and of the three major types of RNA. energy carriers, hydrogen or electron carriers, sugar camers, ~9kd~ companent camers, and methionine carriers are of n;clea8der as functional elements in all aspects of metabolism and energy ~anrfer, as well as in the

genetic apparahrs.'These metabohc and rhuctural relationships ~uggast ~g~ shongly that much of the

important meta~oac genetic machinery .of the cell could haveevolved or developed from nucleotides.' ..In simulated primitive earth erpenments it has been found that palynucleotides can act as eomple mentary templater in the absence of enrymer, through

bare painng~' The mort primitive nucleic acids could have replicated themselves in the abrence of enzymer, by the action of abiotically formed condensing agents. Similarly, the most primitive form of the present-day

ATP-rystem for energy transfer could have fundbned without enzymer . . . possibly throu~ the action of primitive mineral or organic catalyrts. Criclr and Orgel have suggested that the real answers to the origin of life may lie in the ori~h of nbonomes, of transfer RNA, ana of the genetic code. Non-informahbnal nucleic acids, hansfer RNA and ribosomal RNA, do not serve template function, but both are involved in hanslating the DNA genetic code into the synthesis of proteins. There two forms of RNA ,,,ggeEted to be the vital parts of a primordial system which learned how to mate hue informational

proteins. not merely random polymers of amino acids. The pnmitlve forms of hmsfer and ~oromal RNA may have pedormed ~,..r the important functions of .....yme, namely, the provision of specific bmdi:g sites to position the loosely bound amino acid rubstrates in such a way ar to allow them to interact in the presence of a nonenzymatic condensing agent. In developmg the first template for specifying the re-

quence of bRNA'E and thus of the amino acids they carry, perhaps one of the many different prebiotically

formed palyibanucleodder in the primeval broth coded for the sequence of some po?vpeptide that endowed the ribosomal apparatus with enhanced Efability or ..tlrity, which became the precurrer of present-day nb,somal proteins. "Perhaps others coded for the rynthesis of a polypeptlde that rtrbi~ed and pro\ided a sheath far the first messenger RNA, and thus became the forerunner of a viral coat protein." .Later the primitive ribosomes mav have learned to

e'-deox~manudeotide1I1 …Y~I~IYII U1 bul;~lm,"~id~;"bi'-DNA ar; the correspondmg ribonueleotides. "U1Gmately, the most compelling and probably over-riding features of the nucleic acid hypothesis, whatever its details, is that nucleic acids do have the capacity to serve as templates in the absence of enzymes or proteins, m such a way that a complementary nucleic acid can be formed by an abiotic catalyst or condensing agent. hloreover, through the tendency of nucleic acids to undergo mutation, the capacity of a nucleic acidbased life to undergo refined and subtle evolutionary modulations become. ~eatly enhanced."'

Origin of Enzymes and Cell Structures 'gn the evolution of enzymes from simple precursors, it seems highly probable that catalytic capacity apneared first and that substrate specifinty followed as a later evolutionary develapment… Cell boundaries or membranes may be formed by coacervation of a polymer solution or by formation of Lipid bilayers.'' Such boundaries lend protection to biomacromoiecules from environmental de,rmctlon. Self-forming, cell-l*e rrmctires have been observed in the forms of coacervate droplets and microspheres of proteinolds. "Once a template system, a set of catalysts, and a surrounding membrane evolved, in whatever sequence, the process .f cellular evolution becomes much easier to mmprehend."l "Living orgamrms may be the inevitable outcome of the evolution of self-orgalllzing systems of organic molecules(' The laws of chemist3r and physics we know today do not forbid the process of self-wganizatron; they simply provide no explanation for it.'~ These h~otheses ~may well be experimentally since with the advantage of modem of the properties of organic molecules and of molecular science may be able to accelerate the chemical processes leading to, or mvolved in, the tendency of organic molecule. to undergo relforgani~a: 6on." "Life may therefore arise under any physlca~ conditions in which organic compounds may undergo the full range of then potential evalutian.'~l

Related Evidence The remaining physical elidence, in the form of arbonomical, peolog~cal or paleontological (remains), is quite fragmentary, and clearly the experiment cannot be runagain on its orianal scale. Chemicals thought to be ~ey precursors m the prebiotlc soup have been identified in outer space. Most of the comman bullding-bloci biomolecules--amino acids, purines, pyrimidines, fatty ands-have been repeatedly found in ancient roc~ and red~mentr, and in meteorites. The oldest Lnorn organic material dated by isotope methodr to be 3.1 b~lllon years i. in the Fig Tree shale deposits in South Africa, which contain hydrocarbons, induding isoprenoid.. porphynns, purines, p~imidiner, and cell-~e E~uchlres, in add~tion to tossils of bluegreen algae. These findings suggest that these biamalecules may be ubiquitous and perhaps even doMnant products of energy-activated organic chemical evolution. All of the.e lend credence to this scientrfic theory of chemical prebiohe origins of life. There rr a clear

IOU.NAL OF TnE *MERIC*N SCIENTIFIC AFFltl*TiOtt

iutlon of organisms-a parallel frrst ruggerted by Darrin himself. The concern is wrth ertablishing plauiibilitv, since the histoncal facts cannot be ascertained.

A CHRISTIAN BIOCHE~IIST LOOKS AT EVOL~ION Aha CREATION

Concepts which have enabled me to reconcile the apparent conflict between evolution and creation inc~de: distingurshlng the category of worldview from that of scientific theory or mechanism, accepting the

Biblical doctrine of creation as world~ew and biological evolution as scientific theory, rejecting the mechanistic interpretation of special creationism and the philosophy at evolutionism, applying the doc~ne of Providence and the pnnciple of mmplementality, adopting theistic evolution add a non-literal interpretation of Genesis, and affirming the Bible's own proclamation of its purposer and ]esus Christ alone as the foundation of my faith.

Warldviews and Scientific Mechanism~

The debate about creation and evolution ir mifortunately involved in a mnfusion of categon~es: world\iews and scientific mechanisms.s Both creatian and evolution have been described in terms of opposing ways of laoling at the world, as well as apposing ways of e\plarning how ]i~ing forms originated in the world. It is important that we appreciate the worldviews of Creation and Design as alternatives to EvoluGon(iJm) and Chance, but we must also avoid the opposite extreme of insisting (1) that science somehow demands for us to accept only Evolution and Chance as worldviews and (?.) ihat biblical Christian farth somehow demands for us to accept only fiat creation (spontaneous generation) and determirusm, instead of evolutionary process and chance, as scientific mechanisms. One muld (many do, mcluding me) accept the creation worldview and evolutionary process as a scientific mechanism st the same time.

Creation as a Worldview The Biblical doc~ine of creation is the source of the creation woild~ew. Holy Scripture reveals to us that": (1) The God Who loves us is also the God Who created us and all things-which establishes the relab~onship between the God of our faith and the God of physical reality. Our Creator and Redeemer are One and the same God. (Jn. 1:1-3, 1 Cor. 8:6, Col. 1:16-17, Heb. 1:2, 11:3, Ps. 138:5-9, 146:5-6, Is. 40:28-31, 43:1-2,5-7, 44:24) (2) We can trust in the reality of a physical and moral structure to the universe, which we can explore as scientists and experience as persons. God creates life with physical matter and through natural procesres. (Cen. 1:12, 20, 24, 2:7, 9) (3) The universe and e\erything in it depends moment-by-moment upon the sustaining power and activity of God. (Heb. 1:3, Ps. 95:4-5, 104:2-30, 147:8'9, Rev. 4:11, Job 34:14-15) (4) God created the uni\crre freely and separately, with a beginning and with a temporal existence which He alone giver it. (Gen. 1:1, Heb. 1:3, 11:3, Ps. 90:2-6)

lurr~ 1P~7

eregesis of Genesis 1 and 2.

(5) We are not the end-products of meaningless processes In an impersonal universe, but persons mads in the image of a personal God. (Gen. 1:26-28, 5:1, ps. 139:13, is. 40:28-31, 43:1-2,5-7, 44:24) (B) Everything created is inrmnsieally good. (Gen. l:l~b. LZb, 18b, ?Ib, 25b, 31a, L Tim. 4:4a) Human Formptlon of the good creation (disobedience and rebellion against Goa, Gen. 3:22; inhumane trea~nent of our fellow human beings, Gen. 4:8: mismanagement and misuse of the earth, Gen. 3:17b-18a) is the manifestation of evil in the world. Attempts to go beyond the basic theological pnnT a revealed rmths of creation like those listed ~~9~Se are fraught with problems, dangers, and con-

troversies. Such attempts include interpreting the deta~lr of Genesis narratives as historical events and explaining these details in scientific terms. These interpretationr are unwarranted by exegesis of the fed and are inconsistent with the purposes of God's reuelat~on in Scripture, which are'~n, ~ve us the wisdonl that leads to salvation through fa~ith in Christ Jesus, .. for teaching the rmth, rebuking error, correcting faults, givmg inrhuction far right Living,... so that we may be fully qualified and equipped to do every kind of good wor~.~~ (TEV, 2 Tim. 3;15-17: see also 1…… 5:39, 20:31, Rorn. 15:4)

