Origin of Life Studies

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 Molecular 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 (bio-molecules), 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 bio-molecules 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 bio-molecules 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 bio-molecules 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 bio-molecules. "It appears likely that these primordial bio-molecules were particularly suited to be the components of living matter, not only because of their intrinsic structure but also because feasible pathways existed for their enzymatic interconversion" through consecutive reactions having common intermediates.¹These primordial bio-molecules may be regarded as the ancestors of all other bio-molecules. New bio-molecules 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 bio-molecules (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 primordial biomolecules 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),  motion, muscle interaction), and active transport of substances across membranes in to cells. In general, all life shares common metabolic pathways, common enzyme and common enzyme catalysts for biochemical reactions, common nucleic acid replicating mechanisms for storage and transmission of information and hereditary characteristics, 

Twenty amino acids and eight mononucleotides are identical in all species and each serves multi-functions. This underlying simplicity in molecular organization of cells implies common ancestry of life.

common protein synthesizing mechanisms leading to species-specific phenotypic characteristics, common mechanisms for regulation of synthesis. Complex organisms share internal communication routes via hormones; compatible use of the same hormones is made by different, though related species. All animals with nerve transmission utilize acetylcholine and cholinesterases. Strong evolutionary relationships exist between the blood group proteins of humans and other primates.

All life depends on photosynthesis, directly or indirectly capturing energy from the sun via complex biochemical reactions leading to carbohydrates. Life depends on oxidative phosphorylation, another series of biochemical reactions, for building new life and providing energy for life's processes. A biochemist sees an interrelatedness and interdependence in all life. Although living forms have obvious morphological or phenotypic differences, molecular similarities abound at the subcellular level. Small chemical changes in proteins make radical changes in biological adaptation possible. The similarities in structures of homologous macromolecules having the same functions in widely divergent species is a unifying feature of life.

Since the proteins of all living forms today possess amino acids having one of two possible asymmetric configurations, the derivation of all organisms from one cell or a closely related population of cells is suggested. Biological stereospecificity is also possessed by polynucleotides. Continuity is implied in the development of all life from simple origins to complex structures. In reproduction and differentiation or development to maturity all multicellular organisms originate from single, simpler cells.

Evolutionary aspects are linked to the origin or biosynthesis of natural products, e.g., alkaloids in early evolutionary pathways (polyacetates derived from relatively simple enzymic pathways) are simpler in chemical structures than alkaloids produced from later evolutionary pathways (shikimate in complex enzymic pathways). Continuity of life is also implied in the underlying principle of molecular economy. Twenty amino acids and eight mononucleotides are identical in all species and each serves multi-functions. These facts suggest selection during the course of chemical evolution for the capacity to serve several functions. This underlying simplicity in molecular organization of cells implies common ancestry of life.

'A living cell is a self-assembling, self-adjusting, self-perpetuating, isothermal open system consisting of many consecutive, linked organic reactions promoted by organic catalysts produced by the cell operating an the principle of maximum economy of parts and processes."¹

Energy Transformations in Living Cells and Self-Regulation of Cell Reactions

"The living cell is an isothermal chemical engine," containing catalysts (enzymes) capable of greatly enhancing the rates of specific chemical reactions. The high degree of specificity of enzymes results from operation of the principle of structural complementarity. The active site of an enzyme fits its substrate with a near-perfect complementary. Enzyme-catalyzed reactions are linked into many different sequences of consecutive reactions having common intermediates. The formation or breakdown of ATP, the major carrier of chemical energy in the cells of all living species, is the connecting link between the two large networks of enzyme-catalyzed reactions-metabolism and biosynthesis. "These consecutively linked networks of enzyme-catalyzed reactions are essentially identical in all living species."¹

