Isn't Life from non-life and evolution like a HOUSE built on SAND in this Bible verse ?

This principle also applies on a personal level. Concluding his famous Sermon on the Mount, Jesus Christ said: “Everyone that hears these sayings of mine and does them will be likened to a discreet man, who built his house upon the rock-mass. And the rain poured down and the floods came and the winds blew and lashed against that house, but it did not cave in, for it had been founded upon the rock-mass. Furthermore, everyone hearing these sayings of mine and not doing them will be likened to a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand. And the rain poured down and the floods came and the winds blew and struck against that house and it caved in, and its collapse was great.”—Matthew 7:24-27.

EVOLUTION-A HOUSE BUILT ON SAND ?

11 Answers

Relevance
  • 7 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    @ Fitz: You say, "it's a natural process, and we're half way there in figuring it out." "Half way"? That's a bit like saying, we've found an inhabitable planet just 30 light years way, and so we're half way to inhabiting it. There is still the "small" matter of getting a craft to convey occupants the 284,018,400,000,000 kilometers to get there, which even traveling at 1,000,000 kph would mean you would have to live the 3,240 years it would take just to reach it. Food? Fuel? Forget it.

    A science daily.com report of Jan 10, 2009 shows that, under contrived experimental conditions, Dr Joyce and his associates did, apparently, achieve self-replicating RNA enzyme systems. The report does, however, include this observation: "But the main value of the work, according to Joyce, is at the basic research level. "What we've found could be relevant to how life begins, at that key moment when Darwinian evolution starts." He is quick to point out that, while the self-replicating RNA enzyme systems share certain characteristics of life, they are not themselves a form of life."

    So if anyone believes that this somehow gives credence to evolutionary theory, then you must be able to show where this process happened in some primordial organic soup where new life forms actually started from scratch, [abiogenesis] from non-living elements at the molecular level forming into amino acids, proteins, RNA and DNA, the building blocks of life in all living things. If it happened then, why isn't it still? To say "we're half way there in figuring it out" is not correct, as Dr Joyce would have to admit. The gulf between non-living things and living things is vast.

    To illustrate the point, consider protein molecules. They can be made from as few as 50 to as many as several thousand amino acids bound together in a highly specific order. The average functional protein in a “simple” cell contains 200 amino acids. Even in those cells, there are thousands of different types of proteins. The probability that just one protein containing only 100 amino acids could ever randomly form on earth has been calculated to be about one chance in a million billion.

    One chance in 1,000,000,000,000,000? Just one protein, amongst the thousands of different types of proteins?

    Researcher Hubert P. Yockey, who supports the teaching of evolution, goes further. He says: “It is impossible that the origin of life was proteins first. RNA is required to make proteins, yet proteins are involved in the production of RNA. What if, despite the extremely small odds, both proteins and RNA molecules did appear by chance in the same place at the same time? How likely would it

    be for them to cooperate to form a self-replicating, self-sustaining type of life?

    “The probability of this happening by chance (given a random mixture of proteins and RNA) seems astronomically low,” says Dr. Carol Cleland, a member of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Astrobiology Institute. “Yet,” she continues, “most researchers seem to assume that if they can make sense of the independent production of proteins and RNA under natural primordial conditions, the coordination will somehow take care of itself.”

    Q & A Man, as you suggest, the 'House of Evolution' is one built on sand; full of termites, ready to crumble.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 7 years ago

    One day people will know that evolution was just an idea of a man that came to nothing. People are really gullible and would rather believe the lie than find the truth. Proverbs 6:16-19 The religious leaders from the 1st century till today have launched forth lies that people believe. Matthew 26:59 Meantime the chief priests and the entire San'he-dren were looking for false witness against Jesus in order to put him to death, ..... Do you know where the term "trinity" came from? Do you know where the term "hell" came from? The righteous man Job actually prayed to go to "hell" to be protected in the King James translation of the Bible. Where did the Bible translators come up with translating God's personal name Jehovah as "LORD" or some other title instead of putting God's name where the Tetragrammaton is in the Hebrew Scriptures some 6,000 times? Why not find the truth to all your most perplexing questions by means of a FREE in home Bible study, even at your convenience? Go to www.jw.org. to request it or talk to one of Jehovah's Witnesses in your neighborhood. I really appreciate your question because good questions are few on this site. Thank you very much

    Source(s): The Bible
    • Login to reply the answers
  • Ashnod
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    No. It is clear that life began at some point, since we understand very clearly how the planet Earth formed from the sun's stellar accretion disk. The only question that remains, then, is how -- and unless we're willing to assume it happened by magic (which is both entirely unsupported and patently absurd), then it is reasonable to assert that natural processes were at work. Given that we have begun to replicate those natural processes in a laboratory setting, it seems equally reasonable to state that we have a fairly good grasp on exactly what those processes were.

    If we were to instead claim that some supernatural being created life out of nothing, THAT would be your "house built on sand."

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Fitz
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    No, it's a natural process, and we're half way there in figuring it out. I do think it's something that requires a lot of caution, but it's not a scientific impossibility at all.

    We've worked out in a lab how to take inorganic material, and turn it into organic material (RNA) which are the building blocks of life. We just haven't worked out the recipe of how to turn that organic material (RNA) into life (DNA).

    We're still in the infancy of that science though. Our problem (modern society) is that we're all into instant gratification (I know I'm guilty of it). It's unreasonable of us to think that scientific breakthroughs are going to happen in our life time. I hope it does ... but it probably won't.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Tyvern
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    Quid Pro Quo.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 7 years ago

    Right, because those are the same thing.

    You seriously believe that an obtuse parable from a Bronze Age book of mythology compares with a hundred years of scientific experimentation and observation?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    I suggest you to watch these famous debates please

    The Purpose of Life by ex british atheist Adam Deen

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DL-X3unx8Wo

    Youtube thumbnail

    God : Delusion or Truth (by british converts to Islam Green and Hamza):

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMby49k7zCU

    Youtube thumbnail

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 7 years ago

    The outward misrepresentation of evolution by religious nuts is only eclipsed by their internal misunderstanding of it.

    Sad really.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Yes & the more they dig trying to explain it the more they undermine the foundations.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 7 years ago

    Nope..

    But building a religion based on an ancient book with 'faith, beliefs and unfounded claims' is...

    IMHO

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.