• 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!

Why I believe God Created Life.

Mycroft

Ministry of Serendipity
For Adam to become a living soul, didn't God gave him the breath of life?
. (Genesis 2:7)

If human beings are 'animated by a life force' why are they so easily killed? The term you describe seems to imply that life is transmitted to a body by an external agency, therefore any damage to the body would not 'disrupt' the transmission of this 'force'.

Anyway, there's no evidence for that, so that's that, I'm afraid.
 

idav

Being
Premium Member
If human beings are 'animated by a life force' why are they so easily killed? The term you describe seems to imply that life is transmitted to a body by an external agency, therefore any damage to the body would not 'disrupt' the transmission of this 'force'.

Anyway, there's no evidence for that, so that's that, I'm afraid.

Agreed our life forces appear to be very dependent on biological mechanics. Seems odd if it is an external thing. We can't find the power plug cause we operate on rechargeable batteries.
 
If human beings are 'animated by a life force' why are they so easily killed? The term you describe seems to imply that life is transmitted to a body by an external agency, therefore any damage to the body would not 'disrupt' the transmission of this 'force'.

Anyway, there's no evidence for that, so that's that, I'm afraid.

I believe yes, because when each person's life force goes out, he dies.
(Psalm 146:4)

The living however beget the living, and life goes on through conception.
 

Mycroft

Ministry of Serendipity
I believe yes, because when each person's life force goes out, he dies.
(Psalm 146:4)

The living however beget the living, and life goes on through conception.

Do you seriously look to the Bible, a text written before medical science was a thing, as...no, in fact, don't answer. I know the answer already. I'm going to leave it here before we jet off completely into Mushroom Dream Land.
 

Ouroboros

Coincidentia oppositorum
Well, man has to create technology. How come technology hasn't evolved by chance?

I believe I am alive because a life force animates my being.

Shall we agree to disagree?
Example of technology developed using evolutionary algorithms (chance and selection, just like evolution):
Evolved antenna - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And that's just one out of many. Evolutionary algorithms are now used in finance, engineering, technology, computer games, and more. I don't remember the company name of the finance system, but there is a large company specializing in GA for finance (and neural nets too, of course).

Internet, the data sent from your computer to the forum server jumps through random nodes. So randomness shouldn't be dissed or argued to be unusable. That was the intent of TCP/IP when it was invented in the 70's.
 
Last edited:

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
After researching the subject, I have come to conclude that Evolution is still a theory, because science has till now has been unable to prove that life can spring from non-living molecules. Even in a laboratory, under controlled conditions, man has never been able to create living material.

Has anyone other evidence?

What does that have to do with evolution?

Nothing.
 

Parsimony

Well-Known Member
Hmm is it? Ok

Btw, curious, how do you square critical thinking that lead you to believe evolution with your religious beliefs, the Bible is what, mostly ideas that don't mesh with evolutionism.
Only if you interpret those particular parts of the Bible to be literal. Even if there was no way that I could reconcile it with the Bible, I'd still have to accept evolution based on what I know of it. To do otherwise I would be falling prey to the "argument from consequences" fallacy (which in fact I did for a long time).

Susanpalli said:
Well i thought abiogenesis is part of the evolution theory
It is related to it and relevant to it, but it is not a critical part of it. In that sense it's like genetic recombination: it is related to evolution and relevant to it, but evolution can happen without it (such as in asexual animals).
 

NewGuyOnTheBlock

Cult Survivor/Fundamentalist Pentecostal Apostate
After researching the subject, I have come to conclude that Evolution is still a theory, because science has till now has been unable to prove that life can spring from non-living molecules. Even in a laboratory, under controlled conditions, man has never been able to create living material.

Has anyone other evidence?

The evidence is plentiful, but beside the point for the moment.

