Account  |  Contact Us       

 Home  >  Articles  >  God - The Creator  >  Scientific Evidences of Existence  >  Scientists Prove God and Validity of the Quran through Failure to Synthesize Life from Nonlife

Scientists Prove God and Validity of the Quran through Failure to Synthesize Life from Nonlife

We have come to the end of the story. Through previous several articles posted at this blog and at QuranScienceBlog ( we have seen how science in non-tech domain is being shaped up on atheistic lines by the atheist lobby cautiously and surreptitiously exploiting the immense trust people repose in science and scientific community. First and foremost, scientific community does not accept God and hence treats belief in God as irrational and superstitious. This verdict is not based on scientific evidence or based on scientific evaluation of the Quranic revelations. This observation is all the more pertinent and relevant as atheism is unscientific – it is neither scientifically testable nor falsifiable. Therefore it can be stated that the refutation of God by the scientific community has no scientific basis and is meaningless. But the biggest joke is atheists have already proved God! They are not even aware of it! They are yet to realize it!  

Being the Word of God (Q. 18:27) and under His protection (Q. 15:9), the Quran is Truth (Q. 16:102; 17:105) and none can change it (Q. 18:27). The Quran thus becomes the universal reference standard for verification of information in the sense any information that is not consistent with or contradictory to the Quran will be false. This applies to every kind of information including science.

Thus we have seen theories that contradict the Quran have either failed or remained controversial. Steady state cosmology, molecular gene (genome), theories of origin of life, and Darwinism come under this category. Of these, steady state theory that was introduced to counter big bang cosmology, which indicated beginning for the universe and time and hence the need for Creator, is almost rejected. Theories of origin of life are not scientific although they circulate as scientific theories. There are dozens of them. None of these theories meets the requirements of scientific theory. They are neither verifiable experimentally nor falsifiable. They do not yield verifiable predictions either. They all remain in the domain of nonlife without giving any suggestion as to how life originated.

These theories are founded on the baseless assumption that life originated from nonlife as emergent phenomenon. It is surprising to see how these theories get published and how they get into science curriculum! It is the same scientific community, which proclaims the Quran is irrational without examining its scientific validity, that upholds pseudoscientific theories and promote them as science! Darwinism is yet another theory being fought against by scientists and theistic religious leaders. Even after one hundred and fifty years, it remains controversial!

Another giant in the list is the molecular gene (genome) theory. While introducing the gene concept in 1909, Wilhelm Johannsen warned against treating gene as physical entity. The term ‘gene’ was meant to indicate the factor responsible for inheritance of characters. He had also warned against assigning gene to particular character. But later scientists could not think of an entity with metaphysical underpinnings. Thus with the elucidation of the chemical structure of DNA, which was found to determine the amino acid sequence of protein, the molecule was declared as constituting the genetic information required for the biological activities of an organism. Thus the phenomenon of life acquired physical basis. Today we know that molecular gene and genome are in big crisis. Both warnings given by Johannsen stand proven. But yet biologists are not mindful of their mistakes nor are they prepared for a reexamination of the whole concept of physical gene.

Summing up the discussions, the following conclusions can be drawn.

a) None of the theories of origin of life is scientific. These theories do not meet the requirements of a scientific theory. They are neither testable nor falsifiable. They also do not yield testable or falsifiable predictions. In other words they do not satisfy any of the criteria formulated for a scientific theory. It is these theories that are taught in schools and colleges in biology curriculum! It is theories of this kind that are discussed and published in thousands of biology journals! Nobody questions them! The scientific community who declares God and religion as blind beliefs and irrational is silent about its own criminal action of promoting unscientific theories in the garb of science. Its hypocrisy and hidden agenda are laid bare!

b) Darwinism-based theory of evolution is another gimmick to sell atheism. Darwin proposed his theory against natural evidence (absence of intermediate forms of life) knowingly with the caveat that nature is wrong (i.e., fossil record is imperfect)! The assumptions on which the theory is based are invalid, the predictions of the theory have failed and more than all, several natural evidences and scientific findings are against it. Voice of dissent over the theory is getting louder by the day.

c) If we examine the biology literature, it will be apparent that biology as a whole is molecular gene-centric barring perhaps such traditional areas as taxonomy, anatomy, cytology, physiology and biochemistry. In other words, if molecular gene concept is proved wrong, modern biology will collapse under its own weight. The assumption that life originated from nonlife (i.e., nonliving matter) is founded on the idea that biological program is encoded by a chemical molecule, DNA. It is therefore believed that change in DNA structure (mutation) brings about change in the biological information encoded by it. That in turn reflects in the change of phenotype. New organism evolves that way. With this assumption, a living being is reduced to mere bundle of chemical molecules. It is without testing the scientific validity of molecular gene, all these conclusions are being drawn by scientists. No wonder molecular gene (genome) concept is in deep crisis now.