"The linking of enzyme-catalyzed reactions into sequences of consecutive reactions makes possible the orderly channeling of the thousands of chemical reactions taking place in cells (simultaneously from simple precursors), so that all the specific biomolecules required in cell structure and function are produced in appropriate amounts and rates very rapidly) to maintain the normal steady state , characteristic of the living, functioning cell. "The rate of a specific reaction of one portion of the complex network of enzymatic reactions in the cell can be controlled or modulated by the rates of reactions in another part of the network." Certain enzymes, "particularly those at the beginning of reaction sequences or at branch points, function as regulatory enzymes; they are inhibited by the end product of that reaction sequence. Living cells possess the power to regulate the synthesis of their own catalysts. They can turn off the synthesis of the enzymes required to make a given product from its precursors whenever that product is available, readymade, from the environment. Such self-regulating and self-adjusting properties are fundamental in the maintenance of the steady state of the living cell and are essential to its energy-transforming efficiency."¹

"Living organisms create and maintain their essential orderliness at the expense of the environment, which they cause to become more disordered and random. 'the cell is a nonequilibrium open system (steady state), a machine for extracting free energy from the environment, which it causes to increase in entropy. Another reflection of the principle of maximum economy is that living cells are highly efficient in handling energy and matter." ¹

The genetic information is compressed into the nucleus of cells, in the nucleotide sequence of a very small amount of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). "The one-dimensional information of DNA is translated into the three-dimensional information inherent in the macromolecular and supramolecular components of living organisms by translation of DNA structure into protein structure."¹ The common genetic code (trinucleotide = amino acid) for all life puts the mechanism for evolution on a chemical basis. The events that take place in DNA molecules to give rise to molecular evolution are of three general types: (1) duplication of DNA double strands, as gene duplication followed by a functional differentiation, via mechanisms of crossingover or recombination; (2) shortening or deletions of portions of DNA strands; (3) point mutations or replacements of one base pair in DNA.2 DNA changes are then translated into changed proteins by means of the common messenger-ribonucleic acid, ribosomalribonucleic acid, amino acid-transfer-ribonucleic acid mechanisms. These changed proteins, especially if they are enzymes, are often capable of changing some 'properties of the cell and lead to phenotypic changes in the organism.³ "It now appears certain that, even in the intact cell, the DNA molecule may break frequently. Usually it is quickly repaired, but such errors or mutations are not always deleterious and may 'possess advantages in enabling organisms to better adapt to their environment."¹

Adaptation of living organisms to their changing environment enables conditions inside the cells to alter in response to the external pressures. Adaptation is a result of biomacromolecules 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 pressure is the final determinant in the expression of ,new or changed DNA (genes) as evolutionary changes. Perpetuation or disappearance of the phenotypic consequences of these DNA changes is decided by classical natural selections The remainder of the evolutionary process is concerned with various complexities arising from morphological, ecological, and other results of translation of the molecular changes among populations of organisms.

Biological Fitness of Organic Compounds

"Carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen are far more abundant in living matter than in the earth's crust. We may therefore presume that compounds of these elements possess unique molecular fitness for the .processes that collectively constitute the living state."' the four most abundant elements making up about 99% )f the mass of most living cells (carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen) readily form covalent bonds by electron-pair sharing, readily react with each other to ill their outer electron shells, and are the lightest elements capable of forming covalent bonds. "Since he strength of a covalent bond is inversely related to he atomic weights of the bonded atoms, it appears that living organisms have selected those elements capable f forming the strongest (and most stable) covalent bonds."¹ Carbon is unique as an element, because no other chemical element can form stable molecules of ach widely different sizes and shapes, nor with such variety of functional groups with oxygen, nitrogen, nd sulfur. "We may therefore conclude that organic carbon compounds must be especially well suites for ie purposes of living organisms, since they were elected despite the relative sparseness of carbon in ie earth's crust and despite the fact that energy must P expended to reduce organic carbon."¹

"Current evidence supports the concept that the molecules we know today were selected from a much larger number of available compounds because their special fitness, which gave cells containing tem superior survival value." "Since several hundred organic compounds have been isolated during experiments 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 appears very likely that a process of selection took place." "Presumably the biomolecules are the simplest, most versatile, and most fit molecules for their 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, conditions favored the existence of many different organic compounds in relatively high concentration in the surface waters of the ocean and that the first living cells arose in this warm soup of organic compounds."' Hypotheses stimulated experiments on the prebiotic origin of biomolecules, and experimental demonstrations have verified these hypotheses. Much progress has been made in the brief 20-year period of this young science.

