Origin of life

[columbus]

@Jumi

Sorta like that, but much longer ago.
Tom

 

[Godobeyer]

Science doesn't deal with God. Individual scientists can believe whatever they want, but believing in God does not enter into their pursuit of science.
Science collects evidence, analyses it, forms hypotheses and then tests them. Belief or disbelief in God is not a factor in their work.

agreed .

It's not just editing. There are many religions with many holy books, some thousands of years old, some hundreds of years. They don't all agree.

editing not depend the time period , it's could be in first day , it's could be after thousands of years .

Why do you think the Quran is for all people, but not other holy writings?

I did not said Quran , i said Muhammad (pbuh) .

please notice ; i am saying because i have only some knowlege about semitic religions . i dont know about other religions, since i don't believe they are comes from God .

.I am not asking if God is competent to protect His message. I'm asking if the message is clear to begin with. I'm asking weather God, Himself, is incompetent and unable to present His desires clearly.
Even within the Quran there are contradictions, and Allah changes His mind between the early Suras and later Suras.

God never change His mind , there is no contradiction in Quran , there are step by step rules .

for exemple , Quran never said Alchohol is allowed , then said it's forbiden .

 

[SomeRandom]

Of course, but really, it is already a stretch that there are theists who deny evolution. An atheist would not even have a reason to make the attempt.

Mate, there are people who deny gravity or round earth or the fact that the earth revolves around the sun. They are mocked or ignored as being uneducated, of course. But they exist. Not saying we should focus on these blokes, merely said that they exist.

 

[SomeRandom]

Example please?

I have encountered a few on various boards who claim to be atheist but still reject Evolution. Mainly on the Sodahead boards. Haven't been there in a few years though, so I am blanking on the specific names. I do recall Jerry Fydor and a guy called Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini brought out a book criticizing "Darwinism" called "What Darwin Got Wrong."
Now, they are both known philosophers and professors of cognitive sciences, so I don't know if I'd go running to these geezers for any information regarding Biology. But whatever.

I never said it was prominent, or they were some sort of representatives of Atheists as a whole. I merely said, rather offhandedly admittedly, that there just so happens to exist some atheists who deny evolution. I think you'll find some who believe in Lizard People or the Illuminati if you search hard enough. Atheism has a wide array of people with various beliefs. Just because they all happen to be atheist, doesn't mean that none of them will have some......er "interesting" beliefs as well.

 

[leibowde84]

Where did life come from ?

During the big bang no life can exist, so what made the first cell of life to exist without being born.

Why the DNA is complex and is adjustable (mutations), how you explain those things to happen without any intelligence being involved ?

Our present extremely limited understanding of the cosmos should not lead one to jump to the conclusion of "intelligent design." For a very long time, we had no idea what lightning was, why volcanoes erupted, how birds flew, what shape the earth was, what a "day" actually was and why it was roughly 24 hours in length, etc. We found scientifically grounded explanations for all of these things that, long ago, were inconceivable. Why wouldn't it be safe to assume that we will get an adequate explanation for any question regarding the origin of anything later on, as scientific understanding progresses? Why is a jump to the supernatural warranted when questions such as this arise?

To me, it seems like you think it is "debunking evolution" or "a natural explanation for the origin of life" when you posit a question that currently has no difinitive answer. But, all you are doing in actuality (at the very best, I might add) is pointing out things that science has YET to explain. In other words, a lack of understanding in regards to science doesn't point to the supernatural nearly as much as pointing out that our scientific understanding is extremely limited at this point. We discover new things every day, some of which end up contradicting what we thought we knew before. This is why I find it unjustified to jump to the explanation that there was some kind of intelligent design, rather than pointing out our lack of knowledge.

 

[columbus]

how you certain that God did not send messages to us (Holly books ) ?

Because there are lots and lots of them. None show any signs of being from God. They all are what I would expect from the people from the time and place that they appeared.
Through history these writings have changed along with humanity. They've gotten more sophisticated as our languages and logic and morality have improved.

But I just can't believe that prophets and scripture and such are the best way such a divine being can communicate with us. Much more likely that is the best ancient people could think of.
I can think of better ones.

For exemple we humans make catalogeu (menu) to machine (instructions to run ok) , Why God did not did the same with us ?

Imagine you get a package you didn't order or know where it came from. Inside is a strange object. Also dozens of books and papers all saying that they are the true manufacturing manual. They're all different, written in different languages claiming different things and all appear to be hand written. They've got cross outs, bad translation and some are obviously copied from others.

How could you believe any are really from the manufacturer? I wouldn't.

Tom

 

[FearGod]

Except that it is basically impossible for an atheist not to accept it unless he is remarkably uneducated.

Our present extremely limited understanding of the cosmos should not lead one to jump to the conclusion of "intelligent design." For a very long time, we had no idea what lightning was, why volcanoes erupted, how birds flew, what shape the earth was, what a "day" actually was and why it was roughly 24 hours in length, etc. We found scientifically grounded explanations for all of these things that, long ago, were inconceivable. Why wouldn't it be safe to assume that we will get an adequate explanation for any question regarding the origin of anything later on, as scientific understanding progresses? Why is a jump to the supernatural warranted when questions such as this arise?

