Much of the next section of Rodney Stark’s book God’s Battalions, which deals with the Crusades, looks at Christianity’s attempts to stop the onslaught of the Muslims over a thousand years ago. Due to victories at Constantinople, Spain, Sicily, and southern Italy, Islam was beaten back from Europe. I won’t spend time on the history that he recounts other than to say it’s fascinating. The main purpose for my series of blogs about this book is to highlight the politically correct thinking that has attached itself to the Crusades and to show the true story behind them. For example, Stark has one chapter called “Western Ignorance Versus Eastern Culture.”

The author says current thinking claims that while Europe slumbered through the “Dark Ages,” science and learning flourished in Islam. Stark says this story is “at best an illusion.”

The key point for this chapter is that whatever sophisticated culture the Arabs picked up, they learned from their subject peoples. So, the sophisticated culture so often attributed to Muslims was actually the culture of the conquered people — the Judeo-Christian-Greek culture of Byzantium, the remarkable learning of several Christian groups, extensive knowledge in Persia, and mathematical achievements of the Hindus, where Muslim armies had invaded.

He gives many examples of this. In one case, Muslims used ships designed, built, and sailed by conquered peoples within Arab territories. What about highly acclaimed Arab architecture? It too came from captive peoples, this time in Persia and Byzantium. Then there is the supposed contributions of the Arabs to science and engineering. Very little of this can be traced to Arab origins. Their best scholars were Persians, Syrians, Christians, and Jews. People have been misled because these early contributors to science and philosophy were given Arabic names and their works were published in Arabic. In another case, people may think of Arabic numbers, but they were entirely of Hindu origin and brought into the Arabic world due to Muslim attacks into Hindu lands. Then there are those who have credited Arabs with sophisticated medicine. Not so. Their medicine was in fact of Christian origin.

It is true that Arabs possessed much classical writing from the ancients. But this actually had a negative impact on their society. Muslim intellectuals read the ancients and decided these early Greeks must be read without question or contradiction. Greek ideas, such as those of Aristotle, were seen as complete and infallible. In contrast, knowledge of Aristotle’s work prompted experimentation and discovery among Christian scholars in the West.

Stark then shows Muslim disregard for education by how they treated libraries. Early Muslims record the fact that it was Arabs who burned the huge library at Alexandria. Saladin, the famous 12-century Muslim hero, closed the official library in Cairo and discarded the books.

After dispelling the idea that the Muslims had a sophisticated culture, Stark turns his attention to those who suggest the West was terribly ignorant during this same time. He says the claim that Muslims possessed the more advance culture rests on an illusion about the cultural backwardness of Christendom in the so-called “Dark Ages.” Those who discredited Western learning had a special agenda: they wished to indict Christianity as a backward way of thinking.

The heart of his message here is that these so-called “Dark Ages” were actually a great era of innovation with technology being developed and put into use on a scale not previously known. In fact, it is during these times that Europe began its great technological leap forward to put it way ahead of the rest of the world.

Stark spends the rest of the chapter talking about various innovations that Europeans came up with during this time. For example, they were the first to develop a collar and harness that would allow horses rather than oxen to pull heavy wagons. Their wagons had front axles that swiveled as well as adequate brakes. In addition, food production per capita rose dramatically in this time. Better plows were developed, a three-field system of agriculture was established — all leading to bigger, healthier, and more energetic people than elsewhere on the globe. Other areas of improvement included armor, crossbows, and ships.

So, it appears that the traditional picture of Western and Muslim advances is far from the truth. Keep that in mind the next time you hear of the enlightened Arab culture of long ago.

This is a second blog covering a fascinating book called God’s Battalions, in which the author, Rodney Stark, dismantles incorrect assumptions about the Crusades. In his opening chapter, Stark shows that the history of the Crusades really began in the seventh century when armies of Arabs, newly converted to Islam, seized huge areas that had been Christian.

It all started with Mohammed. In his farewell address he told his followers, “I was ordered to fight all men until they say ‘there is no God but Allah.'” Stark says this is consistent with the Koran (9:5): “slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them [captive], and beseige them, and prepare for them each ambush.” With this as their marching orders, Arabs set out to conquer the world. So much for the “peaceful” religion of Islam.