'Special" Creation as Scientific Mechanism in Pre… Darwinian Biology The biblical doctrine of creation is not the "special~~ creation desmbed as the scientific mechamsm or explanation of pre-Darvinian biology. Before the theory of evolution was accepted as the scientific explanation of how L~~ng organisms developed and changed over long penods of time, the expknatlon of special creation reigned in biology. Every specie. of Life was considered to have been specially or individually created by an instantaneous process of spontaneous generation. This scientific \.iew fitted in well with the literal interpretation of the Genesis accounts which described how (by'~fiat'~ or God's spoken word) and when creation took place (about 6000 years ago and in the total time period of less than one ordinary week). Most Christians readily incorporated this snence into the~r theology and selected that interpretation (Ilteral) of Genesis which could best be reconwled with their current science. One of the few exceptions to this dangerous thinking among Bible scholar. included Martin Luther, who u~ote:

u.td oow there ha. not bcm anyone in the EhYreh Who has Elpiyned everything in this ehaplp. iGen 1) with rde4uate rLIII. The Enmmentaton, with their Nndn… different, nod Eountlels qucstana, hare so Eonfured everything in this as to m~o it clear enough that God i..c.cnEd his cralted wisdom and eorrect understanding.f this ehapte. for Hunself alone, although He has left us with thu general knowledge that the world had a beginning and that it Was ne.ted by God out of

nothing.

"""rlru urrwnls evidence for the theory of evolutiorl, those who clung to rpecial crea-

Sonism for p'oviding answers to the ..how.. and ~when.. Of the origins of life found themselves out on the proverbial sawed-off limb. Their immediate reaction was one of defensive over-reaction, mstead of re-evaluation of their literal 1Dterpretation. instead of re-rxamin~g the Scriptires for God,r message and re-dircovedne

~is PL~pdei i" Cnation, the relationships H.,,tab`lished, and the baric meanings of there purposes and relationships, spdal C"BhD"iStr mistakenly considered evolution as scientiiic mechanism to be a threat to

creation as worldview. They should have seen evolu~:~~tl~Sn~~~alternaLive scientific mecharusm to special

I bel~eve ~themerrage of God

obscured"eb~odayd;lL;:~:~e.m"~~t~:~sdt Christians who inOr C,od m creation ir still

rtst upon their literal-histoncal interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2 as the only corrfft View of creation. This "grd attitude also raiies a stumbling block for many people educated in the Sciences who cannot accept the promotion of special creation as necessary doc-

~ine of Christian faith. Fu'fhermore, the Literalists have not solved a numbei of critical problems and

inconsistencies in their interpretation.'

The Scientific Theories of Evolution

As a biochemist committed to the scientific method and its application to u"derstanding the nature and functions b~ liie, I acceptboth the special and general theories of evolution Br viable scienhfic explanations of how biological life originated and developed. Evolution may be defined as the description and explanatwn of how changer i" living forms took place over long penod;r of 6me. Special evoluaan.the aescnption and erplana~on Of hOW changer within population of clorely related organisms took place. Every scientist worth hir salt accepts theEpecial theory of evolution, although a few, who are special creationirts, refuse to call it I'evoiutlon.^ Their …bromesnivp creation model~ mcorpo,ater the rame evidence andprincip]es of biological change compLising special evolution. Although the evidence. "complete, I accept general evolution, which links all formr of life hcommon ancestral origins and beyo"d to rimple chemical mmpounds on the pnmitive ea'th, as a worb~ng hypothesis for correlating biological and biochemical data.

