The Origin of Life - A Scientific or Philosophical Debate?

I'm currently reading the book, "Origins of Life" by Dr Fazale Rana and Dr Hugh Ross of Reasons to Believe. Early in the book Dr Rana traces the various theories that have been considered throughout history concerning the origin of life. It fascinates me that some of the most prominent scientific minds have presented some of the most unscientific explanations. With the near impossibility of defending the theoretical position of life coming from non-life some have made up very interesting arguments. One of my favorites is Directed Panspermia which credits alien life for seeding the earth. Very interesting...

So that makes me think a little.... When we argue about the origin of life aren't we stepping outside of the realm of science and entering the realm of philosophy? It's impossible to observe and impossible to test life's origin so it cannot be evaluated using The Scientific Method. Hence, this debate really does come down to the simple question; "What do you believe?" Once we establish what we believe we may then use any observable evidence to strengthen or weaken our belief. Now let's use some brain power.

Excerpt From Faith Science;

Here are three crucial quotes from the Chicago Tribune article “Fermilab Test Throws off More Matter than Antimatter and this Matters” on May 29, 2010. I cited it earlier as the number-three headline that followed the D-Zero Collaboration announcement. It highlights comments made by Joseph Lykken, a theoretical physicist at FERMILAB.

“It’s like looking back to the instant where everything began,” said Joseph Lykken.

The question of existence is something that humans have wondered about ever since there were humans to wonder: “Why is there something rather than nothing?” as the seventeenthcentury philosopher Gottfried Leibniz put it.

This discovery someday could have practical spinoffs, but it could have immediate implications, among them is the clamorous intersection of politics and religion. Lykken hypothesized that proponents of “intelligent design” could seize upon the new findings to further support their argument that the laws of nature are so fine-tuned, they must be the handiwork of a creator.

—Fermilab Test Throws off More Matter than Antimatter and this Matters—Particle collision thought to replicate Big Bang forces, may help explain how things exist by Ron Grossman, Chicago Tribune, May 29, 2010

So what did they expect to happen? Is it by chance that ultra highspeed collisions support the notion of super symmetry resulting in consistently more matter than antimatter? Could this process have simply replicated itself to result in the highly detailed physical realm in existence today?

It’s actually much more challenging to believe that there is no Creator than to believe that there is. With each new discovery, scientists find answers that result in more questions. This perpetual process of experimental analysis will continue until the truth is accepted.

But God shows his anger from heaven against all sinful, wicked people who suppress the truth by their wickedness. They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God. Yes, they knew God, but they wouldn’t worship him as God or even give him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. As a result, their minds became dark and confused. Claiming to be wise, they instead became utter fools.

Romans 1:18–23 nlt

One of the worst decisions a Christian can ever make is to get into an argument with atheists or agnostics about the Theory of Origins. Even if they are presented with the conclusions of respectable scientists, they will not listen. They know the truth in their hearts and cannot deny the impossibility of chance in proven scientific processes like CP violation. It’s not supposed to happen that way; that is, unless it was really supposed to happen that way. Why is it so hard to believe there’s more to our existence than random scientific reactions? The truth is not always hard to believe, but most times it’s hard to accept.

In the Chicago Tribune article cited earlier in this chapter, Ron Grossman said:

One of physic’s foundation stones is the concept of a symmetrical universe. Everything has its mirror opposite, like humans’ left and right hands. As schoolchildren learn, Newton said every action has an equal and opposite reaction. “A good example is the Big Bang,” Lykken said, putting his colleague’s discovery into context. “The universe began as a perfectly symmetrical object, a ball of energy.” The problem lies in what happened next. That energy condensed into matter but also its opposite, antimatter. The two being mutually destructive, they should have canceled each other out. Instead, Lykken noted, matter joined together in ever larger concentrations—nuclei, atoms, stars, galaxies.

Fermilab test throws off more matter than antimatter and this matters—Particle collision thought to replicate Big Bang forces, may help explain how things exist by Ron Grossman, Chicago Tribune, May 29, 2010

An atheist could probably continue the quote with, “ … water, trees, humans, dogs, etc.” Once again, let’s take a look at Romans 1:23: “Claiming to be wise, they instead became utter fools.” Those who argue on the side of chance claim to be wise. Why does anything exist? Their wise answer is “the Big Bang.” Why are humans developed beyond the rest of the animal kingdom? Their wise answer is “evolution.” What will happen when they die? Their wise answer is “nothing.” The more we discover about our existence, the more we need to discover. The search for truth cannot end if those who are searching don’t intend to accept it.

When times get bad, people cry out for help. They cry for relief from being kicked around, But never give God a thought when things go well, when God puts spontaneous songs in their hearts, When God sets out the entire creation as a science classroom, using birds and beasts to teach wisdom.

Job 35:9–11 msg

God is our science teacher, and the universe is his classroom. This probably explains why several scientists and writers for scientific publications are quick to mention God after major scientific breakthroughs. Why don’t they say that the experimental results prove that there is no God and there was no creation? Isn’t that supposed to be the goal of many of these educated theorists?