The conquests started even before the death of Mohammed. His forces went into Syria and Persia, but much more was to follow. The Arabs attacked their neighbors at this particular time because they finally had the power to do so. The most important reason for expansion was to spread Islam.

Other conquests followed. After taking over Persia, Muslim forces went north to subdue Armenia and also moved east, eventually occupying the area of modern Pakistan. In addition they swept over the Holy Land, Egypt, North Africa, Spain, Sicily, and southern Italy. Their use of camels made the Arabs the equivalent of a mechanized force so that they could travel quickly. On the battlefield they used this mobility to attack an inferior enemy force and destroy it before reinforcements could arrive.

What was life like for the conquered peoples? Stark says much nonsense has been written about Muslim tolerance. This claim probably began with Voltaire, Gibbon, and other 18th-century writers who used it to make Christians look bad. It is true, he states, that the Koran forbids forced conversions. But this didn’t mean much in the real world considering that many subject peoples were “free to choose” conversion as an alternative to death or enslavement since that was the usual choice presented to pagans as well as often times to Jews and Christians. In theory, Jews and Christians were supposed to be tolerated and allowed to follow their faiths. But repressive conditions abounded — death was (and still remains to this day) the faith of anyone who converted to either Judaism or Christianity. In addition, no new church or synagogue could be built. Add to that the fact that Jews and Christians also were prohibited from praying or reading their scriptures aloud even in their homes, churches or synagogues. Then add one more thing. Jews and Christians who refused to convert to Islam (known as dhimmis) were, according to official policy, made to feel inferior and to know their place. This played out in the kind of animals they were allowed to ride, marks they were forced to carry on their clothing, a prohibition from being armed, and an incredibly severe tax rate compared with Muslims.

But it gets worse than that. For example, in 705 the Muslim conquerors of Armenia assembled all the Christian nobles in the church and burned them to death. There were indiscriminate slaughters of Christians as Arabs moved into other lands. Mohammed himself let Arabs know how to treat Jews when he had all the local adult Jewish males in Medina (approximately 700) beheaded after forcing them to dig their own graves. As time went on, massacres of both Christians and Jews became increasingly common. Stark mentions Morocco as one example where more than 6000 Jews were killed in the years 1032-1033. So, efforts to portray Muslims as enlightened supporters of multiculturalism are, in Stark’s words, “at best ignorant.”

Did the conquered peoples turned to Islam when they found out how wonderful the new religion was? No, answers Stark. It was a very long time before the conquered areas were truly Muslim in anything but name. For a long time very small Muslim elites ruled over non-Muslim populations. He points out this runs contrary to the widespread belief that Muslim conquests were quickly followed by mass conversions to Islam. Despite terrible conditions of second-class citizenship, conquered peoples only slowly converted to Islam.

Here’s a key point to remember — most of what has been regarded as Muslim culture and said to have been superior to that of Christian Europe was actually “the persistence of pre-conquest Judeo-Christian-Greek culture that Muslim elites only slowly assimilated, and very imperfectly.” This will be discussed in more depth in a future blog.

Muslim invaders were bitterly resented in Europe as they took over many lands and actually invaded Europe itself. Most Christians believed during this time that war against the Muslims was justified partly because the Arabs had usurped lands by force where once Christians had lived and had abused the Christians over whom they ruled. There was a feeling it was time to strike back.

Rodney Stark, a professor at Baylor University, has written 30 books on religion, including The Rise of Christianity, For the Glory of God, Discovering God, and The Victory of Reason. Last year his book God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades was published. Of course, in a period of political correctness regarding the history of Islam, his book created quite a controversy. I read it recently and would like to report on some of his major points. A disclaimer at the beginning–I really like Stark for his clarity and willingness to challenge a leftist academic view of history and religion.

For one thing, the title may be a bit misleading. Yes, he does discuss a defense for the Crusades in an attempt to set the record straight. We hear so much today about the evil West, so Stark wanted to establish a better understanding of what really happened during the Crusades. But there is more to the book than simply a defense for this action of Christendom; he spends a great deal of time discussing the historical and cultural background to this pivotal series of events. I’m not complaining that he spent the time doing this. I just want the reader to understand that the book is more complex than simply a defense of Christian activities then.