1. "Evolution" is the study of the diversity of life; not the advent of life nor the advent of ... anything. Once we have a consensus on what Evolution means, then it can be discussed between two parties. When two parties have different definitions for the same word, communication and discourse are impossible as we are experiencing the same words but are having completely different ideas of what that word represents.
2. "Theory" does not mean "wild guess" or "guestimation" as is used in everyday terminology. If you are suggesting that "Evolution is just a wild guess" or "a guestimation", then you are completely wrong.
3. "Theory", in the scientific definition, is a "body of knowledge". This is what "Theory" means in the term "Theory of Evolution"; a body of knowledge that quite demonstrably proves Evolution. Many things we accept as fact are also "Theories". Theory of Gravity, Cell Theory, Germ Theory are a few other terms that are "theories"; yet I don't think anyone questions anymore whether or not germs cause sickness or that living organisms are comprised of cells.
 

Ouroboros

Coincidentia oppositorum
Well i thought abiogenesis is part of the evolution theory
Yes and no.

Abiogenesis is most definitely an aspect of biology and understanding how biological evolution started, but abiogenesis isn't biological but rather chemical or biochemical.

Put it this way. A builder that builds a house needs to know how nails, planks, and such works and how to use the tools. Knowing how nails are made or trees are grown are interesting aspects of it and could have important information for the quality of the construction, but still not always a necessary information. A nail that is made from a material that can rust or not might be important. Knowing how a plank was cut and cured etc can also be important. But in general, constructing a house is not dependent on where, when, or how a nail was made.

Astronomy is dependent on physics. Knowing where quarks came from might be interesting for an astronomer but perhaps not necessary for explaining how a star is formed. Biological evolution is only dependent on chemical evolution (abiogenesis) from the perspective of where life came from, but not to explain how life evolves. The evolutionary aspect holds true because it's independent of chemical evolution.

Or put it this way, do you have to know who grew the basil, celery, carrots, potato, etc to cook food? Can a chef cook great food without knowing horticulture? The answer is Yes! Horticulture is an interesting aspect of cooking, but not a necessary one (in general).
 

Aman777

Bible Believer
3. "Theory", in the scientific definition, is a "body of knowledge". This is what "Theory" means in the term "Theory of Evolution"; a body of knowledge that quite demonstrably proves Evolution. Many things we accept as fact are also "Theories". Theory of Gravity, Cell Theory, Germ Theory are a few other terms that are "theories"; yet I don't think anyone questions anymore whether or not germs cause sickness or that living organisms are comprised of cells.

Dear NewGuy, The ToE is provably wrong, since ALL of it's assumptions are clouded by the Fact that Humans did NOT have our origin on the present Earth.This sticks a big metal rod into the gears of the machine teaching the False ToE to little children in the Public Schools.

Humans FIRST came to this Planet in an Ark and left traces which History records, since Humans arrived some 10k years ago in the mountains of Ararat, and now, Human History can begin on this Planet. Here is evidence of their Sudden arrival and the beginning of Human civilization on Planet Earth. Map: Fertile Cresent, 9000 to 4500 BCE

If you don't agree, then post your own evidence. God Bless you.

In Love,
Aman
 

NewGuyOnTheBlock

Cult Survivor/Fundamentalist Pentecostal Apostate
NOAH'S ARK AND INSTANT FOSSILIZATION: There are many, many reasons why this is absolutely scientifically false. I'll name just one: We never find fossils of homo saipian buried at the same level as a Triceratops. This is because of plate tectonic movement, glacial movement and the processes by which things are buried by windblown dust and particles, and the decomposition of plant an animal matter that, over time, buries what is on the ground. We never find an artifact belonging to the Cambrian era at the level we expect to see the Jurassic era. We never find an artifact belonging to the Jurassic era at the same level as the Neogene era. We never find something belonging to the Neogene era at the same level as the Cambrian era. If hypothesis that massive fossilization happened instantaneously at the time of the biblical flood, then all of these remains would exist on the same layer and at the same depth; or would otherwise be "all mixed up". If such an enigma were actually discovered, it would cause us to question everything we believe to be true about Evolution, Plate Tectonics, Geophysics, Volcanism, Climate Change and the entirely of all of our accumulated knowledge about natural sciences. That is why such a find has never occurred; and highly unlikely to ever occur. (This is why Creationism is regarded as an attack on science in its entirety). The fossil layers, alone, refute the hypothesis of a singular mass extinction/flood event.

