Creating New Form of Life

[little_monkey]

Originally Posted by rocketman

Yes, I was working on the IF factor. You see, IF humans can create life, it does not automatically follow that life originated on this planet according to natural laws. In fact, it's a completely different line of investigation compared with testing to see if life can start on it's own.

The answer to your original question "What are the implications of this new discovery/technology on CREATIONISM?" is: Little or none.

Sorry I totally disagree. If life can be demonstrated that it does follow natural laws, then putting God as the creator of life is superfluous. It's like I need God to keep the Earth orbiting around the sun. The law of gravity makes that idea laughable.

[Heneni]

Originally Posted by little_monkey

Sorry I totally disagree. If life can be demonstrated that it does follow natural laws, then putting God as the creator of life is superfluous. It's like I need God to keep the Earth orbiting around the sun. The law of gravity makes that idea laughable.

Gravity is caused by spinning....stuff dont just start spinning all by themselves.

[Willamena]

Originally Posted by little_monkey

Sorry I totally disagree. If life can be demonstrated that it does follow natural laws, then putting God as the creator of life is superfluous. It's like I need God to keep the Earth orbiting around the sun. The law of gravity makes that idea laughable.

I think you are comparing two things that in my opinion are not usefully comparable: the natural law, and a Creator. A natural law is a description we made of a particular phenomenon we observed in the world. It has no abilities, it has no power to create; it's just described. Magnetism, for instance, as a "natural law" is our description of the polarized electrical fields we observe that attract and repell.

What power does a description have to create the thing it describes?

[little_monkey]

Originally Posted by Willamena

I think you are comparing two things that in my opinion are not usefully comparable: the natural law, and a Creator. A natural law is a description we made of a particular phenomenon we observed in the world. It has no abilities, it has no power to create; it's just described. Magnetism, for instance, as a "natural law" is our description of the polarized electrical fields we observe that attract and repell.

What power does a description have to create the thing it describes?

As you aptly say, a law describes. In that context, this law would describe how life arose from inert matter. Where is the need then for the intervention of a Creator?

[little_monkey]

Originally Posted by Heneni

Gravity is caused by spinning....stuff dont just start spinning all by themselves.

Spinning produces centrifugal forces, not gravity.

[Heneni]

Originally Posted by little_monkey

spinning produces centrifugal forces, not gravity.

ha ha ha ha.....lol!!!!!

[Willamena]

Originally Posted by little_monkey

As you aptly say, a law describes. In that context, this law would describe how life arose from inert matter. Where is the need then for the intervention of a Creator?

Isn't that obvious? From whence did the inert matter arise? We could someday describe that based on another substance, but then where does that substance arise?

[little_monkey]

Originally Posted by Willamena

Isn't that obvious? From whence did the inert matter arise? We could someday describe that based on another substance, but then where does that substance arise?

With your reasoning, you're going to end up with a first cause. And that leads to infinite regression -- what's before the first cause, etc. which is another futile investigation as it leads to no conclusion.