The scientific theories of evolution are not mconsistent with the biblical doctrine of creation, because thev are on ditferentlevels and have different purposes. Ho;uever, the generai theory is contradictory to the

special creation model which attempts to explain how and when life originated on the basis of the Genesir accountr. According to one Of its proponents: special crration 1E DDt even scientific theory, but 1 think it classified as pseudo- or pre-scientific specula-

Providence andComplementarity a, Keys for Reconciling the Creation Wo'ldview and Scientific Evolution

If the origin of life Vi" general evolution a an mevitable result of the lelf-arganizing~ re~-replicatmg nature of organic matter under favorable conditions, 82

unnecessary argument for the existence of God ham the design evident in living creahlres. How then can Christians reconcile the; faith in a Creator with the scientific theories of orieinr? The continual providence of Cad and the principie of c4mplementaiity in human lrnowledge are two lieyr which can hrln reconeilr the creation wadd~ew with scientific evol;tions

The Doctn'ne of Pra.idence:..The universe exlrtr moment-hy moment only because of the creative and p'eserving power of God.'s (Bube;j Thesis I) Therefore, the organic matter created by Cad which has the inherent tendency to relf-organile and self-redicate '"'O living systems under favorable conditions doer so only because of the creative activity of God. We need to affirm that God in actively involved in sustaining and holding together all things in the universe mnt'nually, thus giving existence to all things.

The Principle of Complementarity: ..There are levels at which a ~ven sihlatnn can be described. Ah exhaustive descnpSon on one level doe. not preclude meaningful descriptions an other levels' (Bub~s Thesis II) Far example, human nature can be described 0" physicochemical, pwloacal, psychological, social, and theological or EpL"m~il levels. The human being can be descnbed " a complex organic machine, a highly developed animal, a social being, a creation or Cad and a rp"hlal being. A mmplete description of human nature on any One of there levels does not rule out or invalidatemeaningful descnptions on other levels. To obtain a balancedIlew of human nature and as complete an u"de"tanding as possible it is neceslary ta accept desuiptions on all levels as complementary (additive) to each other. We Deed to recop "'Ze that a given dhlation or phenomenon can have any number of valid descriptions on different levels which are not contradictory.

The principle of complementarity can be applied to creation and evolution by stating that an exhaustive descnption of the origin of life on the biochemical level doer not rule out meaningful descriptions of origins an the theological or biblical level I believe that God's revelations to us in His Ward and through His world are mmplementuy~ not conbadictay or mutually exclusive". Any apparent conflict between interpretaBonr of His Word in Holy Scnpturer and of science may exist only because the interpretations are faulty or our science is incomplete, or both. I believe that creation is a theological explanation of why life onginated and by Whom. I think that evalutlan is only a scientdic explanation of how and when blalogical life onginated and developed. Creation is con"med with purpose and relationship to the Creator: evolutlan is concerned "th mechanisms. Geation and evolution encompass the same phenomena of ongms, but are on two separate, completely different and inde. pendent levels of u"de'ltanding, expression, and dercnpson. The scientific theories of evolution are not mmnristmt with theBibiical doctrine of creation when the pnnciple ofcomplementarity i, applied and the docbine of providence is accepted in all its ramificahonr.

IOURN~L OF THE I\MLRIC*N SCIENTIFIC AAILIATION

;i~nel~CGe~~tion and a Non…Literal Inte~preta…

Two.more approacher which are

"pp'oacner which are helpful in reconI~~n~g~ the apparent conflict be~ueen creation and evotake completely different approaches. Theistic evolution, based on the doc~ine of Proridence, attributes the evolutionary prar"l to God's actions. Ar a Christian I believe that God in the beginning made matter and energy which did not exist before. As a Christian and a hiochemirt I believe God made simple liring things from thirmatter and energy by natural processes in favorable e"wDnmental conditions and proceeded to develop morecomplex living things from the simple forms by the evolutionary process. From stock God made human beings with the _:-… 1:161*1 developed nervous system, thinking powers, ano aolury to verbally communicate. Our conscious awareness of self abilities to ' .. Smotirihi to the needs of others, all given I…~flll~n~a:e ou: en\vonment and to reflect, ~~ ~r U'Y, slare us unique creatures on this planet at least. We were created for umque communion with God, to serve Him as His managers of the earth, andto give Him the glory.

