God in our DNA

0:02 Looking at our world from a theological perspective. This is the Theology Central podcast making Theology Central. Good morning everyone. It is Saturday, August twenty fourth, twenty twenty four. It is currently nine fifty six am Central Time, and I am coming to you live from the Theology Central studio located right here in Abilene, Texas. Now, I want you to imagine the following scenario. You wake up tomorrow, it's Sunday. You tell everyone get ready, we're going to church, and everybody's like, yay, we love church. Okay, maybe this is a little bit, you know, not true, but okay, we love church. And everybody gets ready and you're driving to church and everybody's like, y hey, this was great.

0:51 Maybe you stop somewhere to get breakfast on the way there. So everyone arrives at church, they're not hungry, they have been well fed, they're excited, and everybody runs into church. Right. Everybody goes somewhere, maybe you have the Sunday school hour. Everybody's doing their thing, and then you all come together and there you are, sitting in pews if your church actually has pews, sitting in pews, sitting in seats, sitting and steadium seating, whatever sitting you have, you're all sitting there. There's Mommy, there's Daddy, there's little Johnny and little Susie. Okay, whatever the situation is, you're sitting there, whether you're an individual, whether you have a family, whatever the case may be. Children, no, children, doesn't matter. But you're sitting there. And the pastor says, all right, open up your Bibles to the Book of Romans.

1:36 And you're like, okay, yeah, we've been in this series in Romans. All right, this is great. I've been really learning a lot of good theology in the Book of Romans. This has been really good. All right. And in his kind of introductory material, kind of the introduction to the study in Romans, the pastor well gives you sites a supposed scientific fact about God and human DNA. He gives this scientific fact about God and human DNA. And as soon as you hear it, there's a part of you you're kind of looking around and everybody else is like amen, Amen, and they seem like wow, they think this is the greatest thing ever, and they're amazed. You see some people writing it down ooh, you know, God is in human DNA, And you're like, wait, a minute, you just feel like something's not right. So you kind of look around and you're like, well, you know, I got my phone here, so you kind of grab your phone and you start looking up this supposed scientific fact about God in your DNA and you start looking and you're like, wait a minute, I think this information is bogus. I think this information is fraudulent. I think what the pastor just said is bogus, fraudulent information. This has been debunked. Now at that moment, what do you feel. Do you feel like, well, you know, the pastor just didn't look it up. It's no big deal.

3:06 I mean, I know he's standing behind the pulpit. I know he just claimed that this is scientific fact even though it's fraudulent. I you know, so wid do you just kind of just, you know, everyone can get something wrong and you're just kind of dismiss it. Or do you kind of say, well, wait a minute. If he didn't bother to fact check and to verify and to research this supposed scientific claim that he just cited as factual, if he did not check this out, then why should I trust anything else he says about the Book of Romans. Does it cause the pastor to lose credibility in your sight? And what do you do if your kids are old enough to understand what he said? Do when you get in the car, do you say, all right, kids, look the pastor at the beginning he gave that supposed scientific fact. Well, kids, I'm sorry to tell you the pastor was wrong. Well how do you handle that? Do you call the master later and say, hey, this information was completely fraudulent. How do you handle it? How much impact does it have on you? Do you even care? Now I'm going to argue, and I cannot. I cannot prove this, but I think there's a large number of people in the church. They just don't care if the information is true or false.

4:21 If it sounds good, they're happy with it. And if you point out that the information is fraudulent, they may even argue with you. We're seeing that a lot in culture. Nobody cares about truth, nobody cares about facts. As long as information supposedly agrees with their ideology. Facts no longer matter. Well, that may be true in the political realm, that may be true in the culture, It should never be true inside the church. The church should care about one thing, the pursuit of truth, whether we like it or not, whether we agree with it or disagree with it, we should be willing to have things challenged. Now. I bring all of this up because at four thirty am, four thirty am this morning, I was like, well, we've been working in the Book of Romans, and we're doing this going through the entire Book of Romans, looking at every therefore.

5:15 We're gonna go through the entire Book of Romans looking at every therefore. And I said that one of the things I would do is I would be looking up random sermons on the sermons two point zero app and dealing with therefore, and I'm a review how they handle the their force. Remember, there's about what twenty four twenty eight. I don't have the exact number in front of me. Their fours in the Book of Romans. I think it'll be a fun, an interesting way to kind of get us back in the Book of Romans since we've been we did what a verse by verse study of the Book of Romans for years and now, but we we didn't finish it because we took our detour into long Gospel. But I'm like, okay, so let me find a sermon. So I found one, four thirty in the morning. I hit play at about four minutes and thirty seconds into the message, the pastor sites this supposed scientific discovery, this scientific fact. And as soon as he said the so called scientific fact, I was still laying in bed. I reached over, grab my iPad and immediately started researching. And lo and behold, it seems like that fact may not be as factual as sighted now. Most of the time, when I do any kind of review, I give the name of the pastor and the church because I want you to go listen to it. But in this particular case, I'm not going to give the name because the goal here is not to embarrass or humiliate or anything along those lines. What I intend to do here is say, hey,

6:45 here is this claim that I heard at four point thirty in the morning. It's posted on the internet. It's on the sermon's two point zero app. It's it can be heard by anyone. It's public right. The numbers for it. If I look at the numbers for it, it has been listened to. Let me see if I can find it. It's been listened to one hundred and sixty seven times, so it's been listened to one hundred and sixty seven times. So I mean that's a pretty decent number on the app. So I'm like, okay, so this is very this is public, this is out there. What I want to do this and listen, My goal here is not to contradict the pastor.

