Abiogenesis

[liamconnor]

Again, I rarely wander over to the sciences and more rarely set up an argument. Not my forte.

But I recall reading that a famous atheist became a theist (not a Christian) because of the problem of abiogenesis.

Now, as I understand the term, it refers to the theory that life can come from non-life.

In simplistic terms, a rock can, over time, produce (on its own, nothing added to it; the development happens "within") cells.


Question:

Do I understand the term "abiogenesis"?


Based on my (or your corrected version's) definition, has it been reproduced by scientists?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 378 by For_The_Kingdom]

Sure, God just woke up on morning and said "I think I am gonna kill me a bunch of people today". That is exactly how it happened, eh?

He's gunning for Moses for literally no explored reason, at one point.
Exodus 4 Verse 24
" At a lodging place on the way, the Lord met Moses and was about to kill him."

Second, on atheism, I am not sure why genocide is so wrong anyway.

Can you defend it on theism first, before casting stones our way? Other than defining it as right simply because he's God...what else have you got? I've talked about this before, about the numerous methods God could have done, such as teleporting the humans who were in the 'wrong' land away.

God has the right to give life, take life, and restore life.

So we're nothing more than possessions, toys. How little you think of yourself.

Second, how many flys have you killed in your life? On atheism, a human life doesn't have any more virtue than a fly, ant, or roach.

I don't preach to the insects that I'm this superior form of life that they ought to worship and praise constantly.
If the insects think of me as this murderous brute...so be it. I'd have earned that distinction in their eyes.
You want your God to have his cake and eat it too. Nope.

In fact, on atheism, humans ARE animals...and in the animal kingdom, animals kill each other all the time. Its what we do.

In theism, your god has the means, motive and opportunity to fix all of that...yet doesn't.

The arguments for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ is my justification.

It might shock you, but even theoretically proving Jesus Christ was resurrected wouldn't make me think that Old Testament God was sweetness and light.
It'd be like expecting me to think that a doctor who gives a patient a cure for a painful illness is a good guy...even when we all know the doctor was the one who deliberately infected the patient in the first place!

[For_The_Kingdom]

He's gunning for Moses for literally no explored reason, at one point.
Exodus 4 Verse 24
" At a lodging place on the way, the Lord met Moses and was about to kill him."

Sure, God choose for Moses to be the "chosen one" for the redemption of Israel..yet, he woke up and suddenly decided to kill Moses for no reason whatsoever.

Gotcha.

Can you defend it on theism first, before casting stones our way?

I was responding to a contention. I'd like the person that made the contention to address my response to his contention, first. Then, we can discuss my theism.

Other than defining it as right simply because he's God...what else have you got?

If objective moral values and duties exist, then that is all I need.

I've talked about this before, about the numerous methods God could have done, such as teleporting the humans who were in the 'wrong' land away.

That may be the best way for you, but it was not the best way for God.

So we're nothing more than possessions, toys. How little you think of yourself.

On atheism/naturalism, we aren't even toys. We are nothing more than dust.

I don't preach to the insects that I'm this superior form of life that they ought to worship and praise constantly.

Right, you just step on them or swat them. Those kind of actions speak louder than any words I know of.

If the insects think of me as this murderous brute...so be it. I'd have earned that distinction in their eyes.
You want your God to have his cake and eat it too. Nope.

What?

In theism, your god has the means, motive and opportunity to fix all of that...yet doesn't.

He may have morally sufficient reasons to act, or not react.

It might shock you, but even theoretically proving Jesus Christ was resurrected wouldn't make me think that Old Testament God was sweetness and light.
It'd be like expecting me to think that a doctor who gives a patient a cure for a painful illness is a good guy...even when we all know the doctor was the one who deliberately infected the patient in the first place!

Again, morally sufficient reasons.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 380 by For_The_Kingdom]

Sure, God choose for Moses to be the "chosen one" for the redemption of Israel..yet, he woke up and suddenly decided to kill Moses for no reason whatsoever.

Gotcha.

...FtK, what gotcha is there? You don't have one. That is EXACTLY what is suggested by the text in Exodus Chapter 4. We have God choosing Moses for some great task, then, for no reason whatsoever that is explained to us the reader...God is about to kill Moses.

No reason given as to why, no reason given as to why he doesn't actually go through with it.

Right, you just step on them or swat them. Those kind of actions speak louder than any words I know of.

But you don't let those actions speak when it's God doing them. If I swat flies, I can be considered a heartless monster. If God swats US by the millions...he's loving, just and merciful.

[Clownboat]

The Christian god concept is one that is willing to commit genocide. And you want to point to a verse in its ignorant book to claim that I'm without excuse to believe in this genocidal god concept?

Sure, God just woke up on morning and said "I think I am gonna kill me a bunch of people today". That is exactly how it happened, eh?

