Abiogenesis

tularcitas: At some point, it appears that scientists will be able to create life in a test tube from inert organic matter. Will this impact religion? If humans create life from non-living material, isn't that what, up to this point, has only been under the aegis of God?

Cenababy: Humans create life through living tissue and living sperm. Scientists will try to do the same? Will they fail? And what will be the outcome? Dangerous if you ask me

tularcitas: Yes..perhaps so....but how will religions react to this if it is successful?...we are talking about creating life from non living organic chemicals....if we are able to do what until now some believe only God was able to do, would that make us God, in a sense?

tularcitas: And conversely, if we are able to make humans live as long as they want...to stop death...isn't that something that will take away one of the major tenets of many religions?....promise of an after life?

Cenababy: I don't think we'll ever be able to make humans live longer than they're supposed to, and I doubt they'll be able to create human beings without the egg and the sperm I just don't see that happening that's not how creation is done. Many years ago they did clone a goat I believe it was a goat that didn't turn out exactly how they had planned either and I believe the animal ended up dying it's just a very dangerous thing for people to try to do in my opinion

Cenababy: As far as faith in God is concerned I don't think it'll make any difference basically because our faith in God is just not merely us being human beings it's a faith in him and knowing that he is The Grand Design

FistOfStone: Great questions tular! I can't answer how such things might impact the actual practice and self-understanding of religious people and institutions, but i would like to suggest an alternative interpretation of "playing God," as it used to be commonly put, or what you are calling "doing what, up to this point, has only been under the aegis of God." We tend to assume that calling the creation of life or the indefinite extension of life "playing God" is a description of the causal relationship between creator and created - as we might fashion life and immortality, so did (and does) God.

This seems to suggest that if there is no personal cause of life - if we don't think that life can be traced back to some personal entity as its cause - then creating life out of matter or extending it indefinitely is not impious, it does not have any dubious motives. That leaves only a utilitarian discussion of its risks and benefits to be had, a discussion which may end up concluding that the benefits are worth the risk.

I want to say that regardless of the causal origin of organic life as we know it, the abiogeneticists and the transhumanists are doing something that is an expression of a certain zeitgeist, a certain way of living and assessing life. This zeitgeist sees the physical universe as a mere collection of raw materials standing ready for our use in the project of maximizing our happiness and dominating reality itself. This zeitgeist, I want to say, has a haughty, self-absorbed, anthropocentric quality - it seems to assume that we human beings are the center of the universe, and the "givens" of life are just "rules made to be broken." This quality is best described by the phrase "playing God," not in the sense of one *cause* usurping the dominion of another, but rather that "playing God" is just a better (but roughly equivalent) version of "acting as though human beings are the center of the universe." We might also call it "excessive hubris." This quality inheres in these transhumanist and abiogenetic projects regardless of where life originally comes from in an empirically causal sense.

tularcitas: Thank you both for these replies!

Cenababy: Yay !

Zanjan: What science does has no impact on religion. It's the other way around, particularly in professional matters. Ethical standards are formulated from spiritual values, which are based on divine laws. If there's a contrast in values, there's a clash between people.

God intended for us to seek knowledge and unravel mysteries - this brings us happiness, joy, and drives us towards excellence. However, anything can be taken to the extreme. A tool intended for good can be turned into a weapon.

Being aware of that, God measures and limits the knowledge He delivers to us. We can't go beyond this. Meanwhile, religious spirituality is the great moderator - it permits us to push the envelope but prevents mankind from going over the edge.

Zanjan: We fancy ourselves as mini-creators when we grow a garden. Yet we know we didn't create the seed. Sun, micro-nutrients, and water deserve more credit than we do because all we did was move things around.

Like the fetus in the womb, we didn't give life, we facilitated it. So it will be in future. All enterprises need funding - the voice of the people will determine whether an experiment continues or not. As such, I thank God for the veils and walls He erected for our own good - we are still far from being a responsible, fully civilized species.

Cenababy: Zan, yes.

Crash: "What science does has no impact on religion"


Once again zan you are demonstrably incorrect.


Science impacts EVERYTHING .....and it impacts religion THE MOST!!! lol saying it doesn't just illustrates that you are either uneducated, illiterate or in some SUPER denial. haha

I could make this a very long post.....however I'll make it short and sweet.

The sun used to be worshiped as a god.....Science destroyed that.

Sickness used to be thought to come from evil spirits......Science destroyed that.

Human Sacrifice was thought to control the weather.......Science destroyed that.

Science has narrowed the field of what religion "had the answers for" immensely !!!

I could go on and on and on!!!

So to say science doesn't impact religion is simply a fallacious and ridiculous statement. Absolutely and completely false.


As always ...good talk.

Zanjan: Crash, just save yourself and the rest of us some time; from now on just type NO, NO, NO!

That's as enlightening as your longer posts have been.

By the way, culture is NOT the same thing as religion. NO, NO, NO!

Crash: Once again zan......as per usual....a non rebuttal .....I proved you wrong ...and you have nothing. LOL I would say i'm surprised....but I'm not. haha

Zanjan: NOT, NOT, ..........and NOT.

Crash: Oh ...PLEASE continue ...lol...it's hilarious to see you embarrass yourself ...haha

Zanjan: Never, Never, Never!

Crash: Notice everyone .... How...A.) Zan is embarrassing herself.... B.) Going off the rails..as she does when proved wrong and backed into a logical corner...and C.) Still has no rebuttal .... LOL

But seriously though zan ...keep going this is super funny.

Cenababy: And as usual crash is here to ruinnnnn the dayyyyyyy

Crash: And as usual ...Cena is here to spout nonsense and ignore logic and facts...lol

tularcitas: Okay...some call it the miracle of life.....if scientists are able to create a one-celled self replicating life form from a soup of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen have those scientists them performed a miracle?

tularcitas: What constitutes a miracle? Seems like that is about as miraculous as one can get.

Michael_Demiguros: Certainly call into question what they teach you in sunday school. I wonder how the religious people would find a Justification for that. It would definitely be interesting to see.

Zanjan: ".if scientists are able to create a one-celled self replicating life form"

The question is, HAVE they? I think not. If they did create a life form out of the ingredients you listed, that would be magic, not a miracle.