Life From Dirt?

[Bthoth]

Ezekiel 37 explains about the prophet, his communication with HaShem and the dry bones. I'll have to read it word for word later, I hope you get a chance to also. I'm glad we're talking about it somewhat.

i read it.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Duncan Macleod - "There can be only one"

I prefer: "I like your Christ; I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Mahatma Gandhi

That's how I feel about the vast majority of the ones I've encountered in person and online, including RF. And I usually roll my eyes when they reference scripture in response to my posts, especially when they belong to a particular sect of Christianity with which I've had several interactions in the past.

 

[Brian2]

The irony is also through the roof that you then also say that "if god isn't included, it's speculation based".

That is just hilarious.

If science comes up with naturalistic answers for the origins of life and the universe how would it be anything other than speculation of what happened.
The answers should be "If a creator/ God did not do it, then we think it might have happened this way".

 

[Brian2]

It is not. Plenty of the myths in the bible are demonstrably incorrect.

What you probably mean is that your interpretation of what the Bible means has been debunked. But that is OK. Your interpretation is wrong.

 

[Brian2]

The problems with the historical reliability of the Pentateuch stories is not based on just faith. It is based on evidence archaeological, geologic, and other historical records Events around Noah's flood, Exodus and Sodom and Gomorrah lack historical provenance based on sound evidence as described in the Bible. Yes, these stories may contain some fact, but it has been demonstrated that these stories are based on an Amallgam of stories and memories compiled after 600 BCE.

Absolutely no Hebrew reords before 600 BCE to give factual provenance for the Pentateuch records.

If you accept the curse tablet found on Mt Ebal, what you say about "before 600BC" is not true.
If you accept the Bible for what it says, the answer for why there is a lack of Hebrew records before 600BC is obvious.
Israel in Egypt and the early exodus and the conquest around 1400 BC is based on both what the Bible says and archaeology.

 

[shunyadragon]

If you accept the curse tablet found on Mt Ebal, what you say about "before 600BC" is not true.

The curse tablet has nothing to do with the fact that there are no texts of the Pentateuch before 600 BCE, IT does not represent any text of the Pentateuch. It is also controversial and the original interpretation is not widely accepted.

Mount Ebal curse tablet - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The tablet has been the subject of scholarly skepticism and controversy since the announcement of its discovery, as the team made sensationalist claims about its contents before the find had undergone the peer review process, and presented little to no evidence for their findings, outside of a single photograph taken of the folded tablet which was unveiled during the initial announcement.

The editio princeps of the inscription was published in May 2023.[4] The findings were largely rejected by scholarly commentators.[5]

I am waiting for more scientific review and documentation of this tablet,

If you accept the Bible for what it says, the answer for why there is a lack of Hebrew records before 600BC is obvious.
Israel in Egypt and the early exodus and the conquest around 1400 BC is based on both what the Bible says and archaeology.

Despite your protests and claims there is absolutely no text of the Pentateuch dated before 600 BCE.

Again the archaeology doe not support the Exodus not the Joshua invasion asd escribed in the text,

 

[Brian2]

Don't stop at that, there is an inner life of sub-atomic particles/waves as well.

collisions in a wilson chamber - Google Search

Something moving does not indicate life imo but the workings of cells and bodies, as discovered by science, is evidence of design imo.
Design is evidence of life, the life of a designer.

 

[shunyadragon]

Something moving does not indicate life imo but the workings of cells and bodies, as discovered by science, is evidence of design imo.
Design is evidence of life, the life of a designer.

1954? This is oldy moldy high school stuff and nothing to do with abiogenesis or the origins of early life.

Observing radioactivity in a cloud chamber is simply observing radioactivity i a cloud chamber,

No evidence of Intelligent Design

 

[Heyo]

Soil, dirt, clay and life:
I was just listening to someone talking about her "red dirt" from her home state and she mentioned how things grow from that dirt. Evidently called red soil. From wikipedia:
"Red soils contain large amounts of clay and are generally derived from the weathering of ancient crystalline and metamorphic rock. They are named after their rich red color, which can vary from reddish brown to reddish yellow as a result of their high iron content. Red soil can be good or poor growing soil depending on how it is managed." I am mentioning this because the Bible says God took Adam and more life from -- you know what -- the DIRT. or soil. Exactly how He put the molecules together, the Bible doesn't say. But life CAN come from dirt, or soil, if it is God's will.

It is impossible to create first life from soil. To create life from soil, you first have to create soil.

Soil, also commonly referred to as earth or dirt, is a mixture of organic matter, minerals, gases, liquids, and organisms that together support the life of plants and soil organisms. - from Soil - Wikipedia

So, to have soil, you need to have life first. You run into a hen-egg paradox.

 

[Brian2]

That's a long, long way from saying it's 100% accurate.

Yes it is.

Why do your think there is an answer to 'the why question'? Why do you think there must be a purpose?

Because there is a God who has told us the purpose.

It really isn't anything to do with time. The universe may or may not be infinite in the past time-like directions but time (according to general relativity) is a part of the universe, not something external to it. If you think you need an 'designer' because the universe had a start, then that's a fundamental misunderstanding.

