Understanding the meaning of the church helps us see that we’re talking about people, not buildings. The church is God’s people, not a place. It’s a called-out community (ekklesia) that worships, grows, serves, spreads the message of Jesus, and “teaches them to obey” all he commanded (Matt. 28:20). When we use the term ekklesia, we’re talking about people who’ve been adopted into God’s family and gathered together for God’s purposes.

The church is also distinct from the kingdom of God or what Jesus refers to as “the kingdom of heavens” in Matthew’s Gospel. Here’s the difference: the church can grow and be built, but God’s kingdom is revealed and manifested.

Those who become believers participate in the ongoing growth of the church both in numbers and in spiritual maturity. The kingdom of God is already established and is progressively revealed through Jesus as its king and through the power of the Spirit, to the glory of the Father.

What the Christian Church Is

The church connects believers across the world. When people come together around a common mission—like following Jesus and learning to live out his commands—they create bonds that are stronger than just friendship or shared interests.

The meaning of “church” extends beyond what we can see with our eyes. There’s a visible part (the people we worship with each week) and an invisible part (all believers everywhere, including those who have died and are with Jesus). Scientists who study group dynamics have found that organizations work best when members understand they’re part of something bigger than themselves. This research harmonizes with the biblical teaching that each local congregation is part of the worldwide body of Christ.

Body of Christ

One of the most powerful pictures of the church comes from the apostle Paul, who describes it as the body of Christ. This isn’t just a nice metaphor—it’s a description of how God designed believers to work together with incredible unity, purpose, and connection, with Jesus as the head.

When Paul wrote about the church in 1 Corinthians 12:27, Ephesians 4:15–16, and Romans 12:4–5, he was describing something that researchers today call “organizational synergy.” This is when different parts of a group work together so well that they accomplish more than they ever could individually.

But here’s something really important to understand: the New Testament uses the Greek word for “head of the church,” kephalē, which literally means physical head to the “body” (the church). It doesn’t use the ancient Greek word for “leader” when referring to Jesus. The church-and-body metaphor is referring to the deep unity and closeness between Jesus and the church. In fact, the apostle Paul says that marriage points to the union of Christ and his church (the bride of Christ).

The Bride of Christ

The Bible enlarges our understanding of the church by providing us with a beautiful picture depicting the church as the bride of Christ.

This image shows us the deep love, commitment, and future union between Jesus and his people. You can find this relationship described in Ephesians 5:25–27, Revelation 19:7, and 2 Corinthians 11:2.

This might seem like an old-fashioned way to think about the church, but it actually describes something that relationship researchers have identified as crucial for strong communities: assured commitment and sacrificial love.

When the Bible describes the church as Christ’s bride, it’s showing us that our relationship with Jesus cannot be reduced to following rules or attending services. It’s about a love relationship that will culminate in a future “wedding” when Jesus returns. This gives every believer hope and purpose, knowing that we’re part of a love story that will have a perfect ending.

Who Is the Church?

The church is all people who have repented and put their faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, King and Priest. This is described clearly in 1 Corinthians 12:27 and Ephesians 2:19–22.

This might surprise you, but the church isn’t limited to people who belong to a particular denomination or worship in a certain style. It’s not about whether you prefer traditional hymns or contemporary music, whether your church building is old or new, or whether your pastor wears a suit or casual clothes.

What is the church when it comes to membership? It’s everyone who has genuinely put their trust in Jesus Christ for salvation. This includes people from every nation, race, age group, and background. It includes people who lived hundreds of years ago and believers who are alive today.

From Aristotle to the scientists who study human communities today, many have observed that the strongest groups are those united around shared core values rather than superficial similarities. The church demonstrates this principle—believers from completely different cultures and backgrounds find deep unity through their shared faith in Jesus. The church is open to anyone who believes in Jesus, regardless of their past mistakes or current circumstances.

The Global and Local Church

Understanding what a church is gets even more interesting when we look at the difference between the global church and the local church. Both are important, but they serve different purposes in God’s plan.

Universal Church

The universal church refers to all true believers in Jesus Christ throughout all times and places. It’s not limited by geography, denomination, race, gender, or historical moment. You can read about this in Ephesians 1:22–23 and Colossians 1:18.

The global church is typically understood as the visible body of believers around the world today. It includes churches centered on core historic Christian doctrines and practices of different denominations and traditions that preach the biblical gospel and follow Christ. This is the currently active body of Christ on earth.

Research in global communications has shown how interconnected our world has become. Believers today can pray for, support, and encourage each other across continents in ways that were impossible in previous centuries. Technology helps us experience the reality of the global church in practical ways.

Scientists studying social networks have discovered that people can feel connected to others they’ve never met if they share important common ground. This connection helps explain how Christians can feel a bond with believers in other countries, even when they don’t speak the same language or share the same culture.

Local Church

The local church is the visible, gathered body of believers in a specific location who come together to worship God, hear the teaching of Scripture, share in the sacraments (like baptism and the Lord’s Supper), and carry out the mission of the gospel in their community.

Research on community psychology shows that people need both large-group identity (knowing they’re part of something big) and small-group belonging (having people who know them personally). God designed the church to provide both through the global and local expressions.

Local churches come in many different sizes and styles, but they all serve similar functions: providing a place for regular worship, teaching, fellowship, and service. Some local churches are huge, with thousands of members, while others are small groups that meet in homes. Both can be healthy expressions of the church.

Studies on group effectiveness show that smaller groups (like local churches) are better at providing personal care, accountability, and close relationships. Larger groups are better at pooling resources for big projects and providing diverse perspectives. This is why both local and global expressions of the church are valuable.

What Is the Purpose of the Church?

What is the purpose of the church? This question gets to the heart of why God created the church in the first place. The Bible gives us several clear purposes that work together to accomplish God’s mission in the world.

To Glorify God

The church’s first and most important purpose is to glorify God, as described in Ephesians 3:20–21. This means everything the church does should point people to God’s greatness, love, justice, and power.

Research in positive psychology has found that people are happiest and most fulfilled when they’re part of something bigger than themselves. When the church focuses on glorifying God, it provides this sense of ultimate purpose that satisfies the deepest human needs.

To Make Disciples

Jesus gave the church a clear mission in Matthew 28:19–20: make disciples. This means helping people become followers and students of Jesus and helping them grow in their faith and practice.

Studies on effective teaching and mentoring show the best learning happens in relationships where experienced people invest in newcomers. The church has been using this model for two thousand years, long before educational researchers discovered its effectiveness.

To Worship God

The apostle John tells us that God seeks people who will worship him in spirit and truth. The gathered church provides a place for believers to come together and express their love and gratitude to God.

Research on group singing and communal activities has shown that when people worship together, it creates stronger bonds between them and reduces stress and anxiety. Church worship provides both spiritual and psychological benefits.

To Equip and Build Up Believers

This passage explains that the church should equip believers for service and help them mature in their faith. This is like training and development in the business world, but with eternal significance.

Educational psychology shows that people learn best in supportive environments where they can practice new skills with encouragement and feedback. The church provides this kind of environment for spiritual growth.

To Provide Fellowship and Care

Acts 2:42–47 describes how the early church shared life together, supporting each other through difficulties and celebrating together in good times.

Social science research consistently shows that people with strong community connections are healthier, happier, and more resilient during tough times. The church provides this kind of supportive community based on shared faith and values with the rich resources available from God and his kingdom.

To Serve Those in Need

The New Testament letters mandate that the church should serve orphans, widows, and those who are vulnerable or facing injustice. This attitude rings true for many people in our culture who are looking for ways to make a positive difference in the world.

Studies on volunteer work and community service show that helping others not only benefits those being helped but also improves the mental and physical health of those doing the serving. The church has always emphasized service as both a duty and a blessing.

To Be a Light to the World

Matthew 5:14–16 calls the church to be a light to the world, showing God’s love through actions and words.

Research on social influence shows that positive change often spreads through communities when groups of people consistently model better ways of living. The church is designed to be this kind of positive influence in society.

Who Builds the Church?

Who’s responsible for building this community of believers? The Bible gives us a clear answer that involves divine power working through human participation.

Jesus builds the church, as he promised in Matthew 16:18. This means that, ultimately, the church’s growth and health depend on Jesus, not on human efforts alone.

The Holy Spirit empowers the church through baptism and ongoing filling (strengthening), as described in Acts 1:8 and John 16:8–13. The Spirit provides the supernatural power needed for the church to accomplish its mission.

But believers also participate in the work—we work together with God to build his church.

Paul’s analogy from 1 Corinthians 12 helps us understand this partnership:

The church is like a human body. Jesus is the head—he leads, guides, and gives purpose. The Holy Spirit gives life and empowers the body, helping every part to respond to God’s direction. And God the Father calls us his children and shapes us into Christ’s likeness. Christians are the different parts of the body—hands, feet, eyes, and more. Every part matters, and no single part can do everything on its own.

Our Role in the Church

So what’s a Christian’s role in the church? It’s to work together with believers around the world to be part of God’s mission by sharing the gospel, praying for and supporting other believers, and working together to bring glory to God around the world, as described in Matthew 28:19–20, Acts 1:8, and 1 Corinthians 12:12–13.

This means the church isn’t something that merely happens to you—though it’s true that God places us in the church—it’s something you actively participate in. Whether you’re naturally outgoing or more quiet, whether you’re good with words or better with actions, God has a place for you in his church.

Studies on group participation show that organizations are strongest when every member feels valued and knows how to contribute. The church works the same way—it needs every believer to use their gifts and participate in the mission.

Your role might involve teaching, serving, encouraging, giving, praying, or many other activities. The key is staying connected to Jesus and to other believers so you can play your part in the church’s purpose.

The post What Is the Church? appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

They have been whispered about in candlelit chapels and examined in sterile laboratories. Christians see them as evidence of divine power, proof of a God who steps into the impossible. Skeptics see them as coincidences, statistical outliers waiting for an explanation within the natural laws of the universe.

But whether they’re embraced or dismissed, one thing is sure: Miracles captivate us.

• A last-minute recovery that stuns doctors.
• A storm that shifts course just in time.
• A moment so perfectly timed it feels orchestrated.

Something deep within us pauses and asks if that was just chance? Or was that something more?

We search for answers, wanting to make sense of the unexplainable. Science, by its very nature, is built for that search. It charts the stars, measures the depths of the oceans, and maps the human body’s inner workings.

But what about when something happens that defies human understanding and the natural laws of our physical world? When the rules bend, the impossible happens, and logic and reason have no answer—what then?

Can supernatural intervention be tested in a lab? Can the miraculous be examined under a microscope?

And if not—does that mean miracles aren’t real? Or does it mean that some things are simply beyond the reach of science?

In this blog, we’ll explore the intersection of faith and reason, the seen and the unseen. We’ll examine what science has to say about miracles, where its limits lie, and whether the inability to explain the supernatural makes it any less real.

Because maybe, just maybe, some miracles aren’t meant to be fully understood.

Maybe they’re meant to be believed.

Miracle Defined

Let’s start with the basics. What does the word miracle mean? In everyday language, we toss this word around a lot.

A last-minute game-winning shot? A miracle.

Finding your lost keys just in time? A miracle.

A parking spot in a crowded lot when you’re already late? Definitely a miracle.

But deep down, we know a miracle is more than just good fortune or happy coincidence. A miracle is when the possible bows to the impossible. Miracles happen when the natural world is interrupted. Those moments leave us breathless. The unexpected recovery, the door that opens just when hope seems lost.

We can’t explain them. We can’t predict them.

But something in us knows they aren’t random. They aren’t just luck.

Definition of a Miracle

A miracle is an event that has no explanation from a materialistic, naturalistic perspective.

Religious Significance of Miracles

In the context of faith, miracles take on a deeper dimension. They aren’t just fortunate events or unexplained occurrences. They’re evidence, traces of divine fingerprints on our lives.

