• 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!

The first living thing could not have come into being by random chance, therefore, God Almighty created all things. Just 1 proof.

Twilight Hue

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
SavedByTheLord said:
The first living creature could not have come into being by random chance. It is impossible.

A first living creature would have to have had at least 100,000 amino acids in a particular sequence. This is extremely generous. The smallest free-living thing has over 1,300,000 base pairs. I also have not included having over 500 million other atoms in it.

The odds against a sequence of 100,000 amino acids (20 types, 39 counting handedness) coming to be by random chance is (10 to the 160,000 power) to 1. That could never have happened anywhere in the universe over the supposed 13.7 billion years of its existence. It actually is impossible because no concentration of that amount of amino acids would happen by random chance. There are other factors that make it impossible. It would be a miracle.Where would such an amount of amino acids even occur in nature to even make a first creature? They must be in very near proximity to where the first creature came to be. In water they would immediately diluted and chemical reactions would destroy it. And above ground or in space, it would be destroyed by the the sunlight. So the first creature is impossible.

If such a great miracle did occur, the poor creature will not survive long at all. It is not protected from its environment. Chemical reactions will begin to destroy it within seconds. Which is just another problem. It would take too long to assemble itself. Destruction will happen faster than construction.
The poor creature cannot feed itself. It will also not be able to repair itself.
It will not be able to have any offspring. So it could never exist. So even if it did come into existence, it would die quickly and could not have offspring

And that is just to get to the first living thing. There would have to at least 1 trillion other miracles to produce all the living creatures by evolution. That would be about 70 miracles for each of the supposed 13.7 billion years.

That is impossible to have happened by random chance.
Therefore, God created all things.

A simple elegant proof.
Assume no God. Show the contradictions. Therefore, God exists.
The proof that the Bible is the true word of God is also easy.

The atheists have been deceived into believing that the first creature could come into existence by random chance.
Never has been observed. Simple analysis shows it is impossible. There is no record that it ever did.
So, the evolutionist has the burden of proof.
Click to expand...
The odds game is quite unique for the gullible.

I myself can throw infinitesimal odds each and every single time I throw a handful of rice on the ground noting how each grain falls and is positioned and the subsequent time required to reproduce that throw in the exact same way and manner.

For something supposedly so rare and uncommon, it unquestionably happens all the time all around us. Life erupts all around negating those purported 'odds'.

Just like throwing those infinitesimal odds each and every time I throw a handful of rice.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
SavedByTheLord said:
What exactly is the error?
Click to expand...

That was explained to you on the first page. If you are not going to listen the first time at least have the decency to apologize for not paying attention.
SavedByTheLord said:
What was the first living creature?
Click to expand...
A very simple single celled life.
SavedByTheLord said:
Why is abiogenesis never observed?
Click to expand...

I tell you what, you need to admit that you are totally ignorant if you want to demand answers. Anyone that debates against abiogenesis seriously would already know this.
SavedByTheLord said:
Have scientists made a first living creature just from a random chemical mixture, without using any living creature, and produced a living creature that can survive in the same environment?
Click to expand...
No. Of course now you are back to using a strawman argument again. Can you spot your mistake?
SavedByTheLord said:
It would also have to have offspring.
Click to expand...
No, we really do not need to do that.

Seriously, if you want to discuss this you have to admit that you have no clue at all when it comes to the sciences. If you can be honest then I will have no problem answering your questions.
 
Twilight Hue

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
SavedByTheLord said:
So there is no theory on how life arose anywhere. So why teach the fraud.

But what I have posted proves it could not happen anywhere.
Click to expand...
Try looking at the fact that the materials required for life are everywhere in the universe.


www.nasa.gov

Key Building Block for Organic Molecules Discovered in Meteorites - NASA

Scientists from Japan and NASA have confirmed the presence in meteorites of a key organic molecule which may have been used to build other organic molecules,
www.nasa.gov www.nasa.gov
 
sun rise

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
SavedByTheLord said:
So what was the first living creature?
What was its code?
Was it RNA, DNA or protein based, or some combo?
Where did it come into existence?

You do not even have a theory.
Click to expand...
Your questions are a logical fallacy. You are asserting that because something has not been found that it won't be found. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
 
SavedByTheLord

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
sun rise said:
If you studied evolution, you'd know the answer to that question because it was an area of research. Go search the internet if you want the answer to that question.
Click to expand...
I have studied evolution and there was ni answer at all.

So what was the first living creature? Was it DNA based?
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
SavedByTheLord said:
I have studied evolution and there was ni answer at all.

So what was the first living creature? Was it DNA based?
Click to expand...
You keep making obviously false claims and unjustified demands. Until you agree to learn the basics of science at the very least you have no right to make such demands.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top