No, you see, there is no evidence for a global flood nor this great genocide of life on the planet. If you want me to believe in your genocidial god, you will need to provide evidence for it. Personally, I can only hope that it is false just like all the other gods. At least I have odds on my side as even you probably agree that all the gods are false. Well, all but your own of course.

Second, on atheism, I am not sure why genocide is so wrong anyway.

You don't know why the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation is wrong?
You would seriously not see anything wrong if for example some dictator decided to kill off all Eskimos? If you are not lying to me, then please, I beg you for the sake of our children, please remain a religious person.

God has the right to give life, take life, and restore life.

And you would teach this to children?
Only when mothers and fathers stop telling their children that there is a god out there that loves them so much as to send them to heaven, yet hates another so much as to send them to a hell will we ever stop the violence and bloodshed.
I beg you to keep such teachings away from my children.

Second, how many flys have you killed in your life?

I honestly don't know.

On atheism, a human life doesn't have any more virtue than a fly, ant, or roach.

No atheist I have ever met has made this claim.
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. - Socrates

In fact, on atheism, humans ARE animals...and in the animal kingdom, animals kill each other all the time. Its what we do.

Science, not atheism is what determined that humans are animals. Also, not all animals kill each other.
That was a whole lotta wrong in one post don't you think? If only there was a god concept to help stop such blunders.

The unbeliever is without excuse you quote? Hardly. What is your excuse for defending such a god concept? IMO, you need to justify your belief in such a concept.

The arguments for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ is my justification.

I am sorry to hear you say this. Please stay away from my children as I don't want them to believe in any gods that the believers can justify genocide because of a nonsensical idea that a god needs human sacrifice for atonement.

You see that other tribe over there? They are evil and our god, which is the one true god wants us to murder them to help cleans his planet.

It is sad that humans are still teaching their children such ideas.

[Bust Nak]

But the area of contention is the cause, not the effect.

No it isn't. Your contention is that naturalism cannot in principle explain consciousness.

We agree that the cold air is blowing...no need in debating something that we both agree on. We are in disagreement on how/why the air is blowing and by what means is it blowing.

Disagree away. Both are naturalistic.

You people have problems with me shaking my head. But sometimes, that is all one can do. *shrugs*.

I will take that as another win.

I am an organ donor and I strongly believe in organ donation. That is my contribution to science.

That's more a contribution to society than science specifically, assuming you donation is meant for transplant and not research.

What is your contribution to Christianity?

Hopefully nothing.

But Mother Nature did it with no knowledge at all. So basically, Mother nature is getting more stuff done by accident than intelligent human beings are getting done on purpose. LOL.

Right, is that a problem?

Re-read the scenario.

I am still getting the same impression, you made scramble egg and decorated it with a batman logo using pepper.

What is funny is the fact that you keep referring me to check my local natural history museum, when you know full well that it won't provide those kind of answers to these kind of questions. You know this, yet, you keep referring me to them LMAO.

Incorrect. I kept referring you to check your local natural history museum, because I know full well that that's exactly where you can find the evidence to support the claims I am making.

?

You say you are satisfied, but your actions indicated otherwise. I am asking you to explain this apparent discrepancy.

I would say in about the same sense.

Same sense as what?

2,000 years seems like only yesterday when compared to how long its been since we've seen life come from nonliving material.

In fact, compare 2,000 years to "Never", and 2,000 years seems as close as a few hours ago LOL.

So how much longer would you suggest?

I know..I said I would when I decide to waste valuable time. I haven't decided to waste valuable time yet.

That doesn't sound like you would do it at all.

[For_The_Kingdom]

...FtK, what gotcha is there? You don't have one. That is EXACTLY what is suggested by the text in Exodus Chapter 4. We have God choosing Moses for some great task, then, for no reason whatsoever that is explained to us the reader...God is about to kill Moses.

No reason given as to why, no reason given as to why he doesn't actually go through with it.

So, because no reason was given, therefore, there was no reason at all. Non sequitur.

But you don't let those actions speak when it's God doing them.

Because when God takes a life, he is taking back what is rightfully his. When we take a life, we are taking something that doesn't belong to us.

If I swat flies, I can be considered a heartless monster. If God swats US by the millions...he's loving, just and merciful.

Taking a life, generally speaking, is not necessarily wrong. There may be morally sufficient reasons to do so and not all cases are equal.

There is no contradiction between taking a life and being loving, just, and merciful.

[For_The_Kingdom]

No, you see, there is no evidence for a global flood nor this great genocide of life on the planet.

No, you see, there is no evidence regarding the notion that life came from nonlife, order came from chaos, intelligence came from nonintelligence, language came from muteness, the universe came from nothing, etc.

So before you go talking about what there is no evidence for regarding the Bible, focus yourself on the lack of evidence for your own religion (naturalism).

If you want me to believe in your genocidial god, you will need to provide evidence for it.

Provide me evidence that sentient life can come from nonliving material.

Personally, I can only hope that it is false just like all the other gods.