A miracle is more than an interruption of nature. It’s an invitation, a whisper from heaven reminding us that God is near, that he sees, and that he cares. When the impossible suddenly becomes possible, it’s as if the eternal has broken through the temporary, as if the Creator has reached down to touch his creation.

Throughout Scripture, miracles weren’t just displays of power but expressions of God’s character. They weren’t random acts meant to dazzle the crowd. They were purposeful, revealing who he is and what he desires for his people.

• When Jesus fed the five thousand, it wasn’t just about bread and fish (physical provision), it was about spiritual provision, about showing that in him, there is always enough; physically, emotionally, intellectually, and spiritually (Matthew 14:13–21).
• When he calmed the storm, it wasn’t just about wind and waves. It was about his all-encompassing authority, reminding us that everything on Earth, in the universe, and in heaven must obey his voice (Mark 4:35–41).
• When he healed the sick, it wasn’t just about restoring bodies. It was about restoring our spirits, about compassion, about revealing a God who steps into suffering and offers wholeness (physically and spiritually) for all eternity (Luke 5:12–16).

Every miracle in Scripture pointed to something greater. They weren’t just about what happened but about who made it happen. Miracles were teaching moments about God’s plans, purposes, and priorities. They were intended to motivate people to repent of their sins, receive God’s offer of salvation, and submit to God’s authority and direction over their lives. Miracles were tangible moments when heaven touched Earth, and God’s kingdom broke into human reality.

Miracles: Then and Now

What about today? Have miracles ceased? Are they just relics of a distant past? Just stories of burning bushes, parted seas, and the blind receiving sight?

Some believe miracles belonged to a different time, a biblical era when God made himself known in undeniable ways. But if the God of Scripture never changes, if he’s the same yesterday, today, and forever, then why would his power be any different now than it was then?

The God who split the Red Sea, healed the sick, and raised the dead has not stopped moving.

Miracles still happen.

They may not always come in the form of fire from heaven or a voice from a cloud, but that doesn’t make them any less real. Miracles are not just events; they’re expressions of God’s heart. They tell us he is near when we feel forgotten. And they remind us he is powerful when we feel weak and that he’s ready to assist. They assure us he is faithful when we’re filled with doubt.

And while some miracles are dramatic (seas parting, the blind seeing, the dead rising) many unfold in ways so gentle we might miss them if we’re not paying attention.

• The burden lifts when you pray, even when circumstances haven’t changed.
• The opportunity arises just when you’ve nearly given up hope.
• It’s the hardened heart that softens, the prodigal who returns home; the soul once lost in despair that finds peace.

Through the lens of faith, today’s miracles may look different, but they carry the same message. God is near and working. He’s still making the impossible possible.

What Are Miracles?

Miracles are divine interventions that defy the ordinary course of events and natural laws of the universe.

We live in a world of patterns and predictability.

The sun rises. The tide rolls in. Seasons change.

The laws of nature keep everything moving in perfect rhythm.

But now and then, something happens that doesn’t fit the pattern. Something unexplainable. Something that makes us stop and wonder: Was that more than just chance?

That’s the realm of miracles.

A miracle isn’t just a rare event or an incredible coincidence. It’s more than a feel-good moment or an unexpected turn of luck. A miracle is when God steps in and does what only he can do. It’s something that defies natural explanation and points directly back to him.

Some miracles are dramatic and impossible to miss:

• The withered hand is made completely whole and functional.
• The axehead floats.
• Water is turned into fine wine.

Others are quieter but no less powerful:

• The mother who prayed for her wayward son, only for him to come to faith in a way no one could have predicted.
• The provision that arrives at the exact moment of need, with no logical explanation.
• The peace that floods a broken heart amid tragedy, a comfort no human words could provide.

Miracles are not random or purposeless. They serve as signs, pointing us back to the One who holds everything together. They reveal his power, presence, and love at work.

Miracles vs. Coincidences

How do miracles differ from everyday coincidences or rare events?

The easiest way to tell the difference is by considering the effect.

Coincidences happen. Miracles change us.

A coincidence is an unexpected alignment of events—a surprise, an anomaly, a rare stroke of timing. You bump into an old friend in a city of millions or find a $20 bill in your coat pocket when you need it. You think of someone, and moments later, they call.

These moments feel special, even meaningful, but they don’t transform anything. They’re happy accidents, fleeting moments that come and go without leaving a lasting imprint.

Miracles, however, do more than surprise us—they change us. They don’t just defy the odds; they defy the natural order. A coincidence might make us pause, but a miracle makes us believe.

A coincidence might help you for a moment; a lucky break, a near miss, a perfect turn of events. But a miracle? A miracle alters the course of a life.

• A body riddled with disease is suddenly, inexplicably healed.
• A prodigal, lost in addiction for years, wakes up one day and never turns back.
• A door that should have been sealed shut swings open at just the right moment.
• A heart once filled with bitterness is softened by an unexplainable peace.
• A person bent on habitual evil practices suddenly stops, repairs the damage he’s caused, and consistently manifests Christlike character and love.

Coincidences are mere chances. Miracles are messages. They don’t just happen to us—they happen for us with purpose, meaning, and divine intention.

A coincidence fades with time. A miracle leaves a mark that never disappears.

Evidence of Divine Power

One of the clearest examples of a miracle in Scripture is Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1–44).

Lazarus wasn’t just sick, he had been dead for four days. His body had begun to decay. No doctor, medicine, or natural process could undo what had happened.

But then, Jesus arrived.

Despite the grief of Mary and Martha, the mourners who had gathered, and the weight of hopelessness in the air, Jesus was undeterred. He approached the tomb and commanded that the stone be rolled away.

Martha, ever practical, reminded him, “Lord, by this time there is a bad odor” (John 11:39).

But when has death ever gone too far for the Author of life?

Then, Jesus spoke.

“Lazarus, come out!”

And at the sound of his voice, everything changed.

• The blood that had stopped flowing began to course through his veins again.
• The organs that had shut down came back to life.
• The lungs that had collapsed drew in breath.
• The eyes that had been shut in darkness opened to the light.

A dead man took a breath. A buried man walked out of his tomb.

It wasn’t a coincidence or simply a rare event. It was a miracle.

No one standing there that day could claim otherwise. The mourners who had prepared his body, the family who had wept over his grave, the bystanders who had come to comfort, all of them witnessed the impossible happen right before their eyes.​​ Even the chief priests could not deny the miracle and plotted to kill Lazarus to stem the number of Jews who were deserting them to follow Jesus (John 12:10). The only explanation? The One who holds power over life and death had spoken.

Miracles remind us that God is still in control. They’re his way of showing that he’s not distant or indifferent but is deeply involved in the details of our lives.

So when we see something that defies logic and human explanation and leaves us with only one conclusion, God did this. We stand in the presence of a miracle.

In the end, miracles are not just about what happens.

They are about who makes them happen.

A Scientific Perspective on Miracles

Science loves definitions.

It organizes, categorizes, and classifies. It seeks order in a world that usually follows predictable laws.

Suppose you were to look up the word miracle in a dictionary. You’d likely find something like “a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency.”

A simple definition. Neat and tidy.

But a dictionary entry hardly seems enough for something so extraordinary, so world-shaking.

Science deals with what can be measured, tested, and repeated. Miracles, by their nature, refuse to fit into that box.

How Science Interprets Miracles

When met with a miracle—say, a sudden, unexplained healing or a disaster-defying escape—science looks for patterns. Could there be a natural explanation? A biological reason? A statistical probability?

And sometimes, science finds an answer. Diseases go into remission, winds shift, and human resilience surprises us.

But then there are the moments that go beyond probability.

These are the moments​​ that leave doctors utterly dumbfounded. These are moments when all logic says it shouldn’t have happened.

That’s where science meets its match.

• A body riddled with cancer one day, completely cancer-free the next? No explanation.
• A person clinically dead for minutes, even hours, and then suddenly breathing again? No explanation.
• A blind man who sees? A deaf girl who hears? No explanation.

Science, for all its remarkable insight, cannot define the supernatural. It can only be observed when the natural bends to something greater.

Three Types of Miracles—and How Science Views Them

Miracles don’t all look the same. Some come in flashes of divine power, rewriting the laws of nature in an instant. Others unfold slowly, transforming a life over time. Some don’t change circumstances but carry us when we thought we wouldn’t survive.

Science approaches these miracles cautiously, applying the fundamental sensibilities of patterns, probabilities, and natural explanations. It seeks cause and effect, measurable outcomes, and repeatable processes.

But what happens when even the most advanced scientific methods cannot account for what unfolds before us? When the numbers don’t add up, when logic fails, when the unexplainable refuses to fit the formula?

Let’s consider different types of miracles and how science tries to make sense of them.

1. Transcendent Miracles: When Heaven Breaks Through

Transcendent miracles leave no doubt. These are the ones that defy the laws of physics, biology, and time itself. Blind eyes open. The dead are raised.

Take the resurrection of Jesus—the most powerful transcendent miracle in history. The historical evidence is overwhelming:

• an empty tomb
• hundreds of eyewitnesses
• disciples who went from fearful to fearless, willing to die for their testimony

Yet, science struggles to engage with transcendent miracles because they cannot be repeated, tested, or measured.

Scientists might label them as legends, history distortions, or unknown phenomena.

But what science cannot explain, faith embraces. God is not bound by the laws of nature, because he is the One who created them.

If space and time had a beginning, and if science confirms that the universe was caused by something beyond time, space, and matter, then miracles are not just possible, they’re expected. Scientists have done that very thing (see, The Great Miracle below).

2. Transformative Miracles: When God Operates Within the Laws of Physics

Some miracles don’t violate the laws of physics but occur with such remarkable power, timing, and location as to leave no doubt that God was controlling the operation of the natural laws. Some examples include:

• The ten plagues that struck all the Egyptians but none of the Jews (Exodus 7–11).
• The parting of the Red Sea that permitted the passage of the Jews and their livestock but drowned the Egyptian army (Exodus 14).
• King Jehoshaphat’s tiny army that defeated three powerful armies simply by singing, “Give thanks to the Lord, for his faithful love endures forever” (2 Chronicles 20).

3. Transformative Miracles: When God Changes a Life

Some miracles don’t rewrite the laws of nature; instead, they rewrite the human heart.

• An addict walks away from addiction and never turns back.
• A hardened criminal surrenders his life to Christ.
• A marriage on the verge of collapse is restored beyond what seemed possible.

Scientists call these psychological shifts the result of willpower, therapy, or social influence. Psychologists study behavioral change, emotional healing, and the brain’s ability to rewire itself. While those explanations have merit, they fall short when transformation happens suddenly, permanently, and against all human odds.

• Why do some people with an addiction recover after years of failed attempts?
• Why do some people, known for their rage, become gentle overnight?
• Why do some conversions come with no external influence, only an unshakable encounter with God?

Science can describe what happens inside the brain but cannot explain who changes the heart.

Only God can take a broken soul and breathe new life into it. That’s a miracle.

4. Sustaining Miracles: When God Holds Everything Together

In Colossians 1, the apostle Paul explains that Jesus Christ is the creator of all things, that he is before all things and in him all things hold together.

Scientists have discovered the miracle of everything holding together through their research on fine-tuning. For example, they note that without the ratio of the electromagnetic force to the gravitational force and the ratio of the proton mass to the electron mass both being exquisitely and continually fine-tuned there would be no molecules in the universe and, consequently, no life. Similarly, both the strength and the distance ranges over which the strong and weak nuclear forces operate must be exquisitely fine-tuned for atoms to exist in the universe.

In his debate with Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, Job declared that if God were to withdraw his spirit, every living thing would breathe its last breath (Job 34:14).

5. Sustaining Miracles: When God Carries Us Through

Sometimes, the miracle isn’t expressed as the removal of suffering but the strength to endure it.

• A mother who loses a child but still wakes up each morning with peace she cannot explain.
• A man battling cancer, filled with joy instead of fear.
• A woman facing financial ruin yet trusting God like never before.