The author starts by explaining what has gone on in recent times regarding the Crusades. He notes that shortly after the destruction of the World Trade Center by Muslim terrorists, many people blamed the Crusades as the basis for Islamic fury. The Crusades were explained as the first extremely bloody chapter in a long history of brutal European colonialism. He says people have charged that the crusaders marched east not because of idealism, but to pursue land and treasure. The image is one of power-mad popes seeking to expand Christianity through conversion of Muslim masses and knights of Europe as barbarians brutalizing everyone in their path, leaving an enlightened Muslim culture in ruins. He quotes the chair of Islamic studies at American University in Washington, D. C. as suggesting, “the Crusades created a historical memory which is with us today — the memory of a long European onslaught.” Keep in mind this is a person teaching at a university in our nation’s capital. You probably won’t be surprised to find out he is giving students an incorrect view of history.

This is where it gets good. Stark challenges these anti-Western beliefs about the Crusades. Here is the heart of his book. He wrote God’s Battalions to show the Crusades were precipitated by Islamic provocations — centuries of bloody attempts to colonize the West and by sudden new attacks on Christian pilgrims and holy places. The pope had no hope or plan of converting Muslims. The Crusades were not organized and led by surplus sons, but by the heads of great families fully aware that they would be spending far more money crusading than any modest material rewards they might gain. In addition, the Crusader kingdoms established in the Holy Land were not colonies sustained by local taxation. In fact, they required immense subsidies from Europe.

He also says a couple of other things that are not very popular today. Stark claims it is utterly unreasonable to impose modern notions about proper military conduct on medieval warfare, which clashes today with the pacifism that is so widespread among academics. In addition, he says that it is nonsense to believe that Muslims have been harboring bitter resentments about the Crusades for over one thousand years. Instead, Muslim antagonism about the Crusades did not appear until about 1900, in reaction to the decline of the Ottoman Empire and the start of actual European colonialism in the Middle East. Anti-Crusader feelings did not become intense until after the state of Israel was founded in 1948.

So, this is the book that I would like to summarize for you in the next few blogs. Rodney Stark has done us a big favor by showing that talking heads on TV shows and academics in ivy-towered universities don’t necessarily tell us the true story. We need to be far more critical when we hear academics throw around negative statements about our country’s history, its leaders, or Christianity.

Modern atheists complain about many things associated with Christianity—its documents, its theology, its history, its reliance on miracles. But there is one huge charge made by them—that Christianity is dangerous and ruins everything. Is that true? A few moments of reflection will put this charge to rest. Christianity has, in fact, been a positive good for civilization. What follows is a brief list of major contributions.

Let’s start with one key component of the Western world—reliance on and love of science. Why did the Western world act as the cradle of modern science? Because the Judeo-Christian view says God is rational, He created an orderly world, and He is separated from His creation. Therefore, it was OK to investigate everything, thinking God’s thoughts after Him. Most of the brightest early scientists were devout Christians.

What about evils like slavery? It was the West, thanks to Christianity, that finally abolished this terrible scourge from its territories. Compare its track record with other major civilizations. In Islamic areas, for example, slavery has been much longer in existence..

What about another key interest in the West—higher education? Again, it was Christianity and the Protestant reformation that urged the development of centers of learning. Most early American universities were begun with religious motives and an emphasis on literacy.

Then there’s health care and charities. Christianity has always been in the lead for these concerns. Going back to the Roman days, it was the Christians who helped those in need. Hospitals, care for children, concern for the poor—all were part of the Christian agenda. Think about the Salvation Army, the YMCA, the Red Cross, and other successful charitable organizations—all had Christian roots.

Women have been treated better, thanks to Christianity. Any comparison of Christian women with non-Christian peers will reveal this to be true. Again, consider how women are treated in Islamic countries as a powerful contrast.

Democracy owes its start to Christianity. The ordinary person is uplifted in the Christian faith. It was the religious awakenings that led to the American Revolution.

The freedoms we cherish are also thanks to Christianity. We separate church and state, allowing freedom to worship as we see fit. How is freedom handled in atheistic countries like North Korea and China? How is it doing in other religious lands like the Islamic countries?

Then there’s the emphasis on hard work and capitalism. That’s due to a couple of things. The Protestant Reformation elevated work to a noble calling, a way to honor God, no matter what the job. The general Judeo-Christian worldview emphasized private property, allowing people to work hard for themselves.

