Amazing Nature!

is life designed?

"The issue is NOT that life can reproduce and that things like muscles have various functions. The issue is, where did life come from to begin with."

simple answer: self-replicating molecules. these complex structures don't have to spring into being all of a sudden, that's the point, they come gradually and naturally.

"A scientist in a lab has not done it (which would only prove my point that a mind must be behind it)."

this is the logical problem: if proof = disproof, you have a meaningless argument. there's no way it could be untrue by definition.

I think it would matter a great deal HOW they did it in a lab. if it's something that could easily happen on a sterile planet by natural causes, it's different than say a laser-etched copy of an RNA molecule made using a computer, however impressive that may be. remember, the life we have today could be completely different from the molecule it ultimately comes from. perhaps our "ancestors" were silicon life-forms, or simple oceanic salt molecules.

imagine a volcanic vent or subterranian hot springs cavern where minerals and salts are constantly flowing for thousands or millions of years through high-pressure warm water into cool, low-mineral water. the temperature differential would be there on a consistent basis for any sufficiently opportunistic mineral-salt or quartz crystal so inclined, to exploit and make a self-replicating structure that could eventually mutate to form amino acids and life.

criticisms of the urrey-miller experiment (electricity and methane, etc. making amino acids) just show they were possibly barking up the wrong tree, not that abiogenesis of some kind didn't happen. even if the only environment for it to happen is in outer space, such as an icy comet that vaporizes partly then refreezes every year, it could get here by a meteorite. it's also possible that abiogenesis happens easily by several mechanisms, and we simply don't recognise it happening because so much life already exists on earth.

if you take a look at the phenomenally complex geological structures that result from molecules colliding according to natural processes in the earth, you can see how a similarly natural process might result in a "life" molecule. if in looking at the crystals you automatically assume they must have been designed it's kind of hard to reason any further. of course we automatically feel like something as beautiful as a crystal garden must have had a designer, but there are also ugly formations which don't inspire the same reaction of awe. are they less designed?

are all things inherently designed? if you want to think mystically, you can say that all clouds, constellations, snowflakes, and sunsets are all designed and the designer is God. but that makes them no less natural phenomena, which we can analyze, explain, and predict using science. that doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't praise God for them! we simply cannot use God as the simple explanation for anything in science.

using God as an explanation for just *some* things (even wonderful ones like life or humans) would be to diminish His glory as the designer, creator, and redeemer of *all* things, even the unpredictable, ugly, imperfect seeming ones. that's what christianity is really about -- even imperfect people are special and God wants to redeem us and give us purpose.