Genesis vs Evoluion

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"Abiogenesis is the dividing line between chemistry and biology."

[sdelsolray]

...
Where we begin to deviate in agreement is the origin of life?

Genesis (My belief), life occurs under the proper conditions, and is started by God.

Abiogenesis (Athiest belief), is the scientific hypothesis/theory that life occurs from inert matter under the proper conditions.

Is this an acceptable starting point?

Regards, GBTG

No, it is not an acceptable starting point.  Your belief is what you claim it to be, which is fine.  Projecting a different belief upon all atheists is problematic.

Here are better starting points:

1)  Theism/Atheism issues:

You believe goddidit.

Atheists withhold belief in, do not have belief in and/or reject claims that gods exist, including the god(s) you believe in.

Some theists will claim knowledge that goddidit (gnostic theists).  I'm not sure whether you are a gnostic theist.  You may be an agnostic theist.  Please clarify.

Some atheists will claim knowledge that gods do not exist (gnostic atheists).  Most here are not in that group.  Most are agnostic atheists.

2)  Origin of carbon based life on Earth issues:

I don't know, and neither do you.  The jury is still out.

Current scientific investigation continues (involving many scientific hypotheses) and no scientific theory has been formulated regarding whether goddidit or natural emergence did it.

3)  Probability issues:

Intellectually honest theists and atheists tend to defer to probability analysis to measure any truth claims they make.

Intellectually honest theists and atheists are content with saying, "I don't know".


And, BTW, you may wish to change the title of this thread you created.  Biological evolution has nothing to do with the formation/creation of the universe or of life.

[Mike Cl]

GBTG,
If you want to deal with facts, go to Jesus--Fact or Fiction thread.  So far I've listed 41 facts dealing the historicity of Jesus.

[Hydra009]

Biological evolution has nothing to do with the formation/creation of the universe or of life.

Yeah, that's the hallmark error of a creationist.  They frequently confuse abiogenesis, evolution, and atheism.

I think the intent is to promote Christianity by "refuting" atheism/evolution/abiogenesis.  But the result is invariably the Christian looking like an anti-scientific loon.  They rarely realize that 1) they're connecting things that aren't connected 2) you can't refute over a century and a half of science with personal incredulity and bible verses.

[sdelsolray]

Yeah, that's the hallmark error of a creationist.  They frequently confuse abiogenesis, evolution, and atheism.

I think the intent is to promote Christianity by "refuting" atheism/evolution/abiogenesis.  But the result is invariably the Christian looking like an anti-scientific loon.  They rarely realize that 1) they're connecting things that aren't connected 2) you can't refute over a century and a half of science with personal incredulity and bible verses.

Yes, poster GBGT is somewhat unclear and has shifted about what he wishes to discuss.  Still, I'm going to wait and see how his dialog progresses.  Granted, he's a Christian theist, no doubt full of beliefs common to that religion.  But his beliefs don't count for much, and it will be interesting to see if he understands that and has something to offer beyond his religious dogma.  He did try some science stuff earlier in the thread, and perhaps he will go down that trail more.  We'll see.

[SGOS]

Why would an omnipotent god need 'proper conditions' to create life?

And for that matter, why would he poof into existence all the ugly guts and brains and blood.  In order to live, we have to swallow various edible foods if we are lucky enough to find them, and then our bodies turn that food into disgusting ungodly waste that we shit out of our asses in steamy smelly piles of toxic bacteria infested lumps.  We contaminate each other with deadly viruses, and have to occasionally wash off all the filth that we collect from those 'proper conditions' in our environment.

Really?  Talk about a god that tends to over-complicate things.

[Mike Cl]

And for that matter, why would he poof into existence all the ugly guts and brains and blood.  In order to live, we have to swallow various edible foods if we are lucky enough to find them, and then our bodies turn that food into disgusting ungodly waste that we shit out of our asses in steamy smelly piles of toxic bacteria infested lumps.  We contaminate each other with deadly viruses, and have to occasionally wash off all the filth that we collect from those 'proper conditions' in our environment.

Really?  Talk about a god that tends to over-complicate things.

And theists love to spout 'Thou Shalt Not Kill!' as a commandment.  Yet their god created 'nature' and made it so creatures that he created for 'nature' have no choice but to kill if they wish to live.  How stupid of a god is that????

[Baruch]

And some of the most important discoveries in math were made by those who went beyond arithmetic.  I don't know what the next step is beyond Play-Do, but that's a purely nonsense comparison.  Nonsense doesn't beckon such great men.  Nothing can be derived from nonsense, just more nonsense.  Your defense of nonsense is quite curious.

It was a rhetorical question, you weren't supposed to take it literally.  I go beyond ... just not limited to materialism or rationalism.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

And why the Spanish spelling of evolution?

[Jason78]

Why would an omnipotent god need 'proper conditions' to create life?

Wouldn't such a being be able to create life under any conditions?

'Proper conditions' are needed for life to arrise naturally (which is where the evidence points). The idea that life arose under 'proper conditions' points away from a deity being necessary.

Abiogenesis is not an 'atheist belief'. It s scientific hypothesis. Atheism has not tenants or dogman on the origins of life. Just that there is insufficient evidence to accept the premise that a god is responsible.

I was just thinking that.   If all the proper conditions are there, then what job is there for the gods to do?

[Baruch]

I was just thinking that.   If all the proper conditions are there, then what job is there for the gods to do?

Right ... I don't need to go to work.  All that I do, would happen spontaneously thru Quantum Mechanics ;-)

The problem with abiogenesis is that it is a hard problem ... what conditions? ... how many millions of years before statistics catches up?  Not an empirical science, ever.  But it is the only reasonable position to take.  Hard problems (like consciousness) are hard for a reason, unlike simple things like Ohm's Law of electrical resistance.

[SGOS]

"God works in mysterious ways," translates into "I don't know why something happens."

[Baruch]

"God works in mysterious ways," translates into "I don't know why something happens."

G-d is an asshole, so what is mysterious about that?  People say "G-d works in mysterious ways" because they don't want to admit G-d is an asshole.  But as a projection of human assholes, how could G-d do anything different?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"God works in mysterious ways," translates into "I don't know why something happens."

But if you tell them that's a crap answer they start making shit up.

[aitm]

But as a projection of human assholes, how could G-d do anything different?

How obvious yet so overlooked. But v/v the babble acknowledges it, "let us make man in our image".