This is only a quick list, but it serves to make the point. The atheists are able to freely express their opinions precisely because they live in a land that was founded on Christian principles. Imagine they were to say these things in Iran, Saudi Arabia, or other repressive regimes. Their life expectancy would be measured in hours. They should thank Christians for giving them a platform for their views.

Toward the end of his book, The Cell’s Design, Dr. Rana completes his discussion of many startling molecular features inside the cell and focuses on a common challenge leveled against arguments for intelligent design — imperfections found in nature. Critics say odd arrangements and funny solutions are proof of evolution because a sensible God would never put things together that way.

Rana admits there are some designs that are less than perfect. But he says these designs merely reflect the unavoidable consequences of the laws of nature instituted by the creator. As an example, he points to the second law of thermodynamics (entropy). Living systems which experience this law tend toward disorder. For example, chemical and physical damage to DNA inevitably cause abnormalities. Over time, the accumulation of these damaging mutations can transform an optimally design biochemical system into one that is substandard. He also says complex, human-engineered systems often involve trade-offs . When confronted with these trade-offs, the engineer carefully manages them in such a way to achieve the best overall performance of the system itself. As an example, think of today’s automobile. Each car is a balanced system that attempts to deal with issues regarding safety, performance, and gas economy.

Dr. Rana spends time discussing systems that at one time were seen to be imperfect but have recently been discovered to serve a vital purpose. He looks at glycolysis, bilirubin production, uric acid metabolism, junk DNA, and genetic redundancy as examples. His explanations made my head spin, so I’m not going to try to discuss all of them here. But over and over again, he shows how something that originally appeared badly designed has recently been shown to have a highly useful design. Here’s one example — uric acid metabolism. Many people develop kidney stones due to what appears to be poor design in their cells. However, uric acid helps prevent cancer and may contribute to long human life spans since it is a potent antioxidant. Then, of course, there’s junk DNA, which appears to be a portion of DNA that has no purpose. Much to the surprise of scientists, junk DNA has function.

Rana concludes his book by criticizing evolutionary solutions attempting to explain life’s chemical picture. Origin-of-life researchers maintain that information-rich biomolecules, like DNA and proteins, emerged under the influence of chemical selection. Evolutionary biologists also claim that irreducibly complex systems did not have to rise all at once but could emerge in a stepwise fashion. He says these naturalistic scenarios proposed to account for the origin of these incredibly complex systems are highly speculative and lack any type of detailed mechanistic undergirding. The formation of biochemical information systems is a probability problem. It appears astronomically improbable for the essential gene set to emerge through natural means alone. In other words, there does not appear to be enough time for evolutionary processes to stumble upon the universal genetic code. Another problem has occurred in the last decade or so when scientists have discovered that a number of life’s molecules and processes, though virtually identical, appear to have originated independently, multiple times.

At the very end of his book he summarizes features of life’s chemical systems that seem to argue for intelligent design. Here is a list of just some of the ones he mentions – irreducible complexity, chicken-and-egg systems, fine-tuning, biochemical information systems, structure of biochemical information, biochemical codes, quality control, molecular motors, and cell membranes. Take a look sometime at his complete list (pp. 279-282).

Dr. Fuzale Rana (The Cell’s Design) and Dr. Stephen Meyer (Signature of the Cell) have created two books which make significant, serious contributions to scientific literature pointing to intelligent design. Don’t be scared off either of these books because of their technical discussions. Skip anything you don’t understand; you’ll still be impressed with the overall points being made. I recommend both of these books highly.

Let’s pick up where I left off last time as I summarize the findings of Dr. Fuz Rana, in his book The Cell’s Design. This is an important book that explores the biochemical reasons to believe there is a designer behind the creation of life.

Dr. Rana continues where he left off talking about the genetic code inside the cells. He says recent discoveries have unwittingly stumbled across the most profound evidence yet for intelligent activity — a type of fine-tuning in code rules. These rules create a surprising capacity to minimize errors and communicate critical information with high fidelity. There is a redundancy to the code which is not haphazard. Deliberate rules were set up to protect the cell from the harmful effects of substitution mutations. The conclusion is that any genetic code assembled through random biochemical events could not possess such ideal error-minimization properties. Nobel laureate Francis Crick argued in 1968 that the genetic code cannot undergo significant evolution because any change would result in a large number of defective proteins. What is really amazing is that the genetic code originated at the time when life first appeared on earth. The complexity of the code makes it virtually impossible that natural selection could have stumbled upon it by accident in such a short period , according to Dr. Rana’s book.