7:26 My goal here is not to criticize the pastor. What I want to do is challenge the claim of supposed scientific fact and say there is there's at least I've got multiple sources debunking this. There's YouTube videos where the original claim was made by the original person, and underneath there, under the comments, it's being ripped into shreds as this is, this is pseudoscience, this is just nonsense. And so what we're going to do is I want to go after the theory. I want to go after the cop and the reason I want to go after the theory and the concept is because if you hear the theory and you hear the concept, you can reject it and you can hopefully lovingly correct it. The goal here is not so much about the pastor or the church. I don't want to do anything to them. What I want to do is correct the concept and the theory. Right now, I may email them and go, hey, did you know that this is all fraudulent and provide all of my research.

8:27 But I'm more concerned about the public who will hear it, the public and the reason I'm not so. I used to be like email, email, email, But I've emailed pastors so many times for fraudulent information, things that are just not true in a sermon, and I've never had one respond in anything other than being belligerent telling me to basically, it's none of my business. And they've never pulled the sermon down or apologize for the utter, complete fraudulent information. And I've heard some crazy conspiracy theories put forth by pastors that are completely debunked. It's just not true. So I don't have I maybe I'm jaded, but now you know what, I can't worry about other people do, but I can try to combat the wrong information. Now what I'm going to do, Here's what I'm going to do.

9:18 I'm gonna let We're gonna review the audio so you can hear them put forth the theory. Then I'm going to put forth the counter argument. Now, you the listener, it's up to you to do your own research. It's up to you to try to figure out and then you can decide whether you agree or disagree with it. I think it's problematic at the very least. Or put it this way, even if you wanted to buy into this scientific theory, right, even if you want to say that this is scientific fact, you would have to if you're even being remotely fair to your audience. Joe said, though you all of you know there are many who question this and claim to have debunked. So I believe in the theory for these four reasons. Others say that this theory is not true for these four reasons. At the very best, if you're going to give the theory from the pulpit, you have to at least give the people the facts about how much this is challenged, so that the people in the pew will not be tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine. If they're sitting in church being told scientific fact, God is in my DNA, and then they out there are claiming that, and then someone comes back and throws something in their face that they've never heard before that tosses them to and fro. The church is to equip saints so that they will not be tossed to and fro not giving them information that's only going to leave them to being tossed to and fro. So at the best, at the very least, there should have been a clear discussion of wait a minute, not all, not everyone claims this. Now,

10:49 maybe he does. I will play I will go a little beyond where he says it, because as soon as he starts giving the information, I stopped the audio. So for the benefit of the doubt, we will play a past what I heard, just to make sure he doesn't let everyone know that not everyone believes in this theory. I'm hoping that's what he does. But that's that should be the very minimum. But then you would have to ask yourself, if there's all this questioning this supposed theory, then why are you going to give it from the pulpit, especially when the goal here is the Book of Romans. But you can draw your own conclusion. So I'm not going to give the name. I'm not going to give the the the I'm not going to give the church or anything else. If you're looking up sermons on the their fours in Romans, you may come across you may come across this one. But if you come across it.

11:36 That's that's between you and you, right, I don't need to know, and that's perfectly you know, fine, But I want to be fair here and and again I'm going after the concept because the concept is not just and discernment. The concept is on is all over the internet, right. The concept is very well known on the internet, right, because this theory emerged in around two thousand and and I think it was debunked around twenty ten. I believe so. But we will, we will, we will play this out and see. But I'm trying to be very I want to be very fair because he always get people get mad at me. I've got a long history when I hear sermons or pastors or Christian ministries putting forth fraudulent information, misinformation, wrong information. I you know, I will, I will come and say that's just not true. And then and then the people get mad at me. It's like, well, why are you getting mad at me? I'm the one trying to help us get rid of conspiratorial thinking and wild speculations and and just basically made up fairy tales. We need to be Christians. We again, the biblical concept for Christians is we put away lying. We speak the truth.

12:48 We do not engage in gossip and slander and bearing false witness. We should be factual, we should be careful. We all make mistakes. I understand that, but I also know we live in twenty twenty four. You can fact check things in five point two seconds. You can get you have access to all kinds of information. But there's a there's a certain way of thinking that creeps into the minds of some Christians, and it's like, well, no, this is what I believe in. Any information that calls into question what I believe is false news, it's fake news. And it's like, no, just because something disagrees with you doesn't make it fake news. It may mean that what you're holding to is fake, right, So let's pursue this.

13:32 Are you ready? That was a long introduction, But I just want to be very because I know people will. I know I'm gonna get emails. How dare you call this into question? This is absolute factual? But I think it's just I think it's fraudulent. Well, I think in some ways it's using God's name in vain almost. But you can you'll you'll have to draw your own conclusion. Here we go, this is what I heard at four point thirty in the morning. And remember this was shown at random. I didn't go looking for this. I was simply looking for a sermon to give me information on the there force and see how they were going to approach the first Therefore in Romans chapter one, that's what I was looking for. I was not looking for some scientific theory that I'd never heard before and then have to be at four thirty in the morning researching it.

