Survival of life

[timojin]

Look, pal, I was brought up a Catholic, went to a Church of England school and still even now attend mass fairly regularly (I am a choral singer), so I am well aware of the Old Testament allegory of creation.

But that is all it is - an allegory. And that is what the Catholic Church, the Church of England, The Methodists, the Church of Scotland and just about all other major denominations of Western Christianity have taught, for the last century, at least. Nothing to do with snobbery - it is just common sense and standard theology.

You can read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegorical_interpretations_of_Genesis

You and I can discuss this further if you like under the heading of religion - it does not belong on this thread.

Look . O know you are a wise guy , I am not offering the bible to read, don't jump to conclusion . what I am trying to say . Perhaps the earth waS a fugitive planet which had life and come into our solar system and
as waters stare to be separate by God's command dry land appeared and life come from the ground . Keep in mind we are many thousands of year when the book was written , With an open mind it can be seen evolution in that old book

So if we do not believe your holy book we are snobs? Do you believe the Vedas? Does that mean you are a snob?

You are not a snob , you are a nice guy, you might had some of your mush and that make you volatil. By the way what is Vedas.

 

[origin]

You are not a snob , you are a nice guy,

Thanks.

you might had some of your mush and that make you volatil.

It must not mush - although mush describes it pretty well.

By the way what is Vedas.

It is sort of like scriptures for Hindus.

 

[exchemist]

Look . O know you are a wise guy , I am not offering the bible to read, don't jump to conclusion . what I am trying to say . Perhaps the earth waS a fugitive planet which had life and come into our solar system and
as waters stare to be separate by God's command dry land appeared and life come from the ground . Keep in mind we are many thousands of year when the book was written , With an open mind it can be seen evolution in that old book

I agree with your last sentence.

It is not appropriate to introduce religious texts into a science discussion. That is because religion generally deals with meaning and purpose in the world and sets out to provide a guide to living one's life as an individual human being. Science is not concerned with such things. Conversely, religion does not, generally speaking, set out to give an authoritative account of how the physical world works. That is what science does. As my link shows, even the early Christian church, from St. Augustine of Hippo onwards, recognised the need to interpret the text of the bible, in order to derive meaning from it that was consistent with logic and with observation.

So, enough of this digression. I think abiogenesis is a really interesting subject for a chemist. The ultimate mystery to be solved, I suppose, is how the first molecules arose that could replicate themselves. But there are also all the processes to do with containing the biochemistry (i.e. cell membranes), and the processes of proving energy to enable the biochemical reactions to continue indefinitely. I do not expect any solution to the puzzle in my lifetime.

 

[timojin]

I agree with your last sentence.

It is not appropriate to introduce religious texts into a science discussion. That is because religion generally deals with meaning and purpose in the world and sets out to provide a guide to living one's life as an individual human being. Science is not concerned with such things. Conversely, religion does not, generally speaking, set out to give an authoritative account of how the physical world works. That is what science does. As my link shows, even the early Christian church, from St. Augustine of Hippo onwards, recognised the need to interpret the text of the bible, in order to derive meaning from it that was consistent with logic and with observation.

So, enough of this digression. I think abiogenesis is a really interesting subject for a chemist. The ultimate mystery to be solved, I suppose, is how the first molecules arose that could replicate themselves. But there are also all the processes to do with containing the biochemistry (i.e. cell membranes), and the processes of proving energy to enable the biochemical reactions to continue indefinitely. I do not expect any solution to the puzzle in my lifetime.

I am not attempting to introduce Genesis 1 as a religious book.. Religion for me is about behaviour . In that chapter one . there is a process and it tells the water was hot and tell something about ice formation on the poles, it tells the moon was formed after the vegetation was in place and so on to evolution toward man .

 

[Write4U]

I am not attempting to introduce Genesis 1 as a religious book.. Religion for me is about behaviour . In that chapter one . there is a process and it tells the water was hot and tell something about ice formation on the poles, it tells the moon was formed after the vegetation was in place and so on to evolution toward man .

Any book that advocates prejudicial messages and sanctions killing in the name of God is by definition not a Book of Peace. It is a Book of Control.
A revealing message may be found in this seemingly innocuous statement from the handbook of the Inquisition (remember that invention by the Teachers of Peace and Piety.

The 1578 handbook for inquisitors spelled out the purpose of inquisitorial penalties: ... quoniam punitio non refertur primo & per se in correctionem & bonum eius qui punitur, sed in bonum publicum ut alij terreantur, & a malis committendis avocentur. Translation from the Latin: "... for punishment does not take place primarily and per se for the correction and good of the person punished, but for the public good in order that others may become terrified and weaned away from the evils they would commit."[11]And later still, the institution of god was a convenient tool for control.