I believe God har been at work in the process of evolution as His mechanism of rreating life. I wrthhold value judgmentr on such a p'ocess, which same may view as full of wasted time aod energy and of cruel manipulation and experimentation in ttre faire starts. or "dead ends" (e.ti"c6on.), because I cannot view history from the perspective of God or imow what is in His plan for the uluverse. All I can hope to know ~ level is what His purpose is far me in Jesus

Theistic evolution a consistent with my andmy Christian faith, and I believe it is also

the simple anthmpoid most highly and ability

en\vonment and to reflect,

suence consrst-

ent with the bert exegesu (biblical rcholarshipcov~s;s~:~ ~ of Genesis 1 and 2 The theory of evolution p"midve forms ir not necessarily opposed to our faith in the nearness of God. One who believes that God has used the process of evolution to brmg the world as we know it into existence e'c""…d --L…s -)Ym md fm~u?mlYIL s 3;j~ ar One that God created everything instantaneously about 6000 years~zigo. The methods which God uses to make our world what it iS today are not as in,portant to our Chnr~ian faith as we sometimes make 'hem or as some would have us believe.

A oon-literal i"terprctalion of Genesis 1-2 attempts to clarify and emphari.e God's message to us in creation. Godi in\…olvement inneatlon and the messaee of His Word are mo'e clearly understood when t& terminology and setting of the creation story are reem as the framework of an annent worldviews… lo. Creation can be viewed as a lend of parable, rich in meaning and purposeful relationsha, f"""'h person m his life now, instead of an historical account or a do~manr P"pol"'onal statement to be believed with intelPectual assent and defended with emotional fervor. This is not meant to deny thnt creation has happened and i, mntinuingtD take place under God's Providence. But by moving away from a literal interpretation of the creation stories and byemphasidog Godh message of rreat~n's meaning and PU'pOSe we can ga~n insights to mrich our Chdstian liver and relationshipr. For example, the original sin of rejecting God can then

IUNE 1P7~

-1Lnln us U1IVI the "oewMan~ (]esur Christ). "hile this approach emphasizes that Genesis 1-2 affirms the relation berure,, GOd and His world as "sT"bolic expressions of religious huths which are a totally different ler…el from evolutionary hiriory," it declares that biblical rreab~on is ..t concerned with describing hirroiical events." ~The doctrine of crea~on " not fundamentally a hypothesis about ongins, but an affirmation of our dependence an God (U?io is Sovere~~, tranrcendent,ffeely actmp, and purposeful), and of the essential ingfnlness of the wor~dI~2ers, orderliness, and meanFurthermore, God the Creator . not resting: He is mntinually creating (R~ 104:14-30, 139:13, 147:8-18). Ah life is ron8nually evOMng, changing, New stars, comets, and other fea~urtrrtr Of the universe are forming. hTothing in the u"lve'se remains stable. But while God

continues to create, His love to us

Nothing in the

"~"' "'… 'YVe to us remains constant.

Empty Philosophy of Evolutionirm

The scientific theories of evolytion are not a threat to my Christian faith, once no scientific theory has an~hmg to ray about meanmg, purpose, personal rela6anshipr, beauty, love, feeling, goodness, evil, and other human emo~onr a"d values. However, the phi losophy of atheistic evolutionism is contrary to C~iirtian faith, because itpmgressi~ely exalts man, dories the reality of moral guilt, "d interprets the life of Jrsus as nothing ma, than a good example". Christians who are swentists have the tasL of declaring that an arrirude a philosoohv based solely on science 1S emp~y, meanmgle'l, ana g misuse of~science. No matter what some non-Chrrstians and some well-mean. ing Christians ray, athe~~e e"h8onism has no faundation in science and should he expoled as an improper mtrapolarion of biological evolution into a general principle of human livmg. It ir M'tally important to clearly mate this dis8netionbe~ween a neuhal scientific theory of origins and a philosophical riew of life u?thout God which has "D suppart in science.

The Foundation of My Christian Faith

In his letter to the Romans (8:39) Paul wites that ""Othing in all creation will ever be able to separate us from the love of God which is ours through J~-~ Christ our Lord.~ (TEV) MY Christian faithis upon that redeeming, forgiving love of God m lesus, Who died under the i"humanity and inlurtice of all humans for all time, but M~o also arose ham the dead to show Gad~, victory over human death and evil, so that I, and all Otherr who believe in these actions of God for US, may haYe life more abundantly now and live with our Creator in a…- ~… Cad hu a~sidK1~~Yn~;~~;l,:~Ll~,~rp i~-

O"e and only foundaD'on, other foundation can be laid.~' (1CO'. 3:11) This God Who giver meannlg to my lifehal unconditioned power over ail creation, so that my trust in Him g~ves me confidence in the fulfillment of His promises.

