The Origin of Life

When we consider how life began on earth, there are only two options: Either life was created by an intelligent source (God) or it began by natural processes. "Many biologists try to separate the origin of life (sometimes called chemical evolution) and the universe from discussions of biology. These scientists recognize the challenge presented by chemical evolution, but their commitment to naturalism leaves them no other choice. Many different models are used to explain how life can come from non-living matter, but all of these models, including the famous Miller-Urey experiment, fail to account for the many chemical and biological barriers to spontaneously forming life." (Roger Patterson) No known laws of nature allow complex, living, information-containing systems to develop from the random interactions of matter. Yet, this is what is required in order for life to have evolved in the universe. Darwin's theory presupposes that non-living chemicals, if given the right amount of time and circumstances, could develop themselves into living matter. If scientists can really prove that life could emerge purely from chemical processes, then there's no need for God. However, if the evidence points towards an Intelligent Designer, then Darwin's entire theory would collapse. 

Darwin himself admitted that "if it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, then my theory would absolutely break down." Michael J. Behe's award-winning book, Darwin's Black Box, shows how recent biochemical discoveries have found numerous examples of this very kind of "irreducible complexity." We also have to understand that this practical application of "all or nothing" is relevant to other theories and systematic structures as well, including Christianity. The Bible is a great example: Throughout time, skeptics have regarded the Bible as mythological, but archeology has confirmed it as historical. It continues to be attacked by pseudo-science, psychology, and political movements, yet it remains just as true and relevant today as it was when it was first written. If even one part of the Bible were proven to be false, the entire structure of Christianity would collapse. But to this day, the Bible has affirmed itself to be what it states it is: the word of God

Something to consider: Back in the early 1900's, scientists didn't have a way of seeing the complexity that exists within the membrane of a cell. Darwin probably didn't think it would be very difficult to create life from non-life, because the gap between the two didn't appear to be very great. Little did Darwin know that each cell in the human body contains more information than all thirty volumes of the Encyclopaedia Britannica or that 1 square inch chip of DNA could encode the information in over 7 million Bibles. There are about 50-100 trillion cells in the average human body. If the DNA in a single human cell were stretched out and laid end-to-end, it would measure approximately 6.5 feet. The average human body contains 10 to 20 billion miles of DNA distributed among trillions of cells.

Until the later part of the 19th century, life was believed to arise from non-living matter by a process called spontaneous generation. For example, people thought maggots would spontaneously develop from decaying meat. In 1650, Francesco Redi demonstrated that flies didn’t ‘arise’ from decaying meat, but from the eggs that other flies laid on the meat. This was a serious blow to spontaneous generation, but when bacteria were later discovered, it was thought that at least microorganisms might arise from non-life. This notion too was finally laid to rest in 1864 by the great scientist Louis Pasteur, who demonstrated that bacteria can only come from living bacteria. Louis Pasteur successfully demonstrated air contains microorganisms that can multiply in water, giving the illusion of spontaneous generation. When reporting his results before the French Academy, he confidently stated that 'never will the doctrine of spontaneous generation recover from the mortal blow of this simple experiment.' 

In the present, scientists agree with Pasteur that spontaneous genesis doesn't happen in a short time frame. But they theorize that if you had billions and billions of years, then it might really happen after all. And this is the basis for the idea that non-living chemicals can combine into living cells if given enough time. Unfortunately, origin-of-life scientists have come up empty when they've tried to speculate how chemicals could evolve into living matter. Klaus Dose, a prominent evolutionist and biochemist, sums up the situation pretty well: "More than 30 years of experimentation on the origin of life in the fields of chemical and molecular evolution have led to a better perception of the immensity of the problem of the origin of life on Earth rather than to its solution. At present all discussions on principal theories and experiments in the field either end in stalemate or in a confession of ignorance."

References:
1.  The Origin of Life: More Questions than Answers - Klaus Dose
2. The Case For Faith (87-112) - Lee Strobel
3. Evolution Exposed: Earth Science - Roger Patterson