Why Does Biological, Organic Life Exist in a Universe that is Inorganic ?

originally posted by: Xtrozero
So you do not want to say whether the universe started 6000 years ago or 14.5 billion. You also do not want to say whether everything is predetermined or not. OK...

I answered your question "do you believe everything started 6000 years ago?" with "no". Short and sweet.

As to your new 'question', I do not believe everything is predetermined.

Both teachings are popular in various sections of Christendom, the counterfeit version of Christianity that was prophecied in the Bible (a.k.a. the great apostasy).

The Great Apostasy Develops

...

For over 60 years, the apostles had ‘acted as a restraint,’ endeavoring to hold back the tide of apostasy. (2 Thess. 2:7; compare 2 John 9, 10.) But as the Christian congregation was about to enter the second century, the last surviving apostle, John, died, about 100 C.E. The apostasy that had slowly begun to creep into the congregation was now ready to burst forth unrestrained, with devastating organizational and doctrinal repercussions.

Clergy and Laity

“All you are brothers,” Jesus had said to his disciples. “Your Leader is one, the Christ.” (Matt. 23:8, 10) So there was no clergy class within Christian congregations of the first century. As spirit-anointed brothers of Christ, all the early Christians had the prospect of being heavenly priests with Christ. (1 Pet. 1:3, 4; 2:5, 9) As to organization, each congregation was supervised by a body of overseers, or spiritual elders.* All the elders had equal authority, and not one of them was authorized to ‘lord it over’ the flock in their care. (Acts 20:17; Phil. 1:1; 1 Pet. 5:2, 3) However, as the apostasy unfolded, things began to change—quickly.

...

Are Our Lives Predestined? (Awake!—1983)

...

The Origin and Development of Predestination

In ancient times people believed that their lives could be guided by the stars. This practice, according to the Encyclopædia Britannica, was “first categorized and cataloged in ancient Mesopotamia.” In time “Babylonian diviners began​—for the purpose of predicting the course of an individual’s life—​to utilize some planetary omens.” (Italics ours) Thus the basis for a later belief was laid.

From Babylon such thinking spread and developed in other parts of the earth. It had penetrated Jewish religious thought before the advent of Christianity. The first-century historian Josephus tells us that the Pharisees and Sadducees differed over it. “The Pharisees,” he wrote, “ . . . ascribe everything to Fate or to God.” According to the Muslim Koran: “No soul can ever die except by Allah’s leave and at a term appointed.”​—Surah 3:145, Mohammed Pickthall’s translation.

The doctrine of predestination (or, foreordination) was introduced to Christendom by the Roman Catholic “saint” Augustine in the fifth century. It is sometimes called the doctrine of Augustine. The Catholic Church still holds to it, yet not to the extent that Augustine taught. The New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 11, page 713, states: “All things are foreknown and foreordained by God.”​—See also page 714 under the heading “Predestination in Catholic Theology.”

The 16th-century Protestant reformer John Calvin was more explicit, like Augustine. “Predestination,” Calvin defined as “the eternal decree of God, by which he has determined in himself what he would have to become of every individual of mankind. For they are not all created with a similar destiny; but eternal life is foreordained for some, and eternal damnation for others.” According to him, God fixed every individual’s destiny, including yours, “before the first man was created.”

...

What Does the Bible Teach?

It teaches that God created man in his ‘image and likeness.’ (Genesis 1:26) Such “likeness” refers to qualities, not physical appearance. For instance, just as the Creator is free to do as he chooses, he has created man with a free will. Out of regard for this, the Creator does not fix or foreordain the path each individual will take. Does this conflict with God’s ability to see into the future? No! To illustrate: A radio enables one to hear world news in the home, but it must first be switched on and the right station selected at the correct time. Likewise with the Creator’s power of foreknowledge; he makes discretionary and selective use of it, showing regard for the free will he gave to man.

The Bible teaches that coincidences and disasters are often a matter of “time and unforeseen occurrence.” (Ecclesiastes 9:11, 12) For example, consider a busy traffic intersection. An “unforeseen occurrence,” such as failing brakes, at the wrong “time” could cause a fatal accident. The Bible does not teach that God is responsible for or foreordains such things. Realizing their personal responsibility, Christians will endeavor to drive with “soundness of mind,” seeing to it that their vehicles are kept in a roadworthy condition.​—2 Timothy 1:7.

...

originally posted by: whereislogic

As to your new 'question', I do not believe everything is predetermined.

So God sparked life and then let it run as maybe his universal rules and laws allowed it to play out? So are humans here by random actions based on God's universe?

I would turn it around and ask, what is the point of a lifeless universe?

That might be part of the answer.

Here's two compelling factors that oppose each other in terms of the commonality of life...

originally posted by: FlyingFox

Yeast becoming bigger yeast, and yeast coming together in groups is not evolution. The fact that this is what is supposed evidence of evolution shows the straws that need to be grasped. A yeast cell gets bigger over generations and they say it's evolution. Yeast groups together with other yeast cells (as they normally do) and they say its evolution.

...with that logic I lifted some weights and got bigger, then went and hungout with my friends in clusters and therefore I evolved. Yeast becoming bigger over generations or hanging out in clusters is not proof that organisms can evolve into something new. Yeast is still yeast, just as expected since evolving into something new is not possible. Find something where yeast evolves into literally anything besides yeast, maybe a protozoa or something, and then we can call it evidence.

...the fact is there are no such experiments where anything ever evolves into some new kind of thing. E. Coli remains E. Coli, mice remain mice, fruit flies remain fruit flies. They've artificially selected tens countless generations and still these organisms do not show any possibility of changing into something else.

The theory has no observable backing that its possible. It's based on faith

originally posted by: Xtrozero

Who made the intelligent designer...see the problem here?

Note also the behaviour and accompanying attitude described at 29:55 below (context starts at 25:40 for those interested):

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: whereislogic

As to your new 'question', I do not believe everything is predetermined.

So God sparked life and then let it run as maybe his universal rules and laws allowed it to play out? So are humans here by random actions based on God's universe?

No and no. I assume you are familiar with the Genesis account and the expression therein “according to their kinds”?

For a quick recap (also regarding the other subject you brought up regarding the age of the earth):

Creation (Awake!—2014)

Did God create the earth in just six 24-hour days, as some creationists claim?

“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”​—Genesis 1:1.

WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS

God created the universe, including the earth, in the indefinite past​—“in the beginning,” as Genesis 1:1 says. Modern science agrees that the universe had a beginning. A recent scientific model suggests it to be almost 14 billion years old.

The Bible also describes six “days” of creation. However, it does not say that these were 24-hour days. (Genesis 1:31) In fact, the Bible uses the word “day” to refer to various lengths of time. For example, it calls the entire period of creation “the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven.” (Genesis 2:4) Evidently, these “days” of creation lasted many thousands of years.​—Psalm 90:4.

...

Did God use evolution to create life on earth?

“God said: ‘Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds.’”​—Genesis 1:24.

WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS

God did not make life in a simple form and allow it to evolve into more complex forms. Instead, he created basic “kinds” of complex plants and animals, which then reproduced “according to their kinds.” (Genesis 1:11, 21, 24) This process, which continues today, has resulted in the earth being filled with the same “kinds” of life that God originally created.​—Psalm 89:11.

The Bible does not specify how much variation can occur within a kind, as might result when animals within a kind interbreed and adapt to their environment. While some view such adaptations as a form of evolution, no new kind of life is produced. Modern research supports the idea that the basic categories of plants and animals have changed little over vast periods of time.

...

Who made the intelligent designer?

A god without a design would be a god, but not a designer. Once a design is made by a god, that god becomes a designer, so the designer makes itself a designer by making a design.

originally posted by: FlyingFox
Here's two compelling factors that oppose each other in terms of the commonality of life...

