Here is a diatribe from an evolutionist that is breathtaking in it bold assertion of utter untruth as ultimate truth and of abject folly as admirable wisdom. It comes from a self-appointed expert, blogging away to make himself important. He tells us:
There is no complete theory of abiogenesis [spontaneous generation]. The general hypothesis is that chemicals can form primitive replicators.
Abiogenesis is not a component of the Theory of Evolution, or Germ Theory for that matter. The first life form on Earth may have been a lucky accident, a natural property of carbon and liquid water, a unique circumstance, seeded by comets, or even a Divine Miracle. The Theory of Evolution concerns the diversification of life, not its origin. However, it is known that life did not always exist on Earth, but that once it began, it diversified into a variety of forms.
So, you can hide God in a Gap of human knowledge. Concerning abiogenesis, the Gap should hold for a few more years, at least. But why you would want to hide God in ever-shrinking scientific ignorance is beyond me. Seems like a rather small god.
So much for the mockery of an evolutionary genius! This is about as good a case as an evolutionist can muster against the reality of God our Creator. But it is utter nonsense. Consider it carefully.
First, he argues that the theory of spontaneous generation is not a necessary part of the theory of evolution. In other words, he simply ignores the fundamental question: "You say that the universe as it is today is the result of billions of years of evolutionary development, but where did anything come from in the first place? How did it all get started?" Evolutionists have no answer to that question at all. The best attempt at an answer is spontaneous generation-that is, that without any outside help nothing for no reason suddenly became something from which everything else developed into the universe as it is today. The choice is clear: either the universe was created or it spawned itself out of nothing! So despite their protests deniers of a Creator are stuck with abiogenesis.
Second, we are told that life on earth could have been a lucky accident-for though the writer sarcastically says it might have been caused by a divine miracle he goes on to mock the very idea of God. This still ignores the question of where all the ingredients of this lucky accident came from in the first place. Evolution, we are told, deals with the diversification of life not its origin. He has to say that because he cannot even dream of a viable theory of origins!
Third, it is blatantly untrue that evolution explains the diversification of life and relegates the need for God to the gaps of human knowledge. It's the evolutionist who squirms through the gaps. Think of DNA. This is the master plan containing all the instructions for its own peculiar development that lies in every organism. Without it the organism could not exist never mind develop. Now here's the question: How could an organism evolve and store the instructions necessary for its own existence and replication? That's like asking how an organism that does not exist could decide to exist and to manufacture and store the information needed to secure its ability to replicate itself. Yet this is the folly that evolution passes off as truth.
In arguing this way we are not seeking to hide God in a few gaps of human knowledge. We are pointing out that existence has no possibility apart from God and His creative power. By its very nature DNA-indeed every part of God's creation-carries the signature of its Creator. And when we look at His gloriously designed works, we see no "small god," as the evolutionist charges, but the Lord, the Almighty, the King of creation" and with Stuart Hines exclaim, "My God, how great Thou art!"