Dear Theophilus, 

We left off in the last letter considering DNA and we came to the conclusion that it has certain characteristics which point to the fact that chemistry and physics cannot fully explain the behavior of DNA. Moreover, we have seen that the possibility that DNA arose spontaneously is really very, very slim. This causes us to stop and to consider what the significance of DNA is and what it tells us about the universe.

Before we go any further, allow me to give you a simple illustration which will enable us to draw certain conclusions from the DNA molecule. Suppose that you have a platform which is tilted toward the floor. If you take a ball, and you let it go, the ball will spontaneously roll down. It will never roll up on its own. This is a simple illustration of the way all things behave in the universe. They always, on their own, go down the slope to a state of lower energy. The reverse situation is never observed unless we intervene. Thus, there are certain discernible trends in the universe; our universe has certain basic properties which are never varied.

When we look at DNA, we see that, with time, it becomes longer and therefore, more complex. This happens on its own and is therefore spontaneous. There is something in the fabric of the universe that pushes it towards greater complexity. The claim is made by some scientists that meaning is a nonexistent fiction invented by man to make the universe more palatable. The answer to these scientists would be to consider the DNA molecule. Why does it become more complex with time, eventually producing organisms which are capable of processing complex information which causes them to crave after meaning? The conclusion that even a brief consideration of the properties of the DNA gives is that the trend toward complexity and an increased capacity for meaning seems to be built into the very fabric of the universe. And there is another important additional factor. This growth in complexity has no survival value and since one of the basic driving forces in biological systems is the quest for survival, then this growth in complexity cannot be explained by a search for organisms for a greater capacity for survival. What our consideration of the DNA molecule has shown is that analogous to the potential energy gradient present in mechanical systems in the world, there is a meaning gradient which spontaneously leads to greater depths of meaning. Teleology is built into the very essence of the universe and what this shows us is that when religions speak about a meaningful universe, they are not just offering some pie in the sky. What they are saying is echoed in the very basis of being and creation. Religious meaning, conferring congruity on seemingly unconnected aspects of our lives does not go against what we know of the world and we therefore see plausibility in religion.

We always have to careful in our judgements and keep in mind that we are not the measure of everything. It is true that in archaic thought in the pre-scientific era, there was an abuse of integration. The root of superstition is to see connection, and cause and effect where none exists. We now better understand this error in that we appreciate the influence of coincidence. There is still chance in the universe, because chance comes with freedom, and if there is chance, then there will be coincidences, in other words disconnected occurrences. However, modern man has gone to the other extreme by insisting that there is no coherence in the universe, no meaning. All is chance. Both positions are extreme and because of this, both are wrong..

Religion, faith, conversion have been attacked by some as crutches used by people who are afraid to stand on their own two feet and need the illusion of a caring God looking after their well being. If this were true, then religion would be a sham. But the irony of it all is that when you look at people who have truly believed, they have not been necessarily blessed with health or comfort or prosperity. More often than not, their life goes through suffering which sometimes increases as they come to their faith. And yet, they persist in their faith. To claim that they are believing merely for some material rewards of better health or a better psychological state, flies in the face of much that we see in the lives of saints. Then why do they hold on? Why do they persist in the face of persecution? The main reason for this is that conversion opens the doorway to a greater access to meaning. Through the faith that we have, we receive a gift which tells us that the universe is not meaningless but immeasurably meaningful. It is this realization, it is this thirst for meaning that drives us and what we see is that the quest for meaning is not something alien to creation but is entrenched in the very heart of the molecular architecture that guides our biochemical processes.

We started out our discussion by looking at objections to the validity of religion and we saw that one of the major stumbling blocks was the appearance of religion as implausible. The twentieth century has seen a blossoming of science unparalleled in previous history and with this came a knowledge of the workings of our world that was inaccessible to those who lived in previous centuries. The scientific objections to faith are persistent left-overs from the science of the nineteenth and earlier centuries. Modern advances in science have prepared a more conducive environment for at least accepting that God's steps are discernible in creation. Probably one of the areas that has opened up to faith has been physics, particularly in the area of cosmology which studies the origin and evolution of the universe. Here, there has been a refreshing openness to religion. Biology, on the other hand, has been more closed to the possibility of God being involved with creation. One of the reasons for this has been the dominance of Darwinism. This theory worked when the knowledge of biological mechanisms and biochemistry was very limited. Now, with the advances that have been made, Darwinism has been seen to be lacking in many areas and a new theory is called for incorporating the modern advances that have been made. Darwinism has contributed very little to our understanding of mechanism of biochemistry and yet, it exerts a very profound influence on some biologists. The reason for this is that Darwin's theory of evolution is itself a mythic concept which confers unity on the biological world and this has proven to be very attractive to some.

In concluding this letter, I want to underline the uniqueness of Christianity. We have seen that there is a mythic component to man in literature, in worship, and in the arts in general. This is an important and enriching aspect of what it means to be human, but there is a danger that the mythic will swamp our lives. I think that this is one of the worries of scientists who see problems with myths. Their concern is understandable. But the strength of Christianity lies in the fact that it addresses this concern. One of the powerful and evocative images in Christianity is that of a wedding. Different aspects of creation find their meaning and significance and unity in Christ who is the Groom. What Christianity emphasizes is that we must hold a complementary view of life in that seemingly contradictory aspects are both maintained, without one dominating the other. Myth is important, but so is passing time. The Great Time is important, but so is history and what we do in history. And it is precisely in history, in the seemingly mundane goings on of everyday life that we see meaning embedded conferring on it value and hope. I have heard some criticize liturgical prayer as lacking in originality since the words used are prescribed and are therefore lacking in genuineness. But it is this very fact that shows that we deal with something that is not just part of everyday life but something that brings us into another kind of existence. And yet, it is common words that do this in a setting where we share space here and now in prayer with our friends in Christ.

The world, all of creation is teeming with meaning, if we only had eyes to see it. The sciences and the arts both help us to see beyond what we are used to and in this seeing, embrace meaning. We will still hear from scientists who will make all kinds of claims about the absence of meaning and about the fact that we are totally explainable through the movements of atoms and molecules. It is in knowing more about science that we will be able to stand up to these challenges thrown out by reductionists who reduce man to a meaningless motion of atoms. But we will always keep in mind that science does not have the final word. It is only one of the words in the vocabulary of humanity and if we are aware of this, then we will find our lives and our world more meaningful.

Yours,

Bar-Abbas