Jump to content
IGNORED

A Retraction Regarding Abiogenesis


one.opinion

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.13
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

3 hours ago, Kevinb said:

Regarding fringe... most who write on this are Christians who start with the presupposition of accepting prior to writing.

That may very well be true, but there is plenty of evidence from secular writers to accept that Jesus was a historical figure. You and I agree that majority opinion among experts is meaningful and it is true that most historians accept it. Claims that go beyond Jesus as historical figure are debated with more fervor, and there probably are threads already discussing them. I’ll see what I can find.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Nonbeliever
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  35
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,735
  • Content Per Day:  1.18
  • Reputation:   249
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  08/04/2015
  • Status:  Offline

On 2/7/2018 at 7:41 PM, one.opinion said:

I believe that the biggest challenge to a completely unguided/unconscious/naturalistic explanation for life is the problem of abiogenesis. There are many Christians that believe that God set up the laws of the universe (or multiverses :-P) in such a way that life as we see it is the natural outcome of those laws and processes He initiated. I lean toward a slightly more hands-on approach. I must admit that I am only guessing that God created the first cells, but I believe it is a reasonable guess. Once life forms existed, God certainly could have guided evolution in such a way that His involvement was/is imperceptible, making any involvement no different from completely naturalistic processes. I can only guess at how life came to be and when/how/in what way God was involved in the development of life, but I am fully confident that God is Creator and is in full control of His creation.

Well, let me put myself in the shoes of a Christian or, more generally, a theist. Please indulge me if I look funny in them. I am sure I do.

Let's suppose that God created the first cell. As a theist I could not possibly see how God would need to tweak the course of evolution. I mean, we are talking of God, the creator of everything that exists. The almighty all-knowing fine tuning being. Does He need to correct things?  Against what? Something that takes a course that He did not anticipate? He managed to tune up things so good, and then He need to correct things? Sorry, it does not compute.

I am sure you are aware of the logical contradictions that a guided evolution would entail. Personally, I believe it makes no sense in both the naturalistic and theistic interpretation. This, among other things, should make it clear that Christianity, or any theism that assumes some phenotypes as final creation goals,  and evolution are mutually exclusive. You cannot hold both true without hurting both the Bible and current biology. Well, you can,  if you manage to go through several major cognitive dissonances unscathed.

So, let me rephrase my primary question. Suppose that the first cell came to be for some reason, divine or not. Do you think that the current state of affairs necessarily require a divine guide? In other words: do you think that evolution from simple (unexplained) origins require God, or would a natural explanation  suffice?

What I am asking is: is homo sapiens necessarily the result of some divine guide from some organic simple blob?  

:) siegi :)

 

 

 

Edited by siegi91
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Seeker
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  5
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  423
  • Content Per Day:  0.17
  • Reputation:   70
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  04/18/2017
  • Status:  Offline

53 minutes ago, one.opinion said:
4 hours ago, Kevinb said:

Regarding fringe... most who write on this are Christians who start with the presupposition of accepting prior to writing.

That may very well be true, but there is plenty of evidence from secular writers to accept that Jesus was a historical figure. You and I agree that majority opinion among experts is meaningful and it is true that most historians accept it. Claims that go beyond Jesus as historical figure are debated with more fervor, and there probably are threads already discussing them. I’ll see what I can find.

The majority "experts" are Christians.. they've already accepted the proposition and base work on other Christians who've already accepted it. An issue for me is there are religions pre Christian that have sons of god...saviour gods..resurrections after 3 days even. Osiris of Egypt...Romulus of Roman tradition who even on top of this underwent a passion. More modern notions of Christianity were taken from pre-existing Persian after they invaded Judea... the Persian Zoroastrianism stuff added Good God vs evil...heaven and hell were adopted from the persians. I'd have to buy the Jesus stuff in christiantity is true... after the analogous pre dates it. Makes it look like God based the Jesus "truth" on pre existing fables and stories of other civilisations. OR has just been adopted from other cults with a saviour swapped for another.. this has happened often...pre Christian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.13
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

On 3/9/2018 at 6:00 PM, siegi91 said:

Well, let me put myself in the shoes of a Christian or, more generally, a theist.

Try them, you might find out you like them!

On 3/9/2018 at 6:00 PM, siegi91 said:

Let's suppose that God created the first cell. As a theist I could not possibly see how God would need to tweak the course of evolution. I mean, we are talking of God, the creator of everything that exists. The almighty all-knowing fine tuning being. 

I believe there are biological hints, such as orphan genes (genes lacking homologs in even the closest biological relatives), that suggest that such tweaks might have taken place. Neither my faith in God nor my confidence in science will be crushed, either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Nonbeliever
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  35
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,735
  • Content Per Day:  1.18
  • Reputation:   249
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  08/04/2015
  • Status:  Offline

On 4/1/2018 at 3:05 AM, one.opinion said:

Try them, you might find out you like them!

I believe there are biological hints, such as orphan genes (genes lacking homologs in even the closest biological relatives), that suggest that such tweaks might have taken place. Neither my faith in God nor my confidence in science will be crushed, either way.

Well, I like theists, I just do not know so many of them. I like most people. However, I cannot possibly imagine myself believing in the supernatural. But never say never :)

To be honest with you, I am a bit skeptical of a God tweaking things. How is it possible? How could a divine plan go astray if it does not get monitored and corrected almost in real time? I am afraid that would make God ability to design and foresee a bit suboptimal, which is, in my opinion, self defeating for a God worthy that title.

I mean, this is not only biology. Big events also influenced the history of life on the planet.

For instance, if it is true that the coupe de grace to the dinosaurs has been inflicted by a big asteroid hitting earth AND God wanted the mammals to take over, then we should be led to conclude that God does not only tune DNA, but also the trajectory of celestial bodies millions of years before they hit earth at the right moment, so that little rodents can go out of their shelters, become primates and eventually us.

The obvious question is: why make things so complicated? Real-time DNA engineering, asteroids, volcanoes, meteorological changes, tectonic movements, a huge amount of extinctions, living beings needing to eat other living beings, ruthless competition for limited resource, continuous design improvements of  predators fighting against continuous design improvements of preys trying to flee them, arm races between eaters and eaten, etc...when all He had to do is to create what He wanted at once, as literalists claim.

I understand that admiring (evolutionary) science and, at the same time, being fond of the Bible, can generate some cognitive dissonances, but to be honest with you, all this looks like an attempt to fit a square peg in a round hole.  I really have no idea how to resolve such conflicts without a sacrifice.

:) siegi :)

 

 

Edited by siegi91
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.13
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

56 minutes ago, siegi91 said:

The obvious question is: why make things so complicated?

That’s a great question that I don’t know the answer to. Francis Bacon wrote about God’s two books - the book of God’s words and the book of God’s works. I believe God speaks truth through both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...