Most of the chemical reactions from which life is thought to have begun could not have taken place in the present oxidizing atmosphere. The biological systems 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 studies."' Plausible prebiotic conditions have yielded several hundred different organic compounds, including representatives of all the important types of biomolecules (all the common amino acids present in proteins, the five nitrogenous bases of nucleic acids, and many biologically occurring organic acids and sugars). "In view of these results, it now appears quite plausible that these may have included many or all of the basic building-block molecules we recognize in living cells today."' Most of them originated in the primitive atmosphere and oceans as the energy of sunlight, heat of volcanic action, and lightning acted on the chemicals of the reducing atmosphere.

A principle of organization of prebiotic, as well as living, systems: Flow of energy through a system of coupled chemical reactions leads to a greater degree of organization of the system. A more highly organized system can utilize further radiation energy more efficiently by breaking up the energy into manageable packets."

Mechanisms for protecting biomolecules, macromolecules, and prebiotic and primitive living systems from radiation destruction have been hypothesized and can be readily visualized. Thirty feet of water absorbs all solar ultraviolet radiation. This means that thirty feet of water can protect prebiotic biomolecules from destruction by ultraviolet radiation. After formation by radiation in the atmosphere or surface waters enough prebiotic biomolecules can be carried by coiivection currents to safety below this 30-foot depth where survivors could concentrate. Primitive life forms, too, could have survived under 30 feet of water until the ozone layer formed to shield the earth from high intensity radiation.

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

Closer to the water's surface local environments where preservation of prebiotic systems is favorable are provided by rocks, watery caves, and other geologic structures which shield out the solar radiation. After formation by radiation, tides and currents can carry the biomolecules to these shielded "islands" of safety which abound on the shorelines of bodies of water.

The connection or polymerization of these biomolecules into the macromolecules of life requires higher concentrations which could easily have been achieved through evaporation or partial freezing. The linkage of primordial building-block molecules can take place by condensing reactions driven by anhydrous conditions or by the chemical condensing agents formed prebiotically. Even though polypeptide and polynucleotide chains could well have been formed prebiotically, specific sequences of monomers in such chains must be recorded and replicated during the molecular evolution. Polymerization to nucleic acids is hypothesized in one scheme to begin with adsorption of nucleotides onto mineral crystals and then bonding together, with condensing agents, while held together as neighbors. Recording of the nucleotide sequence, and likewise the amino acid sequence, resides in the base-pairing principle inherent in the DNA double helix. There is specificity in the complexing of certain nucleic acid bases with others and with certain amino acids. Experiments have shown that polynucleotides serve as templates for nonenzymatic synthesis of complementary polynucleotides under prebiotic conditions with water soluble condensing agents.

Orgel's "natural selection with function" is the critical stage (the transition from chemical to biological systems) of interaction of proteins and nucleic acids with one another and with their environment, forming larger systems of molecules, the precursors of the first cells. The central problem is to show bow proteins and nucleic acids first began to work together, for neither could sustain a living system by itself. The nucleic acids can replicate, but they would not have been effective in acting on the environment; the proteins can act on the environment but could not replicate in individual units accurately. In living systems the two work together: the nucleic acids code for the production of proteins, and proteins act or feed on the environment and to assist in the replication of more nucleic acids.

Nucleic Acid Hypothesis

In order to explain "how complex energy conversion ,mechanisms and genetic systems arose in the absence of such systems, when there is a general natural tendency to go from order to disorder,"⁴ a plausible hypothesis has been needed. The most plausible is the nucleic acid hypothesis of Crick and Orgel ' which postulates that a nucleic acid molecule possesses the potential capacity to "live" by virtue of its ability to code for proteins, to undergo self-replication 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 these nucleic acids alone are infective. The range of size and complexity of viruses up to very small infectious bacteria (parasitic procaryotes) indicate a vague difference between the largest viruses and the smallest bacteria. (2) The role of non-informational RNA in protein synthesis. (3) The wide range of biological functions of nucleotides in cells document the striking versatility of nucleotides. Monomeric units of DNA and of the three major types of RNA, energy carriers, hydrogen or electron carriers, sugar carriers, lipid component carriers, and methionine carriers are roles of nucleotides as functional elements in all aspects of metabolism and energy transfer, as well as in the genetic apparatus. "These metabolic and structural relationships suggest very strongly that much of the important metabolic and genetic machinery of the cell could have evolved or developed from nucleotides" ¹

