Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
It doesn't explain how the impossible, (life from non life) happens. Its used in evolution theory like a smoke screen to cover the gaps they can't fill.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Information in the Genome
- Thread starter Eyes to See
- Start date
tas8831
Well-Known Member
Sounds interesting - citations/links please.
tas8831
Well-Known Member
You mean like Adam from dust of the ground?
How is that explained?
Details please.
And when you answer "God" to my question above, whatever shall I conclude?
Oh - one other thing - implying that abiogenesis is part of the Theory of Evolution is a lie, so you might want to stop bearing false witness, sinner.
exchemist
Veteran Member
I know wellwisher from of old, on other forums. His 4 hobby horses are:
- the mystical significance of the properties of water
- hydrogen bonding (related to the the above)
- entropy
- liberals (and not in a good way
). He's harmless but has nothing new to say about anything, really.
tas8831
Well-Known Member
Indeed...I know wellwisher from of old, on other forums. His 4 hobby horses are:
- the mystical significance of the properties of water
- hydrogen bonding (related to the the above)
- entropy
- liberals (and not in a good way
He's harmless but has nothing new to say about anything, really.
gnostic
The Lost One
Some do, some don’t.
Some do use Peter’s passage as literal and applied them to Genesis 1’s each creative days. Some don’t.
gnostic
The Lost One
I see no magic in biology. It is all natural processes, and having some understandings of physics and chemistry used together with biology, help with understanding of biological processes, whether it be with Natural Selection, with Genetic Drift, with Mutations, or even with the still hypothetical Abiogenesis, there are no magic involved with reproduction, genetics, cell divisions, metabolism, etc, all biochemical reactions are chemical reactions at molecular level.
Chemical reactions and biochemical reactions are all natural occurrences, therefore natural phenomena. And Natural Selection, Mutations and Genetic Drift are natural phenomena, not magic.
The only magic I see are in Genesis creation, the miracles of some words, eg “Let there be light” and light appear out of nothing (Genesis 1:3-4), which sounds more witches do spells with incantation of some words. Another example of magic, god creating man from dust of the ground (2:7). Or a serpent being able to speak like humans with human language. Or how the whole world got flooded, covering “high mountains”, including Ararat, and some how all those tonnes of water somehow magically vanished (Genesis 7 & 8).
Or the many healing miracles of Jesus and his disciples, including bringing Lazarus back to life after being dead for 3 days, as if Lazarus have not been dead at all.
If you want magic wand, then you really should take good look at your Bible, Wildswanderer.
That’s Abiogenesis, not Evolution.
Evolution say nothing about the origin of first life.
Evolution required life existing already, because offspring and descendants required living parents and ancestors for any genetic traits to pass from generation to generation.
Abiogenesis is about how inorganic matters can form into organic matters (eg amino acids, proteins, nucleic acids, carbohydrates, etc are the biological basis for a living cells), that make up cells, and understanding how these biological compounds formed would be understanding how cells formed.
As I said earlier, biochemical reactions of biological molecules operate essentially in same manner as chemical reaction of non-biological molecules.
Chemical reactions are natural occurrences, whether the molecules are biological or non-biological.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
Then you should reject single cell to us evolution because it's speculation with the magic of time used to fill in the gaps.
gnostic
The Lost One
How so?
Abiogenesis attempt to understand and test the origins of each organic matters or more biological macromolecules, such as proteins (which are themselves made of amino acids), nucleic acids (which are made of nucleotides, nucleobase, carbohydrates (eg ribose sugar in RNA, deoxyribose sugar in DNA).
Every single ones of these biological compounds exist in cells, but if you look at them through “chemistry” lenes, these organic matters that make up cells are basically compounds and molecules, bonding together all the atoms into molecules and compounds.
So unless you can demonstrate to show that proteins, carbohydrates and nucleic acids (DNA, RNA) are not made of atoms and they don’t exist, you claiming that there are magic involved only demonstrate your ignorance on this subject.
As to “time”, time is just measurement of temporal period, and there are no magic here.
It does take time, for some things to occur, and “to occur” naturally.
For instance, a man and woman having sex, don’t instantly have a baby.
Egg in a woman’s ovary is one cell (gamete cell), and man’s sperm is another single cell (another type of gamete cell). These two gametes are individually distinct from each other, and neither one of them are a baby.
Before there can be baby, the cells (gametes) must fused into one cell, call fertilisation, then this single fused cell, begins multiple divisions, to produce as many cells as necessary that will every body parts (bones, tissues (muscles, skin), glands, organs (heart, lungs, liver, kidney, eyes, sex organ, etc), limbs, digits, all the necessary fluids containing cells (eg blood cells), etc, of growing embryos and fetus. Every body parts are made of cells, which take “times” to form, to grow.