Except within the Papal States, the institution of the Inquisition was abolished in the early 19th century, after the Napoleonic Wars in Europe and after the Spanish American wars of independence in the Americas. The institution survived as part of the Roman Curia, but in 1904 was given the new name of "Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office". In 1965 it became the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition

And this teaches the science of Peace? Or is it *Fear*?

 

[timojin]

Any book that advocates prejudicial messages and sanctions killing in the name of God is by definition not a Book of Peace. It is a Book of Control.
A revealing message may be found in this seemingly innocuous statement from the handbook of the Inquisition (remember that invention by the Teachers of Peace and Piety.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition

And this teaches the science of Peace? Or is it *Fear*?

Thank you I am very familiar with inquisition , crusades , I can My mother was orthodox when sh become a believer ( protestant ) the priest in the village , told her parents to get her out of the house wile havin 2 small kids in winter time. So those things are nothing new for me .
But You have to recognise That the bible have other information beside injustice done human to human . If you label every thing under same view , you are putting yourself un the same cat. Think the gas chambers and torture devices Tanks , bombs , airplanes, Atom bombs, Hydrogen bombs , flame trowers eye. are not designed by peasant farmers , but intellectual engineers and Chemist and physicists.

 

[Write4U]

Thank you I am very familiar with inquisition , crusades , I can My mother was orthodox when sh become a believer ( protestant ) the priest in the village , told her parents to get her out of the house wile havin 2 small kids in winter time. So those things are nothing new for me .
But You have to recognise That the bible have other information beside injustice done *human to human* . If you label every thing under same view , you are putting yourself un the same cat. Think the gas chambers and torture devices Tanks , bombs , airplanes, Atom bombs, Hydrogen bombs , flame trowers eye. are not designed by peasant farmers , but intellectual engineers and Chemist and physicists.

You have missed the point completely. This is not injustice done by *human to human*. This is organized injustice and terrorism done by *church to humans, by divine command".

No one is claiming that humans are perfect. It is religions which claim to be Truth and Perfection. If that *official handbook of God's representatives* is an example of distribution of the good messages contained in the Bible, it is a flawed non-peaceful instrument.

If you want to keep the *good stuff* in the Bible do an edit, and apologize for past sins done unto the people. But religions cannot admit fault, their Divine Status makes them *untouchable*.

 

[timojin]

There something is not explained . Religions organization does not represent me nor I represent any religion. , I read from that book what I consider is good for mankind . I don't have to agree with any church ,temple mosque or any other leaders . The only leader for me is Jesus Christ, and because his teaching he got killed , and his teaching was to be good to honor God and respect your fellow man . So uf the church was carried on murdering , they did not obey thet were not christian .
Lets get back to life.
What is expressed in Genesis 1 it does not have any thing with religion. who ever printed it was great .

 

[Write4U]

There something is not explained . Religions organization does not represent me nor I represent any religion. , I read from that book what I consider is good for mankind . I don't have to agree with any church ,temple mosque or any other leaders . The only leader for me is Jesus Christ, and because his teaching he got killed , and his teaching was to be good to honor God and respect your fellow man . So uf the church was carried on murdering , they did not obey thet were not christian . Lets get back to life.

This does not make you a good Christian, it makes you a good person.

What is expressed in Genesis 1 it does not have any thing with religion. who ever printed it was great .

You may want to reread Genesis, which undoubtedly was written in good faith.
But you will not find factual truth in Genesis.

Even in the abstract (allegory), I have not found a single reason why I should believe those wise men, who were completely ignorant of the properties of the universe, beyond a concept that humans are the culmination of an evolutionary process of increasing Self-awareness, an evolutionary process that started some 14 billion years ago, with the first bio-chemical molecules and self-replicating *strings* of bio-chemical molecules.

The One thing I can agree with in Genesis is the concept (from a subjective personal viewpoint), that "Creation was a Good thing", regardless of the incalculably violent and chaotic Energy which brought forth the condition of spacetime, and the wonders of the Evolutionary process.

And just the awareness that we have the great good fortune to experience life as humans. It is up to the individual.
If I were to rewrite Genesis, I would only need to replace the word *God* with the phrase *Potential Energy*.

Try it, it really works and can be philosophically, even scientifically defended (except for the factual errors).
The Singular difference is that *Potential Energy* is not sentient in and of itself. Creation was NOT intentional, it was a Probability. And I feel humbled by that knowledge, because it also bestows great responsibilities (moral conduct).

 

[exchemist]

I am not attempting to introduce Genesis 1 as a religious book.. Religion for me is about behaviour . In that chapter one . there is a process and it tells the water was hot and tell something about ice formation on the poles, it tells the moon was formed after the vegetation was in place and so on to evolution toward man .

I agree, sort of, with your second sentence, though I think it usually more about an attitude of mind, which should then result in behaviour guided in a certain way. (Of course in practice it often is not, or gets perverted, as many contributors on these threads are keen to point out, with some justice.)