|
|
See this page in: Dutch, Japanese, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish | |  The earth is filled with life forms of enormous complexity. Where did the first life come from? How did it form? |
Is evolutionism correct? Could time, chance and natural chemical processes have created life in the beginning? Many modern scientists are materialists. That is, they believe physical matter is the only ultimate reality. They suppose that everything in the cosmos, including life, can be explained in terms of interacting matter. Materialists do not accept the existence of spiritual or supernatural forces. Biologists who believe in materialism are particularly concerned with: (a) proving a purely materialistic origin of life, and (b) proving that life can be created in the laboratory. Most scientists are not strict materialists. Biochemist Dr. Arthur Wilder-Smith:
"Life rides upon matter, and matter has to be highly organized to carry life. The materialists say that life, since it's made up of atoms, molecules, and chemical reactions, is just simply chemistry and nothing else and that life originated by chance chemical reactions. Now, if life consists merely of chemistry, and nothing but chemistry, the best way to understand its real potentialities is to look at some of the chemical substances of life. And we shall see that it is NOT merely a matter of chemistry." [115] It was the famous French scientist and Creationist, Pasteur, who provided the first scientific evidence that living things are not produced from non-living matter. [116] During the Middle Ages, some people thought non-living matter often gave birth to living things (spontaneous generation). Worms, insects, mice, and other creatures were thought to be created by materials in their environment. spontaneous generation: the idea that living creatures can be produced naturally from non-living substances. [117] It is important to note that science has never observed such an occurrence. [118] |