TRANSITIONAL FOSSILS: Darwin lamented about the lack of transitional fossils 155 years ago. Since Darwin, 155 years of progress has been made discoveries have been found. We now have hundreds of transitional fossiles; Australopithecus; aka "Lucy", Tiktaalik, and many more listed on Wikipedia under the title "Transitional Fossils".

CROSS-CONFIRMATION: The theory of Evolution is not a stand alone theory; it is well documented and supported by a vast array of scientific disciplines, many of them hardly even related: Chemistry, Biochemistry, Plate Tectonics, Geophysics, Geology, Paleontology, Volcanism, Comparative Morphology, Taxonomy, Embryology, Ecology, Botony, Molecular Biology: All which elegantly point to the conclusion that we evolved from single celled life forms to the complex life forms we are today, and that we all share a common ancestry.

Futile attempts to take down the theory of Evolution is akin to trying to tear down Hoover Dam with a claw hammer.
 

Aman777

Bible Believer
NOAH'S ARK AND INSTANT FOSSILIZATION: There are many, many reasons why this is absolutely scientifically false. I'll name just one: We never find fossils of homo saipian buried at the same level as a Triceratops. This is because of plate tectonic movement, glacial movement and the processes by which things are buried by windblown dust and particles, and the decomposition of plant an animal matter that, over time, buries what is on the ground. We never find an artifact belonging to the Cambrian era at the level we expect to see the Jurassic era. We never find an artifact belonging to the Jurassic era at the same level as the Neogene era. We never find something belonging to the Neogene era at the same level as the Cambrian era. If hypothesis that massive fossilization happened instantaneously at the time of the biblical flood, then all of these remains would exist on the same layer and at the same depth; or would otherwise be "all mixed up". If such an enigma were actually discovered, it would cause us to question everything we believe to be true about Evolution, Plate Tectonics, Geophysics, Volcanism, Climate Change and the entirely of all of our accumulated knowledge about natural sciences. That is why such a find has never occurred; and highly unlikely to ever occur. (This is why Creationism is regarded as an attack on science in its entirety). The fossil layers, alone, refute the hypothesis of a singular mass extinction/flood event.

Dear NewGuy, You are posting things which Scripture does NOT say. It was Adam's world which was totally destroyed in the Flood and NOT the present Earth which is a ROCK. You seem to have the mistaken idea that it was our Earth which was flooded.

TRANSITIONAL FOSSILS: Darwin lamented about the lack of transitional fossils 155 years ago. Since Darwin, 155 years of progress has been made discoveries have been found. We now have hundreds of transitional fossiles; Australopithecus; aka "Lucy", Tiktaalik, and many more listed on Wikipedia under the title "Transitional Fossils".

What has been found all the way through Cro-Magnon are the descendants of the sons of God (prehistoric people) who were NOT Humans, no matter how many Evols claim they are. Humans are the descendants of Adam, the FIRST Human. ONLY Adam was made with the highest intelligence in Creation, which is like God's. Gen 3:22


CROSS-CONFIRMATION: The theory of Evolution is not a stand alone theory; it is well documented and supported by a vast array of scientific disciplines, many of them hardly even related: Chemistry, Biochemistry, Plate Tectonics, Geophysics, Geology, Paleontology, Volcanism, Comparative Morphology, Taxonomy, Embryology, Ecology, Botony, Molecular Biology: All which elegantly point to the conclusion that we evolved from single celled life forms to the complex life forms we are today, and that we all share a common ancestry.

Futile attempts to take down the theory of Evolution is akin to trying to tear down Hoover Dam with a claw hammer.

In the last Days, Scoffers (Evols) will be "willingly ignorant" that Adam's world was totally destroyed in the Flood and that our world will be burned. ll Peter 3:3-7. Can you tell us HOW they can be willingly ignorant IF no one tells them? God Bless you.

In Love,
Aman
 

NewGuyOnTheBlock

Cult Survivor/Fundamentalist Pentecostal Apostate
Strange. I've read the Bible cover to cover. I don't remember a Recreaction account after the mythical Noah flood. Makes me think of these shell game cheaters; You know the ones; If you actually DO choose the right shell, many are skilled with the sleigh of hand to palm that ball; or let you "win" to keep you hooked by "palming" that ball under the shell. So, we investigate the earth, and you say, "Oh, no! Wrong Earth"! LoL! That must be a new trick. Never seen that one before. LoL.
 

