On Sat, 2 Sep 1995 23:22:33 -0400 you wrote:
[...]
GM>I don't know if the origin of life can happen with out God. The
>evolutionists have not proven their case. But given what science has done in
>the past that Christians thought would be impossible, I am not going to be
>surprised if someday they do create life. Christians should at least be
>prepared for the occurrence of such an event rather than having to attempt to
>explain why the creation of some life form by scientists isn't the creation
>of some life form.
Christians *are* prepared for scientists making life in a laboratory.
In *1955* Ramm wrote:
"But supposing that life could originate in the laboratory already
hinted in the Miller-Urey experiment? What should our judgment if
some day a scientist actually makes a living cell or something akin to
an amoeba? Men used to believe that man could change or duplicate
only the inorganic, for only God could make living creatures and their
products. But since the synthesis of urea a good number of organic
compounds have been created and the entire debate ceased. Even the
staunchest hyper-orthodox would hardly reopen this debate. If man can
think God's thoughts after Him, why is it incredible that man can do
some of God's works after Him? Further, because man with a vast
chemical equipment and an equally vast body of chemical data at his
disposal can synthesize complex chemicals, it does not mean that
Nature with only chance as its guide and creator can make life and
foster it into complex creatures over the millions of years."
(Ramm B. "The Christian View of Science and Scripture", 1955,
Paternoster, London, p182-183)
In fact, I believe that if science does achieve the synthesis of life
in a laboratory, it will provoke a much greater crisis in science than
in theology. Because then science will know how hard they had to work
to do it, and they will realise that a "blind watchmaker" could never
have.
If science cannot demonstrate that life can arise spontanously from
non-living chemicals, but can only synthesise it by human
intelligent design, then it seems to me that the analogy is with
creation, not with naturalistic evolution.
God bless.
Stephen