A possible God's possible purpose and nature (The nature of a \'Creator\')

by David Turell @, Saturday, January 15, 2022, 19:53 (318 days ago) @ dhw
edited by David Turell, Saturday, January 15, 2022, 20:00

Since we continue to battle about God's personality and His purposes, I've reopened this discussion.

My position, based what reality contains, assuming God created it, is as follows: God is all-powerful, all-knowing, sees the future as it will turn out, and is very purposeful in His actions to achieve His desired goals. I cannot see Him as otherwise considering how much Complexity He created before He got around to creating a living system. He obviously prefers to create by evolving His objects, as history shows.

In evolution He works stepwise, as the mechanism of photosynthesis demonstrates. That came first and all the complex organisms followed. The stepwise arrangement may or may not cover the other aspects of environment. Stepwise biochemistry is obvious. But Chixculub is His doing or accidental, as there is no clear evidence. The basic chemistry started with many required mechanisms and reactions in the startup bacteria and were added to as complexity of life forms increased. That God was very concerned about problems, He saw oxygen as the best fuel burner for life, but He understood its dangers. It can severely damage if uncontrolled.

Not surprisingly, we are supplied with many antioxident mechanisms and chemicals in God's designs. The editing systems follow the same thought patterns, which dhw ignores and disparages. There are many trillions of reactions per second in living forms, with a tiny error level, when the editing fails, a miniscule failure rate in the only system God could design to create life. The God I describe would fully understand His position ion the possibilities. The biochemistry of life works in a required soupy state where molecules are free to react improperly. It cannot be at the required high speed without molecules freedom of reaction. All biochemists know this.

The origin of life requires highly technical reactions, not possible without guidance. Read James Tour's current article to see that. I apologize in advance for the technical jargon:

https://inference-review.com/article/much-ado-about-nothing

The article was presented here previously. If God handled all of these intricacies, and we have life, He knew exactly what He was doing.

"These notions and the RNA world hypothesis itself have proven remarkably durable, even though they fail to account for the prebiotic chemical difficulties involving in creating a homochiral ribonucleoside; the thermal instability of RNA, which decomposes rapidly, even at 0°C; the fact that even specifically designed and primed RNAs have never been shown to duplicate more than 7% of themselves, and that those segments were found to be too short to serve as new templates; the difficulties involved in separating RNA-RNA duplexes, which impede further reactions; the role played by non-canonical 2′,5′-linkages that are routinely obtained in 20–80% yields, retard subsequent templated utility, and play no part in translation and transcription.

"The new RDNA world hypothesis only resolves one of these issues: the RNA-RNA sticky-duplex problem. For all these reasons, it is very difficult to accept the claims being made about the significance of this new research. As it stands, the prospects for the RDNA world hypothesis appear bleak."

We are here. Adler and I see the role of God very clearly. So should all clear thinking folks.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum