life on earth is a virgin birth

7 views
Skip to first unread message

Timothy Sutter

unread,
Mar 29, 2010, 6:25:26 PM3/29/10
to
what you may want to ask anyone
who says that 'virgin birth'
is a 'miracle' is;

are you insisting that
'miracles' do -not- happen?

and then consider material life itself;

there is insufficient physical data to support
the notion that any living tissue will rise from
the earthly surroundings by random collisions of
'non-living' molecules or that -algorithms- will
simply write themselves into existence from the
earthly surroundings under their own volition.

On the contrary a wealth of observation supports
the very opposite notion that Life begats Life
and that DNA is the template for its own replication.

that is, 'we' observe that Life springs
from that which is already alive, number one.

and, that -algorithms- never write
themselves in to existence, number two.

-algorithms- arise from the purposeful
assembly of instruction sets
by an outside agency.

the central dogma of molecular biology would state;

DNA --> RNA --> Protein

and never;

RNA --> Protein --> DNA

nor

Protein --> RNA --> DNA

and the central dogma of genetics would say;

"DNA is the template for its own replication"

DNA, here, is our -algorithm- and we observe,
essentially, that DNA is a primary necessity
for the production of DNA and this has never
been observed to be violated in any manner.

and so, proposing the idea that living tissue
manufactured itself from inert chemical materials
leaves us with a quandary that a purposed phenomenon
like an algorithm, wrote itself into existance
in a set of freakish accidents.

this is contrary to all observation and must,
therefore, be discarded as a self evident falsehood.

now, you -should- begin to see *exactly* why any
proposed theories of 'abiogenesis' are based
on self evident falsehood.

it steamrolls overtop of physical observation and
overwrites it with some simplistic metaphysical lie
gleaned from the entrails of an owl.

as far as physical observation is concerned,
a purposeful Creative Event is exactly necessary.

and this is no accident.

can be classified as "miraculous" even.

certainly, there's more to
a living creature that just DNA.

but, as far as proteins which are -not- alive
following some non-demonstrable mechanism
that fits together a self duplicating and
living organism and then shuts off and
is never seen again, there is not any sort
of viable explanation for such an
impracticable possibility.

the trouble with this sort of consideration
is that it suggests that natural forces
provide the onus for a living cell to
deliver its own functionality before
-it- is there to provide the onus for itself.

that is to say;

natural forces -cause- the components of a
living cell, gathered up from whatever source,
to behave as if they were part of a working
device -before- that device is working

and this phantom mechanistic device carries
out the purpose of bringing the actual device
into being.

it basically cedes a living
-purpose- to an inanimate nature.

it is as if the living cell were
operating without being a living
cell -to produce- a living cell

whereupon, this mechanism
disappears into oblivion,

and the living cell procedes to
continue producing living cells.

that is, the living cell uses proteins
and the like to reproduce DNA et al

but in this very special case,

natural forces did the work of the mechanism
-without- any sort of encoded instructions.

instructions the cell now receives
from the living cell mechanism.

this demands that -no- mechanism has brought
a self promulgating mechanism, in to existance,

where the functions of a cell are carried out
by no cell -until- the actual cell is
there to carry it out.

nothing like this is observed.

it requires belief -against- factual
reality to support such a hokum.

see what i mean?

you have -no- mechanism bringing
a self perpetuating mechanism
in to existance.

and that should be much more puzzling
than any chicken/egg difficulties.

you have the functions of a
cell being carried out by no cell,
-until- the actual cell is
there to carry it out.

nothing like this is observed.


we just say something like;

"the power of will in words is alive"

the design personality of the Creator
turned ideas into reality by a Power
contained in the Creator's declarations.

and materials aligned themselves around
and about those 'powerful' declarations.

and we -have- observed
things -exactly- like this.

now, if we claimed that God was entirely
beyond our understanding, and "unknowable"
-then- we should speak no further,

however, we do not speak of a "God" who is
beyond all understanding and unknowable
but of a Creator who -does- present
God for inspection.

a God we -can- come to know and understand.

we simply maintain that much personal
understanding of the Creator must
be presented -by- that same Creator.

we don't abstract God -from- natural reality

we learn of God from God in much the
same way as we learn of each other
from each other and learn of stones
and flowers from stones and flowers.

the design personality of the Creator
caused materials to align themselves
around a template of conscious purpose,
by a Power contained in the Creator's
own demonstrative declarations.

the Creator molded space in to
a template and the materials aligned
themselves about this template.

theories of 'abiogenesis' would demand
a similar unseen template structure to
exist and operate and would be forced
to cede a conscious -purpose- to an
inanimate nature.

we know the consciously purposeful designer.

this is no mystery to us

and yet, it will forever remain a mystery
to anyone who would make attempts at ceding
conscious purpose to inanimate materials.


no statements in favor of such an outlandish
proposal as inert chemical materials initiating their
own advance towards structures that actually support
living processes because there is no statement that
will possibly stand in support of a conscious purpose
existing in an inanimate material nature.

"conscious purpose"

this is the fundamental idea that
you will never be able to reconcile
with your god-less mythology.

"conscious purpose" is required to initiate genesis

"conscious purpose" is not an attribute
of inanimate material and natural forcework.

"conscious purpose" is an attribute
of Personality and Living Being.

these are not two equally viable prospects.

conscious purpose -is- a Living Personal Being.

we know God.

and life itself is miraculous, not because
we do -not- understand it, but because
we -do- understand it.

assume A

A implies B

B proves A


now, it's 'ok' to assume an 'A'

and to suggest that an "A" implies a "B"

but, when one uses "B" to
then say that "A" is 'true'

one falls headlong into
an invalid reality.


if you assume that there is no directing
influence which is not composed of the
98 elements, gravity and electromagnetism,

you may imply that life arose on
earth with zero directing influence.

what you should not be found doing is;

-then- suggesting that life did, in fact,
arise without an outside directing influence
and therefore that there -is- no outside
directing influence.


someone somewhere would call this;

"assuming the conclusion"


--
http://timothysutter.usafreespace.com/

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages