The Beginning of Life

[Vort]

There may be differences between early Earth and early Mars to take into account while coming up with a hypothesis or experiment. It doesn't answer the fundamental questions, as you say, but it is still worthwhile to consider the starting conditions you are proposing life began in. In full disclosure I'm not overly familiar with the proposal, I'd have to read up on the literature to know what their thought process is and why they think Mars is a better candidate than Earth.

Yeah, I agree, but...I still think it begs the question.

The inferred conditions of very early Earth were so utterly alien to how things are today that you could visualize (and justify) just about any scenario. So given our knowledge (or lack thereof) of ancient Earth, I just don't see that it makes much difference at this point whether you want to say that abiogenesis occurred here or on Mars, or for that matter anywhere else. If you're claiming abiogenesis, you need to demonstrate any situation where it might occur, then go looking for where that situation might come up and how resultant life might get spread through space and time. The Martian Origin of Life idea is interesting and all that, but I'm not seeing what scientific conundrums it solves.

[Traveler]

The book of Genesis is written many years after Noah. In other words, Noah was in Paradise at the time those words were written. The words do not say "in this life". Just keep that in mind, but even then, you know this, the word "perfect" has several meanings explained by the guide to the scriptures as "Complete, whole, and fully developed; totally righteous. Perfect can also mean without sin or evil. Only Christ was totally perfect. True followers of Christ may become perfect through his grace and atonement." The footnote in the scriptures says "complete, whole, having integrity" as the Hebrew translation. Whereas the footnote in Matthew says "complete, finished, fully developed." If you think a man can become "finished" and "fully developed" in this life then I am not sure what the resurrection is for.

My opinion correlates with Bruce R. McConkie's. I am not sure why it needs more than a whole paragraph of clarification for you, that was given. In summary it states that the trajectory of life is set when we depart this life. If we live righteously we will continue onto the pathway towards perfection. "Being perfect" entails setting our trajectory in that direction so it can continue the same when we depart this life. The "trajectory" judged to be perfect is dependent on a lot of factors that only God can judge, thus it is based in a certain set of circumstances or laws given for that time, i.e- generation. If one leaves this life pointed towards the Celestial Kingdom based in the laws given for that generation then they would be called "perfect" in their generation. Why is that so hard to comprehend?

I like your statement "If we live righteously we will continue onto the pathway towards perfection." But I think it would be more accurate to say, "If we live righteously we walk the pathway of perfection."

I believe that perfection is an learned or acquired characteristic. I intended, by asking questions to see if you would move towards the concept that divine perfection a learned.

I think you almost got there with this statement, "Perfect can also mean without sin or evil. Only Christ was totally perfect. True followers of Christ may become perfect through his grace and atonement." I do not know the difference between "perfect" and "totally perfect. I believe that we are free of sin through repentance - not maybe.

the Traveler

[Traveler]

Yeah, I agree, but...I still think it begs the question.

The inferred conditions of very early Earth were so utterly alien to how things are today that you could visualize (and justify) just about any scenario. So given our knowledge (or lack thereof) of ancient Earth, I just don't see that it makes much difference at this point whether you want to say that abiogenesis occurred here or on Mars, or for that matter anywhere else. If you're claiming abiogenesis, you need to demonstrate any situation where it might occur, then go looking for where that situation might come up and how resultant life might get spread through space and time. The Martian Origin of Life idea is interesting and all that, but I'm not seeing what scientific conundrums it solves.

How do you understand Genesis and the idea that life existed before the sun and moon gave "light"?

The Traveler

[Vort]

How do you understand Genesis and the idea that life existed before the sun and moon gave "light"?

The Traveler

I do not believe that the Genesis account has anything at all to do with the development of life on this planet. I believe that Genesis explains the place of Man in God's creation, not the mechanics of how God accomplished that creation.