On average it take 9 months of a woman being pregnant, before childbirth. So it take 9 months to grow a baby that started from two gamete cells that fused together.
All these processes are events that take “time”.
For you to even claim magic because of time, just show you uneducated you really are.
Magic wand only exist if you think Adam being instantly created from dust. Adam wasn’t born, have no childhood; instant adult is the sort of idiotic myth. There are nothing natural about Genesis 2, nothing natural about dust magically turning into ADULT human male.
God can do anything, and god is all-powerful and all-knowing are nothing more than myth and deluded fantasy of magic and supernatural.
Can you demonstrate that such magic like in Genesis 2 even remotely possible?
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
You don't understand what I'm saying at all.
I accept " magic" or rather God's power by faith.
Evolution supposes that everything evolved without proof that's possible, and the way that's pushed is to appeal to time making anything possible by chance.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
That's simply not at all true as we well know how most processes work. What we do not know scientifically is how all life started, which is where one's religious faith can could it.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
We don't know near as much as we are told we do. Lots of smoke and mirrors fools the general population.
gnostic
The Lost One
The Bible include no understanding of nature, as it explained absolutely nothing of values.
Not about astronomy, including the Solar System, and our own planet.
Not about the Earth’s environments, terrain, atmosphere and the interiors of Earth.
Not about life, none of them
The biblical “God did it” are just primitive superstitions, which are primitive ignorant beliefs. What the ancient Hebrews and ancient Christians believe in, are on the same levels of other religions of their contemporary, that showed only very superficial and limited views about nature and life.
Sciences are all about understanding not just WHAT each physical or natural phenomena are, but also HOW each physical or natural phenomena work.
For instances, the Bible explain nothing about anatomy of any organisms, or the physiology of every anatomical parts, not even about human, like explanations as to HOW brains, hearts, lungs, livers, kidney, muscles, bones, limbs, etc, HOW they work, nor WHAT everything are made of.
And everything in our biology are made of smaller parts: cells. But there are physical components within the interior of cells, that are even smaller, that have certain physical functions, and these include some proteins, genes that heritable information of parents and ancestors, include DNA & RNA, nucleic acids, and various carbohydrates.
And these cells exist in every organisms, and these organisms are very broadly divided as to what types of cells,
- prokaryotic cells (which have no cellular nucleus and no organelles):
- Bacteria,
- Archaea; and
- eukaryotic cells (which do have nucleus and organelles):
- Animalia,
- Plantae,
- Fungi.
There are many other different cells in the eukaryotic cells, which would have different physical functions, but what distinguishes plants from animals, is that plant’s cell have organelle containing chloroplasts (a different form of protein), and chloroplast have green pigment (chlorophyll) which have photosynthesis capability, to capture sunlight (more specifically ultraviolet radiation) that convert carbon dioxide and water molecules into oxygen and carbohydrates (which you would commonly know as starch or sugar, which foods for plants) that sustained life for plants.
Cells in animals don’t have any organelles with chloroplasts.
What prokaryotic organisms (or prokaryotes, bacteria and archaea) differed from eukaryotic organisms (or eukaryotes, eg animals, plants, fungi), is that a single bacteria only have a single cell that make them alive, while most eukaryotes have multiple cells that work together to make eukaryotes “living”.
As I have said earlier, the Bible explain nothing about biology of any organisms (including human), and the authors have no knowledge of cells.
Plus dust are not living matters, and more importantly dust are not cells. Dust are byproduct waste.
Although organism can reduce to dust, when this organism died, but that would mean cells have dried up and broken down, where the cells are no longer organic. Dust cannot reconstitute itself as organic matter.
Only ignorant authors think that dust can magically transform into a fully grown, male human. The Genesis creation of Adam from dust, is the Abrahamic religions’ smoke and mirrors.
Last edited:
The Barbarian
Christian Barbarian
God says that the earth brought forth living things, as He created it to do. So nature was made to produce life. But you're completely off base about evolutionary theory, which has nothing whatever to do with the origin of life. Darwin, for example, just suggested that God did it.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Sorry, but you've either just fabricated that or you're parroting someone's nonsense.
The fact of the matter is that NASA's official scientific pronouncements are peer-reviewed, and this is important because otherwise Dr. Joe Schmoe could publish anything he wants no matter how wrong it may be, and that can get a following.
tas8831
Well-Known Member
Please stop conflating evolution and abiogenesis.
I know you lack the requisite scientific background to formulate any meaningful sentences on the topic, but this constant uninformed yammering of yours is tiresome.
Perhaps I can constantly demand that Christians explain why Jesus is 50 feet tall and blue?
tas8831
Well-Known Member
False witness is cool. For sinners.
tas8831
Well-Known Member
How do you that we do not know things?
Still waiting for the citations I asked for from you - or did you just make that up, too?
tas8831
Well-Known Member
Evidence please.