These types always conveniently overlook the existence of folding machines in living organisms:

Which came first, the folding machines (made out of precisely folded proteins, that were folded by the folding machines depicted in the video above) or the proteins that need them before they can become biologically functional? (misfolded proteins will aggregate and cause problems in a cell, eventually even trigerring cell death; they are often associated with various diseases; tampering with the production or activity of folding machines, will cause misfolded proteins to aggregate, see picture at 5:19 under that link)

Or could it be that someone who knew what he was doing created them both at the same time (along with the rest of the cellular components, machinery and coding that runs all the cellular operations we observe in all living organisms) for the specific functions and purposes we are observing, according to his plan/design?

originally posted by: whereislogic

Which came first, the folding machines (made out of precisely folded proteins, that were folded by the folding machines depicted in the video above) or the proteins that need them before they can become biologically functional? (misfolded proteins will aggregate and cause problems in a cell, eventually even trigerring cell death; they are often associated with various diseases; tampering with the production or activity of folding machines, will cause misfolded proteins to aggregate, see picture at 5:19 under that link)

Or could it be that someone who knew what he was doing created them both at the same time (along with the rest of the cellular components, machinery and coding that runs all the cellular operations we observe in all living organisms) for the specific functions and purposes we are observing, according to his plan/design?

Exactly. The absolute necessity of folding proteins in even the most basic organisms is enough to prove that life did not emerge by random chance. This alone disproves abiogenesis and evolutionary theory. Even biologists who study these admit:

"An interesting puzzle is how any arbitrary new protein that could be produced by evolution can be handled properly by a (chaperone protein) network that has never seen that protein before."

source

I rarely ever see scientists question the fallibility of evolution, but chaperone proteins are the clear case to show the persistent chicken-or-the-egg dilemma that emerges time and time again.

originally posted by: Xtrozero
Your logic is based purely on faith, and the difference between you and me is I'm open to more answers than you are.

If you were truly open minded, you would see the impossibility of evolution due to the necessity of folding proteins. It was through the unbiased pursuit of science that I returned to believing in God. There's no shame in accepting the evidence that disproves evolution, even though it may be tough to let go of your long-held beliefs. Without folding proteins to properly fold proteins, other proteins cannot properly function. Those very same folding proteins cannot come to exist without other folding proteins to help them fold properly. It is an insurmountable hurdle that could not be achieved by random chance chemical reactions. An intelligent Creator is required.

originally posted by: whereislogic
The Bible does not specify how much variation can occur within a kind, as might result when animals within a kind interbreed and adapt to their environment. While some view such adaptations as a form of evolution, no new kind of life is produced. Modern research supports the idea that the basic categories of plants and animals have changed little over vast periods of time.

The biggest issue here is that God must have brought forth billions of species that have come and gone then, so what happens when we are down to cows, pigs chickens, and humans as the last major animals on the planet? This all seems like a dismal ending of a world with billions of animals and life forms to just dwindle down as each species goes extinct. This also does not speak to the earth having catastrophic events in the past like snowball earth or being hit with life-ending rocks to see life come back, so then I guess God reseeds now and then, and that once again makes little sense.

Lastly, what are vast periods of time? Where were humans a million years ago?

originally posted by: Untun

A god without a design would be a god, but not a designer. Once a design is made by a god, that god becomes a designer, so the designer makes itself a designer by making a design.

what came first...

originally posted by: cooperton
An intelligent Creator is required.

How is this different than back when we had a 1000 Gods with each one a way to explain something we do not know yet?

a reply to: Xtrozero

That's clear for everybody.

originally posted by: Untun

That's clear for everybody.

The fundamentals of what goes on outside of our universe are so 2nd-grade material...LOL

originally posted by: Xtrozero

How is this different than back when we had a 1000 Gods with each one a way to explain something we do not know yet?

Any comment on the chaperone proteins? The powerless god of random chance evolution could not have created this. Or anything useful for that matter.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

The biggest issue here is that God must have brought forth billions of species that have come and gone then, so what happens when we are down to cows, pigs chickens, and humans as the last major animals on the planet? This all seems like a dismal ending of a world with billions of animals and life forms to just dwindle down as each species goes extinct. This also does not speak to the earth having catastrophic events in the past like snowball earth or being hit with life-ending rocks to see life come back, so then I guess God reseeds now and then, and that once again makes little sense.

