I Owe You an Apology: Creation of Live V. Spontaneous Generation

In the last part of the “I Owe You an Apology” series, The Creator Revealed, I followed a series of logical arguments to demonstrate that the Creator must be One and must have several characteristics ascribed to the God of the Bible. Before that I allowed Science and Logic to show that the Universe must have been created by a specific type of being.

Today I want to focus on the Origin of Life. Of course this whole discussion is a bit of a moot point given the evidence for a Creator, but it is interesting to note the blind faith of atheistic scientists in excluding the possibility of a Creator.

First lets look at what science has believed in the past and has proven.

Spontaneous Generation

You might remember this concept from a High School Biology lab. The short version is, scientist believed that life which they could not document the origin of must have come out of inanimate matter spontaneously when the conditions are right. For example, when meat begins to decay maggots will grow out of the rotting meat, or when mud hits the right saturation, frogs will spring forth. Don’t remember this? Here is the introduction from the Wikipedia Article on teh subject

Spontaneous generation or Equivocal generation is an obsolete principle[citation needed] regarding the origin of life from inanimate matter, which held that this process was a commonplace and everyday occurrence, as distinguished from univocal generation, or reproduction from parent(s). The theory was synthesized by Aristotle,[1] who compiled and expanded the work of prior natural philosophers and the various ancient explanations of the appearance of organisms; it held sway for two millennia. It is generally accepted to have been ultimately disproven in the 19th Century by the experiments of Louis Pasteur, expanding upon the experiments of other scientists before him (such as Francesco Redi who had performed similar experiments in the 17th century). Ultimately, it was succeeded by germ theory and cell theory.

The disproof of ongoing spontaneous generation is no longer controversial, now that the life cycles of various life forms have been well documented. However, the question of abiogenesis, how living things originally arose from non-living material, remains relevant today.

Spontaneous Generation Disputed

This theory had held on for well over a thousand years and shaped the scientific minds through the Renaissance. Eventually science reached a point where some key parts of the theory could be tested, and initial results were not well received by the scientific community. Many scientists were removed until the weight of evidence overwhelmed the bias towards this long held belief.

The key experiments that essentially laid this theory to rest were conducted by Louis Pasture, the same guy that helped create pasteurized milk. Since I like bacteria free milk, I’m a pretty big fan of this guy.

Basically he conducted a series of experiments that showed key life forms did not come from matter, but instead came from other life. One of the most notable experiments was his work with bacteria. This extremely small and seemingly simple form of life must appear on its own from the matter it is found in. Science, at the time, simply could think of any other explanation. Pasture eventually created a series of custom flasks with varying inlets. He was able to show that bacteria actually reproduced from existing cultures coming from a wide variety of sources. This is why we wash our hands before and after handling food or when going into and out of hospital rooms, and hopefully after using a restroom. Seriously people, please wash your hands. I’m not a germophobe but it’s just gross if you are gonna shake my hand after going to the bathroom but haven’t washed your hands.

Spontaneous Generation Revisited

While Pasture was conducting his experiments that essentially disproved Spontaneous Generation, another man of Science was doing research that would lead science back to this belief. In fact, 1859 was the year of Pasture’s famous broth experiment and Darwin’s release of On the Origin of Species. This book was both praised and reviled, certainly the impact has been building ever since. Generally it deals with evolution of species, which will be addressed in another post, but it sets the stage for Spontaneous Generation of Life.

The problem with proving that Spontaneous Generation is a false theory is that it ultimately required a Creator, much like the origin of the Universe. So Science like to hold that this can actually happen, with simple enough life, on very rare instances, when conditions are right.

Essentially the Atheistic Scientist is saying, “we can accept that spontaneous generation may have been a one time event in our history which we cannot replicate, but we accept this despite the evidence against it because we refuse to believe in Creation.” I know it sounds like I have over simplified things, but that is the basic premise behind the theory that life came out of the primordial soup. In fact there have been many failed experiments to create life from non life, and the results very closely match what Pasture proved, so far life has never come from non life.

Now the Atheistic Scientist will say, “but that doesn’t prove this to be a false theory, since time, chance, and the right conditions haven’t been met, so we will keep trying till this has been proven because we know it must be fact.” I find that to be interesting, and a position that would be generally unacceptable in science without valid rationale behind it. If the reasoning is a simple refusal to accept another theory which seems to fit the data more readily, then I wouldn’t consider that valid rationale.

What if Science Makes Life

This is the question that begs an answer. What if a scientist is able to create the right conditions, with the right essential elements for life, and constructs a simple organism? Well, that hasn’t happened, but let’s say it happens later today, will that change anything? Not really, because what that has proven is an intelligent mind can create life from non-life. That is the basic premise of the Creation theory. A Creator, God, made life. If a scientist can create life from non life, then I have to believe an infinite being would find that to be a trivial task.

If science were to make life, it still wouldn’t prove Spontaneous Generation, as this wouldn’t be spontaneous, nor would it disprove the Creation theory.

Pan Sperma and other Theories

There is a growing number of scientists that realize that the odds are not in their favor. In fact mathematicians have estimated the odds of life happening by chance is so astronomical it is what we can call an essential impossibility. You have a better chance of winning the lottery without a ticket.

Now, one would think that a rational person, when faced with a mountain of evidence against the prevailing theory would at least look at a competing theory which seems to address the inherent problems of the prevailing theory. Instead, blind faith causes Creation Theory to be rejected out of hand, so other theories must be created.

Among the more popular is that life on Earth came from life outside Earth. Some believe aliens seeded the planet with life, other believe that the most basic life exists in the Universe along side matter and just waits for a habitable planet. Still others believe that the Universe itself created life, while others believe life willed itself to be.

Each of these theories fail the science and logic from the previous two parts if this series. First, the alien theory must assume an infinite regression of life, where did the aliens come from? If they came from Spontaneous Generation we have just moved the impossibility off by one life form. There for they must have come from life alien to them, so and and so forth until the Atheistic Scientist rejects the impossibility of Spontaneous Generation and says “and the life came from nothing” or for infinity. Both of which are unreasonable.

To believe that life simply exists still begs the question, where did it come from? Was it created alongside the Universe or is the Universe eternal? To believe it was created along with the Universe is to simply agree in the Creation theory, just a question of the timing, to believe it is eternal is to fail to grasp why the Universe, nor life as we know it can be eternal.

The last two are countered in the previous part in the series where I discuss why the Universe cannot be a part of God (Pantheism).

In fact, every theory offered by the Atheistic Scientist fails the test of logic and reason or only serve to postpone the question to the actual origin of life. It grasps at that which has been proven by science to be wrong and all this to avoid belief in a Creator who loves us.

It is pride at its worst. This is essentially the same as a man who was given everything by his wealthy parents rising to great heights and then rejecting his family saying “all that I am I have done on my own.”