14:20 But here we go. We never know what's going to happen on this podcast, right, we never know, but I guarantee listening to sermons will always lead us somewhere. So here we go. Imagine you're sitting in church tomorrow morning. This is what you hear. How would it impact you? You may not even care. I obviously care a little bit more. We will see. Maybe you're right, maybe I'm right. Who knows, let's find out. But for the moment, if if you would take your Bibles and go with me to Romans chapter one, Now here's what's hilarious. I know you're gonna think this is really funny. When I originally got started doing this, you know, I thought, well, maybe perhaps possibly with as many chapters as there is in Romans. You know, the this sixteen chapters in Romans. You know, we'll take a chapter a week.

15:22 Then I thought, well, you know, Romans one is thirty two verses. You know, it's one of the longer ones in the entire book. So you know, maybe you know we'll get that one. In two weeks. Well, we should be able to finish it up in three as today, all right, so we're going to We're gonna we're gonna wrap up and finish. Looking at Romans chapter one. Now, from my perspective, if you can make it through Romans chapter one in three weeks, I need to learn how you do that, because I could not make it through Romans chapter one in three months. Okay, I mean, in fact, I can probably look and see how long it took us to make it through Romans chapter one.

16:07 I think it took us almost six months. It was crazy because there's a lot going on there. But okay, he's making it through the entire chapter of Romans chapter one in three weeks. That means he's typically doing more of an overview. He's probably breaking it down into certain segments. Now his outline, I think he does offer an outline here. I found a little bit weird because he kind of has the therefore in the part of a section instead of the beginning or the ending of a section. Wouldn't the therefore mark a division if you're doing an outline. So the outlining thing is a little interesting here. But I don't want to get sidetracked. We're waiting for the so called scientific evidence about God in your DNA. That's what we're waiting for.

16:49 Here we go, And we said that Romans won the entire chapter. The main theme. Of it as a whole is is the ungodliness and unrighteousness of men. It has a lot more to say about those two factors of mankind than pretty much anything else in the chapter other than just the fact that it is the opening greeting and all to the entire letter written to the church there at Rome. But we said the key verses are verse sixteen and seventeen. We dealt with those last week. For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ. For it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth to the jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith. As it is written, the just shall live by faith. I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, and the just shall live by faith. And so those two verses being the key, is not necessarily what the whole chapter is about. Though we began to look, we've already dealt with basically three divisions within the chapter, Paul's greeting verse one to seven, Paul's longing verse eight through verse no Ver seventeen, which we got, got through that part as well, and then we began to look at God's wrath on unrighteousness verse eighteen down to the end of the chapter

18:20 verse Noumber thirty two. And my question was verse twenty four. Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanliness. Now shouldn't the therefore mark either the beginning or the ending of a section that therefore, that's a transition, it's a connecting, it's a turning, its a it's a transition. Right. So that's interesting how I look. I love outlines. I love outlines when it comes to Bible study. And I always like I love sometimes I put my church, you know, I used to put my church on the spot and say, okay, guys, come up with an outline. Here we go, and then they would start outlining, and I would like, well, what about this, or what about this? And what about that? Almost inevitably I would disagree with their outlines. Sometimes they would disagree with mine. But I'm not saying there's always there's always a right or a wrong. I'm not saying I mean, you can outline things in many different ways. I just think when I see a therefore, that typically signifies a transition from one section to another section. Right, it's transitioning.

19:23 So if it's a transition, should that not mark Maybe something in your outline just just a theory you can determine. But we're waiting for the scientific evidence about God in our DNA. Here we go, and we got through thus far. The guilt of the Youngodly verse eighteen, first part of verse eighteen and then also nineteen and twenty deals basically with the knowledge of God. Is in them and revealed to them. So God has revealed knowledge of himself and even within man. Can't go into all the I. Was watching something recently about about the the molecule, the DNA molecule, and I don't have all the information.

20:10 I saved it on my phone. I was hoping to be able to. Put it together and put something on screen the night, just to kind of back this up. I might still do it another another Wednesday evening as a precursor to moving forward. But I will say this. There was a a man that was reading some scientific information off and I was talking about the DNA molecule and how that in every aspect of DNA it has, it has a layout. There's a pattern in DNA, and that DNA. The way he was talking and laying it out that that DNA's pattern is a pattern of numbers.

20:52 When you look at the when you add up the way it's laid out, and so it's a pattern of numbers. And when you look up those numbers and it's a consistent you go, there's four four numbers that are presented in that pattern. And then those four numbers. Just repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat. And that that's what creates DNA. Every human being is made of that DNA. Everything has DNA to it, uh when it comes to life. And so he talked about how that those four those four numbers that are laid out when you look in the Hebrew, the Hebrew alphabet and everything, and you can associate numbers with letters in the Hebrew alphabet. He said, the interesting thing is in the human human DNA, and in the DNA of all living things that DNA pattern wise brings out to being.

21:46 This thing's gonna start doing. I was waiting for it. It's been a while since I've had to change this microphone out. But that DNA is UH in its pattern. You look at the letters that it represents, it's why w why, yeah, thank you, y h w h, thank you. My brain skipped there. And if you look at y h w H in the Hebrew that spells yahweh, that is Jehovah. And he was laying out how even in human DNA, the pattern of human human DNA describes the creator himself, Jehovah, God and UH.

