Do Christians deny the existence of DNA?

Question

I've seen a lot of answers in this forum that lead to the assumption that Christians deny the existence or effect of DNA on the construction of an organic body. Deoxyribo Nucleic Acid is a chemical compound, millions of which exist. Why is this particular kind so hard to accept? Or do they just believe that they are unrelated with certain issues of a human body?

to E=MC2
very incitive of you. Please direct your efforts into answering this question.

Answer 1

Yes Chrisitans believe in DNA..I'm sure you have a point and anxiously await the next question. If this has to do wiht the previous question as i have told you it is a moot point to say(which could be argued) that someone is born homosexual. It does not matter. We are what we are but sin is still condemned it the flesh and salvation available through thae atonement. We are all born to sin if not show me the man without sin. Jesus Christ is the man without sin and he chose to pay the penalty of death for you.

Answer 2

Religion often seeks to explain things that science has not yet figured out...at one time it was heresy to suggest the world was flat. Until science proved it, then the religion adapted. Although there are still many verses in the Bible that would indicate the Earth is flat...but then they are "reinterpreted" as something else.

1 Chronicles 16:30: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable.”
Psalm 93:1: “Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm ...”
Psalm 96:10: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable ...”
Psalm 104:5: “Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it
never can be shaken.”

Then when something has not yet been proven by science, the christians will say "see science does not have any explanation, is therefore flawed, so the Bible is true." Faulty logic at best. I don't think any scientist ever claimed science has all complete answers to every mystery...which is why we continue to research and study.

Whenever that research and study imposes on religiously held dogma, get ready for the screaming. Until of course, the science proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that the religion is wrong...time to reinterpret scripture.

I wish we'd just let science go its course. Especially in the areas of stem cell research and DNA. So much valuable knowledge is being slowed, which will one day I'm sure, be as common knowledge as the Earth not being the center of the universe is today.

So, anytime the Bible is used as "proof" of anything, there is a great chance that we are just misinterpreting it until science proves it otherwise.

Answer 3

Evolution is a theory, but DNA is not. The existence of DNA has already been verified and geneticists are already decoding the genome as we speak. Kind of hard to deny the existence of something real. That's like trying to deny the existence of water.

Answer 4

No, many Christians do believe in DNA, here is a quote from a Christian website that clearly shows that DNA is more supportive of creation than evolution

"It is not enough to explain how DNA might have gathered into strands by random chance; evolutionists must also explain the machinery to interpret DNA. In other words, it’s not enough to explain how random letters could eventually fall into the order S-E-E-T-H-E-D-O-G-R-U-N. These letters still don’t mean anything unless you have a pre-existing language system for interpreting those letters! ‘See the dog run’ has meaning, but only to a modern English-speaker. (The origin of ‘information’ is a critical weakness in evolutionary theory—see Self-Replicating Enzymes? and Q&A: Information Theory.) "

Answer 5

Forensic conclusions are made, not by scientific-method "operation science", but by the reasoning of "origin science" which is based on theoretical deduction, indirect proofs, irreproducible singularities (i.e., one-time-only happenings), evidence from the unobserved past, and historical or hypothetical events beyond a reasonable doubt. In this respect, the study of origins (creation vs. evolution) and the determination of DNA lineages are amazingly similar in that the interpretation of the evidence is not open to empirical disproof.


Please also keep in mind that, according to a biblical worldview, it is not God that classifies man as a primate along with apes and monkeys. It is the evolutionary mindset that considers man to be a member of the mammalian order that also includes prosimians, tarsioids, and anthropoids. Nevertheless, it is commonly asserted now that man and the chimpanzee must be very closely related because they are said to share 96%-98.7% of their functional DNA which, in reality, is only the 1.3%-4% of the genome consisting of the genes that are actually known to be responsible for the coding of proteins. Be aware that the human haploid genome consists of some 3 billion nucleotide pairs of DNA! The fact that approximately 98% of the 1.3-to-4% of human DNA that is known corresponds to chimpanzee DNA really proves very little. Even a cloud, a watermelon, and a jellyfish are 98% similar since they are all 98% water!! It really is the 2% variation that truly makes all the difference!

The infinitely more significant fact that each specific kind of organism has its own individually-unique DNA molecular structure, not 100% identical to any other kind of organism, is academically dismissed when considering comparative anatomy, structural homologies, or molecular similarities. Indeed, the very design of DNA is orchestrated to prevent one genetic blueprint from becoming a clone of a different kind of hereditary program. It is hard to imagine a more solid evidence for special creation--and against a common ancestor--than the mere existence and function of DNA!

To the objective mind, similarities should indicate a common designer at least as much as they indicate a common ancestor. It would be logical that an Intelligent Designer would use the same efficient plan to code for proteins in all living organisms genetically engineered by Him. In fact, based on their comparable structure, one would predict blueprint similarity between humans and apes indicative of "common design in advance", not "common dice and chance".


The original 1987 study used mitochondrial tracer DNA (mtDNA), the chromosomes of which are passed unchanged from mother only to offspring, unlike nuclear DNA, which comes from both parents. The study involved 136 human women with widely-varying geographical and ethnic diversity. The analysis was said to point back to a single ancestral mtDNA molecule from a human female living in sub-Saharan Africa about 200,000 years ago. However, it has now been determined that both the entering order of data input and the interpreting of data output were prejudiced toward an African origin for "mitochondrial Eve" based on evolutionary presuppositions

Answer 6

No, all the Christians that I have known in 20 years have alluded to the existence of DNA. Now where you go with that is your own buisness, but I think that the question seems to play us for fools.
I think that I know that you are trying to make a point, but perhaps you didn't need to ask this question.

I will attempt to answer all of your questions today though. You seem to be genuine in your heart. ( :

Answer 7

AS a Christian college student, I find DNA amazing. I look at it as the blueprint for life. To me, DNA is just another reason to regard God as awesome. DNA is another reason that the existence of God can be regarded as true. People say that life began with the BIG BANG THEORY, I disagree...the genetic code of humans, and the sequence in which the nucleotides are arranged in human DNA as well as other plants and animals tells me that DNA is the handiwork of a higher supernatural power.

Answer 8

When God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam in the Garden of Eden and He created Eve, God used Adams DNA for that. IT WAS NOT A RIB. You will have to go to the original languages to understand this. He used the feminine side of man for that purpose. You would not know that very much today in this world as there are a lot of feminine men. A Strong's Concordance will help you understand this.

Answer 9

No, absolutely not. Thinking Christians would not deny the existence of DNA.

For more, see: http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?z=y&EAN=9780743286398&itm=5

Here's the book blurb: Dr. Francis S. Collins, the man at the helm of the Human Genome Project, doesn't think that science and faith are foes. In The Language of God, Collins describes how his Christian faith has worked in tandem with his search for scientific truth.

Answer 10

Some DNA can cause certain diseases; other DNA can cause a susceptibility to certain diseases.

Then others blame their alcoholism on DNA. Well, possibly some DNA can cause a susceptibility to alcoholism, but it does not cause them to get drunk.

If someone's DNA is preprogrammed such that they want to murder you, should any effort be made to prevent them from acting on their DNA's promptings? Or should we just say "well, that's their DNA" so it is not their fault. They should be allowed.

Some DNA might make a person more susceptible to rob a bank, but it doesn't cause them to rob it.