Science might point to resilience, coping mechanisms, or neurological conditioning, but how do you explain peace where there should be despair? Joy where there should be fear? Strength where there should be nothing left?

The apostle Paul prayed three times for God to remove his “thorn,” but instead, God gave him the grace to endure it (2 Corinthians 12:9).

This is a sustaining miracle. It may not part seas, but it (meaning, God) holds people up when the waves crash down. God may not remove the fire, but he walks with you through the flames.

Science may not be able to explain it, but millions of Christians can testify that when life should’ve broken them, God held them together.

Scientific View: Do Miracles Happen?

Science is a gift, an incredible tool that allows us to explore the depths of the oceans, map the intricacies of the human genome, and glimpse the edges of the universe.

Does science observe miracles? Absolutely.

What it doesn’t do (at least, not within its framework) is label them as such. Where faith sees divine intervention, science sees an event that doesn’t fit the expected model. It acknowledges the pattern break but stops short of calling it a miracle, not out of dismissal, but because a miracle implies divine agency—and science, by its nature, works within the realm of the observable and testable and often excludes the possibility of the supernatural.

Will the residue of the supernatural fit in a lab report? Some say no.

Can the fingerprints of the divine be detected under a microscope? Maybe not with a microscope, but certainly with other scientific instruments such as the James Webb Space Telescope’s exploration of the first billion years of cosmic history giving us more evidence for the biblically predicted big bang creation model and the Initiator and Designer of the universe.

Where it can be unmistakably detected is in the extraordinarily exquisite fine-tuning at every cosmic size scale to make possible the existence of life (human beings in particular) and in the redemption of billions of humans on one planet from their sin and evil. Even more impressive is how much of this multi-faceted fine-tuning simultaneously occurs only during the narrow time window of possible human existence.   

So, science has its own words. The term phenomena is a useful one. Science recognizes that, at times, things happen that cannot yet be explained. A disease disappears. A storm changes course at just the right moment. A patient declared beyond hope recovers with no medical explanation.

These cases are documented, studied, and analyzed. But because—with rare exception—they do not lend themselves to repeatability, they remain categorized as extraordinary but unclassified events. One exception is when Christians who believe in the power of prayer pray for the healing and rapid recovery of hospitalized patients they do not know—people recovering from surgery, injury, or disease—without the patients ever knowing.

But for all its brilliance, science has its limits.

Science does not disprove miracles. It simply approaches them from a different lens.

Science can tell us when something is statistically impossible but can’t explain why it happened. It can observe the laws of physics, but can’t account for the moments when they appear to bend

Yet even science points to something beyond itself in its search for truth. Behind the forces of gravity, behind the finely tuned laws of the universe, behind the order and complexity of creation, there is a Lawgiver.

The Great Miracle: The Birth of Space and Time

If we’re looking for the most profound, undeniable miracle, we need only look to the universe’s beginning.

Before the first star flickered, before time had a first second, before space had a place to exist—God was.

And then, in a moment beyond human comprehension, he spoke. And everything began.

Science confirms what Christianity knows: The universe had a beginning. The space-time theorems of general relativity prove that the cosmic time and space dimensions we can observe had a beginning, that the universe we can observe came from that which we cannot observe (Hebrews 11:3).

But that raises the question: who or what created the space, time, matter, and energy that we observe?

The cause of all this must be an Entity beyond the time, space, matter, and energy that we observe; something uncaused, something eternal.

That “something” is a “Someone.”

And if the entire universe (the very fabric of existence) is built on a miracle, why should we doubt that any lesser miracles are possible?

More Miracles: The Origin of Life

Miracles didn’t stop with the stars. Life appeared. Some scientists assert that life arose naturally from nonlife on the early Earth. Yet despite decades of effort, no one has been able to replicate this process in the lab. While experiments have successfully simulated some of the basic chemical steps involved in the origin of life, these results were achieved only under tightly controlled conditions—using pure, preselected chemicals, regulated temperature and humidity, ideal pH levels, and the elimination of all contaminants and competing reactions.

Such conditions bear little resemblance to the chaotic, uncontrolled environment of the early Earth. Ironically, these very experiments demonstrate that the emergence of life requires far more knowledge, precision, and power than even the most skilled, well-funded scientists can provide—pointing instead to the work of an intelligent Creator.

That emergence includes not just physical life, but soulish and spiritual life.

Science can describe the biological complexity of a cell, map the human genome, and explain neural pathways, but it cannot explain why humans are different.

• Why do we have a moral compass?
• Why do we seek meaning and purpose beyond survival?
• Why do we long for eternity?

We are not just flesh and bone or only have electrical signals firing in the brain. We are soulish and spiritual beings, handcrafted by a Creator who placed eternity in our hearts.

Science can explain how life functions but cannot explain why we know there is more to life than existence.

Within the scientific community, some moments refuse to be explained, instances that challenge what is known and stretch the limits of understanding.

Spontaneous healings are among these mysteries. Researchers have documented cases where diseases vanish, wounds heal overnight, and medical scans show conditions that no longer exist despite no medical intervention that can account for the change.

Near-death experiences also defy explanation. Patients who have been clinically dead—some for minutes, others for longer—later describe encounters beyond this world or details of their surroundings beyond what their physical bodies or physical organs can detect. For example, a patient under anesthesia on the operating table describing upon recovery surgery tools that were beyond the line of sight of her body.

Scientists have spent years researching these accounts and have found compelling evidence that consciousness continues after brain activity ceases. While difficult to measure in a lab, these reports consistently suggest there’s more to human existence than the physical body.

Similarly, visions of recently passed loved ones have been widely reported, particularly in end-of-life care. Studies published by PubMed Central (PMC) suggest that as many as 50% of hospice patients experience brief, 5- to 6-second visions of deceased loved ones, offering reassurance that they are at peace in the afterlife.

For scientists who hold a strictly naturalistic view that assumes only what is measurable is real, these accounts are often dismissed as anomalies, coincidences, or the result of psychological and physiological factors.

Spontaneous healing can be attributed to unknown biological mechanisms or misdiagnoses.

At the same time, near-death experiences are sometimes explained as the brain’s response to extreme stress, a surge of neural activity, or even hallucinations brought on by oxygen deprivation.

Similarly, visions of deceased loved ones can be interpreted as the product of memory recall, subconscious processing, or the brain’s way of easing the transition from life to death.

Yet, despite these rationalizations, such experiences persist across cultures, eras, and belief systems, defying simple explanations. Many scientists who initially dismissed them as unscientific have been drawn into more profound research, compelled by the consistency of these reports and their profound impact on those who experience them.

Studies in quantum physics, consciousness, and neurobiology have begun to challenge the notion that reality is purely physical, raising new questions about the nature of existence, perception, and the limits of empirical observation.

While the scientific method relies on measurable, repeatable phenomena, some moments transcend those boundaries, leaving even the most skeptical minds with lingering questions.

For some, whether these mysteries represent the limits of current scientific understanding or point to something beyond the physical realm remains debatable. However, one thing is clear: Human experience doesn’t always fit neatly into what can be seen, tested, and quantified.

For those willing to consider the supernatural, these moments point to a reality far greater than what science alone can uncover.

The Skeptic’s View: Why Some People Doubt Miracles

Not everyone accepts the idea of miracles.

Some struggle because they’ve never witnessed one, and others find it hard to believe in something that cannot be tested or reproduced.

Psychologists often argue that hope, cultural background, or perception may influence some miraculous claims. They say the mind is powerful, and people may interpret events as supernatural in moments of deep emotion or trauma.

Yes, the human mind is powerful. Faith can bring strength in suffering. Hope can change our outlook. But faith apart from God cannot cure cancer. Hope apart from God cannot bring the dead back to life.

There are times when something happens that goes beyond human psychology and reasoning. And when that happens, we must ask: Who is behind it?

To acknowledge miracles is to recognize a Miracle-Maker. It is to admit there is something—or Someone—more significant than us. And for some, that’s a difficult concept to accept. To embrace miracles is to surrender to the reality that we are not the ones writing the story.

Some resist the idea, not because miracles lack evidence but because miracles point to a God who is sovereign, in control, and not bound by our limitations.

And if that’s true, then it raises the question of what that means for us.

Faith and Science: Complementary, Not Contradictory

This is where faith and science meet, not as rivals but as partners in the search for truth.

If miracles are real, faith and science can help us understand them. The two are not enemies; at their best, they are allies.

• Science explains how things work. Miracles remind us who is at work.
• Science studies creation. Miracles reveal the Creator.
• Science seeks knowledge. Miracles whisper of a deeper truth.

Skeptics may demand more proof, and scientists may wrestle with what cannot be measured. But in the end, miracles are not so much about data but revelation.

They are God’s fingerprints left on the world he created.

They are the impossible made possible by the One who has never been bound by impossibility.

And maybe, just maybe, they are invitations to believe, to trust, to open our eyes to a world far greater than the one we can see.

But miracles—whether in the birth of the universe, the origin of life, the formation of the soul, the resurrection of Jesus, or the healing of the broken- continue to whisper a truth. The truth that there is more to this world than what we can see.

The question is are we willing to look beyond what we can measure and step into what we must believe?

Miracles vs. Magic: The Power Behind the Impossible

Miracles and magic often get tangled together in a world captivated by the extraordinary.

Both speak of things unseen and break from the expected. Both stretch the limits of human understanding.

But look closer, and you’ll see they are not the same, not even close.

Magic is an illusion, a crafted spectacle designed to deceive the senses, while miracles are interventions that transcend what naturally happens under the operation of the laws of physics and chemistry. It seeks to impress, drawing attention to the performer’s skill, whereas miracles seek to reveal something greater, pointing beyond human capability.

Magic is about manipulating perception to create wonder, but miracles are about surrender, inviting trust in something beyond explanation.

One is a performance. The other is a proclamation.

The Difference Between Miracles and Magic

Magic is about illusion, manipulation, and control. It attempts to bend reality to human will, whether through sleight of hand, deception, or the pursuit of hidden forces. Magic whispers, “Look what I can do. Look at my power.”

A miracle, however, is not man’s attempt to gain power; it’s God’s revelation of his power. It’s not an illusion or an act of deception but truth breaking through.

When Jesus performed miracles, he never did them for spectacle.

He didn’t turn stones into bread to satisfy his hunger or summon angels to rescue him from the cross. His miracles were meant to heal, restore, and proclaim God’s kingdom’s presence.

When the blind received sight, it was about restoring vision and revealing the Light of the World.

When the storm was calmed, it wasn’t just about silencing the waves. It was about revealing the One whom even the winds and seas obey.

When the dead were raised, it wasn’t just about bringing life back to a body. It was about pointing to the resurrection power of the Savior who would conquer death itself.

Magic tricks the eye. Miracles transform the heart.

Is Magic Real?

The Bible is clear on this topic. There is a supernatural realm and forces beyond human understanding. But not all supernatural power comes from God.

Scripture warns against sorcery, divination, and attempts to seek power outside God (Deuteronomy 18:10–12; Acts 8:9–24). Why? Because magic is about self-exaltation. It’s about seeking power apart from the Creator.

Consider Pharaoh’s magicians in Exodus. They mimicked some of Moses’s miracles—turning staffs into serpents and water into blood. But they couldn’t undo what God had done, and they couldn’t match his power. Ultimately, they were defeated, unable to stand before the one true God.

There is no competition between magic and miracles. One is a counterfeit. The other is the real thing.

The Bible acknowledges that angels, both the righteous angels and the evil angels, can perform miracles to a limited degree. Consequently, John, in his first epistle exhorts us, “Do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God” (1 John 4:1).

The Significance for Christians

Why does this matter? Because where we seek our power determines where we place our faith.

The world is drawn to magic because it promises control. Miracles remind us that God is in control.

Magic says that if you learn the secret, say the right words, and tap into the right force, you can shape your destiny.

Miracles say, “Be still and know that I am God.”

