Common origin of life as proof of evolution

The false presupposition is, Actuality is generated by chemical and mechanical processes. All the fuss about evolution is based on that old mistake. According to the logics of the modern quantum physics, Actuality is generated by observation, physical and chemical laws being the objective Math to correlate/organize the actual observed events - analogous to chessboard organizing the chess game, as Feynman said. So, from the Theistic viewpoint, evolution has never actually happened but was pre-calculated in God's great computer, in the Days of Creation.

That poses some serious theological problems. For instance, this means it was God's plan for young children to get mutations that cause lethal cancers, such as leukemia. It is God's plan that bacteria evolve antibiotic resistance and cause painful and lethal infections that we can't stop.

Yeah a real sick MFer.

There is a difference between causing something to happen and allowing nature to run its course. Hypothetically, if God prevented humans from experiencing any bump or bruise, sickness or sin, we would be weaker because of it. Critics will then say that there is no difference between an observer God (hands-off) and no God. So here we are. Pick your belief.

You have always had an issue with the hypothetical God. Perhaps getting stirred up was your destiny.

Just reading what it says in the abrahamic holy books. Have you read them?

Come on, tackle it face on. We're not talking bumps and bruises - we're talking agonising, excruciatingly painful and incurable conditions, forcing the victims into a revolting and unthinkable pit of hellish existence. Bumps and bruises is no way to refer to it.

That is yet another level of morality. I am standing on a sidewalk, and I see two young children playing in their front yard. They throw a ball and it rolls onto the street next to me. They begin running right at me and towards the ball sitting on the street, and at the same time I see a car barreling down the street right at the ball. The car will have no time to stop if the kids run out into the road. What do I do? Do I stop the children from running onto the road just by reaching out and grabbing them, or do I let "nature run its course"? What is the moral thing to do? Do I do nothing and let them get hit by a car because humans need to experience some bumps and bruises?

Utter cr@p, that was his original idea. And it's his ultimate idea.How come it was fine for the Garden of Eden and fine for heaven, but somehow in the only place that actually exists it's not?

Hell was never created for people. Humans only end up in Hell by refusing to accept God through Christ. There would be no good reason not to accept God...unless in so doing you lose your precious freethought independence.I try and imagine what an atheist would think, however. To them, the God whom I imagine exists is as unrealistic as these silly RPG game characters that I see younger people playing. Everyone wants to hold on to our imagination and freethought. In addition, I am told that the God of my imagination is fantasy and that the reality we all share is the only reality there is. I find comfort in rejecting belief in Hell. Apart from all that, I just realized that this is a science forum so perhaps Im not allowed to imagine anything.Im getting tired, though. I have to go to a cardiac specialist on Monday. My EKG reading was abnormal and has an additional tick and a jump in it.

Perhaps I should have been clearer.I'm not talking about the afterlife version of hell - I'm talking about the living hell of pain, disability and despair which incurable conditions force on living human beings.You were saying: I was saying you are not being honest enough. You should be saying: You'd still be making your point, but at least you'd be being more honest about it.

It could be that humans who refuse to accept abiogenesis and evolution are also thrown in Hell. Maybe you should accept these ideas just in case, right?Pascal's Wager isn't that great of an argument. Was Thomas' freewill taken away when Jesus let him touch the wounds on his hands and side? If not, I don't see the harm in asking for the same type of evidence. For all I know, what you claim may be true. However, there's no evidence that it is. I need evidence in order to be convinced. Best wishes, and I hope things turn out well.