Chicken or the egg?

When someone asks, “Which came first, the chicken or the egg?” it’s usually posed as a rhetorical question. However, this is not just a common or entertaining question; it has real significance.

From a biblical standpoint, the obvious answer is “the chicken.” That’s because God created land creatures on day 6, fully formed and fully functional. From an evolutionary standpoint, however, the answer is quite elusive. You can’t truly have a chicken egg unless it comes from a chicken. But you can’t have a chicken unless it comes from a chicken egg. This dilemma is not exactly “breaking news.”

The primary focus of this article isn’t really chickens and eggs but the “chicken and egg” scenario in general, of which there are many. We’ll take a look at a few.

Let’s start big. Which came first, matter and energy or the laws of science that guide them? Even though there’s no rational answer to how matter and energy could come into existence from nothing, it wouldn’t make any sense to imagine those entities without the constraints that guide them (i.e., the laws of science). However, it is equally strange to imagine laws of science coming into existence out of nothing but lacking anything to apply themselves to (i.e., matter and energy). In fact, you cannot even describe these laws without reference to matter and energy (and time and space, while we’re at it). I’ve addressed this issue in greater detail in previous articles, videos, and podcasts, so I’ll leave it at that.

Here’s another “chicken and egg” scenario. As far as we can tell, only about 2% of our DNA directly codes to construct proteins, which are responsible for carrying out most of the functions in our bodies. Evolutionists have long considered the remaining 98% to be useless “junk” because it was thought to have no function. They now know better. The 98% they called “junk” is actually more complex than the 2%!  It’s what we call “meta-information.” That means information about information. It is instructions telling the 2% what to do. It’s incredibly complex.


“…the failure to recognize the implications of the non-coding DNA will go down as the biggest mistake in the history of molecular biology.” – John Mattick (Molecular biologist)

So, here’s the “chicken and the egg” scenario. Which came first, the 2% used to make the incredibly essential proteins, or the meta-information portion (98%) that directs the use of the 2%? You can’t just have one or the other. You need both at the same time. Oh, but wait. It gets more challenging than that!

There’s a significant amount of information outside of the DNA itself, housed in the cell membrane. Far from being some simplistic container used to house the cell’s internal components, the cell membrane is extremely complex. Those details will have to be addressed elsewhere, maybe in a future article. For now, just know that you can’t have a living cell without a membrane. But you also need the internal DNA that the membrane works with. You need both, fully developed and fully co-functional at the same time!  Explain that from a slow, gradual evolutionary process.
How about one more? Well, you’re getting one whether you like it or not. 🤣

For life to be possible, you need a DNA correction system. When cells reproduce or create proteins, they read and copy portions or all of the DNA. Mistakes happen. Also, DNA is subject to breaking down over time, (i.e., regular “wear and tear” on a daily basis). In fact, in a human cell, on a good day, about 1,000,000 bases (i.e., rungs on the ladder, or “letters”) are damaged. Fortunately, we have an amazing DNA repair system that does a great job. If we didn’t, we’d be dead. Here’s the kicker. The repair system is coded on the DNA! That means you need DNA to give you the necessary instructions to build the repair system. However, you can’t have functional DNA without a complex, pre-existing repair system but you can’t have this repair system without functional DNA to build it! You need both of them to be fully functional right from the beginning. That’s a massive problem for evolutionists.

The overall conclusion is that from an evolutionary standpoint, all we’d have are scrambled eggs and dead chickens! What does that mean? I have no idea, it just popped into my head and sounded funny. Welcome to my world!

My main point is pretty obvious. Naturalistic explanations cannot provide logically coherent answers to these “chicken and egg” scenarios but the Christian worldview can. I’ve mentioned it before but it’s a crucial point.  Christians don’t run into complex challenges and simply make up an all-powerful “god” as an “easy out” in order to solve the seemingly insurmountable problems. On the contrary, we START with the belief that God exists, then study His inerrant, inspired Word and use it to make sense of the world around us. And guess what? That approach works amazingly well! If you start with an atheistic worldview and attempt to use that to make sense of the world, you’ll have no end of irreconcilable challenges.

Everyone has a choice to make. You can either choose to believe in the miracle that nothing created everything or the miracle that something created everything! My money is on the “something” choice, and I also believe we have a special message from that “something” telling us who He is, why we’re here, and what happens to us when we die—the Bible!

More Questions of the Month

What exactly is a shaman?

Seems like nowadays you can’t go anywhere without seeing the word “shaman” plastered all over the place. It’s on billboards, sides of buildings, storefronts, lawn ornaments, and even the paper wrappers around our hamburgers. OK, maybe not… but you’ve at least heard the word before, right?

Is “Doctrine” Divisive?

Have you ever been told that you were divisive or met someone who was markedly divisive? Many of us would answer in the affirmative to this question.

Christians … Are We All Just Biased?

“You’re just biased… that’s why you believe what you do!” What comes to mind when you hear a claim like this? It probably isn’t anything positive. The initial response from many Christians is to become defensive and possibly more emotional. But what do you think about this? How should we respond?

What is Elephant Hurling?

No, it’s not an Olympic event, although we’ve had some unusual ones in the past (tug-of-war, club swinging, live pigeon shooting, croquet and underwater swimming to name a few). This phrase refers to a debate tactic in which the critic uses summary arguments from various areas to give the impression that voluminous supporting data exists, when little or none is actually given.

Is the Bible always rightin a world that is constantly changing)?

​I remember hearing a woman say she finally met “Mr. Right”. Unfortunately, she soon after found out his first name was “Always”! I’m not going that direction with this month’s question, so you can breathe a sigh of relief.

How can I use “starting points” in witnessing?

Some people will actually approach a total stranger and ask them point blank if they have placed their trust in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of their sins. There’s a pretty good chance that you’re not one of these people. I would not say this approach is wrong, but it takes somewhat of a special personality to have the desire to do so and to do it effectively. For the rest of us (myself included), we need to consider a different approach.

Sign Up for The Starting Point Project Newsletter

Subscribe to our mailing list

Powered by Robly