The faithful don’t chase after illusions, after hidden forces, after shadows pretending to be light. We follow the One who created light itself.

Miracles are not about what we can do. They are about what God has already done and is still doing.

Because absolute and eternal power doesn’t come from spells, formulas, or human effort. It comes from the One who spoke the universe into existence, the One who conquered the grave, the One whose name makes demons tremble and hearts come alive.

And that’s no illusion. That’s true. That’s Jesus.

The Miracle Worker: The Evidence of a Living God

Miracles are more than just moments that make us wonder. They are signposts pointing to the One who holds all things together. They whisper through the impossible, echo through the unexplainable, and remind us that we are not alone.

Because behind every miracle—every healing, every divine provision, every heart that beats again—is a living, present, all-powerful God.

God: The Source of All Miracles

From the first breath of creation to the resurrection of Christ, every miracle in history has one common denominator: God himself.

The Red Sea didn’t part because of Moses’s greatness. The blind didn’t see because of their strength. The dead didn’t rise by accident. These things happened because the Creator of the universe stepped in and did what only he can do.

Miracles are not random events. They are evidence. Evidence of God’s power and his love. Proof that he is not distant or detached but deeply involved in the lives of his children.

Science may explain the mechanics of the world, but miracles reveal the heart of the One who made it. They remind us that we’re more than atoms and molecules—that eternity is real, that hope is not in vain, and that the impossible is possible when placed in God’s hands.

1: God Works Through His People

Although miracles originate from God, he often works through people to accomplish his purposes.

He used Moses to call down plagues and part the sea, Elijah to bring fire from heaven, Peter to heal the sick, and Paul to raise the dead.

And he still uses his people today.

• The doctor who prays before surgery and watches a tumor disappear.
• The missionary who lays hands on the sick and witnesses their healing.
• The Christian who speaks a word of truth that turns a hardened heart toward Christ.

Miracles aren’t locked in the pages of history. They still unfold in the lives of those who trust him, step out in faith, and believe that the same God who worked wonders then is still working today.

2: All God’s People Can Experience Miracles

The apostle Peter exhorts Christians to always be ready to give good reasons for their faith and hope in Jesus Christ, and to do so with gentleness, respect, and a clear conscience (1 Peter 3:15–16). When Christians undergo such preparation, God will perform miracles to bring them into contact with non-Christians who will respond to the good reasons and Christian demeanor by committing to become followers of Jesus Christ. Examples of such miracles are documented in the book of Acts. They also occur in the lives of many Christians today as documented in the book, Always Be Ready

Are Miracles Real? Signs of a God Who Still Moves

Miracles surround us. Some are grand, and some are quiet. But they all speak the same truth that God is near.

The greatest miracle isn’t just what God has done. It’s what he is still doing. In hearts, in lives, in moments we may never fully understand.

One day, we will experience the crowning miracle of God’s story. The moment we step into eternity, where every tear is wiped away, death is no more, and God’s presence is not just felt but seen.

Until then, we walk by faith.

We trust. We believe. And we give thanks to the God of miracles.

Frequently Asked Questions About Miracles

Miracles spark wonder, stir faith, and make us lean in and ask the big questions. Here are a few quick answers to some of the most common ones.

1. What Is the True Meaning of a Miracle?

At its core, a miracle is a sign—a glimpse of God’s power, a whisper of his presence, a reminder that he is near.

A miracle isn’t just an unlikely event or a happy coincidence. It occurs when God steps in and does what only he can do. It’s when the natural world bows to the supernatural, the impossible becomes possible, and heaven touches Earth.

2. Why Don’t We Hear More About Miracles?

Miracles happen more often than we realize. The problem isn’t that God isn’t working; the problem is that we aren’t always seeing.

Sometimes, we expect miracles to look like lightning from heaven, but more often, they unfold unexpectedly. A prodigal child returning home. A cancer scan that comes back clear. A moment of peace in the middle of the storm.

Miracles happen all around the world, but we often dismiss them. Missionaries report healings and doctors see recoveries they can’t explain. God is still moving. The question is do we have eyes to see them?

3. Can Miracles Still Happen Today?

Absolutely.

The same God who parted the Red Sea, raised Lazarus, and fed 5,000 with a few loaves and fish has not changed. His power is not confined to the past.

Miracles still happen in hospital rooms, church pews, and the faithful’s quiet prayers. People are healed, hearts are restored, and prodigals come home.

And the greatest miracle of all? A life transformed by Jesus.

Some miracles unfold instantly, and others take time. But God is still at work. He still hears, moves, and does the impossible.

4. Why Are Some Prayers Miraculously Answered While Others Are Not?

This is a tricky question. If we’re honest, we’ve all struggled with it.

If God can do anything, why does he sometimes seem silent?

Here’s the truth: Every prayer is heard. Every prayer is answered.

But not always in the way we expect.

• Sometimes, God says yes.
  • The healing comes. The provision arrives. The door swings wide open.
• Sometimes, God says wait.
  • Because something is happening behind the scenes—something we can’t yet see.
• Sometimes, God says no.
  • Not because he doesn’t care but because he sees what we cannot. Because what we want isn’t always what we need. Because his plan is always bigger, always better, and always filled with wisdom beyond our understanding.

Even when the miracle doesn’t happen as we hoped, God is still good. His love is still sure, and his presence is still near.

And one day, when we stand in his presence and see the whole picture, every seemingly unanswered prayer will make sense.

Until then, we trust. 
We believe. 
We hold onto the God who still works miracles.

The post Miracles: A Scientific View of the Unexplainable appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

Ironically, many skeptics would point to the human birthing process as an example of a flawed and imperfect biological system. It’s anything but a marvel, they say. Anything but a miracle. 

Difficulties of the Human Birthing Process 
In some respects, I understand why they would take this position. The human birthing process is difficult. It’s painful and dangerous for both the mother and child. Often the birthing process is complicated by an obstructed delivery. By comparison, for nonhuman primates the process of giving birth is relatively easy and free of the complications characteristic of human births. 

An Evolutionary Origin of the Human Birthing Process?
In light of theses difficulties and dangers, skeptics maintain that the human birthing process is best explained as the product of our evolutionary history. Why would a Creator make human beings—the crown of creation—suffer through a poorly designed birthing process?

Many evolutionary biologists think the difficulties associated with giving birth arise from what’s called the “obstetrics dilemma.” In fact, recent work by a team of anthropologists from Europe seems to uphold this perspective.¹

The obstetrics dilemma posits that the origin of the human birthing process represents a compromise between two evolutionary pressures. The first arose from the shift of our knuckle-walking ape-like ancestor to a bipedal hominin. The second arose from the increased size of the human head. These two factors restricted the size of the human birth canal and made the passage of a large-headed infant through the birth canal difficult. 

Many biologists see the obstetrics dilemma as precisely the type of biological system that evolutionary processes produce. According to many evolutionary biologists, evolutionary processes don’t produce well-designed, optimal systems. Instead, the unguided, undirected processes of evolution yield flawed, poorly designed systems. These systems emerge through a process constrained by evolutionary history in which new systems are cobbled together by co-opting and modifying preexisting systems. 

For evolutionary biologists, the human pelvis evolved from the pelvis of a knuckle-walking ape-like creature—a pelvis best suited for creatures walking on all fours, not a creature that stands erect and moves around on two feet. Presumably, evolutionary forces narrowed the pelvis as hominin bipedalism emerged. Consequently, the opening of the birth canal became smaller in humans, making it more difficult for the baby’s head to pass through the birth canal. As hominins evolved toward modern humans, fetal head size increased, further compounding this restriction. This increase made a child’s passage through the birth canal even more challenging. 

Presumably, the obstetrics dilemma forced a comparative shortening of gestation in humans. This shorter pregnancy ensures that the growth of the fetus’s head doesn’t progress beyond the point that he or she can’t enter and pass through the birth canal. 

Due to shorter pregnancies, the development of the human brain must continue outside the womb, a process called secondary altriciality. At the time of birth, the head size of the human neonate (newborn) is about 28% the size of an adult’s. By comparison, the head size of a chimpanzee neonate is about 50% the size of an adult’s. Despite this difference, the neonate head size of chimpanzees is still smaller than that of humans, so the birthing process for chimpanzees (and other great apes) is largely free of complications.

Another consequence of the obstetrics dilemma is that humans require assistance during the birthing process. Evolutionary biologists refer to this requirement as cooperative breeding. 

New Insights into the Origin of the Obstetrics Dilemma 
Recently, a team of researchers from Europe sought to understand the evolutionary origin of the human birthing process and establish support for the obstetrics dilemma. The anthropologists chose to study the birthing process for the australopithecines because these creatures are viewed as transitional forms leading to the evolutionary emergence of modern humans. Australopithecines had the capacity to walk upright, yet they had a relatively small brain size. (For reference: the average brain size of chimpanzees is around 400 cc [cubic centimeters]; the average brain size of Australopithecines was about 450 cc.; and the average brain size of modern humans is about 1200 cc.)

By studying the birthing process of the australopithecines, the researchers could tease out the relative contributions that the narrow pelvis and large head size make to the obstetrics dilemma. The team accessed australopithecine pelvises from the fossil record. The fossils allowed the team to reliably estimate the size and geometry of the australopithecine birth canal. To date, no australopithecine neonate remains have been recovered. To determine fetal brain size, the research team turned to estimates previously published in the scientific literature. These estimates ranged from 110 g to 180 g. For their study, the team used three head sizes: 110 g, 145 g, and 180 g. 

They then modeled the birthing process using 3-D computer simulations and learned that only fetuses with a head size of 110 g would pass through the narrow australopithecine birth canal. The head size estimate of 110 g assumed that the head size of the australopithecine fetus was 28% that of the adult’s, just like it is for modern humans. 

The results of this study are based on computer modeling. As such, caution is in order interpreting their results. Given that caveat, I will take their results at face value. The researchers concluded that the primary contributor to the obstetrics dilemma is the narrowing of the human pelvis due to the evolutionary shift to bipedalism. Even with a relatively small head size, the australopithecine fetus would have had difficulty making its way through the birth canal because of the narrowed pelvis. The team also speculated that because the fetus’s head size would be 28% as large as an adult’s, the australopithecines practiced cooperative breeding and experienced secondary altriciality (head growth after birth)—just like modern humans. 

The researchers conclude that their results provide added support for the obstetrics dilemma. This conclusion is significant for evolutionary biologists because some anthropologists question the obstetrics dilemma. Those who question the model argue that the shortened gestation and secondary altriciality in modern humans is driven by metabolic considerations, not concerns about obstructed deliveries. 

According to this alternate model, the human fetus’s disproportionately large brain requires a relatively high level of calories and nutrients. As the pregnancy progresses, the mother can no longer supply the nutrition needed for the fetus’s brain to grow and develop in the womb. Therefore, the gestational period becomes shortened and secondary altriciality results. 

The work by the European scientific team doesn’t invalidate the metabolic demand model, but it does lend direct support for the obstetrics dilemma. And, from a big picture standpoint, studies like this one seemingly evince an evolutionary origin for humanity. 

A Creation Model Perspective on the Obstetrics Dilemma 
Is the evolutionary paradigm the only way to interpret the obstetrics dilemma? Is it possible to view the obstetrics dilemma from a creation model or a design perspective?

I think so. Instead of viewing the human birthing process as a flawed design that reflects the constraints of a historically contingent evolutionary process, I see it as an optimally designed process that meticulously balances several trade-offs—just the type of system that would be designed by a Creator. 

Trade-offs are an inevitability in engineering. Systems intended to accomplish multiple objectives—some of which conflict—inevitably face trade-offs. In these cases, each facet of the system can’t be optimized. Instead, the system’s components must be intentionally made suboptimal, carefully balancing the competing objectives of the system to achieve overall optimal performance. 