If you think that the universe needs a designer because of complexity or improbability or whatever, then we run into infinite regress problems. A designer would need to be even more complex and improbable or whatever. That's why a designer basically just makes any perceived problems worse, rather than solving them.

So a designer/creator is not postulated in science and the evidence for a designer/creator is not verifiable anyway. It is not a science question when the designer/creator is not a part of the universe, His creation, and cannot be studied by science.
But that has nothing to do with whether a designer/creator exists or not and the evidence in nature is pretty plain for a designer and so a creator imo. PLUS there is evidence in human experience for God and spirits.

 

[shunyadragon]

Soil, dirt, clay and life:
I was just listening to someone talking about her "red dirt" from her home state and she mentioned how things grow from that dirt. Evidently called red soil. From wikipedia:
"Red soils contain large amounts of clay and are generally derived from the weathering of ancient crystalline and metamorphic rock. They are named after their rich red color, which can vary from reddish brown to reddish yellow as a result of their high iron content. Red soil can be good or poor growing soil depending on how it is managed." I am mentioning this because the Bible says God took Adam and more life from -- you know what -- the DIRT. or soil. Exactly how He put the molecules together, the Bible doesn't say. But life CAN come from dirt, or soil, if it is God's will.

I am not sure why you go through this contorted explanation as to how Ggd made life. Biblically God did it much simpler, though the description in the Bible is an ancient myth.

Not based on very basic high school science. The origin of life cannot come from soil we see today, Sediments on land would be sterile and green when life was teaming in the seas. Soil comes after the the evolution of life produces an oxygenated atmosphere over 2 billion years after life began. Then you can have red oxidized clays and soils on land.

Soil Net

Soil-Net.com - a soils educational portal developed by the National Soil Resources Institute (NSRI), the largest UK national and international centre for research and development, consultancy and training in soils and their interaction with the atmosphere, land use, geology and water resources.

www.soil-net.com

. . . soils first began to form in Pre-Cambrian times (the earliest of the geological periods) dating back over 2,000 million years. Soils then would have been quite different to those now because in Pre-Cambrian times there would have been no living creatures and no green vegetation. These earliest soils were formed in an atmosphere with little or no oxygen and consisted of green clays. There would have been no organic matter in the soils and so the soils can be considered to be sterile. Gradually, but still some 400 million years ago, in the Devonian period, soils began to develop.

 

[Bthoth]

If you accept the curse tablet found on Mt Ebal, what you say about "before 600BC" is not true.

Mt ebel?

If you accept the Bible for what it says, the answer for why there is a lack of Hebrew records before 600BC is obvious.

the language did not exist before 1000bc

Israel in Egypt and the early exodus and the conquest around 1400 BC is based on both what the Bible says and archaeology.

The only archaeology of an exodus is the schism of ahkentan from thebes

 

[Aupmanyav]

Something moving does not indicate life imo but the workings of cells and bodies, as discovered by science, is evidence of design imo.
Design is evidence of life, the life of a designer.

Design by the four forces, and ultimately perhaps out of 'void', 'Ex-nihilo'. Quantum Mechanics! "Nothing is unstable".

 

[Aupmanyav]

So, to have soil, you need to have life first. You run into a hen-egg paradox.

The hen-egg paradox is true for God too. If Mary mothered Jesus, who mothered God?

 

[YoursTrue]

It is impossible to create first life from soil. To create life from soil, you first have to create soil.

So, to have soil, you need to have life first. You run into a hen-egg paradox.

It doesn't matter what you think about the soil and what you think God can or cannot do. Thanks for your input. It helps and it does show me something.

 

[YoursTrue]

Mt ebel?

the language did not exist before 1000bc

The only archaeology of an exodus is the schism of ahkentan from thebes

It really doesn't matter how the language may have evolved. Take care and have a good one.

 

[YoursTrue]

It is impossible to create first life from soil. To create life from soil, you first have to create soil.

So, to have soil, you need to have life first. You run into a hen-egg paradox.

By the way, it wasn't the soil that gives life. take care again.

 

[Heyo]

By the way, it wasn't the soil that gives life. take care again.

Iirc, it was clay, which doesn't contain organic matter. Just be precise.

 

[YoursTrue]

Iirc, it was clay, which doesn't contain organic matter. Just be precise.

it doesn't matter. Life comes from God. He can use anything He wants. Thanks and have a good one, take care as time moves along.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Actually it is known from 10e-43 of a second following the bb. That is trillions of times less time than the fastest clock tick of the fastest computer.

Prior to 10e-43 one can only hazard a guess because it is getting to close to infinity and calculations begin to break down.

Here ya go.
Timeline of the early universe - Wikipedia

The standard model of cosmology is a mathematical model partially confirmed by observation. But the earliest observable evidence, the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, occurred some 380,000 years after the Big Bang - if there even was a Big Bang. The earliest origins of the universe (and whether the universe had an origin) are certainly not known, nor is the standard model uncontested. Early images from the James Webb space telescope are already throwing the timeline into doubt.