A later chapter talks about biochemical quality control systems which are in place to identify and rectify any production errors. Biochemists have discovered that, like any manufacturing operation designed by human engineers, key cellular processes incorporate a number of quality control checks. Checkpoints occur at several critical junctions during protein manufacture, including mRNA production, export from the nucleus, and translation at ribosomes. One of the most remarkable features is the ability to discriminate between misfolded proteins and partially folded proteins that appear misfolded but are well on the way to adopting their intended three-dimensional architectures.

Next, Dr. Rana asks a key question. If life results solely from evolutionary processes, then shouldn’t scientists expect to see very few cases in which evolution has repeated itself? Random processes shouldn’t repeat over the history of the earth. That makes sense to me. He goes on to say, however, if life is the product of an intelligent creator, then the same designs should repeatedly appear in biochemical systems. He gives one hundred recently discovered examples of repeated biochemical designs (see pages 207-214). The explosion in the number of these examples is odd if life results from historical sequences of chance evolutionary events. However, if there is a creator, it’s reasonable to expect he would use the same designs repeatedly.

There is one more chapter devoted to recent discoveries that seem to require a supernatural agent. Dr. Rana takes a look at cell membranes. Forty years ago they were seen as little more than haphazard, disorganized systems. However, since then advances have dramatically changed how scientists think about these membranes. Biochemists have discovered the cells’ boundaries are highly structured, highly organized systems. They require fine-tuning of their composition to be as stable as they are. These membranes not only form a key boundary layer, but they also play a critical role in regulating the activity of proteins associated with the membrane. Some biochemists go further, suggesting that cell membranes harbor information.

The last part of his book responds to one of the most common challenges leveled against arguments for intelligent design — imperfections found in nature. I’ll save that for one last blog on The Cell’s Design.

The next section of Dr. Fuzale Rana’s book, The Cell’s Design, covers biochemical fine-tuning which conveys a sense of the remarkable exactness of biochemical systems. Aquaporins form channels in cell membranes where they transport water across the membrane. Amino acids have to be brought into an exact alignment to form a useful three-dimensional architecture. In addition, collagens, the most abundant proteins in the animal kingdom, also contained an exact, fine-tuned amino acid composition.

Exact fine-tuning is not limited to the structure of the biomolecules. The rate of chemical processes is also carefully refined. For example, the cell’s machinery copies mRNA from DNA only when the cell needs the protein encoded by a particular gene housed in the DNA. When that protein is not needed, the cell shuts down production. Biochemists have also discovered that the breakdown of mRNA molecules is not random but precisely orchestrated. Proteins are constantly made and destroyed by the cell. Those that take part in highly specialized activities within the cell are manufactured with great timing — only when they are needed. Once the proteins are no longer useful, the cell breaks them down into the amino acids of which they are made up. This also is an exacting, delicately balanced process.

Rana then spends some time on the precise arrangement of elements in the cell. Amino acids link together in a head-to-tale fashion to form chains of proteins. These sequences appear to be highly optimal. Their exact positioning makes proteins better able to withstand mutations to DNA that result in a change to the amino acid sequence. Their structures also appear perfect to withstand damage caused by oxygen in the cell. The molecules that make up the backbone of DNA and RNA appear to be in a highly specific arrangement. Their chemical properties produce a stable helical structure capable of storing the information needed for the cell’s operation.

The Cell’s Design continues by highlighting the information found in the cell. Proteins and DNA are information-rich molecules. Just as letters form words in our language, amino acids are strung together to produce useful information. The chief function of DNA is to store information; it houses the directions necessary to make change-like molecules (polypeptides). DNA compares to the reference section of the library where books can be read but not removed. The material stored in these books has to be copied before it can be taken from the library — exactly the same thing happens in the cell. The language of DNA and RNA is translated at the ribosome into the amino acid language of proteins. DNA can store an enormous amount of information — theoretically one gram of DNA can house as much information as nearly one trillion CDs. To summarize, it’s not the mere presence of information that argues for a designer. It’s the structure of the information housed in proteins and DNA. There is a direct analogy between the architecture of human language and the makeup of biochemical systems. This information is handled exactly like a computer would do. For example, computer scientist Leonard Adleman recognized that the proteins responsible for DNA replication, repair, and transcription operated as Turing machines, which gave rise at a fundamental level for all computer operations. I don’t have the space here to develop this, but check pages 163-168 in Rana’s book.