The human birthing process exemplifies this engineering concept. It reflects the perfect compromise that allows for fetuses with large heads (and brains) to be birthed by a creature who stands and walks upright. Other features of the birthing process and human growth and development can be viewed as compensatory designs that help to mitigate the difficulties of the birthing process caused by the baby’s large head and the narrowing of the mother’s birth canal. These compensating designs include secondary altriciality, cooperative breeding, the twisted birth canal, and the newborn’s malleable head. 

In short, when the basic constraints of engineering are considered, it becomes evident that the human birthing process has been designed to expertly manage competing and conflicting objectives. This type of system isn’t necessarily expected from an evolutionary standpoint. But it is the type of design expected to come from a master engineer. In other words, it is rational to think that the human birthing process is, indeed, the handiwork of a Creator.

But what about the anatomical and physiological features shared by humans and other primates? 

From a creation model / design framework, shared features among the birthing processes of humans and other mammals—including nonhuman primates and the hominins—reflect common design, not common descent. 

Evolutionary Constraints or Constraints of the Archetype?
Yet, based on my experience, sophisticated skeptics will insist that even though the design of the human birthing process may well be optimal, it is still more reasonable to view it as a product of evolutionary history. They ask, Why wouldn’t a Creator with infinite power and infinite resources design humans in such a way as to avoid trade-offs such as those connected to the obstetrics dilemma?

It’s a fair question.

In effect, skeptics argue that God should have created human beings with a unique anatomy and physiology to specifically accommodate our bipedalism and large head size. What if he had?

It would solve the problem of trade-offs in one respect, but that doesn’t mean the design of the human body would be free of trade-offs entirely. They are inevitable for complex systems. Any design used to construct the human body would face trade-offs. It’s just that the trade-offs would appear somewhere else.

From a creation model perspective, trade-offs in biological systems arise, in part, from the constraints of the archetypical designs shared by organisms that naturally group together. Prior to the publication of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species, biologists such as the eminent Sir Richard Owen interpreted shared biological features as arising from archetypical designs that existed in the Mind of the First Cause. These designs manifested in biological systems as homologous structures. Owen marveled that the archetypical designs that define the anatomy of organisms that naturally grouped together were so robust that they could be varied to produce biological systems that perform a wide range of functions.

In this vein, it’s remarkable that the design of the mammalian pelvis and gestation is so robust that it can be varied to accommodate two distinct modes of locomotion: knuckle-walking quadrupedalism and upright bipedalism, along with the large human head and brain.

Designed for Discovery
The use of archetypical designs has another important consequence. Shared biological features allow life scientists to generalize what they learn when they study one organism to the entirety of the biological realm. Shared designs make it possible for biologists to use model organisms. For example, by studying the comparative anatomy and physiology of the birthing process in humans and nonhuman primates, the European scientists developed insight into the birthing process of the australopithecines.

Conversely, if the Creator used a near-infinite array of biological designs, it would be challenging to study the living realm. The process of discovery in biology would be cumbersome and laborious.

In short, shared biological designs make nature intelligible. And that’s a marvel—even a miracle.

Resources

The Elegant Design of Human Reproduction

“The Remarkable Scientific Accuracy of Psalm 139” by Fazale Rana (blog)

“Placenta Optimization Shows Creator’s Handiwork” by Fazale Rana (blog)

“Recent Insights into Morning Sickness Bring Up New Evidence for Design” by Fazale Rana (blog)

“If God Hates Abortion Why Do So Many Occur Spontaneously in Humans?” by Fazale Rana (blog)

“The Female Brain: Pregnant with Design” by Fazale Rana (blog)

“Curvaceous Anatomy of the Female Spine Reveals Ingenious Obstetric Design” by Virgil Robertson (article)

“Life’s Twists and Turns Are Designed to Start in the Birth Canal,” by Fazale Rana (blog)

Design Constraints of the Archetype

“Archetype or Ancestor? Sir Richard Owen and the Case for Design” by Fazale Rana (article)

“Q&A: Why Would a Limitless Creator Face Trade-Offs in Biochemical Designs?” by Fazale Rana (blog)

“Q&A: Why Would an Infinite Creator Employ the Same Designs?” by Fazale Rana (blog)

“Duck-Billed Platypus Venom: Designed for Discovery” by Fazale Rana (blog)

Endnotes

1. Pierre Frémondière et al., “Dynamic Finite-Element Simulations Reveal Early Origin of Complex Human Birth Pattern,” Communications Biology 5 (April 19, 2022): 377, doi:10.1038/s42003-022-03321-z.

The post The Obstetrics Dilemma and the Design of the <em class="algolia-search-highlight">Human</em> Birthing Process appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

Let’s look briefly at a heresy that deeply challenged historic Christianity. It’s sobering to note that though church theologians and apologists effectively responded to that heresy, it never died and remains evident today.

Beginnings of Ancient Gnosticism
“Gnostic-like” ideas were evident even in apostolic times. In his first epistle, the apostle John warned his readers about a Christological teaching called Docetism (from the Greek: doceo “to seem”). Docetism taught that Jesus only seemed to have a body, but when he walked along the shore of Galilee he left no footprints, for he was a phantom. In the ancient world it was inconceivable to many that God would appear in flesh. Many people viewed matter, which includes the human body, as lowly and even evil.

John was aware of the heresy of Docetism and responded accordingly:

Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God. For many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you will know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and which is already in the world at this time (1 John 4:1–3).

So an early part of what would become a collection of Gnostic beliefs or tendencies was the idea that matter is evil and spirit is good.

Distinctive Gnostic Beliefs
Gnosticism was never a systematically defined religion with a single set of official beliefs that all Gnostics had to affirm.² In fact, there is debate about whether these Gnostic tendencies emerged initially from interacting with Christianity or whether this movement was a reaction to Judaism or paganism.³ Gnosticism consisted of a loose connection of mash-up ideas that came from the ancient philosophical and religious world. Thus, we might think of the beliefs described below as an amalgam of Gnostic trends or impulses rather than exact beliefs.

Secret Knowledge and Community: Gnosticism was especially prominent during the late second and third century AD and takes its name from the Greek word gnosis or gnostikos, which for the ancient Gnostics meant a secret or esoteric intuitive knowledge. This knowledge was believed to be hidden from most people. So the Gnostics viewed themselves as the spiritual or enlightened elites who received Christ’s true message through reflection and self-denial. This “discovery” of gnosis had uncovered the truth of salvation via intuition rather than through the normal Christian practice of preaching the gospel of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. 

Cosmos: Gnostics embraced a dualism that considered matter—including both the physical cosmos and human bodies—to be less real and even evil. Spirit, in contrast, was considered to be good. Thus, the material world was to be shunned and ultimately escaped, which defines salvation in a Gnostic context. Gnostics even reasoned that the bad and capricious God had created the material cosmos.

God: There are a number of major and minor deities within Gnosticism. First, the true and supreme God (the Monad: the Father) is a purely spiritual being who is completely transcendent and has no connection to the evil creation. Second, there is an inferior, unenlightened, and evil creator of the world called the Demiurge, who is sometimes referred to as Jehovah.

Human Beings: Gnostics as the spiritual elites reflect “sparks of spirit” of the same substance as the supreme God. Yet these spirits—through the fall of humanity—have somehow become trapped in physical bodies, which subjected them to sin and disorientation and from which they long for release.

Salvation: Salvation is attained through gaining spiritual secret knowledge and the spiritual essence by which the immortal soul is released from the dungeon of a material body and rejoins the true spiritual God the Father.

Christ: The Christ was a heavenly messenger sent from the Father to enlighten only the spiritual ones. As a purely spiritual being, he did not possess a body and thus did not suffer crucifixion nor experience bodily resurrection.

Gospels: There were many Gnostic gospels (Gospels of Judas, Philip, Mary, Thomas, etc.) that revealed spiritual truth and were seen as superior to the four canonical Christian Gospels. The discovery of the Gnostic writings of the Nag Hammadi library⁴ in Egypt in 1945, which contained forty new Gnostic documents from the late fourth century, led to a revival of Gnosticism within both scholarly and popular circles in the modern world.

An Orthodox Christian Response
Having gained a brief understanding of the bare convictions of ancient Gnosticism, let’s consider a brief historic Christian response to this challenging alternative belief system.⁵ Some of these points were made by the second-century church father Irenaeus, who studied various Gnostic teachers and offered a biblical and theological critique in his work Against Heresies.⁶

A Public Universal Community: Historic Christianity isn’t made up of spiritual elites with secret knowledge. Rather, the public Christian message is open to all people who are sinners by nature and need God’s gracious gift of salvation. The church is a public community of people living throughout the world (it’s catholic, meaning universal or whole).

Cosmos: God created the universe good and there is no moral duality between matter and spirit. Human bodies, though affected by sin, are nevertheless real and good and the essence of a person is found in the unity of body and soul.

God: There is only one true God. The Triune God is one in essence but three in personhood. God has revealed himself in the created order, the human conscience, in the history of Israel, and in the historic material-physical incarnation of Jesus Christ.

Human Beings: Humanity is uniquely made in the image of God and possesses inherent dignity and moral worth. Yet, human beings are fallen and they need redemption.

Salvation: Salvation is found by believing that Jesus Christ’s life, death, and resurrection saves a person from their sins.

Christ: Jesus Christ is the one and only Savior, the God-man, who suffered for the sins of humanity and was raised in immortal, incorruptible flesh. His resurrection assures believers of their own resurrection to eternal life.

Gospels: The four canonical gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) were written by apostles or close associates of apostles. But orthodox Christianity rejected the Gnostic gospels for four basic reasons:⁷

(1) They couldn’t be connected to the apostles.

(2) They didn’t emerge from the apostolic era.

(3) They contradicted apostolic doctrine (denying creation and the Incarnation).

(4) They didn’t gain church acceptance (because of reasons 1–3).

Gnosticism Today
Gnostic-like ideas can be found in today’s religions and culture.⁸ In this sense, Gnosticism is a heresy that seemingly will never die. Maybe its enduring appeal is that it offers a dualistic explanation for good and evil.

Takeaway
Gnosticism is a heresy that, if adopted, would change the very nature of Christianity. If matter is evil then such doctrines as creation, incarnation, atonement, and resurrection would be nullified.

Reflections: Your Turn 
An extremely popular movie series reflects Gnostic-like ideas. Anything come to mind?

Resources

• For a general introduction to Gnosticism, see Gnosticism.

• For a Christian summation of Gnosticism, see Theopedia’s article on Gnosticism.

• For a Christian evaluation of ancient Gnosticism and its leaders, see Justin S. Holcolmb, Know the Heretics.

Endnotes

1. See Ryan Reeves’s YouTube video, “Gnosticism and the Early Church.”

2. My article is influenced by D. Jeffrey Bingham’s online article, “Gnosticism Unmasked,” Christianity Today (2007), accessed February 3, 2023.

3. See Justin S. Holcolmb, Know the Heretics (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan), 33.

4. See the Nag Hammadi library.

5. Bingham, “Gnosticism Unmasked.”

6. See an introduction to Irenaeus, which includes a brief summary of his response to Gnosticism, in Kenneth Richard Samples, Classic Christian Thinkers: An Introduction (Covina, CA: RTB Press), chapter 1. Against Heresies is available online.

7. See Christian philosopher Douglas Groothuis’s critique of the Gnostic Gospels in “The Gnostic Gospels: Are They Authentic?“, Christian Research Journal online, updated September 23, 2022.

8. For both popular and scholarly presentations and defenses of Gnostic ideas, see Dan Brown, The Da Vinci Code (New York: Doubleday, 2003), and Elaine Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels (New York: Vintage, 1989). For religions connected to Gnosticism, see List of Gnostic sects.

The post Heresies Never Die: Gnosticism appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

My training in physical therapy often leaves me marveling at the intricacies of design and intentionality in the systems of the human body and in this context—the human thumb. The anatomical, neurological, and biomechanical complexity levels reveal a super-intelligence. This brief piece highlights the purposeful uniqueness in conception, construct, and function as a case for the design argument pointing to an intelligent Creator.