To me, it seems like you think it is "debunking evolution" or "a natural explanation for the origin of life" when you posit a question that currently has no difinitive answer. But, all you are doing in actuality (at the very best, I might add) is pointing out things that science has YET to explain. In other words, a lack of understanding in regards to science doesn't point to the supernatural nearly as much as pointing out that our scientific understanding is extremely limited at this point. We discover new things every day, some of which end up contradicting what we thought we knew before. This is why I find it unjustified to jump to the explanation that there was some kind of intelligent design, rather than pointing out our lack of knowledge.

Do you think one day we'll know the origin of life ?

 

[leibowde84]

Do you think one day we'll know the origin of life ?

Sure I do. Of course we will. But, until we have evidence either way, I am not going to make any declarative statements about it. We'll just have to wait and see.

 

[columbus]

Do you think one day we'll know the origin of life ?

Yes. Unless we blow ourselves up or collapse the biosphere or otherwise bring civilization and scientific progress to a halt.
Tom

 

[FearGod]

Sure I do. Of course we will. But, until we have evidence either way, I am not going to make any declarative statements about it. We'll just have to wait and see.

Hope you'll be alive till that miracle happen.

 

[leibowde84]

Hope you'll be alive till that miracle happen.

I'm not counting on it.

 

[Maponos]

Evolution obviously happened. Whether there was any divine hand it it is unknown but very possible. I believe there was some meddling done of the gods' part, but not any kind of literal creation or something along those lines.

Edit: By evolution, I mean humans evolving from Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens. Where they actually came from is still a mystery and ill likely forever be one.

 

[Godobeyer]

Because there are lots and lots of them. None show any signs of being from God. They all are what I would expect from the people from the time and place that they appeared.
Through history these writings have changed along with humanity. They've gotten more sophisticated as our languages and logic and morality have improved.

But I just can't believe that prophets and scripture and such are the best way such a divine being can communicate with us. Much more likely that is the best ancient people could think of.
I can think of better ones.


Imagine you get a package you didn't order or know where it came from. Inside is a strange object. Also dozens of books and papers all saying that they are the true manufacturing manual. They're all different, written in different languages claiming different things and all appear to be hand written. They've got cross outs, bad translation and some are obviously copied from others.

How could you believe any are really from the manufacturer? I wouldn't.

Tom

maybe because God made us different and had different langauge .

I am curious if God was right when He sent his message to Arabs tribes (Muslims) by Arabic langauge .

and sent Torah to Jews by their native langauge ...etc

that would be problem if He sent Quran to Arabs by Hebrew .


how you explain that most of Muslims don't speak Arabic ?

do you get my point ?

 

[LuisDantas]

Do you think one day we'll know the origin of life ?

I fully expect abiogenesis to be replicated in laboratory in the next few decades, and I fully believe that to be how life originated (on Earth, at least).

Actually knowing that it was so is a considerably taller order, though. That I don't really expect to happen in the foreseeable future.

 

[Valjean]

Hope you'll be alive till that miracle happen.

You seem to think this is a complicated problem.

 

[Acintya_Ash]

do you get my point ?

How do you explain the contradictions between different religions of the world?

 

[LuisDantas]

You seem to think this is a complicated problem.

Hmm... maybe it has to do with some assumption there there is an inescrutable mystery in there (at the origin of life)?

Or, if not an inescrutable mystery, at least one that will be so very impressive as to... convince the unbelievers somehow?

Maybe it is just me, but those seem to be just vague preconceptions. Taboos if you will.

The origin of life is ultimately just yet another field of research.

We have researched things such as the composition of rocks, the origin of diseases, the nature of celestian bodies , the nature of sound and even the existence and applications of the whole spectrum of electromagnetism. Many of those are indeed wonderful and very impressive, and one can very legitimately be in awe of them. And of course, some will see it as the manifestation of a divine will - correctly, for all I truly know, although I don't share such a belief. That is all fair and proper.

All the same, the plain fact is that none of those research areas ended up producing much if anything in the way of clear evidence of a creator deity. Not in the sense of convincing those who do not already believe, at least.

I suppose that it will happen at some point in the future is always a possibility. But what are the odds? What could possibly be learned of during the research for the origin of life that would make a believer in God out of an atheist?

I honestly can't really think of anything reasonable.

 

[columbus]

how he created us and forget us ? He had the right to punch us or award us , since he created us ?

do you think , He will award who believe in Him and punch who disbelieve in Him ?

Forgetting, rewarding, punishing and things like that are all things humans do, not God. We are limited beings and God is not. So the same things just don't apply to God even though they are natural to us.

If God cared about what we believe we would know what it is. We always would have. But we just make stuff up and pretend that it is from God.
Tom

 

[LuisDantas]

how he created us and forget us ? He had the right to punch us or award us , since he created us ?

do you think , He will award who believe in Him and punch who disbelieve in Him ?

What do you think?

Would a God of supreme love and good feel entitled to punish sentient beings that he created, on the grounds that they are his creation?

Personally, I find the very idea absurd. Most humans would not. How could possibly the very reference for supreme love and supreme wisdom act any worse than the average human?

 

[George-ananda]

Where did life come from ?

During the big bang no life can exist, so what made the first cell of life to exist without being born.

Why the DNA is complex and is adjustable (mutations), how you explain those things to happen without any intelligence being involved ?

Super physical beings/nature spirits working with the elements created life in my view.