22:28 And so when you think about that, the knowledge of God. Is in them and revealed to them. It's in you to begin with, and it's revealed to you if you look at actual science, not modern day style of science, but actual science, and you look up actual DNA, you'll find that it has been proven that in numerology and everything, laying out that Jehovah himself basically stamped his. Own name in the living DNA. Of all things. How interesting that is. But uh, the the guy who spoke it out and it all, he is much much more eloquent than I am with it. But I found it rather interesting, especially with dealing with chapter.

23:16 One and that thought that. There's the supposed claim God has stamped his name on human DNA. And he said, this is actual science, not that false science out there. So he's stating this as scientific, dogmatic fact, and that anything that would question this is not true science. He's not. He doesn't even tell the people this is a theory that has been debunked by many, are challenged. No, no, no, no, no, no. Hey. In fact, he almost shuts that down by saying, no, real science, not that other stuff. See, real science will tell you that DNA contains a pattern that corresponds to the Hebrew letter why h wh which is the name of God Shahweh Jehovah Jehovah. Remember how to actually pronounce it, because they didn't use all the letters of the Jews, didn't write all the letters of God. We could get into a whole discussion there, But that's the claim. Now, four point thirty in the morning, I immediately, like I opened my eyes and was like, whoa wait a minute, way to stop, stop, stop, and again we know he's not gonna come back. Well not everyone believes that. He already shut it down. Any science that would say this is not true is not true science. True science will tell you that, hey, the structure of the DNA couruse contains a pattern that corresponds to the Hebrew letters why hwh,

24:49 which is the name of God in the Hebrew Bible. God has stamped his name upon DNA and everybody. Now I don't know how many people in the background there were saying a amen. The volume is kind of low, but immediately when I heard this, I was like, no, no, no, no, no, no no, So are you ready to work through this now? Again, I don't care about at that point. I don't care about his sermon. I don't care about the name of that church. I don't care about any of that. It's not about them. It's about this theory. Because Christians will go and promote this theory and cite it and pro and post it on social media, and then when someone calls them out for this fraudulent information, they'll be like, well, you believe in that false science. We have real science that understands the true structure of DNA. Well, let's look into this and see what we can find. Right, Well, so you've heard their theory, all right. So basically again, they suggest that the structure of human DNA contains a pattern that corresponds to the Hebrew letters y HWH which is the name of God and the Hebrew Bible. This idea is based on the concept of jamatria, a form of Jewish numerology that assigns numerical values to the letters.

26:12 So immediately when I hear this, this is not based off science. This is more based off Jewish numerology. He says, it's science. No, this is Jewish numerology. It's not science, and that's called jamatria. Right, So are you ready, let's look into this, all right. That's the theory. That's the theory, right, Do I need to state the theory again? The theory suggests that the structure of human DNA contains a pattern that corresponds to the Hebrew letters y H w H, which is the name of God in the Hebrew Bible chafwey right, Jehovah. This idea is based on the concept of jamatria a form of Jewish numerology that assigns numerical values to letters. So let me make it very clear of this is Jewish numerology, not science. In fact, you're imposing symbolism and numerology upon scientific information. This is not the way you do this. This is all this is questionable.

27:15 This is not coming from the Bible. It's not even coming from Christianity. It's coming from Jewish numerology. All right, So all right, but let's let's read here, all right. First, the very first thing I found was this, this theory has been debunked. That's a very free It took three seconds. And immediately I found out that this has been debunked. I found the video of the origin, the individual who gave this theory, or at least the video featured him. I don't know if it was put out by him, but it was featured him. And immediately even the comments on YouTube was like, this is junk, this is trash, this is not true. This is utter fraudulent. Right, So immediately I was like, wait a minute. See, even if I was to state this from the pulpit, I'd be like, well, I heard this, I believe it here's my four reasons, but here are the reasons people give to say it's not true. Now, at that point you would ask why you want to do that in your introduction to Romans chapter one or your conclusion of Romans chapter one. I think at that time you're just now you've distracted us from the Word of God and that Look, I didn't even get into his teaching on Romans, because now look what I'm doing in stead of focusing on Man that was such a good sermon on Romans. What am I focusing on? I got to figure out whether this is true or fraudulent? All right, So are you ready? So the very first thing has been debunked, the claim that the DNA sequence, specifically the sepheric bridges between the nucleotides, follows a pattern of ten five six ' five. So

28:48 this claim is based. This is very important that the DNA sequence, specifically the sepheric bridges between the nucleotides, follows a pattern of ten five six five, which supposedly matches the numerical values of hy HWH and jamatria. In reality, DNA is composed of four nucleotides right held together by hydrogen bonds, not sulfur bridges, So already something is We already know that there's a problem here. This is based on the concept that it is that it is that the DNA sequence, specifically the sepheric bridges between the nucleotides, follows a pattern of ten five sixty five. But it's not sepheric bridges, it's hydrogen bonds, so already we have a problem. Moreover, there is no literally no scientific evidence supporting the existence of such a pattern in d N A.

29:53 The theory was first proposed by doctor and I'm not even going to attempt to say his first name, rub but at locks credible scientific backing and has been criticized for its inaccuracies. So we know the name of the individual who put forth the concept. Now some claim that he claimed he published this in a specific journal. Others claim that they cannot find the supposed publication of this in any journal. So there is some back and forth on that. But just please note this gets into the entire structure of DNA and how it works. Now, this is why pastors have to be very careful coming to the pulpit claiming this stuff, because unless you're an expert on this, now you have to rely on a lot of different sources, but there are clear sources. Going wait a minute, this is all based on again the idea that sulpheric bridges between the nucleotides follows a pattern of ten five six five, But in reality, DNA is composed of four nucleotides. I have the list of those four here, but I'm not going to try to pronounce them because then I'm going to look foolish. All right, They're held together by hydrogen bonds, not sulfur bridges. So already that this is based off begins to fall apart. There is no scientific evidence supporting the existence of a pattern in DNA.