I need a couple more blogs to finish reporting on Rana’s book. The detail in it blew me away with its careful analysis of the cell’s abilities. Hope you feel the same.

In the last blog, I introduced you to Dr. Fuzale Rana’s book, The Cell’s Design. His claim is that today’s biochemists have uncovered amazing molecular features inside the cell that lead to one reasonable conclusion — a supernatural agent must be responsible for life. Let’s move on to further chapters in the book which offer more reasons why he believes this is the case.

In Chapter 4, he introduces molecular motors. He starts with a famous example, which has been brought up in previous books — the bacterial flagellum. Made up of over 40 different kinds of proteins, this is essentially a molecular-sized electrical motor which rotates a propeller, allowing the bacterial cell to navigate through its environment. But the rest of the chapter has many more examples of these molecular motors. Some are rotary in nature, including parts such as turbines, rotors, cams, and stators. Some motors spin, and some swivel. One amazing molecular motor, dynein, carries cargo throughout the cell along microtubule tracks. This motor literally shifts gears in response to the load that it is carrying. You can see a terrific video put out by Harvard showing dynein in operation–Google “The world inside the cell” then “cell–inner life.” His conclusion? Eexperience teaches us that machines and motors don’t just happen.

He sees these motors as an update of the watchmaker argument (just as watches which display design are the product of a watchmaker, so organisms which also display design are the product of a creator ). The discovery of these biomolecular motors and machines inside the cell revealed a diversity of form and function that mirrors the diversity of designs produced by human engineers. In addition, researchers working with nanotechnology reinforce the idea that molecular motors in the cell are literal motors in every sense. The contrast between synthetic molecular motors designed by some of the finest organic chemists in the world and the elegance and complexity of molecular motors found in cells is striking. Actually, the cell’s machinery is vastly superior to anything that the best human designers can conceive or accomplish. For example, bacterial flagella operate near 100% efficiency while man-made electric motors only function at 65% efficiency ,and the best combustion engines only attain a 30% efficiency.

Dr. Rana’s next chapter deals with a chicken-and-egg problem. DNA houses the information the cell needs to make proteins, which play such a vital role in almost every cell function. Biochemists call DNA a self-replicating molecule. However, DNA cannot replicate on its own. Instead, it requires a variety of proteins. So here’s the problem — proteins cannot be produced without DNA, and DNA cannot be produced without proteins. Many proteins, in addition, need the assistance of other proteins to fold into the proper three-dimensional shape after they’ve been produced at the ribosome. Once again, you need proteins to help fold proteins. You can’t have one without the other. Biochemical chicken-and-egg systems represent a special type of irreducible complexity where you need all the parts to function properly. He raises questions about the ability of evolutionary processes to produce these systems.

I need more space to explore further chapters in Dr. Rana’s book, but the information is pretty dense. I’ll keep these blogs short enough for you to digest the ideas–more to come next time.

Some time ago I got to meet Dr. Fazale Rana, a biochemist and author of several books. He gave a presentation on the complexities inside the cell, which he used as an indication of the existence of God. This represents a continuation of the design argument, which says God is the ultimate engineer who designed everything in the universe. I recently finished reading Dr. Rana’s new book called The Cell’s Design. It makes an important contribution to the argument of design by explaining recent scientific discoveries that seemed to indicate complexity far beyond anything that random processes can create. For the next couple of blogs, I’d like to explore his key points in this book.

He starts by mentioning another famous book, Darwin’s Black Box by Michael Behe. This earlier book presented a case for intelligent design from the biochemical perspective. Behe had argued that biochemical systems, by their very nature, are irreducibly complex. He argued for intelligent design by emphasizing the inability of natural selection to generate such complex systems through a gradual evolutionary process. Critics, however, said that this book rested on a lack of understanding, so they rejected his argument. As result of this, Dr. Rana wanted to write a book that went beyond irreducible complexity to communicate a vast range of amazing properties that characterize life’s chemistry. These indicators of design seen inside the cell make a case for a creator based on what scientists know, not on what we don’t understand.