"In simulated primitive earth experiments it has been found that polynucleotides can act as complementary templates in the absence of enzymes, through base pairing." The most primitive nucleic acids could have replicated themselves in the absence of enzymes, by the action of abiotically formed condensing agents." Similarly, the most primitive form of the present-day ATP-system for energy transfer could have functioned without enzymes . . . possibly through the action of primitive mineral or organic catalysts" ¹.

Crick and Orgel have suggested that the real answers to the origin of life may lie in the origin of ribosomes, of transfer RNA, and of the genetic code. Non-informational nucleic acids, transfer RNA and ribosomal RNA, do not serve template function, but both are involved in translating the DNA genetic code into the synthesis of proteins. These two forms of RNA are suggested to be the vital parts of a primordial system which learned how to make true informational proteins, not merely random polymers of amino acids. The primitive forms of transfer and ribosomal RNA may have performed one of the important functions of an enzyme, namely, the provision of specific binding sites to position the loosely bound amino acid substrates in such a way as to allow them to interact in the presence of a nonenzymatic condensing agent. In developing the first template for specifying the sequence of t-RNA's and thus of the amino acids they carry, perhaps one of the many different prebiotically formed polyribonucleotides in the primeval broth coded for the sequence of some polypeptide that endowed the ribosomal apparatus with enhanced stability or activity, which became the precursor of present-day ribosomal proteins. "Perhaps others coded for the synthesis of a polypeptide that stabilized and provided a sheath for the first messenger RNA, and thus became the forerunner of a viral coat protein." "Later the primitive ribosomes may have learned to synthesize an enzyme."¹

In support of this idea, the direct precursors of the 2'-deoxyribonucleotide building blocks of DNA are the corresponding ribonucleotides. "Ultimately, 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, in such a way that a complementary nucleic acid can be formed by an abiotic catalyst or condensing agent. Moreover, through the tendency of nucleic acids to undergo mutation, the capacity of a nucleic acid based life to undergo refined and subtle evolutionary modulations becomes greatly enhanced."¹

Origin of Enzymes and Cell Structures

"In the evolution of enzymes from simple precursors, it seems highly probable that catalytic capacity appeared first and that substrate specificity followed as a later evolutionary development." Cell "boundaries or membranes may be formed by coacervation of a polymer solution or by formation of lipid bilayers."I such boundaries lend protection to biomacromolecules from environmental destruction. Self-forming, cell-like structures have been observed in the forms of coacervate droplets and microspheres of proteinoids. "Once a template system, a set of catalysts, and a surrounding membrane evolved, in whatever sequence, the process of cellular evolution becomes much easier to comprehend."¹

"Living organisms may be the inevitable outcome of the evolution of self-organizing systems of organic molecules." "The laws of chemistry and physics we know today do not forbid the process of self-organization; they simply provide no explanation for it." These hypotheses "may well be experimentally approachable, since with the advantage of modern knowledge of the properties of organic molecules and of biochemistry, molecular science may be able to accelerate greatly the chemical processes leading to, or involved in, the tendency of organic molecules to undergo self-organization." "Life may therefore arise under any physical conditions in which organic compounds may undergo the full range of their potential evolution." ¹

Related Evidence

The remaining physical evidence, in the form of astronomical, geological or paleontological (remains), is quite fragmentary, and clearly the experiment cannot be run again on its original scale. Chemicals thought to be key precursors in the prebiotic soup have been identified in outer space. Most of the common building-block biomolecules-amino acids, purines, pyrimidines, fatty acids-have been repeatedly found in ancient rocks and sediments, and in meteorites. The oldest known organic material dated by isotope methods to be 3.1 billion years is in the Fig Tree shale deposits in South Africa, which contain hydrocarbons, including isoprenoids, porphyrins, purines, pyrimidines, and cell-like structures, in addition to fossils of bluegreen algae. These findings suggest that these biomolecules may be ubiquitous and perhaps even dominant products of energy-activated organic chemical evolution. All of these lend credence to this scientific theory of chemical prebiotic origins of life. There is a clear parallel with the better-established theory of the evolution of organisms-a parallel first suggested by Darwin himself. The concern is with establishing plausibility, since the historical facts cannot be ascertained.

