[betty boop]

Since some would argue, as you have, that the common building blocks suggest a deeper common origin, I would offer that the huge ability gap argues eloquently for purpose. Randomness, you say, can’t account for the similarities. Likewise, randomness or accident does not account for the mammoth capability/potential gap. Both argue for a common Designer.

Oh, I so agree, dear padre!

I have long believed that there is a Common Ancestor: God Himself. :^)

A/K/A the Common Designer.

This being the case, we are speaking of intelligence and purpose as the ground of Nature itself, its Logos. The universe is not accidental; it is created, and it is structured. And Christians and Jews believe that creation is on-going.

Thank you so very much, dear xzins, for your outstanding essay/post!

[wmfights]

This being the case, we are speaking of intelligence and purpose as the ground of Nature itself, its Logos. The universe is not accidental; it is created, and it is structured.

BB thank you for the ping.

FWIW, not being the greatest scientific mind I try to break discussions down to the simplest point possible. In this case, the argument for or against a designer of nature, it seems the question is how did inorganic matter become organic and then self replicating. The deeper question of course is where did the matter come from. For me the answer is obvious.

However, I have a good friend who is in charge of the biology department at a prestigious medical school. He runs the research dept and teaches medical students. He will agree there is no explanation for how inorganic matter became organic and then self replicating, but continues to deny there was a designer that caused it.