They come up with complicated explanations for life’s intricate details while God uses birds and beasts to teach wisdom. Then they see experimental data that points them to God and they struggle to accept it. The good news is that God knows how to trigger a response out of even the most stubborn hearts.

Can Scientific Evidence Prove The Bible is The Word of God?

I received the following question from Alicia;

What are the scientific truths/proofs that the Bible is the Word of God?

Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines the scientific method as, “principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.”

Scientific proof is testable. For me to present scientific truths/ proofs that The Bible is the Word of God I have to confirm using scientific evidence (not scriptures) the existence and true identity of God Himself. I then have to confirm using scientific evidence (not scriptures) the true source of The Bible in it's original form.

I may believe as a Christian that The Bible is The Word of God but which Bible are we referring to? Definitely, not the one we have in our hands right now. Why? I have about 20 versions of The Bible at my house alone and they each say different things. That's not just because they're different translations from the same original source.

They actually were translated from different manuscripts which said different things. In fact, some of my Bibles have notes which list several sources of information which they selectively chose to use for the same scripture. As a Christian, it doesn't really bother me because The Bible is just a tool which helps me to develop a relationship with God. As long as I can understand God's intention in what's being said, I am fine. However, as a scientist I cannot ignore the specific details.

I then have to confirm using scientific evidence (not scriptures) that God gave us The Bible. Not only that, I'll have to use scientific evidence to prove how God did it and why it could not have come from another source. That's a tall task that cannot be done at this time.

However, I do have some exciting news. I present to you some ambitious research out of Jerusalem by The Hebrew University Bible Project. At the rate they're going, they expect to have a definitive version of the Old Testament in about 200 years.

An article by AP writer Matti Friedman called "Scholars seek to correct 'mistakes' in Bible" published on August 12, 2011 says the following;

A dull-looking chart projected on the wall of a university office in Jerusalem displayed a revelation that would startle many readers of the Old Testament: The sacred text that people revered in the past was not the same one we study today.

An ancient version of one book has an extra phrase. Another appears to have been revised to retroactively insert a prophecy after the events happened.

Scholars in this out-of-the-way corner of the Hebrew University campus have been quietly at work for 53 years on one of the most ambitious projects attempted in biblical studies — publishing the authoritative edition of the Old Testament, also known as the Hebrew Bible, and tracking every single evolution of the text over centuries and millennia.

And it has evolved, despite deeply held beliefs to the contrary.

For many Jews and Christians, religion dictates that the words of the Bible in the original Hebrew are divine, unaltered and unalterable.

For Orthodox Jews, the accuracy is considered so inviolable that if a synagogue's Torah scroll is found to have a minute error in a single letter, the entire scroll is unusable.

But the ongoing work of the academic detectives of the Bible Project, as their undertaking is known, shows that this text at the root of Judaism, Christianity and Islam was somewhat fluid for long periods of its history, and that its transmission through the ages was messier and more human than most of us imagine.

The Hebrew University Bible Project team at work.

If you visit my website and read many of the articles there, they provide proof that the source of information in The Bible is supernatural in nature. Why can I say that?

The scientific research that would have been necessary to provide some of the information that's presented in The Bible was only recently completed. For them to know what to write would have been impossible on a natural level.

For example, the meticulously ordered universe mentioned in Genesis 1:1 could not have come into place from random processes. In other words, the source of highly complex order cannot be chaos. According to The Big Bang Theory, as stated in my article "The Big Bang in The Bible" there was a singular point from which all time and space came into existence. It was something called the primeval atom.

Scientific evidence results in theoretical conclusions that can point as far back as the primeval atom. However, it can go back no further. Why? Scientific evidence can only operate in time and space which did not exist before The Beginning. We cannot test anything that's outside of this realm using tools that are of this realm. The Bible agrees that there was a beginning in Genesis 1:1, however, it goes a step further to say that God caused The Beginning. There is no way to prove that statement with science.

Science proves that there was a beginning but cannot identify The Beginner.

Genesis 21:33
Then Abraham planted a tamarisk tree at Beersheba, and there he worshiped the Lord, the Eternal God.

According to The Bible, God is eternal and transcends time and space. Therefore, He transcends the boundaries of scientific evidence.

As a Christian, I believe that the supernatural source of the information in The Bible is God. I cannot use science to prove that because scientific research cannot identify God. It can only observe His handiwork within time and space.

 

Romans 1:18-23 (NLT) - But God shows his anger from heaven against all sinful, wicked people who suppress the truth by their wickedness.^{[i] 19} They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. ²⁰ For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.

²¹ Yes, they knew God, but they wouldn’t worship him as God or even give him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. As a result, their minds became dark and confused. ²² Claiming to be wise, they instead became utter fools. ²³ And instead of worshiping the glorious, ever-living God, they worshiped idols made to look like mere people and birds and animals and reptiles.

 We don't prove The Bible! The Bible proves us!