Darwin and the Bibel – Are both right?

The Big Bang theory is widely accepted among scientists and describes the origin and evolution of the universe. We know that the universe began as an infinitely small point that was hot and dense and has been expanding ever since.

However, the Big Bang theory only explains what happened after the initial expansion of the universe. It doesn’t clarify where the material that triggered the explosion came from or how life truly originated on Earth. Whether we label the initial explosion as the Big Bang or attribute it to a divine being is, therefore – whether one likes it or not – a matter of personal belief.

Our understanding of the origins of the universe is, in reality, extremely limited.

One could venture to hypothesize that religions and their creation stories are merely a scientific theory based on observations, even if they were formulated without access to the data and knowledge we have today.

Possibly worthy of criticism is the imposition and solidification of insights or theories over millennia without adapting them to new developments and data. But at the beginning of religious creation myths, there seems to be an assumption based on empirical data.

And the transformation of knowledge into religion was more important than one might think. It ensured the survival of the knowledge over millenia.

To underscore this, let’s consider an experiment:

Imagine you are a nuclear scientist contemplating how to convey the message of the danger of nuclear waste to future generations since it remains hazardous for thousands of years. The waste is buried deep underground. But how can you communicate its danger to those who might excavate it in the distant future? Will future generations be able to read our language, understand our symbols, or even find them after erosion and time have taken their toll?

The idea that might come to mind is to preserve information for millennia by issuing a religious prohibition that enforces the importance of avoiding the storage sites.

The thought is fascinating. Perhaps the transmission of religious duties and prohibitions for the human species was just as crucial as spreading knowledge about which plants are edible or poisonous.

The Starting Point: Science vs. Belief

There are two groups attempting to explain the origin of life: religious thinkers and scientists. When looking at it broadly, the two are not as far apart as one might believe, and that is interesting.

The scientific view: The Primordial Organism

Scientists assume that the first common ancestor of all life on Earth was a single-celled organism that lived about 4 billion years ago (abbreviated in English as “LUCA” – the Last Universal Common Ancestor). This organism must have possessed essential cellular mechanisms like DNA, RNA, and ribosomes that allowed it to translate the genetic code into proteins.

Even though the emergence of living organisms from simple components is not fully understood, the prerequisites for the development of a living cell are clear: a habitable world, simple organic compounds, and the formation of polymers like proteins and RNA.

The question of how this ancestor began to live is as challenging for scientists to answer as it is for religious individuals.

The religious view: The Golden Egg

Our ancestors instinctively believed in a mix of reasons for life, and they were probably right. Debates among religions about the details of creation can, in some cases, resemble the heated arguments that take place among scientists in academic journals.

However, some religions considered the possibility of a single starting point for creation thousands of years ago. This is true, for example, of the Rigveda, one of the oldest sacred texts of Hinduism, composed in Sanskrit around 1500-1200 BCE in the Indus Valley. It contains a creation story describing the origin of the universe and the beginning of life.

In the hymn “Nasadiya Sukta” (Rigveda 10.129), the process of creation is described as the emergence of the universe from a golden egg in a state of chaos and confusion. The golden egg contains the potential for all life, and from it arise the various realms of existence, including the gods, the heavens, the earth, and all living beings.

The same applies to the mystical egg of the god Phanes in ancient Greek mythology. Phanes was an original deity associated with the creation and the cyclical nature of the universe. According to the Greek Orphic tradition, Phanes emerged from the cosmic egg containing the seed of creation.

The religious view: Made from Clay?

The theme of creating life from clay appears in many more world religions and mythologies, including the Bible (Genesis), the Quran, Sumerian, Egyptian, Greek, Hindu, Norse, and Polynesian mythology, among others. Various gods, goddesses, or deities create humans or animals from dust, mud, or clay, giving them life and abilities. Subsequently, a god or goddess usually breathes a soul or wisdom into the newly created being.

Does that sound unreasonable? Let’s admit it: probably not.

“And certainly did We create man from an extract of clay. Then We placed him as a sperm-drop in a firm lodging. Then We made the sperm-drop into a clinging clot, and We made the clot into a lump [of flesh], and We made [from] the lump, bones, and We covered the bones with flesh; then We developed him into another creation. So blessed is Allah, the best of creators.” Quran (Surah Al-Mu’minun, 23:12-14)

The scientific view: Made from Clay?

Scientists, too, consider clay a promising place to search for the origin of life. The key role of clay minerals in the emergence of life was first proposed by Bernal in 1949. His groundbreaking hypothesis stated that the ordered arrangement of clay mineral particles, combined with their high adsorption capacity and ability to shield ultraviolet radiation, made them ideal for concentrating organic chemicals and using them as templates for polymerization. And although this hypothesis has not yet been supported by experimental data, subsequent experiments have shown that clay minerals are efficient catalysts for the polymerization of amino acids and nucleotides.