Astute Anatomy
The human hand is so well-designed that the hands of our so-called “close cousins” (primates) don’t compare. The distinction gets even sharper as we study the human thumb. While the human hand has around 30 muscles working across five digits (fingers), it’s the thumb that gets the lion’s share. Nine muscles are devoted exclusively to producing the many movements of the human thumb that primate thumbs can’t match.² In fact, a paralysis of certain muscles around the human thumb is termed “ape thumb” sign or deformity!³

Not only does the human thumb have a larger share of muscles that work around it, but its muscle mass is significantly greater, too—supplemented by extensive vasculature (blood vessels) in comparison with the other digits. Moreover, the unique joint orientations result in enhanced grip strength and functionality.⁴

Novel Neurology
The nervous system in living beings is comparable to a circuitry through which electricity passes to enable appliances and devices to function. The complexity of this mechanism in living beings includes a mind-boggling interaction between ions, electric potential, neurotransmitters, and the system of nerves that carries these impulses from the surface of the body to the brain and back. The human hand’s neural circuitry and, specifically that of the thumb, is simply remarkable. Of all the other organs in the body the hand has the largest representation on the motor cortex of the brain. Needless to say, the thumb again leads the pack. The area of the motor cortex devoted to the thumb alone roughly equates to the entire face, torso, and lower limb!⁵ It’s precisely for this reason that the most affected and challenging part of the human body to rehabilitate after a brain stroke is the human hand—and more so the thumb.

Figure: 2-D Cortical Sensory Homunculus
Credit: Wikipedia, OpenStax College–Anatomy & Physiology, Connexions Website

Brilliant Biomechanics
The human hand has a total of 27 joints. Of these, the joints that are part of the thumb have the highest degree of freedom. Biomechanically, this roughly translates to the thumb being the most mobile digit of the hand. While all other fingers are capable of moving in two planes at best, the thumb has multiple planes of movement through multiple axes.⁶

A distinct functional movement called the opposition makes in-hand manipulation possible and contributes to exceptional hand dexterity. The thumb is the only digit that can be opposed to the other four fingers. Nothing in the animal kingdom compares to the dexterity levels of the human hand. The thumb contributes to 40% of that hand dexterity.⁷

Though the medical fraternity has made noteworthy strides in upper limb prosthetics, engineering anything nearly as intelligent and efficient as the human thumb remains elusive. The human thumb not only stands unmatched in design, dexterity, and complexity to the rest of the animal kingdom but it also unveils a brilliance, an intentionality in the way it’s been “fearfully and wonderfully” designed to suit maximal human flourishing, stewardship, and dominion over the rest of creation.

All of these complex morphological designs support equally complex mechanisms for specific purposes, serving as great talking points for elegance, economy, efficiency, and design! The case for the human thumb is yet another effective pointer to the need for a magnificent Architect behind this miniature bioengineering marvel that is inimitable but oft ignored! As I see people splashing virtual “likes” on social media, I can’t help but imagine them flashing their “thumbs-up” to Intelligent Design!  

Endnotes

1. The Story of Eklavya and Dronacharya—Stories from Indian Mythology, Tell-a-Tale.com, accessed October 3, 2022, https://www.tell-a-tale.com/story-eklavya-dronacharya-stories-indian-mythology/.
2. Wikipedia, s.v. “Simian Hand,” accessed October 4, 2022, https://neurosigns.org/wiki/Simian_hand.
3. Tim Taylor, “Muscles of the Hand and Wrist,” Innerbody Research, accessed October 4, 2022, https://www.innerbody.com/image_skel13/ligm27.html.
4. T. Imaeda, K. N. An, and W. P. Cooney 3rd, “Functional Anatomy and Biomechanics of the Thumb,” Hand Clinics 8, no. 1 (February 1992): 9–15, PMID:1572928.
5. W. J. Z’Graggen et al., “Mapping of Direction and Muscle Representation in the Human Primary Motor Cortex Controlling Thumb Movements,” Journal of Physiology 587, no. 9 (May 2009): 1977–87, doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2009.171066.
6. D. Spencer Nichols BS, Haley M. Oberhofer MD, and Harvey Chim MD, “Anatomy and Biomechanics of the Thumb Carpometacarpal Joint,” Hand Clinics 38, no. 2 (May 2022): 129–39, doi:10.1016/j.hcl.2021.11.001.
7. Adrian E. Flatt, “Our Thumbs,” Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings 15, no. 4. (October 2002): 380-87, doi:10.1080/08998280.2002.11927870.

The post A "Thumbs Up" for Intelligent Design appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

My answer: Teleporting information about a single particle may be physically possible. Some experiments (Quantum teleportation) have demonstrated limited success. We know that teleporting an entire human body is physically impossible because it would violate the laws of physics. Statistical mechanics, quantum mechanics, and entropy are guaranteed to generate sufficient uncertainties and chaos as to disrupt a successful teleportation of any large physical object. Speculations on the teleportation of human bodies also ignore the fact that we humans are much more than just physical machines. We are soulish and spiritual beings. We are much more than just physics and chemistry. Sorry, Star Trek fans, Scotty can’t beam us up.

The post Is Teleportation Possible? appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

“Life is full of surprises and serendipity. Being open to unexpected turns in the road is an important part of success. If you try to plan every step, you may miss those wonderful twists and turns. Just find your next adventure—do it well, enjoy it—and then, not now, think about what comes next.”

Anyone who has lived for a while knows that life is full of twists and turns, unplanned and unexpected happenings that shape our destinies—for good and for bad. 

Biologists have come to learn that life’s twists and turns begin even before we’re born. In fact, we all experience our share of twists and turns during the birthing process because of the shape of the human birth canal. The inlet to the birth canal is transversely (left to right) oval (or round, in some cases). The mid and lower part of the birth canal is longitudinally (front to back) oval. When the birthing process begins, the baby enters the birth canal with the longest dimension of its head aligned with the widest dimension of the birth canal. The twisted birth canal forces the baby to rotate and reorient as it makes its way through the birth canal. If the baby’s head becomes misaligned, it can result in obstructed labor, which can be deadly.

A Challenging Question for Creation Proponents
Even though many people try their best to put life’s unexpected twists and turns in a positive light, the twists and turns that babies face during the birthing process appear to have no obvious upside—at least, at first glance. Its peculiar shape prompts the question: Why is the human birth canal twisted?

This question carries biomedical importance and theological significance. In fact, it takes on urgency for people (like me) who advocate for a creation model approach to biology. Why would God create human beings—the crown of creation— with such a dangerous and difficult birthing process? 

This question packs an even more powerful punch when the birthing process of humans is compared to that of old-world monkeys (native to Africa and Asia) and the great apes. Both groups of primates have a uniformly shaped birth canal, with the inlet, middle, and outlet possessing a longitudinally oval shape. This uniformity makes for a relatively easy birthing process compared to that of humans. 

I must concede that it wouldn’t be unreasonable for a skeptic to conclude that the twisted human birth canal is another example of a flawed biological design best understood as a consequence of an unguided and historically contingent evolutionary history. In this view, evolutionary mechanisms “make use of” preexisting biological systems (for example, the longitudinally oval birth canal of the great apes) to “cobble together” new ones (in this case, the twisted human birth canal). To counter this skeptical perspective, it is incumbent upon proponents of a creation model to identify sound reasons for the twisted human birth canal.

New Insight on the Human Birth Canal
A team of researchers from Austria has discovered that the architecture of the human birth canal is no accident. By using biomechanics principles to analyze the twisted human birth canal, they found that its design appears to reflect a necessary trade-off between several competing requirements that humans uniquely face—given our large brain size, upright posture, and bipedal locomotion.¹ 

Based on biomechanical considerations, the Austrian researchers discovered that the design of the human birth canal reflects a trade-off between (1) minimizing the deformational stress experienced by the muscles in the mother’s pelvic floor and (2) the constraints that arise from upright posture and bipedal locomotion (walking erect). 

Their calculations indicate that the design of the birth canal found in old-world monkeys and the great apes appears to be ideal for those species. Both (1) an oval shape and (2) longitudinal elongation of the birth canal minimize the deformational stress experienced by the pelvic floor muscles during the birthing process. (Excessive deformational stress can lead to pelvic floor dysfunction, which can have lifelong consequences.) 

The team’s calculations also indicates that the longitudinally oval shape of the mid and lower birth canal in humans is, likewise, ideal for humans.

But If the inlet of the human birth canal was also a longitudinally oval shape, it would cause problems because humans walk upright. A longitudinally oval inlet into the birth canal would force excess curvature of the spine and greater pelvic tilt. While this shape would facilitate the human birthing process, it would also compromise the spinal health of the mother by placing undue shear stress on her vertebral discs. Greater pelvic tilt and spinal curvature would also lead to a loss of stability, making it a challenge for human females to adopt an upright posture. On the other hand, the researchers discovered that a transversely oval shape to the human birth canal inlet reduces the pelvic tilt and spinal cord curvature, protecting the mother’s spine from injury.

Because old-world monkeys and great apes are quadrupeds, they can tolerate a birth canal with a longitudinally oval inlet. Hence, the Austrian researchers argue that their analysis indicates that the complex shape of the human birth canal evolved under the influence of antagonistic selection effects arising from (1) the birthing process, (2) pelvic floor stability, and (3) the demands of an upright posture and bipedalism. 

Based on a creation model perspective, I interpret their findings differently. From my vantage point, the research team’s work highlights a previously unrecognized set of intentional design trade-offs.

It is commonplace for engineers to be confronted with trade-offs when they design devices or systems intended to perform a variety of competing functions. To overcome trade-offs, engineers must intentionally introduce suboptimal features into their designs in order to achieve an overall optimal performance for the device or system. 

In other words, thanks to this new insight, the twisted human birth canal no longer poses an intractable problem for creation models. Instead, the human birth canal can be rightly understood as an optimal, well-designed system that expertly manages competing design priorities. 

Evolutionary Constraints or Constraints of the Archetype?
Yet, based on my experience, sophisticated skeptics who are versed in evolutionary theory will not accept my argument. They will insist that even though the design of the human birth canal may well be optimal, it is still more reasonable to view it as a product of evolutionary history in which the evolutionary pathway to the human birth canal was constrained by its natural history. Accordingly, evolutionary processes “work” with existing systems, “modifying” them in response to the pressures that come from natural selection. In this case, the modified inlet (and, consequently, the twisted birth canal) is understood to be a concomitant evolutionary response to the evolution of our upright posture and bipedalism.

In light of this perspective, I have often heard skeptics ask, Why wouldn’t a Creator with infinite power and infinite resources design humans in such a way as to avoid trade-offs, such as those that lead to a twisted birth canal just so we can walk on two legs? It’s a fair question. For this reason, I have addressed it elsewhere. (See Resources for Further Exploration.) 

In effect, skeptics are arguing that God should have created human beings with a unique anatomy and physiology to specifically accommodate our bipedalism. If he did, however, it doesn’t mean that the design of the human body would be free of trade-offs. They are inevitable for complex systems, such as the human body. It’s just that the trade-offs would appear somewhere else.

From a creation model perspective, trade-offs in biological systems arise, in part, from the constraints of the archetypical designs shared by organisms that naturally group together. Prior to the publication of Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species, biologists such as the eminent Sir Richard Owen interpreted shared biological features as arising from archetypical designs that existed in the Mind of the First Cause, designs manifested in biological systems as homologous structures.

