Until this article by Answers in Genesis staffer Dr. Georgia Purdom, I didn’t know some Christians were trying to prove God’s existence (or character) from a protein molecule shape. Here it is, apparently called laminin.
But I am a bit confused as to how a photo of a laminin protein can be such a boon to faith as some Christians say it has been to them. Help me out here? And I don’t want to be rude, but I have a few questions, and I’m sure they’ll be echoed by others who also don’t quite get it.1
1. Is it that all galaxies or protein molecules contain cross shapes?
2. If not, might other galaxies or proteins seem to have other shapes instead? Perhaps even shapes in reminiscent of other religious icons, such as a Star of David or the Islamic Crescent? Perhaps someone with more of a life-sciences background could fill us in on this.
3. Could therefore someone of another religion use the same argument? Would it be valid for their point? If not, should we as Christians use the same line of reasoning? Does Scripture encourage us to do so?
4. Is this much different from people thinking they’ve seen Jesus, the Virgin Mary or a saint in shrubbery, and take it as a sign of blessing?
5. Do Christians really “need” such signs? Should we bring them up as proof that God’s testimony of common grace and Creator is evident in creation? Does this jibe with Christians’ claims to believe the written Word as God’s final and uttermost specific revelation to people?
Cross shapes, whether in molecules or stripped-off bark of a tree, can remind us of Jesus. But I wouldn’t use it as a basis for supposed proof of His Word or for God being our Creator.
In her excellent and recent Answers in Genesis article, Dr. Georgia Purdom kindly and with Biblical basis explores the laminin protein and its seeming cross shape. She starts off with a mention of evangelist Louie Giglio, who with good intentions relates the shape of laminin to the truth of Colossians 1:17.2
While I appreciate Mr. Giglio’s passion for the Word, I would suggest that this type of argument is not a good one to use. [. . .] The main problem with this type of argument is that it appears that something outside of Scripture (in this case, laminin) is vital to know the truthfulness of a biblical truth. Laminin is used to prove a biblical truth. However, we should never use our fallible, finite understanding of the world to judge the infallible Word of God. What we observe in the world can certainly be used to confirm God’s Word (and it does), but our finite observations are not in a position to evaluate the infinite things of God. Only if we start with the Bible as our ultimate standard can we have a worldview that is rational and makes sense of the evidence. [. . .]
The structure of laminin was not made popular until 2008, yet I have no doubt that many Christians before that time have trusted the truth presented in Colossians 1:17 because it is God’s Word. Would Colossians 1:17 be any less true if laminin were not in the shape of a cross? No. If five years from now we discover that the laminin protein actually has a different shape (in fact, some electron micrographs of the protein do not resemble a cross at all, see here, p. 149), would that change the truth found in Colossians 1:17? No, because our belief in the truthfulness that Christ holds all things together should start and end with God’s Word alone!
Continue reading …
- That includes some skeptics and atheists, who may not be trying to persecute Christians by asking this, but are sincerely scoffing at argument methods like this. ↩
- Here is one video in which Giglio draws the comparison. ↩