As the French scientist André Brack explained in a 2013 paper titled “Clay Minerals and the Origin of Life,” RNA could have existed in a world of clay minerals before the first cells emerged. Encapsulated in vesicles and capable of growing and dividing by absorbing fatty acids, these vesicles could have mediated the replication of life through growth and division cycles.

This is a fascinating possibility, and the data obtained so far undoubtedly suggest that clay minerals could have played an active role in the abiotic origin of life.

However, the theory that we were made from clay was first mentioned by the founders of religions thousands of years ago, and it’s not the only theory that could be closer to the truth than some might believe.

The scientific view: The Primordial Soup

Another scientific hypothesis, that of chemical evolution, the emergence from the “primordial soup,” posits that life began with the formation of simple organic compounds in the primordial soup of early Earth, which then evolved into more complex organic molecules through chemical reactions. Over time, these molecules could have combined to form self-replicating structures like RNA, leading to the emergence of the first living organisms.

It was the ancient Greeks who first presented this idea, that living beings could arise from inanimate matter, in a scientific approach. It is known as ‘spontaneous generation.’

Aristotle, who lived in the 4th century BCE, explained it as follows:

“Among animals, again, some spring from parent animals according to their kind, whilst others grow spontaneously and not from kindred stock; and of these instances of spontaneous generation some come from putrefying earth or vegetable matter, as is the case with a number of insects, while others are spontaneously generated in the inside of animals out of the secretions of their several organs.”

Aristotle, History of Animals, Book V, Part 1

Scientists have proposed another alternative theory for the origin of life that sounds like it’s straight out of a science fiction novel. According to this theory, life did not begin on land but in the deep, dark depths of the ocean, near hydrothermal vents. These vents are located at the ocean floor and are fed by underwater volcanic activities that heat the surrounding seawater to temperatures of up to 400°C.

This theory has gained significant traction in recent years as scientists have discovered numerous types of microbes living near hydrothermal vents that differ from all other life forms on Earth. These organisms can survive in extreme conditions and could be key to understanding the origin of life. The idea that life originates from the depths of the ocean may sound far-fetched, but this theory is gaining increasing support among scientists.

The religious view: The Primordial Soup

Religious views were originally developed by humans, and their creators may have had a certain intuition for the truth. It’s fascinating to note that some religious beliefs already hint at the idea that life originated from a primordial soup or the ocean. This suggests that the instinctive religious assumptions of our ancestors may have been rooted in observations of nature, long-standing endemic or traditional knowledge, and a deep experience of life on Earth while simultaneously observing the environment and the heavens.

So, we should not dismiss hastily what was proposed by religious traditions. They might have been the first to suggest an idea that could be entirely valid.

The concept of a primordial sea is already mentioned in the Norse Prose Edda, written (but created much earlier) by the Icelandic scholar Snorri Sturluson in the 13th century. According to Norse mythology, the world originated from the primordial void known as Ginnungagap, a vast and empty space between two worlds of fire and ice.

Here is a sentence from the Edda describing this original space:

“Ginnungagap, the Yawning Void…, which faced toward the northern quarter, became filled with heaviness, and masses of ice and rime, and from within, drizzling rain and gusts; but the southern part of the Yawning Void was lighted by those glowing masses which flew out of Múspellheim.”

Prose Edda (Gylfaginning)

In Norse mythology, the giant Ymir was born from the melting ice of this primordial sea, and the first gods shaped the world from his body.

“In the beginning, when naught was, there was neither sea nor land nor air, when there was neither heaven nor sky nor stars, when Ymir lived – neither heat nor cold nor aught to comfort him – he was formed from the drops that fell from the melting ice.”

Edda (Gylfaginning)

In the early 15th century, Scandinavian cartographers explored the mystery of Ginnungagap and attempted to determine its location in the real world. A fragment from an Old Norse text called Gripla from the pre-Columbian era suggests that it was in the sea: “Between Vinland and Greenland is Ginnungagap, which flows from the ocean, called Mare oceanum, and surrounds the whole earth.”

So, life originated from the ocean, as is now suggested by scientists.

Another interesting religious text also deals with the necessity of heat or at least warmth for creation.

Here is a quote from the Rigveda, the sacred text of the Hindus:

“In the beginning, there was neither existence nor non-existence. There was neither atmosphere nor heaven above it. What enveloped it? Where was it? In whose care was the water, the unfathomable abyss? There was neither death nor immortality, nor was there a difference between day and night. That one breathed calmly, self-sustaining; there was nothing else. Firstly, there was darkness, veiled in darkness. All this was only unmanifested water. That one germ, which was covered with the void, was born through the power of heat.”