The seemingly biased approach of biologists toward these theories places them in a class of their own. These atheism-friendly theories enjoy immunity from satisfying the essential criteria prescribed for a scientific theory. Biologists introduce these theories into the realm of science and treat them at par with scientific theories to give credibility to atheism and project theism as irrational. That biological diversity we observe today is the product of chance evolution is a foregone conclusion. That the genome encodes biological information required for the life of an organism is another foregone conclusion. Explanations given to biological phenomena are therefore developed to suit these conclusions. The question that inevitably comes up here is how long biology will be able to survive on atheistic pseudoscientific foundation?

Entry of pseudoscientific theories into the domain of life sciences has made biology a mockery of sorts. Biology is virtually a breeding ground for atheism-oriented pseudoscientific theories. The pathetic state of affairs of modern biology can be understood from the fact that although biology is the science of life, biologists do not know what “life” is; they cannot even define the phenomenon. Evolutionary biology is the science of evolution of species; but evolutionists (including Darwin) do not know what “species” is. Genetics is the science of molecular gene; but geneticists do not know what the “gene” is. One does not need anything more to visualize where biology is taking us.

The Quran is the only source that sheds light on the phenomenon of life. As may be noted, theories of origin of life from nonlife, theory of evolution of species through descent with modification, and molecular gene theory indicating life is material phenomenon are opposed to the Quranic revelations. The Quran reveals to us that life is nonmaterial phenomenon. Life is caused by the nonphysical intangible rooh (or nafs). Accordingly organism has been described based on a computer model as natural biocomputer or biorobot. Please see post 4 at QuranScienceBlog ( for a detailed discussion.

The rooh (soul) can be understood as the nonmaterial biosoftware of an organism. The molecular gene theory is thus refuted by the Quran. Wilhelm Johannsen’s original proposal of nonphysical gene is however consistent with the Quran. Any theory that is against the Quran, the Word of God, is destined to fail. The Quranic revelation thus poses the biggest challenge to material gene concept. If material gene theory is wrong, it goes without saying that every other theory (particularly those relating to origin of life and evolution of species) is also wrong.   

Biologists are unable to explain life because the molecular gene and genome concepts are wrong. In other words, life is not a material phenomenon. Non-recognition of this truth leads biologists to try out synthesizing life from nonlife (chemical molecules stored in bottles on the shelves of laboratory). To create life, biologists start from scratch by synthesizing genome, chromosome, or a cell through artificial means using chemical molecules. A more practical method is to try it out with a dead cell. Instead of creating synthetic cell without involving a living organism (which of course is impossible), a dead cell can be considered as equivalent to prosthetic cell. It can be used as the starting material for the creation of life. It has all the material structures (genome, cytoplasm and other cell structures including cell wall) except life (biosoftware). That is to say, it is materially identical to a living cell. Biologists only have to restore life to it by chemical means without employing a living cell. In this way they can test the scientific validity of the molecular gene and genome concepts.

The outcome of this scientific experiment will also provide answer to the biggest question “Is there God?” If they succeed in creating life from nonlife without involving living cell or organism at any stage during the process, they are not only proving the molecular gene but also disproving the Quranic revelation of nonmaterial basis of life and God’s very existence. On the other hand, if they fail in their attempt, it will invalidate not only molecular gene concept but also theories of origin of life and evolutionary biology as a whole. More importantly it will confirm the validity of the Quran and existence of God. A lot of studies are now going on in several universities and research institutions in this line to create life from nonlife. As of today, all the experiments have failed indicating the validity of the Quran and existence of God. Atheists have thus proved God already.

 Their continued efforts to create life from nonlife are not going to produce a different result. But indeed future failures will help confirm the existence of God unequivocally. Atheists are now doing that. That will mark the end of atheism as well as the religion-science controversy. It is just a matter of time biologists called it a day. That will also mark the day of realization of another Quranic revelation:

“Soon will We show them Our signs in the (furthest) regions and in themselves until it becomes manifest to them that this (Quran) is the truth. Is it not enough that your Lord is witness over all things?” (Q. 41:53).

Prof. Wahid  [External/non-QP]


Please login to leave review.
© 2017 Quran Project - All Rights Reserved.
Website Ecommerce and Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) developed by EvolveNet