|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,483 Year: 3,740/9,624 Month: 611/974 Week: 224/276 Day: 64/34 Hour: 1/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: No Abiogenesis, no Evolution, then what? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Now, that those two things are given, I would like Faith or another creationist, to show me how God is the only other option. CREATION is the only other option, not "God." I believe there is only one God, as shown us in the Bible, but in this conversation I only say that there are just the two options, that is, either life arose by purely natural blind chemical processes, or a mind created it. Either it just happened to happen or it was intentionally created. I see no other options. So you'd have to show me that there are other options.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Again, I would like to discuss what the ramifications would be if evo. and abio. were to be proven wrong/or never existed all together. I don't see the problem. A Christian would base all knowledge of biology on Genesis. Other religions would have their own versions of creation. What we'd be debating then is pure religion, which version of creation, which God, is the true one.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
There could be numerous other natural options. I can't think of any. Can you?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Are you able to list a possible natural mechanism for the same reason? Not for the same reason, but I'm very interested in considering all the possibilities. I simply can't think of any.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Just because a natural option has not been thought of yet doesn't mean a natural option doesn't exist. I guess, but why is that relevant. If we can't think of one we have nothing to discuss. This message has been edited by Faith, 10-07-2005 12:07 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
There is still a possibility of panspermia. In particular, if the universe has existed forever, then it is conceivable that life always existed, and is distributed via panspermia (suitable organic molecules being distributed into space). So there is no origin, but only distribution in this model? Nevertheless it is apparently a naturalistic model, right? Nothing supernatural.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I can't think of any. Can you?
This points out a pretty big flaw in christian/creationist reasoning. It basicaly says "I give up, I'm satisfied not knowing and settling for the answer that makes me 'feel' good". I'll ignore your imputation of motives to me and just ask, can you think of any?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Hey Faith. I'm gonna reply to both your posts in this one to prevent confusion. CREATION is the only other option, not "God." I'm confused... how can you have a creation event without a god? Like aliens or somethin? I'm simply trying to cover the field. There seem to be various theories floating around, various creator "gods" and aliens yes. I don't know what all. Gaia is an idea. I'm not sure what that is. Sort of a conscious universe or something like that. Whether "creation" is done by "Gaia" I don't know.
I believe there is only one God, as shown us in the Bible, but in this conversation I only say that there are just the two options, that is, either life arose by purely natural blind chemical processes, or a mind created it.
See Faith, I think thats a false dichotomy. Just because abiogenesis and evolution may be false, I don't see how it points to a consious mind at all... the universe is pretty mindless no matter how you slice it, I don't see how one can deduce consiousness from it. Speaking of the Biblical God and Biblical creation, this isn't deduced from anything, it is known by revelation. It is a viable theory held by many and if the odds are against all naturalistic origins it gives weight to theistic creationism.
Either it just happened to happen or it was intentionally created. I see no other options. So you'd have to show me that there are other options.
But this has never been the case. Biology, nor any other science, has ever been based on the bible. For example, what knowledge of neurology does the bible empart to us? Nothing. We'd simply never have come up with evolution or abiogenesis. Our genetics, our neurology, whatever, would take creation for granted and otherwise not be different from those sciences as they now exist. We'd probably look for evidence of DEvolution in genetics as that would follow from our Biblical assumptions rather than evolution. But otherwise, science as usual.
I say this because it is important to note, that even without evolution/abiogenesis, science would still be inherantly naturalistic and observational. No god or bible would be required. Maybe not required, but it would be nice to acknowledge the Creator of it all, and thank Him for it, and in fact depend upon Him to increase our scientific knowledge.
Maybe I should ask you this way: Should evo. and abio. be deposed, do you feel that a god would be the only explanation left? As I say above, Christians, independent of science, believe God is the Creator of all things. We EXPECT naturalistic explanations ultimately to fail. So when evo and abio are deposed, as you put it, for us that is simply proof of what we know already. This message has been edited by Faith, 10-07-2005 12:25 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
So then we have three possibilities?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Wasn't it your implication that because you or any of us, might not be able to think of other natural options for how life could have arisen, that it somehow follows that there must be a supernatural cause? No. If there ARE none, yes, but not being able to think of any though there are some, no.
Put another way, are you saying that, by definition, anything about the natural world that we do not currently understand, or may never understand, must have a supernatural cause? Not at all. I believe what I believe from the Bible. God created everything at one point in time, or over a period of seven days. After it was created I have no reason to think He did any more creating. He now sustains what He created but doesn't add anything more to it. Whatever we don't understand about the natural world is for science to study. Science is completely compatible with God as the Bible reveals Him (in fact wouldn't have developed without belief in Him) except on those points where it denies the Bible, the Creation and the Flood.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
1) Naturalistic - Abiogenisis 2) Panspermia 3) Creation by God 4) Creation by a divine entity other than God (Maybe the Angels created life. Maybe the Devil. We have no reason to believe otherwise) 5) Life has always existed everywhere in the universe. 6) Gaia - Earth, and everything alive on it, is part of one large organism. 7) Life does not exist at all - we are mistakingly attributing ourselves with "life" when in fact we are not alive 8) Creation by super intelligent aliens 9) Creation by future Humans sending life back through time (yes, it's a paradox, but still more reasonable than the spagetti monster theory) Really it all appears to break down to naturalistic origin vs. creation by something or someone, as I've been saying. 3, 4, 8 and 9 are creation, the rest are naturalistic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Actually since 8 and 9 bring up the infinite regress situation, the question of the origin of the aliens and the future humans, it is not yet determined whether they are naturalistic or supernatural.
This message has been edited by Faith, 10-07-2005 11:23 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Except that the way we know about God is through revelation (though some are smart enough to see Him in His creation), and revelation tells us that He is uncreated. No infinite regression of the Biblical God.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Huh?
Don't buy what? God is the only uncreated thing, the only beginningless thing. He preexisted everything He has made by an eternity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
God is not "bio" as in "abiogenesis." Only things and life were created. God is Spirit, uncreated, above it all. He didn't "come from" anything. He has always Been.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024