Life From Dirt?

[YoursTrue]

Yes, in reality death cannot be evil in of itself. You still believe in an evil God. So why do you believe in an incompetent, lying evil God?

In reference to the point about death not being evil but it is considered an enemy, why worry ? Death is not life. So why be concerned if God imposed the death penalty on Adam and Eve and their offspring? I mean, death is not evil, right?

 

[YoursTrue]

Evolution only explain the mechanisms of changes - biodiversity, adaptation, speciation, Natural selection, frequency of alleles, mutations, genetic recombination, hybrid population from 2 parent populations (Gene Flow), etc.

Evolution was never about the origin of life, which there are several different models of the hypothesis, Abiogenesis.

But Abiogenesis isn’t just about the first life, but rather the origins of numbers of different biological compounds or more precisely biological macromolecules (eg amino acids, proteins, nucleic acids, carbohydrates, lipid

You are free to believe whatever you want to about it. And if you are foolish enough, you are free to reject 'what is' in favor of your beliefs. But the truth will still be 'what is', and not what you believe it to be. And that goes for the scientism cultists as well. They also want to believe their beliefs rule the truth of what is. And they don't.

Right now, 'what is', is that the origin and purpose of life is a mystery to us.

The truth is what is, and we don't have much access to it. Nor do we possess the intellect required to grasp what we do have access to. So we can go around spouting off about what we believe to be true and how anyone that believes differently is a fool, but in the end we are all fools if we are believers in our own profound ignorance.

The truth is what is and so far evolution hardly goes beyond conjecture and appearance, basing complexities on imaginings. It doesn't and can't say how it happened molecularly from the beginning. After "abiogenesis." As often said, there is no proof. No photographer. No videos. No microscopic record. No written history about this. And, believe it or not, no fossil evidence considered as proof of the theory. None. Say what you will, but again...there is no evidence to verify the theory on a molecular basis. At all.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

the truth will still be 'what is', and not what you believe it to be.

Those are the same thing for the empiricist, or what you call the scientism cultist, because he actually looks at reality and generates useful inductions from his observations that can be confirmed empirically. Perhaps you're projecting.

And that goes for the scientism cultists as well. They also want to believe their beliefs rule the truth of what is. And they don't.

Empiricism is the only path to correct ideas about reality. Ideas believed by faith do not derive from or represent reality, cannot be used predict anything, and thus cannot be called knowledge.

Right now, 'what is', is that the origin and purpose of life is a mystery to us.

To you. There's no mystery about where life came from for me, and it has no known purpose. Nor does it need one.

in the end we are all fools if we are believers in our own profound ignorance.

You speak for others a lot. I think you project. This is probably how you see your early life. You made foolish choices in ignorance, regretted them very much, pulled yourself out of a deep hole, and you think that describes everybody's journey and condition.

 

[Subduction Zone]

In reference to the point about death not being evil but it is considered an enemy, why worry ? Death is not life. So why be concerned if God imposed the death penalty on Adam and Eve and their offspring? I mean, death is not evil, right?

You do not appear to understand your own myth. Or worse yet you do and you are trying to make excuses for your God's evil acts. Which one is it?

 

[YoursTrue]

You do not appear to understand your own myth. Or worse yet you do and you are trying to make excuses for your God's evil acts. Which one is it?

You cannot remove death. It is not evil, you say, because it is normal, natural and inevitable, therefore not imposed by a higher intelligent power. Greater than you or I. although the Bible refers to death as the last enemy. Perhaps you have no feeling about impending death and the natural circumstances of death. It just is what it is. I could go into more but I don't think I will now in reference to your viewpoint because you want to actually impose your views on others about God. Your opinion doesn't make sense to me anyway, because you say death isn't evil, evolution isn't evil, but then say God is evil because He allows you and me to live and face death.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You cannot remove death. It is not evil, you say, because it is normal, natural and inevitable, therefore not imposed by a higher intelligent power. Greater than you or I. although the Bible refers to death as the last enemy. Perhaps you have no feeling about impending death and the natural circumstances of death. It just is what it is. I could go into more but I don't think I will now in reference to your viewpoint because you want to actually impose your views on others about God. Your opinion doesn't make sense to me anyway, because you say death isn't evil, evolution isn't evil, but then say God is evil because He allows you and me to live and face death.

Why do you run away from reasonable questions?

 

[YoursTrue]

Lol...ok...have a good one. Clearly you don't see now. Death is going to be removed by the one who has power to remove it. But there are qualifications to meet and you don't like that.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The answer to one will probably provide the answer to the other. Existence is holistic, after all.
It's more likely that "existence/non-existence" are the cognitive result of how the human brain functions: compare-contrast-repeat between phenomena being experienced and phenomena being imagined and/or remembered. Our brains are a binary processor.

