Conflicting statements in the bible

[A_Nony_Mouse]

To repeat. There is nothing in living matter that is in nonliving matter. Where else could living matter come from other than non-living matter?

That in no way proves that living matter can naturally arise from non-living matter, there’s nothing in the works of Shakespeare that cannot be found in Nature (ink and paper), but those works didn’t spontaneously generate.

But there was and is NOTHING ELSE but inanimate matter. Again WHAT ELSE could it have come from?

Why is there nothing in life that indicates a creative mind?

DNA indicates a creative mind; it’s the most sophisticated message encoding system we’ve ever observed; it blows the doors off of binary.

I was hoping you would not only say that but describe how to quantify, i.e. measure, this creative component. Please do that. Although it is amusing to call it sophisticated it is by definition imperfect and does not produce perfect copies while computer systems do. It is a noisy method for error prone information transmission. What is creative about creating a sloppy system that cannot faithfully transmit data?

Before Pasteur people were seeing life come from non-life all the time. Maggots spontaneously arose from shit for example. You folks were completely satisfied with abiogenesis from observation until Pasteur showed otherwise. Why the sudden change of heart?

I am not that old. You’re the one who is still arguing for spontaneous generation even though it was disproven hundreds of years ago (more so by Redi than Pasteur), not me. Christians have always been opposed to the notion of spontaneous generation (which was a Greek teaching) because Genesis teaches that after creation week life comes from life, all animals reproducing after their kind.

How could Christians have been against what they saw with their own eyes, maggots appearing from shit?

Francesco is credited with being the first to challenge the common christian belief in the origin of maggots but he got no respect in his own lifetime. And of course he published without contradicting the Christian idea for fear of the stake. The idea was never adopted by Christians. Thus it WAS the Christian belief until Pasteur.

...

On ancient earth tens to hundreds of quintillions of amino acid molecules or even more than that interacting many times per second for a hundred million years or more and it only has to produce a self-replicating grouping once for life to start.

How do you know how many amino acids were on the ancient Earth?
[/quote]

They produce so easily and commonly whenever the needed atoms are around that they are found in clouds in deep space and in meteorites. Besides that would only be a couple whales worth by mass. Hardly none at all spread throughout the oceans.

---

Cool, I guess that's another example of the Bible being full of shit. Thanks!

Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

God is not a natural process, please try to pay attention.

But mouth to mouth breathing does not create life. Not that your god has lungs to breath with these days but he did way back when. When did it lose its lungs?