Owen marveled that the archetypical designs that define the anatomy of organisms that naturally grouped together were robust enough that they could be varied to produce biological systems to carrying out a wide range of functions. In a presentation to the Royal Institution of Great Britain, Owen stated,

“The satisfaction felt by the rightly constituted mind must ever be great in recognizing the fitness of parts for their appropriate function; but when this fitness is gained as in the great-toe of the foot of man and the ostrich, by a structure which at the same time betokens harmonious concord with a common type, the prescient operations of the One Cause of all organization becomes strikingly manifested to our limited intelligence.”²

Drawing inspiration from Owen, creation proponents could view the twisted human birth canal as a modification of the archetypical design of the primate birth canal that has been intentionally restructured to accommodate our upright posture and bipedalism. Accordingly, it is remarkable that the design of the mammalian birth canal is so robust that it can be varied to accommodate two distinct modes of locomotion: knuckle-walking quadrupedalism and upright bipedalism.

Designed for Discovery
There is another conceivable reason why God could have created life’s diversity using archetypical designs: discoverability.

The universal nature of biochemistry and biological systems is fortuitous for life scientists. These features allow them to generalize what they learn by studying one organism to the entirety of the biological realm, in some instances. For example, by studying the anatomy and physiology of the birth canal in one group of mammals, scientists can generalize what they learn to all mammals, including humans.

The universal and homologous designs in biology also allow the scientific community to use organisms as model systems. Where would biomedical science be without the ability to learn fundamental aspects about our biology by studying model organisms such as yeast, fruit flies, and mice? How would it be possible to identify new medications if not for the biochemical similarities between humans and other creatures?

Conversely, if the Creator used a near infinite array of biological designs, it would be challenging to study the living realm. The process of discovery in biology would become cumbersome and laborious.

Because the living realm is intelligible, it is possible for human beings to take advantage of God’s provision for us, made available within creation. As we study and develop an understanding of the living realm, we can deploy that knowledge to benefit humanity—in fact, all life on Earth—through agriculture, medicine, conservation efforts, and emerging biotechnologies.

Resources for Further Exploration:

The Elegant Design of Human Reproduction

“The Remarkable Scientific Accuracy of Psalm 139” by Fazale Rana (article)

“Placenta Optimization Shows Creator’s Handiwork” by Fazale Rana (article)

“Recent Insights into Morning Sickness Bring Up New Evidence for Design” by Fazale Rana (article

“If God Hates Abortion Why Do So Many Occur Spontaneously in Humans?” by Fazale Rana (article)

“The Female Brain: Pregnant with Design” by Fazale Rana

“Curvaceous Anatomy of the Female Spine Reveals Ingenious Obstetric Design” by Virgil Robertson (article)

Design Constraints of the Archetype

“Archetype or Ancestor? Sir Richard Owen and the Case for Design” by Fazale Rana

“Q&A: Why Would a Limitless Creator Face Trade-Offs in Biochemical Designs?” by Fazale Rana

“Q&A: Why Would an Infinite Creator Employ the Same Designs?” by Fazale Rana

“Duck-Billed Platypus Venom: Designed for Discovery” by Fazale Rana

Endnotes:

1. Ekaterina Stansfield et al., “The Evolution of Pelvic Canal Shape and Rotational Birth in Humans,” BMC Biology 19 (October 11, 2021): 224; doi:10.1186/s12915-021-01150-w.
2. Richard Owen, On the Nature of Limbs: A Discourse, ed. Ron Amundson (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007), 38.

The post Life's Twists and Turns Are Designed to Start in the Birth Canal appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

A century later as Western culture continues to grapple with how to ensure human equality, a new argument against this kind of dehumanization comes from what I call the moral argument for human personhood. The structure of my argument is based on what is commonly known as the moral argument for God.

Grounding Morality in God

The traditional argument is premised on the observation that some moral laws (e.g., racism is evil) are independent of individual opinion or cultural consensus. The argument may be framed as follows:

Premise 1: If objective moral laws exist then an objective moral lawgiver exists.

Premise 2: Objective moral laws do exist.

Conclusion: Therefore, an objective moral lawgiver exists.

This argument establishes the moral lawgiver as the ontological ground for ethical norms and moral duties. For both the religious Jew and Christian, grounding law and duty in God is the key. Why? Because even an atheist who denies the existence of God can choose to believe that racism is wrong, but only the Judeo-Christian belief in God as our creator makes the argument coherent. For the Christian, the logic of this argument is supported by Romans 2:12–15, which says that the existence of God is the necessary ground for knowing objective moral laws and duties exist. But, as compelling as this argument is, the belief in God as our lawgiver is not enough to protect human sacredness. We need to go one step further and ensure that the sacredness of every human person is protected against dehumanization. Building on the moral argument for God, I frame my moral argument for human personhood as follows:

Premise 1: If the objective moral duty to protect human dignity exists, then the objective fact of human personhood exists.

Premise 2: The objective moral duty to protect human dignity does exist.

Conclusion: Therefore, the objective fact of human personhood exists.

What Is Human Personhood?

This new moral argument establishes human personhood as the ontological ground for ethical norms and moral duties. Premise 1, like the first premise of the moral argument, asserts that if we wish to affirm human dignity for every single person, that claim must be connected to the definition of what it means to be a person. The conclusion that the objective fact of human personhood exists is significant because it exposes a deep flaw in the naturalist’s argument that humans evolved from lower animals. How? By recognizing that naturalism is grounded in the presuppositions that reality is circumscribed by nature, sufficiently explained by science, and excludes supernatural causation. This definition of naturalism is often associated with atheists, but it also includes some theists who believe that God did not supernaturally intervene in the process of natural selection. Consequently, all naturalists—atheists and theists alike—are forced to argue that evolving biological systems provide the sole explanation for human personhood.

Human personhood, for the naturalist, is both a contingent and emergent property of nature. But, if biological systems are continually changing, then human personhood itself is continually changing. Certainly, many naturalist philosophers have tried to resolve this problem by connecting personhood to other special features such as self-awareness, consciousness, or social standing. In the end, these philosophers end up conceding that personhood is a property contingent on some combination of these features, and humans who lack these features lack full personhood. Human personhood for the naturalist, therefore, is not a fact that exists independent from natural selection, but a concept of identity that evolves as our biology (or even perception of biology) evolves.

Now comes the problem for naturalists. If some biological systems (and the species they produce) are better suited to survival, then other systems are less fit. And history shows us that this line of reasoning invariably leads to the dehumanization of those humans who are deemed lower on the scale of fitness.

Is a “Herd Instinct” Morality?

In the hope of affirming the second premise (the objective moral duty to protect human dignity does exist), the advocate of theistic evolution may try to claim that the drive to protect the rights of every person emerged as a result of some herd instinct common to a particular group of hominids. However, as philosopher Brian Morley points out, this “instinct to help and support the members of the herd is not genuine morality.”¹ In other words, theistic evolutionists may describe how ethics work as an instinct that occurs in nature, but they fail to show why we are morally obligated to cooperate with this instinct. I may need to protect the people in my “herd” so that we can survive, but why should this obligate me to protect members of other “herds” who are competing for limited resources?

The desire of theistic evolutionists to ascribe dignity to other humans and protect their rights is, therefore, only a subjective preference for a certain set of actions that the majority of humans believe serve the greater good of the community. Advocates of naturalistic theistic evolution may choose to affirm the abstract principle of human dignity, but they cannot ground that belief in an objective definition of personhood that equally applies to every evolved human.²

Human Dignity Stems from Creation in God’s Image

The moral argument for human personhood, however, establishes an important line of reasoning. It grounds human dignity in the fact of human personhood, which stands outside the boundaries of naturalistic animal-to-human evolution. For the Christian, our belief in Adam and Eve as created in the image of God—the first humans and sole progenitors of every living human—grounds the fact of human personhood outside culture, politics, and nature. While this image of God was deformed by the fall depicted in Genesis 3, creationists affirm that the impact of sin did not destroy the nature of human personhood nor did the fall destroy the sacredness of the material body.

For the apostle Paul, the incarnation of Christ, and his subsequent death and resurrection, transforms the individual believer into his or her ultimate state of being (Galatians 2:19–20). The transformative work of Christ, however, occurs without the individual losing their unique identity as a human person. Therefore, the creationist theology—seen through the lens of Christ’s redemption of humankind—is distinct from the evolutionary worldview that sees the human species as only one short stage of identity along a spectrum of evolved forms. This historic doctrine of special creation provides a stable and persistent foundation for defining human personhood, safeguarding human dignity, and ensuring human rights. The affirmation that every human is a person made in the sacred image of God takes us back to the opening discussion of racism.

Special Creation Grounds Personhood

The moral argument for human personhood, grounded in special creation, offers the most coherent argument against any form of dehumanization. Regardless of how society defines race or dehumanizes based on racial hierarchies, the Christian doctrine of special creation affirms that every human body, regardless of skin color, reflects the image of God and is the object of Christian love. The theology of special creation summarized in the moral argument for personhood undermines racism and does not suffer the definitional problems endemic to theistic evolution. The moral argument for human personhood affirms that discrimination against any racial group is unequivocally a violation of human sacredness and that Christians have a duty to ensure justice for every marginalized group.

Endnotes

1. Brian K. Morley,Mapping Apologetics: Comparing Contemporary Approaches (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2015), 262, Apple Books.
2. See my article for a related discussion, J. R. Miller, “A Response to Clunn’s Axioms of Morality,” Communications of the Blyth Institute 3, no. 1 (January 3, 2021): 39, doi.org/10.33014/issn.2640-5652.3.1.miller.1.

The post A New Moral Argument for <em class="algolia-search-highlight">Human</em> Personhood appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

We also noted that God, as Augustine explains, created us for himself, to have unity with him and glorify him.² Nothing else will ultimately realize our human nature and bring about concomitant joy, happiness, and fulfillment. However, when our human will expresses the sexual libido in a disordered, lustful manner—a manner opposed to our human nature—we experience the privation of a disordered self.³

The focus for this blog is to show how the neurochemistry of attachment seems to support features of Augustine’s orthodox understanding of the Christian sexual ethic.

The Neurochemistry of Attachment

Research in the neurochemistry of attachment suggests that numerous neurochemicals such as oxytocin, vasopressin, and dopamine play a significant role in the formation, maintenance, and expression of monogamous pair-bonds (strong social relations between members of a breeding pair in monogamous species).⁴ Social attachments, including pair-bonding, play a significant role in human well-being.⁵ This bonding implies that sexual expression may promote or detract from human well-being.

For decades, scientists have known about neuroplasticity (the ability of the brain to modify or change) and its connection to hormones.⁶ Given neuroplasticity, sexual expression—with the aid of the relevant neurochemicals—forges new neural pathways of thought, feeling, and behavior. Once forged, people are more prone to follow these pathways next time we embark on the same or similar activities. The more we follow them, the stronger the pathways become and the more deeply they embed themselves within us, thereby habituating us to express ourselves in accord with them. In other words, the more we retread these neural pathways, the more our thoughts, feelings, and behavior approach necessity (compulsion). And the more they approach necessity, the more they impact our relationships with current and future partners.

We see how the neurochemistry of attachment supports what Augustine says about unity and fulfillment through the following explanation. Human nature is structured so that the ordered sexual libido and its expression are conducive to fulfilling its inherent ends. As we begin to meet the ends of our nature, we begin to gain a sense of fulfillment. As the neural pathways of thought, feeling, and behavior forged by neurochemicals released through the process of sexual expression become entrenched in our being, the deeper the unity we experience with our spouse. The relatively large amounts of neurochemicals released through sexual expression within a faithful marriage help the couple forge an ever-stronger bond of love and trust between them, thereby fulfilling some of the ends of human nature.

For Augustine, couples called to marriage are to order their sexual libido toward the good (conducive to human fulfillment and happiness) of marital fidelility.⁷ The good of fidelity leads the couple to experience a level of intimacy or unity that promotes the goods of procreation and sacrament or permanence of the marriage bond.⁸ The three goods of marriage (fidelity, procreation, and “sacrament”) produce much joy and fulfillment for the couple. What Augustine claims, then, seems to accord with the implications of the neurochemistry of attachment.

