Truth and Science Ministries

In Search of the Truth

The Origin of Life

The Origin of Life


“What about the beginning of life itself?" 

"Can life scientifically come from non-life?”


The evolutionists will claim: life came from non-life, from matter or dead chemicals.


Evolutionists call this chemical evolution.  In the 1800s this was called spontaneous generation.  Although they changed the terms, the meaning was exactly the same: life came from non-life through the right mixture of chemicals.  Louis Pasteur, Redi and others proved that wrong through experimentation.


Spontaneous Generation definition: "a theory widely held in the 19th century and earlier but now discredited, stating that living organisms could arise directly and rapidly from nonliving material.  Also called abiogenesis."  Collins English Dictionary


 The American Heritage Science Dictionary also states that Spontaneous Generation has been disproved and that it is also called abiogenesis.   The Merriam Webster Dictionary online does not give a defintion for Spontaneous Generation, but gives a link to abiogenesis.


Pasteur’s experiments

“Finally, in the mid-1800s, Louis Pasteur designed an experiment that disproved the spontaneous generation of microorganisms.   From that time on, biogenesis, the idea that living organisms come only from other living organisms, became a cornerstone of biology.” Glencoe Biology, 2006, pg 381


“Biologists have accepted the concept of biogenesis for more than 100 years.”

Glencoe Biology, 2006, pg 382


“Historically the point of view that life comes only from life has been so well established through the facts revealed by experiment that it is called the Law of Biogenesis.”

Biology: a search for order in complexity, Moore and Slusher, 1984


Question # 1

“Isn’t Biogenesis a law of science?”


In spite of this fact, students are taught the concept of abiogenesis, life comes from non-life.


Question # 2

“Is the hypothesis of abiogenesis (life from non-life) scientific?”  (Has it ever been observed?)


They try to get around this:


“Scientists disagree about the details of the process that led to the origin of life.  Most scientists, however, accept that under certain conditions, the basic molecules of life could have formed spontaneously through simple chemistry.”  HOLT BIOLOGY, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 2006, Pg. 256


Question # 3

"If chemical evolution isn't happening today, how do we know it happened in the past?"


 In 1953 two scientists by the name of Stanley Miller and Harold Urey performed an experiment in a laboratory for the purpose of trying to create life from chemicals.  Under controlled conditions, drawing on years of experience, they designed the experiment to produce the best possible results, yet they only produced two amino acids, which actually bond with tar and are a toxic to life.  Yet many claimed the experiment proved it could have happened.


Not only did Pasteur prove that life doesn’t form from nutrient chemicals today, but the decades of evolutionists trying (and failing) to reproduce abiogenesis so far supports the contention that abiogenesis could never happen. 


Reviewing the Questions:


1.     Isn’t Biogenesis a law of science?

2.     Is the hypothesis of abiogenesis (life from non-life) scientific?  (Has it ever been observed?)

3.     If chemical evolution isn’t happening today, how do we know it happened in the past?


Digging Deeper


The Law of Biogenesis

Simpson and Beck, in their biology textbook, Life: An Introduction to Biology, state that "there is no serious doubt that biogenesis is the rule, that life comes only from other life, that a cell, the unit of life, is always and exclusively the product or offspring of another cell" (1965, p. 144, emp. added).


The Law of Probability

The Law of Probability is 1 chance in 10 50.  This is the number 1, with 50 zeroes after it.  If you had three cups with a marble under 1 cup, you would have one chance in three of finding it the first time.  If the number of cups was the number 10 with 50 zeroes, that is 10 50.  If you still only had 1 marble, you would have 1 chance in 10 50 to find it the first time.  Here are other probabilities:


A single protein forming itself by chance         10 191

A single cell                                                            10 40,000

DNA                                                          10 119,000


Irreducible Complexity

We live in a world full of complexity.  The smallest cell is more complex than the most complex machine man has invented, the space shuttle.  Yet evolution demands that we go backwards in time to when things were less complex.  But almost everything has to be that complex or it won’t work.


More Questions:


1.     If scientists could create life in a laboratory, how does that prove it doesn’t take intelligence to create life?

2.     Which evolved first, plants, or the insects that pollinate them?

3.     Is the design and irreducible complexity of all living systems really the result of random chance?

4.     How can we explain the random development of the human eye, reproductive system, digestive tract, brain, heart and lungs?



"All of us who study the origin of life find that the more we look into it, the more we feel that it is too complex to have evolved anywhere.  We believe as an article of faith that life evolved from dead matter on this planet.  It is just that its complexity is so great, it is hard for us to imagine that it did." (Urey, Harold C., quoted in Christian Science Monitor, January 4, 1962, p. 4)


Dr. George Wald, Harvard University biochemist, and winner of the 1967 Nobel Prize in science said: "One has only to contemplate the magnitude of this task to concede that the spontaneous generation of a living organism is impossible.  Yet here we are -- as a result, I believe, of spontaneous generation."  "When it comes to the origin of life on this earth, there are only two possibilities: creation or spontaneous generation (evolution).  There is no third way.  Spontaneous generation was disproved 100 years ago, but that leads us only to one other conclusion: that of supernatural creation.  We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds (personal reasons); therefore we choose to believe the impossible: that life arose spontaneously by chance." 


And they considered him a smart man. 



The Miracle of Life

Right-handed and left-handed amino acids


1.  A mixture of left-handed and right-handed amino acids is a poison to life.

2.  All biological proteins (all life) contain 100% left-handed amino acids.

3.  When a living organism dies, the natural property of amino acids is to revert to a mixture (left-handed and right-handed).

4.  Scientists have tried to start with an all left-handed solution of amino acids, but the amino acids slowly alter until the solution becomes approximately a mixture of 50/50 right-handed and left-handed amino acids.


All life requires only left-handed amino acids, but they will naturally revert to a half and half mixture in either life or death, by natural processes.  Scientists can't even make it happen on purpose, they have tried.  Life is a supernatural event.