31:19 The theory that human DNA is structured with numbers representing the Hebrew letters y HWH was first proposed by doctor Rubinstein in the early two thousands. This idea gained some attention, but was later debunked by scientists who clarified that DNA is composed of nucleotides held together by hydrogen bonds, not sulfur bridges, as the theory suggested. The debunking of this theory occurred over several years as more scientists and researchers examined the claims and found them to be scientifically inaccurate. By the mid twenty tens, the theory had been widely discredited.

32:02 So this is this message that we're listening to was preached in twenty twenty three. By twenty tens, it was already disproven. So why is it being brought back to the pulpit in twenty twenty three being now broadcast on the internet in twenty twenty four, Like why why? Why? That drives me crazy again, I'm not seeing the pastor can't put forth the theory right because I believe you know, say whatever you want to say, but just be very Hey, look here's the individual came up with this idea. However, starting in the twenty tens, there was a wide criticism of this. Now here are my four reasons for believing this is true, and here's their four reasons, or there's two reasons or three reasons for claiming it's not true. Now, the only problem is to do that, Well, you wouldn't be doing it in your introduction or your conclusion to Romans Chapter one. What you should have done is just made this as your own individual sermon and then give both views and then let the people decid. But even if it's that much, if there's that much question to it, and it's based off Jewish numerology, okay, whatever, But I needed more. I needed more of an explanation, so I did a little bit more work found this. This theory, the theory that you just heard, suggests that the structure of human DNA contains a pattern corresponding to the Hebrew letters y HWH, which is the name of God in the Hebrew Bible. This source says, while it's a it

33:33 is a fascinating claim that has garnered attention among certain groups. However, it is important to critically analyze this theory to assess its validity from a scientific, linguistic and theological perspectives. So this is going to go in far more detail, all right, So we're going to assess the validity of this theory along three lines, scientific perspect linguistic perspective, and the thiological perspective. Let's start with the scientific DNA structure. Human DNA is composed of a double helix structure made up of nucleotides.

34:16 These nucleotides are made of are made of a group. Well, they've made of a couple a sugar group and one of the four nitrogenists based and then they give and they name all of this, So they go through the how these nucleotides are made up. All right, okay, and I'm not going to get into all of this. It's a phosphate group, a sugar group, and then it names the four nitrogen bases. So they're going to go through all of this. This sequence of these bases forms the genetic instruction for the development, functioning, and reproduction of living organisms. Right now, I could go, I could try to read all of that information, but it's a lot of very you know, detailed or technical information that I'm just gonna be honest with you, I would not have a firm grasp on it. But so they're going into the basic structure of it right now at that point, that doesn't really prove or disprove the theory. They're just kind of making sure we understand the basic how it is basically structured.

35:16 But here's the key. There is no literal alphabet in DNA. DNA does not inherently contain letters or symbols from any human alphabet, including Hebrew. The suggestion that DNA corresponds to Hebrew letters requires the imposition of an external symbolic system on the biological structure. In other words, any perceived pattern is not intrinsic to the DNA itself, but is an interpretation imposed by those looking for specific patterns. So already we know this The whole concept is falling apart. Let me read this again. DNA does not, inha apparently, contain letters or symbols from any human alphabet, including Hebrew. The suggestion that DNA corresponds to Hebrew letters requires the imposition of an external symbolic system onto the biological structure. In other words, any perceived pattern is not intrinsic to DNA itself, but is an interpretation imposed by those looking for specific patterns.

36:26 So already we know the thing is beginning to fall apart. You're we already can tell pattern recognition. Humans are naturally inclined to find patterns and meaning. This is a psychological phenomenon. Now I could give you the name of the psychological phenomenon, but we don't. I don't want to. I want to stay focused here, right. So this could explain why some might see a connection between DNA sequences and the letters y hwh. However, the connection is subjective and locks a basis in molecular biology. This is not coming from molecular biology. This is something you're imposing upon it. You want to see a pattern, you can find a pattern, but you're imposing the pattern from an external source onto something that does not inherently have said pattern. In other words, you're imposing an idea upon something. You're forcing your idea upon something, and you're bringing in the name of God to do this.

37:29 That's where I have a problem. Now we're utilizing the name of God in a way that may not well, maybe in fact almost taking it in vain. So there's the scientific perspective DNA there is no DNA does not inherently contain a letter or symbol, or any human alphabet, including Hebrew. The suggestion that DNA corresponds to Hebrew letters requires the imposition of an external symbolic system on the biological structure. In other words, any perceived pattern is not ansic. This pattern recognition is because we want to see it. We're imposing it upon this. And this is a psychological phenomenon that people will do. All right, And we could go study that psychological phenomenon, but we'll get further away from what we're looking we're looking at just the basis for this theory. Now that's the more scientific perspective, maybe an oversimplification of the scientific perspective. I mean, we could go find people have greater knowledge and molecular biology and a greater understanding of DNA, But in many cases what we're going to find is, again, this is an imposition of things upon it. Let's look at it from a linguistic perspective. Hebrew alphabet and numerology. The Hebrew alphabet consists of twenty two letters, and some people engage in jamatria, a form of numerology that assigns numerical values to these letters. Right, the idea that DNA sequences could correspond to Hebrew letters

39:00 or numerological values involves translating biological data into a completely unrelated symbolic system, which is arbitrary and subjective. So, even even if you want to try to bring over numerology into this, you're translating biological data into a completely unrelated symbolic system. Now, this is the key, which is arbitrary and subjective. The whole thing is subjective. It's arbitrary. You're just assigning what you want to assign based off the pattern you want to find. Don't you see, don't you see this entire thing is is questionable from the outright.