A whole lot of your fellow humans would assert that it does seem to have a purpose.

All religions do; each by their own labels. That's how theism works. Even the 'scientism' crowd has a label for the big mystery "what is" ... they call it objective reality.

I tend to agree with your first two statements.
Not with the third. That is more of a wishful thinking.
The difference is that all religions make 'what is' involved (God), Advaita and science keep it impersonal (Nirapeksha).
Nih (No) Apeksha (desire).

 

[PureX]

But speculating can? And based upon what science finds, apart from those who refuse to believe this - as displayed here on this forum.

Humans speculating is the beginning of any understanding we might achieve. And what humans choose to believe is irrelevant. Belief is just egotism pretending to be knowledge.

 

[PureX]

I tend to agree with your first two statements.
Not with the third. That is more of a wishful thinking.

So your thinking is right, even though it finds no conclusion, while their thinking is just "wishful". Got it.

The difference is that all religions make 'what is' involved (God), Advaita and science keep it impersonal (Nirapeksha).
Nih (No) Apeksha (desire).

But isnlt it all that "God" and "desire" that leads to all that wrong "wishful thinking"?

 

[Mock Turtle]

Humans speculating is the beginning of any understanding we might achieve. And what humans choose to believe is irrelevant. Belief is just egotism pretending to be knowledge.

Well plenty here have proved that - as to being self-deluded - by refusing to believe even the best evidence.

 

[PureX]

Well plenty here have proved that - as to being self-deluded - by refusing to believe even the best evidence.

The self-delusion begins with our thinking that we are NOT self-deluded. Because it stops us from being skeptical of our own ideas. We become 'believers' in our own mythical realities. And science doesn't cure us of this.

 

[Mock Turtle]

The self-delusion begins with our thinking that we are NOT self-deluded. Because it stops us from being skeptical of our own ideas. We become 'believers' in our own mythical realities. And science doesn't cure us of this.

Well, pitting one's brain against the vast majority of scientists is a good way of showing this. Me, not so arrogant.

 

[PureX]

Well, pitting one's brain against the vast majority of scientists is a good way of showing this. Me, not so arrogant.

We should be grateful for those few that are willing to run against the herd ... even when they're wrong. We need them to remind us that we ARE A HERD.

 

[Yerda]

Science can only investigate the mechanisms of physics involved. It can't tell us a thing about the origin of those mechanisms. Which means that it cannot answer the questions we have about existential origins or purpose.

It's true that physics doesn't tell us why the laws of physics are the way they are, but there's no reason, in principle, science can never answer this question. There might be a good physical reason why the laws of physics are what the are and it might be possible to find out, though it isn't something I would bet on at the minute.

 

[Aupmanyav]

So your thinking is right, even though it finds no conclusion, while their thinking is just "wishful". Got it.

Yeah that is my opinion, view. If your's is different, I have no problem with that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Lol...ok...have a good one. Clearly you don't see now. Death is going to be removed by the one who has power to remove it. But there are qualifications to meet and you don't like that.

That is just a silly myth that you do not understand either. Do you know that the idea of substitutionary atonement is terribly flawed? Of course not since it is based upon a flawed myth that you do not understand either.

 

[YoursTrue]

That is just a silly myth that you do not understand either. Do you know that the idea of substitutionary atonement is terribly flawed? Of course not since it is based upon a flawed myth that you do not understand either.

I'm not going to discuss much about the Bible with you right now. I will say, however, that it doesn't seem rational to blame God for death since (1) you don't believe in God, and (2) you believe death is something that will happen by evolution inevitably. And (3) death doesn't hurt when a person is not alive.
Maybe some of your friends here who believe evolution is how life is but also claim (pretend perhaps?) to believe in God and/or be part of religion saying it's "Christian" -- who knows?

 

[YoursTrue]

That is just a silly myth that you do not understand either. Do you know that the idea of substitutionary atonement is terribly flawed? Of course not since it is based upon a flawed myth that you do not understand either.

By the way, ask your friends here who claim to be churchgoers, especially "Christian" what happens when they die. Oh, and Bible experts. Have a good time.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm not going to discuss much about the Bible with you right now. I will say, however, that it doesn't seem rational to blame God for death since (1) you don't believe in God, and (2) you believe death is something that will happen by evolution inevitably. And (3) death doesn't hurt when a person is not alive.
Maybe some of your friends here who believe evolution is how life is but also claim (pretend perhaps?) to believe in God and/or be part of religion saying it's "Christian" -- who knows?

Please, do not complain about others thinking rationally. That you want to worship an evil and incompetent God says quite a bit about you. It can only make you worse. Trust me, you are still much better than that God that you worship.