Before Dr. Rana starts on his proof, he describes and justifies the approach used to argue for intelligent design in biochemical systems. He says when people distinguish between the work of an intelligent agent and the outworking of natural processes, they don’t use intuition. Instead, they use pattern recognition. If biochemical systems are indeed the product of a creator who made man in his image, then the defining characteristics of those systems should be very close to the hallmark characteristics of humanly crafted systems. The rest of his book makes use of pattern recognition to build a positive case for biochemical intelligent design.

His first chapter which presents his argument talks about the minimum number of genes and essential biochemical systems necessary for life. It appears as if a lower bound of several hundred genes exist, below which life cannot be pushed and still be recognized as life. If left up to an evolutionary process, not enough resources or time exists throughout the universe’s history to get life even in the simplest form. Scientists used to see bacteria as simple bags of assorted molecules haphazardly arranged inside the cell. But actually these bacteria, as simple as they are, display an incredible degree of internal organization and exquisite composition of biochemical activity. Origin-of-life researcher David Deamer remarked, ” . . . one is struck by the complexity of even the simplest form of life.” So even these tiny bacteria speak of intelligent design.

Ben Witherington, author of The Living Word of God, has a section in which he explains how the New Testament books were formed into the canon (books accepted as authoritative). It’s important to know this story because many people today have mistaken ideas of how this all happened. Thanks to books like The Da Vinci Code, many readers assume a powerful church set up a council and picked which books they considered legitimate. However, it was not a matter of politics or powerful men sitting down in the fourth century A.D. to decide these issues. No one ruled out other books that had been previously considered legitimate. The truth is quite different.

The New Testament canon came about due to a process that actually started in the New Testament era. Take a look at 2 Peter 3: 16, where Peter describes Paul’s writings as part of true scripture. The formation of the accepted New Testament writings was already happening in the primitive Christian community.

Some, including the author of The Da Vinci Code, will argue that Gnostic texts competed with traditional writings for inclusion in the canon. But Witherington says nobody argued for the inclusion of any of the Gnostic texts. They were seen as heresy in their own day as well as long afterward. As he notes, “Not even the earliest of the Gnostic texts, the Gospel of Thomas, was ever on a canon list or seriously considered for inclusion as a sacred text for Christians.”

Most of the New Testament became accepted as sacred with no debate surrounding the various works. The ones accepted immediately were Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul’s letters (except Hebrews, an anonymous letter).

Which works were debated? Hebrew was because it was anonymous. James and Jude were because they seemed so Jewish. Revelation was because of its prophecy.

What were the standards used to decide if a book belonged in the canon? Again, let Witherington describe this: “It needed to be an early witness, a first-century witness, one that went back directly or indirectly to the original eyewitnesses, apostles, and their co-workers or an early prophet like John of Patmos.” So accepted books needed a combination of historical and theological factors to become part of the canon. Early church fathers said accepted books needed to have some sort of connection to an apostle and should involve orthodox teaching.

There was no single church gathering that created the current list of twenty-seven books in the New Testament. The process of sifting and choosing which books should belong in the Christian scriptures was going on throughout the second through the fourth centuries. A man named Marcion came to Rome around 144 A.D. He told the church there he had a list of acceptable books for a canon, but his list was extremely short. It included only Luke’s gospel and a few of Paul’s letters. The church rejected Marcion, claiming that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John should all be considered scripture.

By the end of the second century there was a list which looks a lot like what we have today. Only James, Hebrews, 1 and 2 Peter, and 3 John are missing. What’s interesting is that eventually all geographical areas where Christianity was popular (the Eastern empire, Africa, the Western empire) independently concluded that these twenty-seven books should be recognized as the Christian scriptures. That’s remarkable when you think about it: “The various parts of the church, without political or ecclesiastical coercion, and under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, all came to the same conclusion about the twenty-seven books of the New Testament.”

What can we say to wrap this up? Here’s the key fact — it was not a matter of the church conducting a big meeting, drawing up a list of books to form the canon, and imposing this list on its members. Instead, the church simply recognized the list of books that had been forming since the time of Peter and Paul. Over the centuries Christians had found these books valuable for worship and instruction. As one person says in Witherington’s book, “The canon thus represents the collective experience of the Christian community during its formative centuries.” So there was no conspiracy, no imposition of books, no hiding or destroying competing gospels, no huddled gathering of old men.