39:45 It's it's basis on science is again not not it's not a super it's not what we could go to. We could go to the actual structure if I go all the way back. Remember it's it's it's based on a spheric bridge, when in re reality it's not a sepheric bridge. Okay, remember we already we already looked at that. Okay, it's a hydrogen bomb bonds, not a spheric bridge. So already it's based off a wrong understanding of science. You're imposing things that are not there. But even if you want to go from this, you have the issue that when you're you are basically translating biological data into a completely unrelated symbolic system, which is arbitrary and subjective. Even if one were to assign Hebrew letters to nucleotide sequences right like a equals a lift right, right, whatever, the process would involve a significant amount of selection bias. Moreover, different people might choose different mappings, leading to different interpretations of DNA sequences. There is no standard or agreed upon method to map DNA sequences to the Hebrew alphabet, rendering any such claim speculative. At this is arbitrary. This is speculative.

41:03 This is not science. It's based off what you want to see. It's subjective, it's not scientifically factual, and it has no basis of being preached from the pulpit. But now let's look at it from a thiological perspective. Symbolic interpretations, the name Jahweh Jehovah is a profound importance in Jewish and Christian traditions, representing obviously the holy name of God. Some proponents of this theory might argue that a connection between Yahweh or Jehovah and DNA symbolizes divine creation. However, from a thiological standpoint, such a claim should be approached with caution, as at risk reducing the transcendental nature of God's name to a mere scientific curiosity. Well, I think it's more than just reducing it to a mere scientific curiosity.

41:57 I think you're taking the name of God and play and claiming it somewhere where it may not even actually be, And you're utilizing God's name in a fraudulent, in vain way. You're using God's name to make a fraudulent claim that is not right. Associating DNA with y h Wh or Yahweh could lead to misunderstandings about both science and theology. Theologically, it could suggest a form of biological determinism where the divine name is physically encoded in human beings, which might not align with more nuanced theological interpretations of God's relationship with creation. Okay, well we could get into all of that.

42:39 Now here's the key. This theory lacks a solid foundation in molecular biology. DNA is not a code that can be straightforwardly translated into human language or symbols. The supposed connection between DNA and the Hebrew name of God is more of a product of imagination and pattern recognition than of empirical science. While the idea might appeal to those seeking to find a tangible connection between spiritual spirituality and biology, it is crucial to distinguish between metaphorical or symbolic interpretations and scientific facts. The claim does not withstand scrutiny from a rigorous scientific or a linguistic perspective. In summary, while the idea of finding Jahweh and human DNA may be intriguing, it remains speculative and unsubstantiated by evidence. As with many theories that attempt to bridge the gap between science and religion, it should be approached critically with an understanding of the different domains of knowledge involved. It falls apart scientifically, it falls apart linguistically, falls apart theologically. It's based on Jewish numerology.

43:54 It's arbitrary, it's subjective. You can assign this means this the whole thing is problematic. Yet this theory finds itself and the introduction of a sermon on the Book of Romans. Now I'm gonna back this up, and we're gonna let him give the theory one more time, say that you can hear his perspective one more time. Here we go. I'llequle the DNA model seven Paul's longing verse eight through verse no Ver seventeen, which we got through that part as well. And then we began to look at God's wrath on unrighteousness verse eighteen down to the end of the chapter verse Nomber thirty two, and we got through thus far the guilt of the ngodly verse eighteen, first part of verse eighteen, and then also nineteen and twenty deals basically with the knowledge of God is in them and revealed to them. So God has revealed knowledge of himself and even within man. I I can't go into all of this. I was watching something recently about about the the molecule, the DNA molecule, and I don't have all the information.

45:23 I saved it on my phone. I was hoping to be able to put it together and put something on a screen to night, just to kind of back this up. I might still do it another another Wednesday evening as a precursor to moving forward, but I will say this. There there was. A a man that was reading some scientific information off and I was talking about the DNA molecule and how that in every aspect of DNA it has, it has a layout. There's a pattern in in DNA, and that DNA the way he was talking and in it out that DNA's pattern is a pattern of numbers. When you look at the when you add up the way it's laid out, and so it's a pattern of numbers. And when you look up those numbers and it's a consistent you go, there's four four numbers that are presented in that pattern, and then those four numbers just repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat, and that that's what creates d n A. Every human being is made of that DNA. Everything has DNA to it when it comes to life. And so he talked about how that those four those four numbers that are laid out when you look in the Hebrew, the Hebrew alphabet and everything, and you can associate numbers with letters in the Hebrew alphabet.

