DNA
“-Is the reason life exists” — Actually DNA is a building block of life. Not the *creator* of life, as Christians believe God is.

“-Codes for looks and basic behavior” – DNA did not *willfully* *decide* how you look. DNA stores the information and passes it along.

“-Is immortal through copies” — DNA is only immortal until all of it is destroyed. Say a supernova, or the collapse of the Universe (the opposite of the big bang). Christians believe God is *truly* immortal. Was not born, cannot die. Had no beginning, has no end. Always existed, always will.

“-Is in every living organism” — There’s a huge difference being aware of everything and being inside everything (otherwise this *would* be pantheism). God is Personal, he is a person. He does not reside within all living organisms.

“-Lives on via reproduction, often sexual” — God does not “reproduce” because he is immortal. Christians believe Christ was born, but that was not called “reproduction,” it was called “incarnation” — God’s way of entering the Earth; Christ already existed in Heaven beforehand.

“-Is compatible with science” — Christians believe God is compatible with science, particularly in that he created the physical rules of the universe, and exists within a logical framework. If you want to “find” God though science, you need to use the right discipline: Philosophy. After all, Physicists don’t use Geology to plot orbital mechanics.

“-Can be understood with study and thought” — Yes, Christians believe this applies to God as well. You don’t simply get closer to God through meditation, but can approach God through logic and reason.

-Pie

DNA just isn’t broad enough though and this breaks down as soon as you have non-DNA based life. Such life could be either lab-created or extra-terrestrial. Nature is still more appropriate, or better yet “all the energy and complexity of the universe.”

Regardless of the metaphor, the key distinction between “god” and “God” is a of faith in logic and reason over blind faith. All of the language used in mono/poly-theist dogma make it evident that deities are always created in the image of Man. They always possess human characteristics; emotions, faults, qualities.
We personify everything, few can reach far from their own ego in understanding the universe. Language is a dynamic and human driven vehicle for conveying these ideas. Spirituality is sort of the approximation of actual nature of existence. It is the abstraction of the difference between logic and the unknown.

The problem with dogmas is that they lag the known facts by millennium and disrupt the true integration of logic and spirituality. There isn’t anything wrong with having an intuitive understanding of the unknown and the ultimate, so long as your choices are led by reason and scientific examination.

DNA serves as the master-copy molecule for all cellular organisms and many viruses — everything else is done by other molecules.

Vitalism itself is thoroughly discredited. Molecular biologists have found a vital force to be a completely unnecessary hypothesis, and over the last century of it being a respectable hypothesis, it came to look like a “vital force of the gaps”.

But vitalism continues to persist in the “theoretical justifications” offered for various “alternative medicine” therapies. Such vitalists are not nearly as combative about their theories as creationists are, and most mainstream molecular biologists ignore them. They may lobby for support for their therapies, but they don’t lobby for presentation of their theories as alternatives to molecular biology. In fact, they often don’t seem to think of themselves as explicitly advocating vitalism.

Which is a question worth asking: why are creationists so politicized while vitalists and astrologers are so apolitical?

I tend to view the parts that make “life worth living” as the meaning of life. It seems silly to reduce it to reproduction when that is such a small part of most of our lives. Although I suppose, as a man, I guess I tend to have less involvement in reproduction.

As to the ’spiritualism’ of some atheists, I do find that annoying at times, but I tend to translate that as “emotional needs”, all of which are, in the end, instinctual and ‘programmed’ by genes.

Whether our mental lives are simply epiphenomena, I don’t much care, whether its rational thought or emotional feeling, being human is epic. We create meaning every day.