Personally, I can only hope that mankind didn't originate from slime crawling out of primordial soup.

At least I have odds on my side

Actually, you don't.

as even you probably agree that all the gods are false. Well, all but your own of course.

I also agree that all the women out there aren't my mother. Well, all women but my own mother of course.

You don't know why the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation is wrong?

No, not on atheism/naturalism..no.

You would seriously not see anything wrong if for example some dictator decided to kill off all Eskimos?

No, not on atheism/naturalism. Do you see anything wrong with the alpha male of a lion pride deciding to kill off all hyenas? If you do, tell that to the lion.

What about all of the insects you've killed in your life...or how about all of the animal meat that you've consumed in your life? Are you a vegan? Vegetarian? Are you a member and/or supporter of PETA?

Or do you just care about human life, and disregarding all other forms of life? If you are not a vegetarian, vegan, or a member of PETA, you are not practicing what you preach...because on naturalism, a human life has no more intrinsic value than the life of a fly...yet, we kill insects all the time, and we eat the meat of animals all the time.

Naturalists just simply don't have a dog in the fight it comes to the subject of morality.

If you are not lying to me, then please, I beg you for the sake of our children, please remain a religious person.

Trust me, it is because of my religion as to why I don't do a LOT of things, sir.

And you would teach this to children?

Yes, it is called Children's Bible Study.

Only when mothers and fathers stop telling their children that there is a god out there that loves them so much as to send them to heaven, yet hates another so much as to send them to a hell will we ever stop the violence and bloodshed.
I beg you to keep such teachings away from my children.

I will stop telling them once it stops being true.

I honestly don't know.

My point exactly.

No atheist I have ever met has made this claim.

It was a statement..

Science, not atheism is what determined that humans are animals.

Not necessarily. Not every scientist has to agree that humans are animals...but every atheist does.

Also, not all animals kill each other.

But it happens more times than not.

That was a whole lotta wrong in one post don't you think?

I would tell you to correct me if I'm wrong...but you can't correct me.

I am sorry to hear you say this. Please stay away from my children as I don't want them to believe in any gods that the believers can justify genocide because of a nonsensical idea that a god needs human sacrifice for atonement.

LOL. "Daddy, you said that killing is wrong, but you just ate a greasy hamburger which came from a cow that was slaughtered at the slaugtherhouse. How is killing wrong when you are eating the meat of an animal that was killed".

Clownboat: "Honey, killing is only wrong when it comes to humans killing other humans. The cow that was slaughtered in order for me to enjoy this burger, its life is insignificant. It is ok to butcher animals for the purpose of food consumption. Now, go to your room for having the nerve to question my blatant act of hypocrisy."

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 385 by For_The_Kingdom]

. "Daddy, you said that killing is wrong, but you just ate a greasy hamburger which came from a cow that was slaughtered at the slaugtherhouse. How is killing wrong when you are eating the meat of an animal that was killed".

Clownboat: "Honey, killing is only wrong when it comes to humans killing other humans. The cow that was slaughtered in order for me to enjoy this burger, its life is insignificant. It is ok to butcher animals for the purpose of food consumption. Now, go to your room for having the nerve to question my blatant act of hypocrisy."

It's called perspective. From the perspective of most humans it's not wrong. From the perspective of cows we could be seen as monsters. From god's perspective it might be like killing cows. Yet from our perspective its monstrous.

[For_The_Kingdom]

No it isn't. Your contention is that naturalism cannot in principle explain consciousness.

*the origin of consciousness.

Disagree away. Both are naturalistic.

And one required intelligent design, while the other one didn't.

I will take that as another win.

But why? LOL.

That's more a contribution to society than science specifically, assuming you donation is meant for transplant and not research.

Organ transplants is science at its best.

Hopefully nothing.

That's fine. Its all good. I don't know what Christianity will do without your contributions. I can only hope/pray that we will figure out something.

Right, is that a problem?

Yeah...big one.

I am still getting the same impression, you made scramble egg and decorated it with a batman logo using pepper.

Wrong.

Incorrect. I kept referring you to check your local natural history museum, because I know full well that that's exactly where you can find the evidence to support the claims I am making.

Oh, so the natural history museum will support your otherwise unsupported claims? Gotcha. Tell ya what...give me the number to YOUR local natural history museum, and I will call them and ask them about abiogenesis...and see what they say? Fair enough?

You say you are satisfied, but your actions indicated otherwise. I am asking you to explain this apparent discrepancy.

Ion remember.

Same sense as what?

Ion remember.

So how much longer would you suggest?

Ion know. Thats a toughy.

That doesn't sound like you would do it at all.

I said give me the number. I feel like wasting valuable time.

[For_The_Kingdom]

It's called perspective. From the perspective of most humans it's not wrong. From the perspective of cows we could be seen as monsters. From god's perspective it might be like killing cows. Yet from our perspective its monstrous.

Interesting.