Ecosystems being ravaged by industrialization and other unnatural processes does not disallow God being the cause of creation. The way of Cain (industrialization) was disfavored from the beginning for this very reason... it reaps death and destruction. We're all born in this Egyptian slave state and just like Moses thousands of years ago, we are yearning for a way out.

originally posted by: cooperton
Any comment on the chaperone proteins? The powerless god of random chance evolution could not have created this. Or anything useful for that matter.

You keep on using the term random chance incorrectly no matter how many times people say you do. A better way to explain it is "no predetermined influences" whether God or not.

Ecosystems being ravaged by industrialization and other unnatural processes does not disallow God being the cause of creation. The way of Cain (industrialization) was disfavored from the beginning for this very reason... it reaps death and destruction. We're all born in this Egyptian slave state and just like Moses thousands of years ago, we are yearning for a way out.

You didn't answer my question. If life appeared in its current form and we are not seeing anything new popping in then what happens as all life ends up extinct? What happened after a few mass die offs too? When did man pop into existence?

a reply to: Xtrozero

Any comment on chaperone proteins?

originally posted by: cooperton
a reply to: Xtrozero

Any comment on chaperone proteins?

We synthesize them all the time in the lab - no magic wand required:

Artificial Molecular Chaperone Systems for Proteins, Nucleic Acids, and Synthetic Molecules
Tomoki Nishimura 1, Kazunari Akiyoshi 1
Affiliations expand
PMID: 32336086 DOI: 10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.0c00133

Abstract
Molecular chaperones play critical roles in biological functions. They are closely involved in the maintenance of cell homeostasis, proper folding of proteins and nucleic acids, and inhibition of irreversible aggregation in denatured proteins. In addition to protein production, molecular chaperone function is widely recognized as important for peptide and protein drug delivery systems. Therefore, much effort has been made in recent decades to develop chaperone-mimetic molecules that have similar structures and biological functions to natural chaperones. These artificial molecular chaperone systems have been demonstrated to facilitate proper protein and nucleic acid folding, in addition to the formation of higher-order structures of synthetic molecules. Furthermore, the functions of these artificial systems show promising clinical applications in drug delivery and biomolecule detection. This topical review focuses on recent advances in the design, construction, characterization, and potential applications of different artificial molecular systems with distinct functional roles, such as the folding of water-soluble and membrane proteins, nucleic acids, and the self-assembly of synthetic molecules. Strategies used in the construction of some artificial molecule chaperone systems for proteins (such as pairs of amphiphilic molecules or self-assembled nanogels) and their applications as biomaterials are described. Specific examples from each design strategy are also highlighted to demonstrate the mechanisms, challenges, and limitations of the different artificial molecular systems. By highlighting the many new developments that have expanded the applications of the artificial chaperones beyond protein folding, this review aims to stimulate further studies on their design and applications.

And how about those magic electrons? Was it this guy?



Failed again. Sorry.

originally posted by: Phantom423

We synthesize them all the time in the lab - no magic wand required:

Artificial Molecular Chaperone Systems for Proteins, Nucleic Acids, and Synthetic Molecules
Tomoki Nishimura 1, Kazunari Akiyoshi 1
Affiliations expand
PMID: 32336086 DOI: 10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.0c00133

Another irrelevant reference from phantom lol. How does this prove that natural processes could form chaperone proteins? It doesn't. It's totally erroneous and you're continuing to prove you can't ascertain or post relevant responses to the dilemma at hand. You still won't admit peptide monomer polymerization is thermodynamically unfavorable in water, despite it being a fundamental part of basic biology.

Typical trash from someone who thinks they're mutant ape progeny.

Let's try again sport... show how chaperones could come to polymerize from amino acid monomers and get folded properly without folding proteins. Who am I kidding... you don't even know how to discuss biology. You're just an inflated balloon of hubris.