A CHRISTIAN BIOCHEMIST LOOKS AT EVOLUTION AND CREATION

Concepts which have enabled me to reconcile the apparent conflict between evolution and creation include: distinguishing the category of worldview from that of scientific theory or mechanism, accepting the Biblical doctrine of creation as worldview and biological evolution as scientific theory, rejecting the. mechanistic interpretation of special creationism and the philosophy of evolutionism, applying the doctrine of Providence' and the principle of complementarity, adopting theistic evolution and a non-literal interpretation of Genesis, and affirming the Bible's own proclamation of its purposes and Jesus Christ alone as the foundation of my faith.

Worldviews and Scientific Mechanisms

The debate about creation and evolution is unfortunately involved in a confusion of categories: worldviews and scientific mecbanisms.5 Both creation and evolution have been described in terms of opposing ways of looking at be world, as well as opposing ways of explaining how living forms originated -in- the world. It is important that we appreciate the worldviews of Creation and Design as alternatives to Evolution(ism) 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 (2) that biblical Christian faith somehow demands for us to accept only fiat creation (spontaneous generation) and determinism, instead of evolutionary process and chance, as scientific mechanisms. One could (many do, including me) accept the creation worldview and evolutionary process as a scientific mechanism at the same time.

Creation as a Worldview

The Biblical doctrine of creation is the source of the creation worldview. Holy Scripture reveals to us that⁶:

(1) The God Who loves us is also the God Who created us and all things-which establishes the relationship 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. 136:5-9, 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 a scientists and experience as persons. God creates life with physical matter and through natural processes (Gen. 1: 12, 20, 24, 2:7, 9)

(3) The universe and everything 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 universe freely and separately with a beginning and with a temporal existence which He alone gives it. (Gen. 1:1, Heb. 1:3, 11:3, P 90:2-6)

(5) We are not the end-products of meaningless processes in an impersonal universe, but persons made in the image of a personal God. (Gen. 1:26-28, 5:1, Ps. 139:lS,' Is. 40:28-31, 43:1-2,5-7, 44:24) (6) Everything created is intrinsically good. (Gen. 1:10b, 12b, 18b, 21b, 25b, 31a, I Tim. 4:4a)  Human corruption of the good creation (disobedience and rebellion against God, Gen. 3:22; inhumane treatment 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 principles or revealed truths of creation like those listed above are fraught with problems, dangers, and controversies. Such attempts include interpreting the details of Genesis narratives as historical events and explaining these details in scientific terms. These interpretations are unwarranted by exegesis of the text and are inconsistent with the purposes of God's revelation in Scripture, which are "to give us the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus, . . for teaching the truth, rebuking error, correcting faults, giving instruction for right living, . . . so that we may be fully qualified and equipped to do every kind of good work ." (TEV, 2 Tim. 3:15-17; see also in. 5:39, 20:31, Rom. 15:4)

"Special" Creation as Scientific Mechanism in PreDarwinian Biology

The biblical doctrine of creation is not the "special" creation described as the scientific mechanism or explanation of pre-Darwinian biology. Before the theory of evolution was accepted as the scientific explanation of how living organisms developed and changed over long periods of time, the explanation of special creation reigned in biology. Every species of life was considered to have been specially or-individually created by an instantaneous process of spontaneous generation. This scientific view 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 science into their theology and selected that interpretation (literal) of Genesis which could best be reconciled with their current science. One of the few exceptions to this dangerous thinking among Bible scholars included Martin Luther, who wrote:

Until now there has not been anyone in the church who has explained everything in this chapter (Gen. 1) with adequate skill. The commentators, with their sundry, different, and countless questions, have so confused everything in this as to make it clear enough that God has reserved his exalted wisdom and correct understanding of this chapter for Himself alone, although He has left us with this general knowledge that the world had a beginning and that it was created by God out of nothing.

When science accepted Darwin's evidence for the theory of evolution, those who clung to special creationism for providing 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, instead of re-evaluation of their literal interpretation. Instead of re-examining the Scriptures for God's message and re-discovering His purposes in creation, the relationships He established, and the basic meanings of those purposes and relationships, special creationists mistakenly considered evolution as scientific mechanism to be a threat to creation as worldview. They should have seen evolution as an alternative scientific mechanism to special creationism.

I believe the message of God in creation is still obscured today by fundamentalist Christians who insist upon their literal-historical interpretation of Genesis I and 2 as the only correct view of creation. This rigid attitude also raises a stumbling block for many people educated in the sciences who cannot accept the promotion of special creation as a necessary doctrine of Christian faith. Furthermore, the literalists have not solved a number of critical problems and inconsistencies in their interpretations.⁷

The Scientific Theories of Evolution

As a biochemist committed to the scientific method and its application to understanding the nature and functions of life, I accept both the special and genera theories of evolution as viable scientific explanations of bow biological life originated and developed. Evolution may be defined as the description and explanation of how changes in living forms took place over long periods of time. Special evolution is the description and explanation of how changes within populations of closely related organisms took place. Every scientist worth his salt accepts the special theory of evolution, although a few, who are special creationists, refuse to call it "evolution." Their "progressive creation model" incorporates the same evidence and principles of biological change comprising special evolution. Although the evidence is incomplete, I accept general evolution, which links all forms of life to common ancestral origins and beyond to simple chemical compounds on the primitive earth, as a working hypothesis for correlating biological and biochemical data.

The scientific theories of evolution are not inconsistent with the biblical doctrine of creation, because they are on different levels and have different purposes. However, the general theory is contradictory to the special creation model which attempts to explain how and when life originated on the basis of the Genesis accounts. According to one of its proponents,⁴ special creation is not even scientific theory, but I think it may be classified as pseudo- or pre-scientific speculation.

Providence and Complementarity as Keys for Reconciling the Creation Worldview and Scientific Evolution

If the origin of life via general evolution is an inevitable result of the self-organizing, self-replicating nature of organic matter under favorable conditions then what does this mechanistic view mean to Christian faith in the Creator based on the biblical message of creation? It removes the unnecessary argument for the existence of God from the design evident in living creatures. How then can Christians reconcile their faith in a Creator with the scientific theories of origins? The continual providence of God and the principle of complementarity in human knowledge are two keys which can help reconcile the creation worldview with scientific evolutions.⁸

The Doctrine of Providence: "The universe exists moment-by moment only because of the creative and preserving power of God."⁸ (Bube's Thesis 1) Therefore, the organic matter created by God which has the inherent tendency to self-organize and self-replicate into living systems under favorable conditions does so only because of the creative activity of God. We need to affirm that God is actively involved in sustaining and holding together all things in the universe continually, thus giving existence to all things.

The Principle of Complementarity: "There are many levels at which a given situation can be described. An exhaustive description on one level does not preclude meaningful descriptions on other levels."⁸ (Bube's Thesis 11) For example, human nature can be described on physicochemical, biological, psychological, social, and theological or spiritual levels. The human being can be described as a complex organic machine, a highly developed animal, a social being, a creation of God and a spiritual being. A complete description of human nature on any one of these levels does not rule out or invalidate meaningful descriptions on other levels. To obtain a balanced view of human nature and as complete an understanding as possible it is necessary to accept descriptions on all levels as complementary (additive) to each other. We need to recognize that a given situation 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 description of the origin of life on the biochemical level does not rule out meaningful descriptions of origins on the theological or biblical level. I believe that God's revelations to us in His Word and through His world are complementary, not contradictory or mutually exclusive^9. Any apparent conflict between interpretations of His Word in Holy Scriptures 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 originated and by Whom. I think that evolution is only a scientific explanation of how and when biological life originated and developed. Creation is concerned with purpose and relationship to the Creator; evolution is concerned with mechanisms. Creation and evolution encompass the same phenomena of origins, but are on two separate, completely different and independent levels of understanding, expression, and description. The scientific theories of evolution are not inconsistent with the Biblical doctrine of creation when the principle of complementarity is applied and the doctrine of Providence is accepted in all its ramifications.

