-Summary of the Above Video-
Scientists say that life was created billions and billions of years ago from some combination of chemicals. So naturally when they say “life” was created in this way, we take it for granted they know what “life” means.
Yet if someone makes a statement but doesn’t understand the meaning of the words in their statement, then what value is there in what they are saying? It’s meaningless.
So the first main problem for the materialist defining life as material in essence is that he doesn’t know what “life” means. There is absolutely no evidence that material scientists even know life is, what to speak of being able to create it in their laboratories.
Some people argue against material scientists’ theory on the origination of life by saying that it’s highly improbable that molecules bouncing around in a certain way would create life. That argument is not correct because if you say something is “highly improbable” you are saying it’s possible.
However since there is absolutely zero evidence that scientists have been able to create life from chemicals in a laboratory, then it’s not actually improbable, it’s impossible. They have all the chemicals in the world, so why have they not been able to create life? There is no evidence that life comes from matter. There’s no question that it’s improbable because there’s no evidence that it’s even possible.
Siddhaswarupananda - founder of Science of Identity Foundation