46:47 He said, the interesting thing is in the human human DNA and in DNA of all living things, that DNA pattern wise brings out to being. This thing's gonna start doing. I was waiting for it. It's been a while since I've had to change this microphone out. But that DNA is UH in his pattern. You look at the letters that it represents, it's why w why, yeah, thank you, y h w H thank you. My brain skipped there. And if you look at y h w H in the Hebrew, that spells yahweh, that is Jehovah. And he was laying out how even in human DNA, the pattern of human human DNA describes the creator himself Jehovah God and UH.

47:41 And so when you think about that the knowledge of God. Is in them and revealed to them. It's in you to begin with, and it's. Revealed to you. If you look at actual science, not modern day style of science, but actual science, and you look up actual DNA, you'll find that it has been proven that in numerology and everything laying out that Jehovah himself based. If you look at actual science, not modern day science. But then he says numerology, numerology is not science. It's you're basing this entire theory. It's not scientific, it's not biblical.

48:27 This is complete wild speculation being spoken of as fact from the bulpit. This is what this is where sometimes I'm like, I don't belong in Christianity. This, I what is this? This cannot happen. We've got to combat this kind of thing. All right, I'll let him just finish this up. Basically stamped his own name in the living DNA of all things. How interesting that is. But uh, the other the guy who spoke it out and it all, he is much much more eloquent than I am with it. But I found it rather interesting, especially with dealing with Chapter one and that thought that the knowledge of God is in them and revealed to them, and that all are without excuse because of that very thing.

49:22 Then we begin to look at the actions of the young God. Then he just moves on. But he stated it as factual. And I was watching some guy who is looking up or reading some scientific facts. Well, did you go look at the scientific facts? Did you verify anything? Who was this guy? So let me again go back and just take out he didn't get into. He didn't get into the idea that this theory is based off the idea that DNA sequence, specifically the sepheric bridges between the nuclear tides, follows a pattern of ten five sixty five, which supposedly matches the numerical values for God in Gematria or Yahweh. Remember, in reality, DNA is composed of four nucleotides held together by hydrogen bonds, not sulfur bridges. So already the actual scientific concept behind it is fraudulent and wrong. But remember human DNA are no Remember DNA does not inherently contain letters or symbols from any human alphabet, including Hebrew. The suggestion that DNA corresponds to Hebrew letters requires the imposition of an external symbolic system onto the thiological structure. In other words, any perceived pattern is not intrinsic to the DNA itself, but as an interpretation imposed by those looking for a specific pattern. Humans are inclined to look for these patterns. It's a psychological phenomenon, but it has nothing to do with what you're imposing that pattern.

50:48 Two. All right, this idea, this connection is subjective, and it lacks a basis in molecular biology. The Hebrew alphabet consists of twenty two letters. Some people engage in jamatria form numerology that assigns numerical values to those letters. The idea that DNA sequence could correspond to Hebrew letters or normrological values involves translating biological data into completely unrelated symbolic system, which is arbitrary and subjective. Even if you were to assign Hebrew letters to nucleotide sequences, the process would involve a significant amount of selection bias. Moreover, different people might choose different mappings, leading to a different interpretation of DNA sequences.

51:31 There is no standard, agreed upon method to map DNA sequences to the Hebrew alphabet, rendering any such claim is speculative at best. All right, Yeah, and so there we could go. We could go further into it, and I could reread a lot of things, but this entire thing, it's been debunked, it's been challenged, it's been questioned, it's speculative. And even again, even at the even if I wanted to say the very least the pastor could do, Hey, I heard this theory. Here's the four reasons I believe in the theory. But here are four reasons people disagree with this theory. Now what do you think? Now, again, most people sitting in the pula, it's true. God is stamped on our DNA. I don't care what the facts say, well, because that Christians love to do that kind of thing without ever really considering the facts. Now, I know there are people who listen to this podcast who have much more training in medicine. I know I obviously I worked in the medical world for twenty two years, well, medicine biology, that type of thing, And I'm going to definitely continue to try to seek out my contacts from people I knew who obviously would have much more training and understanding of DNA molecular biology, those areas. Other people may have studied this in college to some level, and I'm more than willing to hear anyone out. So I'm going to continue to verify. Now. You know what I'll do If I come back and go, wait a minute, maybe there's

53:02 more to this, I got no problem correcting it. What I want to do is say, hey, there's enough information out there that only took me four point thirty in the morning, laying in bed. It only took me about five minutes to immediately start coming up with all this information that's calling it into question. It took literally no time at all. So before I stepped in the pulpit and said it, I would at least be willing to go, hey, guys, I saw this. But just know that not everyone believes this, but here and now now you could even challenge whether you think that's right or wrong. But I will continue to try to, you know, do research and talk to people I knew from the past and who have far higher degrees in this area. My degrees are in theology and religious education and biblical studies, not molecular biology, okay, by no means okay, so, And and my degrees in the healthcare world and the medical world is more in medical administration and coding and that type of thing. And it is in an actual you know the structure of DNA, so you can Yeah, those who have a greater knowledge by all means you can say whether right or wrong.

54:12 I'm willing to hear from those who have actual understanding in this area, but it sounds like there's plenty of very well knowledgeable people going, Hey, this theory started in two thousand, two thousand and one, somewhere around that time period, and by twenty ten it was widely debunked, widely proven to be not accurate. Yet showing up in pulpits or in a pulpit I should say, I bet you, I bet you could find lots of sermons that put forth this idea. I bet you I could. I bet you I could, and so called Christian science and which would be really problematic. All right, I think that's good. I think that's good. All right. I do apologize. Nucleotides, I got that right, Jamatria, I think I got that right. Spheric, I think I got that right. Spheric? Was it hydrogen?