Theistic Evolution and a Non-Literal Interpretation of Genesis

Two more approaches which are helpful in reconciling the apparent conflict between creation and evolution take completely different approaches. Theistic evolution, based on the doctrine of Providence, attributes the evolutionary process to God's actions. As a Christian I believe that God in the beginning made matter and energy which did not exist before. As a Christian and a biochemist I believe God made simple living things from this matter and energy by natural processes in favorable environmental conditions and proceeded to develop more complex living things from the simple forms by the evolutionary process. From anthropoid stock God made human beings with the most highly developed nervous system, thinking powers, and ability to verbally communicate. Our conscious awareness of self, sensitivity to the needs of others, abilities to dominate our environment and to reflect, all given us by God, make us unique creatures on this planet at least. We were created for unique communion with God, to serve Him as His managers of the earth, and to give Him the glory.

I believe God has been at work in the process of evolution as His mechanism of creating life. I withhold value judgments on such a process, which some may view as full of wasted time -and energy and of cruel manipulation and experimentation in the "false starts" or "dead ends" (extinctions), because I cannot view history from the perspective of God or know what is in His plan for the universe. All I can hope to know on this level is what His purpose is for me in Jesus Christ.

Theistic evolution is consistent with my science and my Christian faith, and I believe it is also consistent with the best exegesis (biblical scholarship on the text) of Genesis I and 2. The theory of evolution from primitive forms is not necessarily opposed to our faith in the nearness of God ' One who believes that God has used the process of evolution to bring the world as we know it into existence may just as easily picture God working in him and for him as one who believes that God created everything instantaneously about 6000 years ago. The methods which God uses to make our world what it is today are not as important to our Christian faith as we sometimes make them or as some would have us believe.

A non-literal interpretation of Genesis 1-2 attempts to clarify and emphasize God's message to us in creation. God's involvement in creation and the message of His Word are more clearly understood when the terminology and setting of the creation story are seen as the framework of an ancient worldview^{9, 10}. Creation can be viewed as a kind of parable, rich in meaning and purposeful relationships for each person in his life now, instead of an historical account or a dogmatic propositional statement to be believed with intellectual assent and defended with emotional fervor. This is not meant to deny that creation has happened and is continuing to take place under God's Providence. But by moving away from a literal interpretation of the creation stories and by emphasizing God's message of creation's meaning and purpose we can gain insights to enrich our Christian lives and relationships. For example, the original sin of rejecting God can then become more personal, and we can realize greater impetus to accept God's substitute for the "old Adam" within us with the "new Man" (Jesus Christ).

While this approach emphasizes that Genesis 1-2 affirms the relation between God and His world as a symbolic expressions of religious truths which are on a totally different level from evolutionary history," it declares that biblical creation is not concerned with describing historical events."¹¹ The doctrine of creation is not fundamentally a hypothesis about origins, but an affirmation of our dependence on God (Who is sovereign, transcendent, freely acting, and purposeful), and of the essential goodness, orderliness, and meaningfulness of the world."¹²

Furthermore, God the Creator is not resting; He is continually creating (Ps. 104:14-30, 139:13, 147:8-18). All life is continually evolving, changing. New stars, comets, and other features of the universe are forming. Nothing in the universe remains stable. But while God continues to create, His love to us remains constant.

Empty Philosophy of Evolutionism

The scientific theories of evolution are not a threat to my Christian faith, since no scientific theory has anything to say about meaning, purpose, personal relationships, beauty, love, feeling, goodness, evil, and other human emotions and values. However, the philosophy of atheistic evolutionism is contrary to Christian faith, because it progressively exalts man, denies the reality of moral guilt, and interprets the life of Jesus as nothing more than a good examples. Christians who are scientists have the task of declaring that an attitude or philosophy based solely on science is empty, meaningless, and a misuse of science. No matter what some non-Christians and some well-meaning Christians say, atheistic evolutionism has no foundation in science and should be exposed as an improper extrapolation of biological evolution into a general principle of human living. It is vitally important to clearly make this distinction between a neutral scientific theory of origins and a philosophical view of life without God which has no support in science.