Rigveda

Michelangelo, God created Adam. Sistine Chapel, Rome – See the Bible, Genesis 2:7: “Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.”

The scientific view: The Celestial Spark

However, it seems that clay, warmth, and chemicals alone are not enough to bring a being to life. The question remains: What caused the blurbs and microbes to feed, reproduce, and react?

In biology, there is no unified definition of life. Descriptive definitions consider it as a property of something that maintains, enhances, or promotes its existence in a specific environment. Living beings exhibit various features, including the regulation of the internal environment (homeostasis), cellular organization, energy conversion (metabolism), growth, adaptation, response to stimuli, and reproduction. These characteristics have physical and chemical foundations and signal mechanisms essential for maintaining life.

But how did our planet truly ‘get moving’?

In a more scientific approach, the Greek philosopher Anaxagoras in the 5th century proposed that life might have originated elsewhere in the universe and was brought to Earth by comets or meteorites. This theory is known as “panspermia.”

Recent studies suggest that the first organic molecules may indeed have come from space and could have played a crucial role in the emergence of life on Earth. The search for corresponding evidence of life on other planets continues through astrobiology and a NASA strategy from 2015 on the origin of life.

Meteorites have played a significant role in human history and have always been revered. For example, the iron dagger from the tomb of Tutankhamun is said to have been made from a meteorite.

The underlying scientific hypothesis is based on the idea that asteroid impacts brought crucial chemicals that initiated the process of life, such as uracil, a nucleobase in RNA, to our planet. The discovery of organic compounds like amino acids, sugars, and nucleobases in meteorites and other extraterrestrial bodies, as well as laboratory experiments successfully forming similar compounds under space conditions, supports this hypothesis.

Similarly, the Japanese spacecraft Hayabusa2 collected samples from the asteroid Ryugu and found evidence of uracil, providing insights into the building blocks of life. A meteorite found in Antarctica also contained opal, a gemstone associated with water and of biological origin.

The question remains: how did it all start to live?

The religious view: The Celestial Spark

The idea of a divine spark creating the life force is a common motif in creation myths and religious traditions worldwide. In many of these myths, a deity or higher power breathes life into a inert substance like clay or dust to create the first human or animal. This idea is found, among others, in the Abrahamic religions, Hinduism, and ancient Sumerian and Babylonian mythology.

In some cases, the divine spark or life force is considered an essential feature of the human soul or spirit, representing the divine aspect of humans. This concept is also found in ancient Greek and Roman philosophy, where it was believed that the anima mundi or World Soul was the vital force animating and connecting all living things. It was revived in the 18th century by thinkers like Goethe, who referred to it as the “World Spirit.”

Conclusion

Religion has found its answer through the bridge of faith, while science continues to try to decipher the mysteries of the universe through the rocky road of knowledge.

It is worth noting that people have contemplated the question of how life originated on Earth for millennia. Over the centuries, their religions have held views on the origins of life and humanity. Even though these views have been accused of being incompatible with scientific research, they may have served as a means of transmitting knowledge accumulated by generations of observers of the natural world over a very long period.

Indeed, many religious traditions already offer insights into the hypotheses that scientists are exploring today. Therefore, we should not lightly dismiss or disregard the contributions of religious thought to the ongoing search for the origin of life and the human species.

U.C. Ringuer

_____________

[1] “The Origin of Species” by Charles Darwin (1859, John Murray)

“The Selfish Gene” by Richard Dawkins (1976, Oxford University Press)

“The RNA World: The Nature of Modern RNA Suggests a Prebiotic RNA World” by Raymond F. Gesteland and John F. Atkins (1993, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press)

“The Vital Question: Energy, Evolution, and the Origins of Complex Life” by Nick Lane (2015, W.W. Norton & Company)

“The Emergence of Life: From Chemical Origins to Synthetic Biology” by Pier Luigi Luisi (2016, Cambridge University Press)

“The Serengeti Rules: The Quest to Discover How Life Works and Why It Matters” by Sean B. Carroll (2016, Princeton University Press)

“The Equations of Life: How Physics Shapes Evolution” by Charles S. Cockell (2018, Basic Books)

“The Deep History of Ourselves: The Four-Billion-Year Story of How We Got Conscious Brains” by Joseph LeDoux (2019, Viking)

“The New Science of Astrobiology: From Genesis of the Living Cell to Evolution of Intelligent Behaviour in the Universe” by Grégoire Nicolis (2020, World Scientific Publishing) “The Code Breaker: Jennifer Doudna, Gene Editing, and the Future of the Human Race” by Walter Isaacson (2021, Simon & Schuster)