Portrait of Charles Darwin

The alternative explanation for the origin of life stands on a far weaker footing

The modern age can be appropriately characterized by its explosion of cults, ideologies and philosophies, some religious, others atheistic, and a few, aspiring to be syncretic in their spiritual orientation. Added to this spiritual confusion is the newest trend among a growing number of individuals, who profess multiple religious ideologies, calling themselves “Buddhish” (Jewish-Buddhist), Muslim Humanists or Unitarian Universalists.

Indeed all these, often times mutually conflicting views and “religions” are vying for the attention of spiritually hungry minds, frequently resulting in highly individualized expressions of religiosity. Yet others have chosen to abandon spirituality altogether, and it is this trend that appears to be satisfying the intellectual needs of a population disillusioned with organized religion in general, and specific religious traditions in particular.

Furthermore, the ravages of war, inspired by centuries of religious fundamentalism, have contributed to this widespread frustration with organized religion. Also, one can hardly ignore the impact of Darwinism on modern minds, as his theory about the “Origin of Species”, which at times precludes the existence of a Creator, presents an alternative to the Biblical or Qur’anic perspective on our origin as thinking, moral beings.

What is yet a mere theory, has become the religion of a disillusioned generation, who will defend it with the same zeal and fervor as a religious fundamentalist would his/her dogma or creed. In all probability, an evolutionist would find “proof” of the Theory of Evolution, the same way a devout 

	" This trend appears to be satisfying the intellectual needs of a population disillusioned with organized religion. "

Christian would defend the doctrine of God’s incarnation in Jesus Christ. Some Neo-Darwinists go to the extent of saying that matter is sentient and alive, and therefore capable of self-organization into intelligent life forms.

Inorganic matter, according to them, made the transition to becoming a living cell millions of years ago, setting the process of evolution into motion. Homo Sapiens therefore, must have descended from single-celled organisms, as these evolved over time into increasingly more complex life forms.

But while the Theory of Evolution may present an alternative view of genesis, it must necessarily build its premise on far too many “givens”. For example, it is accepted as fact among evolutionists that inanimate matter turned into a living cell millions of years ago by chance, though it is not clear how exactly this happened. Also, there is little attempt by evolutionists to explain how inorganic matter or the elements came into existence in the first place.

Evolutionists also assume the pre-existence of the primordial Big Bang. But did the Big Bang arise out of “nothing?” Does “nothing” have any potential or possibility to produce inanimate matter or living cells?

It is also taken for granted among evolutionists that “missing links” must have formed the fine gradations that connect the parent species to its descendants. As yet, none of these fabled missing links have surfaced, and speculation as to their possible whereabouts continues.

What is however, beyond speculation and within the realm of 

	"Homo Sapiens therefore, must have descended from single-celled organisms, as these evolved over time into increasingly more complex life forms."

certainty is the following. Modern experiments have shown that “Spontaneous Generation” has not occurred even in laboratories where circumstances conducive to its occurrence have been created artificially.

Therefore, to believe that inanimate matter somehow became a living cell amounts to no less of a leap of faith as the belief in a deity. Also, scientists are in agreement that apart from minor variations, the characteristics of species remain more or less stable. Human beings for example, would not begin to grow trunks if the environment forced them to.

There is also evidence that genetic mutations, on which the ‘Theory of Evolution’ relies substantially, are not only extremely rare, but are known to produce harmful consequences on the physiological state of an organism rather than those that may be beneficial to its advancement. Perhaps the most compelling evidence against Evolution in the Darwinian sense, is the established fact of the sudden emergence of diverse life forms in the Cambrian period of the Earth’s history.

What then, would explain, genesis, or life on earth, or spatio-temporal existence? In an attempt to understand this imponderable of all imponderables, ancient Greek philosophers were preoccupied with “First Causes” of all things created. Plato and Aristotle spoke of “the Best Soul” or the “Unmoved Mover” who had set the process of creation into motion. Other cultures worship a “Great Spirit,” the “Tao”, or “Brahman,” as the underlying principle of 

	" In the realm of human endeavor, isn’t it logical to conclude that a manufactured object must have a manufacturer?"

all existence.

These conclusions were reached employing the Cosmological and Teleological arguments, which necessitate the belief that the design so evident in nature, must be due to the artistry of a Designer, and the laws by which the universe is governed, must have a Law-Giver. Perhaps this is why Isaac Newton declared: ”This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel of and dominion of an Intelligent and Powerful Being. This Being covers all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all, and on account of his dominion, He is want to be called Lord God, Universal Ruler.”

In conclusion, one must wonder why the notion of a First Cause has dominated human thought? Could it be that it is most consistent with logic and rationality? In the realm of human endeavor, isn’t it logical to conclude that a manufactured object must have a manufacturer? Indeed, the preponderance of this notion speaks volumes for the claim that the human intellect is perhaps designed to recognize a “First Cause”, “Unmoved Mover” “Cosmic Intelligence”, “Brahman” or “Allah” responsible for creation and its on-going functioning.

And while some religious thought may be fraught with philosophical quagmires and logical difficulties, the alternative explanation for the origin of life stands on a far weaker footing, as scientific data supporting it is sparse, while the evidence countering it appears to be growing each day.