The Foundation of My Christian Faith

In his letter to the Romans (8:39) Paul writes that nothing in all creation will ever be able to separate us from the love of God which is ours through Jesus Christ our Lord." (TEV) My Christian faith is built upon that redeeming, forgiving love of God in Jesus, Who died under the inhumanity and injustice of all humans for all time, but Who also arose from the dead to show God's victory over human death and evil, so that I, and all others who believe in these actions of God for us, may have life more abundantly now and live with our Creator in a personal relationship forever. "For God has already placed Jesus Christ as the one and only foundation, and no other foundation can be laid." (I Cor. 3:11) This God Who gives meaning to my life has unconditioned power over all creation, so that my trust in Him gives me confidence in the fulfillment of His promises.

SUMMARY

Evidence for unity and continuity in a biochemical view of life is seen in a universal biochemistry, a molecular economy of common biomolecules (certain organic carbon compounds), each having multi-functions and linked into a few types of macromolecules, each with common functions in all cells. Development of all life from simple to complex structures implies common ancestry. Biomolecules appear to possess biological fitness and to be ubiquitous wherever conditions for organic chemical evolution have been favorable. They have been identified as energy-activated products of primitive atmospheric constituents under plausible, prebiotic conditions in the laboratory and have been polymerized to macromolecules by condensing agents or anhydrous conditions. Life is nucleic acid-based; a common genetic code provides a chemical mechanism for evolution: molecular adaptation (DNA changes leading to protein changes) in response to a changing environment, and chemical changes in DNA can account for mutations, recombinations, deletions and other molecular evolutionary mechanisms. The base-pairing principle inherent in polynucleotides can direct the synthesis of complementary polynucleotides in the absence of enzymes. Non-informational polynucleotides involved in translating 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 result of self-organizing systems of organic molecules taking place over many millions of years under favorable environmental conditions. Evolution (as a scientific theory, establishing a model of mechanisms relating all life to common origins) and Biblical creation (as theological explanation of Who created and for what purpose, establishing relationships for all life to the Creator) are on different levels of understanding, and are therefore, not contradictory, but complementary.

Christians who are scientists should declare that a philosophy based on science (e.g., atheistic evolutionism) is meaningless and a misuse of science. Meaningful life is based on a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, through acceptance of His redeeming, forgiving love.

REFERENCES

1A. L. Lehninger, Biochemistry: The Molecular Basis of Cell Structure and Function, Worth Publishers, Inc., New York (1970) pp. 3-29, 36, 751-791.

2G. Ness, The Molecules at Life, World University Library, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York (1970) p. 126.

3T. M. jokes, Molecules and Evolution, Columbia University Press, New York (1966)

4D. T. Gish, "Creation, Evolution, and Public Education," (copies available from the author at the Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA 92020).

⁵R. H. Bube, "Creation and Evolution in Science Education," Journal ASA 25, 70-71 (1973).

⁶R. H. Bube, "We Believe in Creation," Journal ASA 23, 121-122 (1971).

⁷M. A. Jeeves, The Scientific Enterprise & Christian Faith, Inter-Varsity Press, Downers Grove, IL (1971) pp. 106107.

⁸R. H. Bube, The Human Quest, Word Books, Inc. Waco, TX (1971) pp. 26-35.

⁹A. Van der Ziel, Genesis and Scientific Inquiry. T. S. Denison & Co., Inc., Minneapolis, MN (1965).

¹⁰W. A. Schmeling, Creation Versus Evolution? Not Really! Clayton Publishing House, St. Louis, MO. (1976).

¹¹I. G. Barbour, Issues in Science and Religion, Harper & Row, New York (1971).

¹²L. Gilkey, Maker of Heaven and Earth; The Christian Doctrin,e of Creation in the Light at Modem Knowledge, Doubleday & Co., Inc., Garden City, New York (1959).