Parsimony

Well-Known Member
Strange. I've read the Bible cover to cover. I don't remember a Recreaction account after the mythical Noah flood. Makes me think of these shell game cheaters; You know the ones; If you actually DO choose the right shell, many are skilled with the sleigh of hand to palm that ball; or let you "win" to keep you hooked by "palming" that ball under the shell. So, we investigate the earth, and you say, "Oh, no! Wrong Earth"! LoL! That must be a new trick. Never seen that one before. LoL.
Try not to take him too seriously. I'm doubting that he believes what he posts.
 

McBell

Unbound
Dear NewGuy, The ToE is provably wrong, since ALL of it's assumptions are clouded by the Fact that Humans did NOT have our origin on the present Earth.This sticks a big metal rod into the gears of the machine teaching the False ToE to little children in the Public Schools.

Humans FIRST came to this Planet in an Ark and left traces which History records, since Humans arrived some 10k years ago in the mountains of Ararat, and now, Human History can begin on this Planet. Here is evidence of their Sudden arrival and the beginning of Human civilization on Planet Earth. Map: Fertile Cresent, 9000 to 4500 BCE

If you don't agree, then post your own evidence. God Bless you.

In Love,
Aman

You keep repeating this steaming pile of bull ****, but you never actually present anything that supports it other than bold empty claims.

now I understand that you think the Bible is some sort of be all end all.
I understand that you have no problems twisting the verses in the Bible to fit your agenda.
I understand that you have no problem telling bold faced lies for your god.

What I want to know is how does your god feel about your hypocrisy?
You whine and whine about others lack of support yet fail to support your own claims...
 

Mycroft

Ministry of Serendipity
You keep repeating this steaming pile of bull ****, but you never actually present anything that supports it other than bold empty claims.

now I understand that you think the Bible is some sort of be all end all.
I understand that you have no problems twisting the verses in the Bible to fit your agenda.
I understand that you have no problem telling bold faced lies for your god.

What I want to know is how does your god feel about your hypocrisy?
You whine and whine about others lack of support yet fail to support your own claims...

That's because he's trolling you. And you keep falling for it. :facepalm:
 

Aman777

Bible Believer
You keep repeating this steaming pile of bull ****, but you never actually present anything that supports it other than bold empty claims.

now I understand that you think the Bible is some sort of be all end all.
I understand that you have no problems twisting the verses in the Bible to fit your agenda.
I understand that you have no problem telling bold faced lies for your god.

What I want to know is how does your god feel about your hypocrisy?
You whine and whine about others lack of support yet fail to support your own claims...

Dear Mestmia, Instead of calling names and playing the role of a nasty right wing Republican, why don't you try to be more specific? Or is that beyond your ability since your major in being disagreeable? Your father would be proud of you. God Bless you.

In Love,
Aman
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Lets work with facts, not your biased opinion.

IAP - IAP Statement on the Teaching of Evolution

We agree that the following evidence-based facts about the origins and evolution of the Earth and of life on this planet have been established by numerous observations and independently derived experimental results from a multitude of scientific disciplines. Even if there are still many open questions about the precise details of evolutionary change, scientific evidence has never contradicted these results:
•In a universe that has evolved towards its present configuration for some 11 to 15 billion years, our Earth formed approximately 4.5 billion years ago.
•Since its formation, the Earth – its geology and its environments – has changed under the effect of numerous physical and chemical forces and continues to do so.
•Life appeared on Earth at least 2.5 billion years ago. The evolution, soon after, of photosynthetic organisms enabled, from at least 2 billion years ago, the slow transformation of the atmosphere to one containing substantial quantities of oxygen. In addition to the release of the oxygen that we breathe, the process of photosynthesis is the ultimate source of fixed energy and food upon which human life on the planet depends.
•Since its first appearance on Earth, life has taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve, in ways which palaeontology and the modern biological and biochemical sciences are describing and independently confirming with increasing precision. Commonalities in the structure of the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicate their common primordial origin
 
Top