55:09 I think I could think I got that all correct. If there's anything I messed up, I apologize, because obviously I want to be as accurate as possible. Let me see how hydrogen bond bonds, not spheric bridges. Okay, yeah, so I think we got I think we got that right. I didn't give the name of the psychological phenomenon for people finding patterns. I think the only area where I decided I decided I made a on the moment spot change is when I got into the human DNA is composed of a double helix structure of nucleotides. These nuclear tires are made up of phosphated This is where I kind of stopped and decided not to go into all the structure. Phosphate group, a sugar group. Then it names the four nitrogenous bases, if I'm saying that right, and then I didn't name all of them. The sequence of these bases forms the genetic instruction for the development, functioning, and reproduction of living organisms. So that was kind of just giving you the basis of human DNA, all right, But there's a lot of things there they're like, okay, not not your genius, I think, is how you say that.

56:13 So I think I got most of that correct. That that paragraph, I probably should have just left that one out because it wasn't really wasn't really necessarily important to the overall discussion. But I just wanted to, you know, show hey, there's actual structure, how this is put together. And none of this has anything to do with Jewish numerology. Okay, none of this all right. You're imposing something on biological data, you're imposing Jewish numerology, and you're doing it in an arbitrary way, subjective way. And interesting that the individual my understanding who did this was Jewish trying to find in a sense, the Old Testament name of God in the pattern.

56:58 Wouldn't he be imposing it, right? Wouldn't he have a predisposition to see it? It would be like you know, a Christian finding the name of Jesus or or you know, it'd be one thing if but no, that this is not like everyone can look at the data and because you're taking Jewish numerology and imposing it, it's not coming from the DNA. You're putting something upon the DNA that's not that's not molecular biology, that's not scientific, that's whatever fields that this would fit into, whichever fields of study, whichever academic areas that this would fit into. I don't want, you know, molecular biology seems to be the I think the major field. But there may be other adjoining fields of study that this could could connect to anything that would look at human DNA. But this is not this is not no, this is not coming from molecular biology.

57:58 What you're what you're claiming is you found something in Jewish numerology that was then imposed upon biological data, and client making a claim about God's name being somewhere where God's name is not there based off what you're claiming, and therefore you're using God's name in vain. That becomes a theological issue and possibly even a sin issue. All right, you can tell me what you think, all right, I am. I'm going to continue to see what I can find out about this and try to see I know there's a lot of people who listen to the podcast who have far more advanced degrees in areas that would be more related to this than I do. All right, so you can you can cite your credentials, all right. Cite your credentials, Cite your area of study, Cite the university which you attended. Please give inform, like if you're going to give me information, please cite the correct you know information, like you know, hey, I I I attended this university and I have a degree of molecular molecular biology. Okay, great now, and you can say you're absolutely wrong. Okay, that guy is absolutely right. Okay, all right, all right, that's good. Now. Why is it that all the information I can find disagrees with you? Right, so and and and because those are that's the kind of back and forth.

59:23 What I wanted you to do is hear two theories, two completely contradictory theories. His theory that was promoted, and all the information that seems to the theory. I'll call my side a theory that contradicts the other theory. Sorry, I can't tell what spring to all right, and you see the my iPad is trying to talk to me. All right, there we go. All right, yeah see she doesn't even understand. She doesn't even understand, right, but we will uh, we'll just see. We'll just see where it goes, right, Hopefully it doesn't go anywhere. Hopefully people will just go, you know, I look, here's that's the thing. At the very least I'll end with this, at the very least minimal minimum, minimum minimum minimum. Before you go out spouting or citing the supposed theory that God has written into our DNA. Maybe you should at least pause and go, hmm, do I want to put forth an idea that is so rejected, criticized, and claim to be debunked. Because if I put forth this idea, I'm not going to be leading people to a discussion about God or his word or his Gospel. What I'm going to be doing is now leading people into a never ending debate over whether this information is true or false, which then takes away from Romans. This is a sermon on Romans. I never got to Romans. I got to this so called supposed scientific fact, and now I've spent an hour talking about that,

1:00:54 not talking about Romans. That's why as pastors we always have to be careful what is from the pulpit. I have made similar mistakes. I am by no means saying I've always done everything correct. I've obviously made a million mistakes. What I'm saying is, whenever we throw something out like that, if all it's going to do is take away from the Book of Romans, then what is our ultimate goal there? Unless you're convinced that this proves Romans Chapter one, which he almost seemed to imply that this proves Romans chapter one. But does Romans chapter one need Jewish numerology imposed upon DNA upon human DNA to prove Romans chapter one? That's a strange apologetic All right, Thanks for listening, everyone, have a great day. I'll continue to look up and email past people I work with and say, hey, doc, you had like fifteen degrees, were together for like fifteen years.

1:02:02 Help me out here. Here's this theory about human DNA. I will go with the doctor I worked with who was an atheist. I'll go with the doctor I worked with who was a Christian. That will be If I can contact both of them, that would be interesting. Here's the atheistic doctor, here's the Christian doctor. What do they say. I don't know if I can contact them. I don't even know where they are anymore. But if I can find them, that would be interesting. That would be interesting. All right, Thanks for listening everyone, Have a great day. God bless