Autonomy Leads to Disruption

However, the converse is also true. Whereas the neurochemistry of attachment implies that within the harmonious marital context our biology promotes greater unity and love with our spouse, it also promotes greater disintegration outside of the harmonious marital context. Specifically, research suggests that the pair-bonding mechanism in human beings becomes disrupted after the loss of a partner.⁹ In their book, Hooked, Joe McIlhaney Jr. and Freda Bush ask us to consider tape. The more we use and reuse the same tape, the more it loses its ability to stick to an object. So also, the more partners a person has, the greater the weakening of the pair bonding effects of oxytocin and vasopressin.¹⁰ In fact, short-term sexual relationships that have little emotional connectedness or intimacy damage the physiological mechanism that the human body has for bonding.¹¹ Specifically, the neurochemical imprint of past sexual relationships remains, disrupting or preventing the physiological processes that lead to healthy relationships.¹²

The weakening of the pair-bonding effect, then, may wreak havoc on a person who, after experiencing many sexual liaisons, finds a partner with whom that person wants to establish a permanent or, even, semi-permanent bond. The well established neural pathways of sexual expression, due to the weakened bonding effects of the hormones, may not allow the person to enter relationships of fidelity and, thus, deep unity and love. Explained alternatively, the more sexual liaisons a person has, the more adverse to love and fidelity the neural pathways of thinking, feeling, and behaving become, and the greater the disorder of the self. The deeply entrenched neural pathways formed by many sexual liaisons produce detrimental effects on future relationships and marriages.

As Augustine explains it, when we decide to become autonomous from God by expressing the sexual libido in a disordered manner, the sexual libido rebels against our will and the rest of our being, enslaving us. “For what else is man’s misery but his own disobedience to himself, so that in consequence of his not being willing to do what he could do, he now wills to do what he cannot?”¹³

Yet, the person whose will is bound by their rebellious sexual libido has reason for hope. We know that if we humble ourselves, repent, and seek God’s forgiveness through Christ, he will hear us, for his mercies are without number and his grace without end.

Because of the Lord’s great love we are not consumed,

for his compassions never fail.

They are new every morning;

great is your faithfulness. (Lamentations 3:22–23)

Path to Harmony and Fulfillment

Thus, contra religious scholar Elaine Pagels, the Christian sexual ethic is not an arbitrary but a beneficial one that takes into account a correct understanding of our human nature.¹⁴ As we’ve seen through science and Augustine’s orthodox theology, Christian sexual mores and Augustine’s understanding of these are salubrious to the human being. If we follow the Christian sexual ethic, it will help lead to our well-being by fomenting harmonious marriages where we experience deep and fulfilling intimacy with our spouse. Also, it will help us create stable, safe, and caring environments for any children we may have, as our marriage becomes a symbol for the indissolubility of God’s love for us.

Endnotes

1. Elaine Pagels, Adam, Eve, and the Serpent (New York: Random House, 1988). See especially chapter V.
2. Saint Augustine, The Confessions of St. Augustine, trans. John K. Ryan (Garden City, NY: Image Books, 1960), book 1, section 1.
3. Saint Augustine, The City of God, trans. Marcus Dods (New York: Random House, 1991), book XI, section 11.
4. Zachary V. Johnson and Larry J. Young, “Neurobiological Mechanisms of Social Attachment and Pair Bonding,” Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 3 (June 2015): 38–44, doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2015.01.009.
5. Johnson and Young, “Neurobiological Mechanisms,” 38–44.
6. J. David Sweatt, “Neural Plasticity and Behavior – Sixty Years of Conceptual Advances,” Journal of Neurochemistry 139,suppl 2 (October 2016):179–199, doi:10.1111/jnc.13580. 
7. Saint Augustine, On Marriage and Concupiscence, trans. Peter Holmes and Robert Ernest Wallis, rev. Benjamin B. Warfield from Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series 1, vol. 5, ed. Philip Schaff (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing, 1887), book 1, chapter 10. Revised and edited for New Advent by K. Knight, http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15071.htm.
8. Saint Augustine, On Marriage and Concupiscence, book 1, chapter 10.
9. Katie Hinde et al., “Challenges to the Pair Bond: Neural and Hormonal Effects of Separation and Reunion in a Monogamous Primate,” Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience 10, no. 221 (November 14, 2016): 1–15, doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00221.
10. Joe S. McIlhaney, Jr. and Freda McKissic Bush, Hooked: The Brain Science on How Casual Sex Affects Human Development (Chicago: Northfield Publishing, 2008), 43.
11. McIlhaney and Bush, Hooked, 63.
12. McIlhaney and Bush, Hooked, 77–78.
13. Saint Augustine, City of God, book XIV, section 15.
14. For a more comprehensive and technical treatment of this topic see, Miguel Angel Endara,“Augustine on Sex and the Neurochemistry of Attachment,” National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 20, no. 4 (Winter 2020): 695–707, doi:10.5840/ncbq202020464.

The post Augustine’s Sexual Ethic, Part 2 appeared first on Reasons to Believe.

Electromagnetic radiation (EMR) in the twenty-first century has exponentially increased in the environment. Wi-Fi, operating at frequencies of 2.4 and 5.0 gigahertz (GHz), permeates most homes and businesses in cities and towns around the world. Cell phones, Bluetooth, and microwave ovens also operate at low GHz frequencies. Cell phone usage has especially increased over the past two decades. People all around the world have largely abandoned their personal landline telephones in favor of cell phones.

Meanwhile, Wi-Fi and cell phone networks have proliferated and network coverage has become more comprehensive. During the last five years, wireless equipment in major cities around the world has doubled.¹ A total of 22.2 billion wireless devices are connected via wireless local area networks (WLAN). Consequently, the possible effects of exposure to GHz electromagnetic radiation on humans and animals have drawn attention from research scientists.

Past Physiological EMR Experiments
The effects of EMR on animals have been poorly or ambiguously determined. Nevertheless, many scientists have speculated that such effects likely exist. The reason why is that the rise of EMR in the environment appears to be correlated with a worldwide rise in sleep disorders,² psychiatric disorders,³ infertility,⁴ and cancer.⁵ However, scientific experiments designed to confirm these correlations—with rare exceptions—have proven either inconclusive or disputed.

The exceptions are sleep disorders and learning/memory impairment. Exposure to mobile phone radiation during sleep altered the sleep patterns of 27 out of 30 healthy men aged 18 to 30, but in widely different ways, showing improvements for some individuals and deteriorations for others.⁶ Exposure of adult mice to low-level 2.45 GHz radiation for 2 hours/day for 15, 30, and 60 days consistently suppressed hippocampal memory formation.⁷

New Physiological EMR Experiment
A team of nine biologists led by Lingyu Liu surveyed the published scientific literature on the effects of wireless EMR exposure on human sleep patterns. However, they noted that human volunteers had difficulty accounting for environmental factors.⁸ Possible complicating factors that may explain the wide range of observed effects on human sleep patterns include the consumption of caffeinated drinks and foods, alcohol and/or medications, cigarette smoking, video and television viewing, and mobile phone and computer usage. Furthermore, human volunteers cannot always be trusted to truthfully report on such complicating factors. Liu’s team needed a reliable proxy.

The proxy Liu’s team chose were mice. Among nonhuman animals, mice and rats come the closest to matching human brain molecular pathways and the brain chemistry related to memory.⁹

Liu’s team designed a chamber with EMR antennae on top and a mouse cage at the bottom. They planted four cranial electrodes in the skulls of four different mice. They recorded electroencephalograms of 12 different cohorts of mice (48 mice total) during several days each of wake-sleep cycles. Their experiments demonstrated “a causal relationship between 2.4 GHz EMR modulated by 100-Hz square pulses and increased wakefulness in mice.”¹⁰

Previous studies had established that increased wakefulness diminishes cognition, attention, and memory.¹¹ Consequently, Liu and her colleagues concluded that exposure to excessive wireless signals alters sleep patterns in mice and likely in humans as well. They also suggested that their experiments may explain why sleep disorders have recently become a worldwide health challenge.¹²

Theological Implications
In their paper, Liu and her colleagues offered no philosophical comments other than to state that the most responsible and ethical response to their experimental results would be to conduct follow-up experiments where the frequency, intensity, and duration of the wireless signals are varied. I would add that varying the conditions and environment of the mice also is important to determine if health, diet, age, and/or environmental factors affect the impact of wireless EMR exposure. I agree that such experiments are essential to establish safe limits for wireless use and wireless EMR exposure.

Experiments like these show that part of God’s great wisdom (Psalm 104:24; Genesis 1:25) was to design mice and rats with characteristic features that mimic many features of the human body. These creatures are also easy to care for and they enjoy the company of humans. Thanks to all these designs, mice and rats have played and continue to play crucial roles in the development of medical advances and treatments for humans.

In Genesis and Job, God explains how he charged humans with the responsibility to manage all Earth’s resources for our benefit and the benefit of all life. Part of that responsibility is to manage any technology we develop for the mutual benefit of humanity and all of Earth’s life. Hence, understanding the benefits and dangers of wireless technology is part of our divinely assigned role.  

Endnotes

1. Thomas Alsop, “WLAN Connected Devices Worldwide 2016–2021,” July 17, 2020, https://www.statista.com/statistics/802706/world-wlan-connected-devices.
2. Desana Kocevska et al., “Sleep Characteristics across the Lifespan of 1.1 Million People from the Netherlands, United Kingdom and United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Nature Human Behaviour 5, no. 1 (January 2021): 113–22, doi:10.1038/s41562-020-00965-x.
3. A. J. Baxter et al., “Global Prevalence of Anxiety Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression,” Psychological Medicine 43, no. 5 (May 2013): 897–910, doi:10.1017/S003329171200147X.
4. Mélodie Vander Borght and Christine Wyns, “Fertility and Infertility: Definition and Epidemiology,” Clinical Biochemistry 62 (December 2018): 2–10, doi:10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2018.03.012.
5. Lindsey A. Torre et al., “Global Cancer Incidence and Mortality Rates and Trends—An Update,” Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention 25, no. 1 (January 2016): 16–27, doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0578.
6. Heidi Danker-Hopfe et al., “Effects of Mobile Phone Exposure (GSM 900 and WCDMA/UMTS) on Polysomnography Based Sleep Quality: An Intra- and Inter-Individual Perspective,” Environmental Research 145 (February 2016): 50–60, doi:10.1016/j.envres.2015.11.011.
7. Saba Shahin et al., “From the Cover: 2.45-GHz Microwave Radiation Impairs Hippocampal Learning and Spatial Memory: Involvement of Local Stress Mechanism-Induced Suppression of iGluR/ERK/CREB Signaling,” Toxicological Sciences 161, no. 2 (February 2018); 349–74, doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfx221.
8. Lingyu Liu et al., “Specific Electromagnetic Radiation in the Wireless Signal Range Increases Wakefulness in Mice,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118, no. 31 (August 3, 2021): e2105838118, doi:10.1073/pnas.2105838118.
9. Hugh Ross, “Save the Rats, Stave Off Dementia,” Reasons to Believe, June 1, 2013, /adam-eve/human-body/save-the-rats-stave-off-dementia.
10. Liu et al., “Specific Electromagnetic Radiation,” 1.
11. William D. S. Killgore, “Effects of Sleep Deprivation on Cognition,” Progress in Brain Research 185 (2010): 105–129, doi:10.1016/B978-0-444-53702-7.00007-5; John G. McCoy and Robert E. Strecker, “The Cognitive Cost of Sleep Lost,” Neurobiology of Learning and Memory 96, no. 4 (November 2011): 564–82, doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2011.07.004; Franz Weber and Yang Dan, “Circuit-Based Interrogation of Sleep Control,” Nature 538 (October 6, 2016): 51–59, doi:10.1038/nature19773.
12. Eus J. W. Van Someren et al., “Disrupted Sleep: From Molecules to Cognition,” Journal of Neuroscience 35 (October 14, 2015): 13889–95, doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2592-15.2015.

The post Assessing Risks of Wireless Radiation Exposure appeared first on Reasons to Believe.