SUMMARy Evidence for unity and continuity in a biochemical \~iew of life rr See" In a universal biochemish…y, a

continues to create, His love to us

Nothing in the

"~"' "'… 'YVe to us remains constant.

Empty Philosophy of Evolutionirm

The Foundation of My Christian Faith

SUMMARy Evidence for unity and continuity in a biochemical \~iew of life rr See" In a universal biochemish…y, a

molecular economy of common biomolecules (certain organrc carbon compounds), each having multi-functionl and linked into a few ~er of macromoleculer, each with common funcSons inall cells. Development Ot all life from simple to complex reucturer implies common ancertry Biomolffuler appear to pasrers'oiological fitness and to be ubiquitous wherever conditions for organic chemical evolution have been fawrable. They have been idenBfred an enrrgy-activated products of primitive atmospheric constitlentr under plausible, prebiotic conditions in the laboratory and have been polymeri.ed to manomolecules by condensing agents or anhydrous condit~ons. Life ir nucleic acid-bared: a common genetic code provider a chemical mechanirm for evolution: molecular adaptation (DNA changes lead~ng to protein changes) in "EpO"Se toa changing environment, and chemical changes in DNA can account for mutations, recombinations, deletionr and other molecular evolutionary mechanirms. The ba.e-pa~nng principle inherent in pol)mucleotides can direct the s)mthesis of comple mentary polynuclhl6der in the absence of enz)mer. Non-intormational polynucleotider involved in banrlating the DNA genetic code into protein synthesis may be the key to understanding how life began in the absence of life.

Life may be the inevitable re.ult of self-organizing Svrtems of organic molecules taking place over many millions of years under favorable en~onmental conditionr. Evolution (as a "ELenGfic theory, establirhing a model of mechanisms relating all life to common origins) and Biblical creation (as theological explanation of Who created and for what purpose, establishing

began in

en~onmental contheoly, establirhing

relatronships for all life to the Creator) are on different levels of understanding, and are therefore, not contradictory, but ~l~:c~ken~:f;~ta~j;b~ld declare that a Christians who are scientists philosophy hased on science (e.g., atheistic evolutionism) is meaningless and a misuse of science. Meaningtul life is based on a personal relationship with le.us Christ, through acceptance of His redeeming, for~,in~ love.

declare that a

REFERENCES

1*. L. Lphninger, Blochrmbfry: Thr Molrrular Bonr of Ceil S~Nclurr.nd Function. Worth Pnblisbers. IOF.… Now YOI~ (1970) pp 3-29, 38, 751-191lc Nets, I~hs Molcnrlrr of Life, World Unlverrib Llbruy, MEGln\u-H% Boot Co., New YDrL (19701 P… 1L6. "T. M. JYlrn. Moi~culpl ond BuolulBn. Columbia Univrrrit) Press, New Yot (1966) 'D 7. Ci.h, "Creetton, Euolnlion, and PublE EduEatlon,~ Icopies arsOab* fmrn ihe su~hor ot the Inrmute for Oreion REsesrcb, Fl Colon, Ca 92020). SE. H. Bubr, "Cre.lion.nd Evolution in Seienco Educationl loumal ASA 25, 7~71 (1973). aR H. Robe, We Believe in CrcLlon," larmnl *S1( 13, 121123 (1911). 'M. ~. I1ever, 7hs Scirnritr Entrrpria. ii Chri~ion Faith, Inter-YYrity Resl, Downers Grove, IL (1971) PD… loB lol. BII. H. Bube, Thr Humnn Ousa~, Word Boots, Inc. Wlm, TX (1911) pp 2635. …i(. Van der Ziel, CIMsI. and SCI~IIWliE byriy… T… S. I*nison it Co., Inc.. Minner~o~s. MN L1965). low, a. Sehmclinn, Cnution vsrau~ EuolutionP Not Rsd~l Cla~mn Pubiirhmg House. Si. Iaub, MO. 11916). nI. c. B~bour, I~UPI i.SE~P~E… nn( R~~Bion. Hnmer d:Row, New YorL (1971). "L. COLe~, Mnb. of Xcnmn and forth; Thc Christian D~nine of Creation in the Li.h~ of ModLm Knaubd~~. Doubledar it Co., Inc., C~den City, New YorL (1959).