Sometimes I just have to laugh. Naturalistic “scientists” are fixated on trying to figure out how and where life began based on natural processes. Recently I have come across numerous articles speculating on this very thing.
- All Life on Earth Comes From One Single Ancestor. And It’s So Much Older Than We Thought (from Popular Mechanics) (https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/a65933876/one-single-ancestor-life-luca-discovery/) All life on earth can be traced back to a last universal common ancestor (LUCA) and it probably lived on Earth only 400 million years after its formation. This is the conclusion of a computer model using a genetic equation based on the time of separation between species that the science team worked out.
- Scientists Say They May Have Just Figured Out the Origin of Life (from Yahoo!News) (https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/scientists-may-just-figured-origin-120028883.html) Biologists say they’ve demonstrated how RNA molecules and amino acids could combine by purely random interactions to form proteins. However, the amino acid chains being produced are random and chaotic, and are only the first step of a very complex process.
- Organic molecules found throughout the universe hint that life began in deep space (from Earth.com) (https://www.earth.com/news/organic-molecules-found-throughout-the-universe-hint-that-life-began-in-deep-space/#google_vignette) The implication is that life on earth was seeded from outer space. The problem is, organic compounds are simply inert chemicals. The fact of their existence tells us nothing about the origin of life.
- Historic asteroid sample reveals the ‘building blocks of life are in fact extraterrestrial in origin,’ scientists say (from CNN) (https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/29/science/asteroid-bennu-building-blocks-of-life) This article notes that the asteroid sampled contained water, as well as carbon, nitrogen and other organic matter. But the chemical composition of the organic material was largely unknown. In other words, more inert chemicals.
- China makes discovery of the century on Mars: It’s the origin of life (from EcoNews) (https://www.ecoticias.com/en/china-makes-discovery-on-mars/9057/) What the Chinese rover found was evidence of an ancient shoreline. The speculation is that if water is the very basis of life, it may have been possible once for life to have existed on Mars.
Actually, articles like these are rather common. People who don’t believe in God are desperate to demonstrate that it is possible for life to have come into existence based on natural processes. If they could demonstrate that, it would support their contention that a creator God was not needed for the existence of life. It would make them feel justified in their rejection of God.
The only problem is, there has never been even one actual scientific discovery able to back up a naturalistic process that would account for the origin of life. Read any one of those articles (and any others like them) and you find they are full of such expressions as:
- discoveries “suggest” …
- … “could have been” a cause of (whatever)
- “it was possible that” …
- “maybe” this or that happened (or didn’t happen)
- “evidence lends credence to the theory that” …
- “history intimates” …
- “not all scientists agree” …
- “findings hint that” …
- … suggests that” …
- “scientists speculate that” …
In fact, virtually every single article you might read on this topic is full of these kinds of hedging expressions. And the reason that is so is because the scientists that are wedded to figuring out how life naturally emerged have no idea how it is even possible. They observe what they find, then start pouring out speculative theories about how things might have come together naturally to bring about life. There is no actual science whatsoever in their speculations.
The beliefs these people hold are not based on science. They are based on the naturalistic philosophy that is the authority source for their beliefs. And since there is no science to back it up, they believe it by faith. It is their religion, not their science that leads them to pursue this topic. They will do or say virtually anything to avoid the conclusion that God was necessary for the existence of life.
Atheists like to make the claim that science and Christianity conflict. However, that is simply not true. Science is only able to deal with things that relate to the natural universe. It has absolutely nothing to say about transcendent reality. What these people have done is to assert the unsubstantiated assumption that the natural universe, operating by natural laws, is all that exists. There is no science to back that up, but they assume it to be true. Then, with that assumption in hand, they assert that believing in God goes against science.
The fact is, Christians believe in the use of the scientific method to study the natural world just as much as any naturalistic Atheist. We just recognize that the natural world is not all that exists.
Life did not begin with natural processes, so all the attempts of “scientists” to prove that belief to be true are useless. You can’t prove something to be true that simply is not true. Life was created by God, and we can know Him because He has revealed Himself to us.