How did life begin?

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

It is really almost inconceivable to me that someone could be certain that no form of God could exist, just like its absurd to think that no invisible unicorns could possibly be hiding under my bed.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the statement were, that someone is certain that God does exist, just like someone is certain that invisble unicorns exist under their bed.

You feel the same way? I assume you do which is why its a bad analogy. To relate unicorns with God is not reasonable, and lets keep the discussion reasonble please.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think its entirely reasonable. Explain to me why it isn't and I will refrain from using the analogy.

[SitNHit]

Anything is possible, but a God is different then a Unicorn. One is a Godly person, another a Godly animal. Billions dont worship a unicorn, they do worship a God. So if your goal is to discuss with others that dont share your opinion, you might want to use a better analogy, one that might make some sense to one who thinks of a God with a bit more importance and affection then a unicorn.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
Anything is possible, but a God is different then a Unicorn. One is a Godly person, another a Godly animal. Billions dont worship a unicorn, they do worship a God. So if your goal is to discuss with others that dont share your opinion, you might want to use a better analogy, one that might make some sense to one who thinks of a God with a bit more importance and affection then a unicorn.

[/ QUOTE ]

The amount of people who worship the unicorn is irrelevant. Its the unprovable and unverifiable nature of the invisible unicorn that makes the analogy appropriate. The absurdity of the unicorn is just what makes the analogy poignant.

And billions of people don't worship the vast majority of possible Gods either...do you want to dismiss all of them? Do you have any basis for doing so?

[SitNHit]

I will dismiss the importance of all of them accept the Biblical God and his son Jesus Christ. I will do that, and the basis is that there is no written consequence that I know of for not believing in the others. Not that personally it would matter to me if there were, just saying objectivley. So I can dismiss them cause it doesnt matter if they existed or not for us, but it does matter if the Bible is real.

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
Anything is possible, but a God is different then a Unicorn. One is a Godly person, another a Godly animal. Billions dont worship a unicorn, they do worship a God. So if your goal is to discuss with others that dont share your opinion, you might want to use a better analogy, one that might make some sense to one who thinks of a God with a bit more importance and affection then a unicorn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoa. What's your problem with unicorns, dude?

(Of course no real gods have ever been animals, right?)

[SitNHit]

of course Gods evolved from animals, DA!

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
I will dismiss the importance of all of them accept the Biblical God and his son Jesus Christ. I will do that, and the basis is that there is no written consequence that I know of for not believing in the others. Not that personally it would matter to me if there were, just saying objectivley. So I can dismiss them cause it doesnt matter if they existed or not for us, but it does matter if the Bible is real.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong you are sir. I wrote a book just the other day, inspired by Kwahv, the one true God, that wearing pants is guaranteed to send you to hell for eternity.

After all, being written down in a book is all we need to seperate the obviously bogus unverifiable beliefs from the legitimate ones, right? I can ship you a copy, if you'd like, $7.99 S&H.

[SitNHit]

I finally stumped ya. Yippi. You have no answer to that. Your human after all. Lol.

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
Before I start the main part of this post I'd just like to say a little something about where I'm coming from. I have been lurking this forum for a little while now and have made a couple of posts but this is my first post of any significant content.

I am a Christian and am currently an engineering student in Sheffield, England. I would like to think that in general I'm a logical person and up to now I have had no major problems with accepting Christianity as logical. There are certain aspects that I'm unsure of but there have been other things I have experienced/seen happen that have made it seem illogical not to believe.

Anyway, enough about me and onto what I wanted to post about. I'm obviously familiar with the theory of evolution and how it postures that life evolved from single celled organisms and eventually led to what we have now (this is an area I am actually slightly unsure of what I think/believe but for now I'd rather it wasn't too involved in this thread). What I don't know so much about is an atheist viewpoint on how the very first life form was created.

From what I have read (admittedly a lot of biased material, but all with seemingly strong references) it seems that the chance of life occuring spontaneously is all but zero. There is the overused analogy of it being as likely as a tornado blowing through a junkyard and assembling a boeing 747 but from what I know that doesn't seem absurd. Life is immensely complex, far more so than a 747, requiring as many as 200 proteins each made up of a string of 100+ amino acids for even the simplest form of life.

What then is the atheist explanation for life on Earth? The only theory I've ever heard is panspermia which frankly seems slightly off the wall and in any case just shifts the problem to somewhere else in the universe. If you could give me any further insight as to current theories and any evidence for them that would be greatly appreciated.

[/ QUOTE ]Life begining is simple compared to matter/time/space begining. Life began when matter formed into structures that replicated, simple, right? Why is there matter to form into replicating structures, no idea. Why did matter form into structures that replicated, because it was possible for matter to do so.

If you are a non literalist xtian you probably want to cheer on the carins-smith(sp) model. Silicon was the replication model that life arrived from. Silicon is founf heavily in dirt.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
I finally stumped ya. Yippi. You have no answer to that. Your human after all. Lol.

[/ QUOTE ]

To what? Did I miss something? Restate your question and I will take a crack at what is bound to be a real stumper.