English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It is all but impossible to prove the source of all. Yet, for the sake of debate, which of the following choices proves most logical:

1) All in nature existed eternally

2) Something in the natural existance is the source of all that ever existed in the natural, (including by evolution)

3) Something beyond nature, and with NO intelligence, is the source of all in nature

4) Something beyond nature, and with intelligence, is the source of all in nature

5) Some other conclusion, (although no other conclusion can be formed without some sort of redundancy).

Please, explain your logic and reason for your conclusion. Logic and reasoning is key.

2006-06-27 10:41:48 · 3 answers · asked by man_id_unknown 4 in Social Science Other - Social Science

Thank you for any and all answers.

2006-06-27 10:46:20 · update #1

3 answers

4. In nature, something cannot come from nothing. We must assume that something beyond nature created anything and everything in nature. And I can't see it being a being w/o intelect given the complexities of life and the universe.

2006-06-27 10:48:57 · answer #1 · answered by geo3_2002 2 · 0 3

With all of the religions of the world, I've looked and thought about for myself, I would say Christianity is the best fit....
I don't see the logic for any of the other major religions. I do believe that there is a God and he did create life and the earth....
as for how
that is beyond human comprehension,
hey try it out, read the bible, at least try. see what u think, Im pretty sure you'll agree, I'm not saying that it isn't confusing as all get out but the basis is solid.
Hey you got ?s
email me at chyhannabananna.com
This is a question no real person can answer for a solid fact.
what you really gotta have is faith, and with this subject, no matter what u believe you gotta have faith, u just believe.
not everything had a logicka answer....not even evolution.....

2006-06-27 10:50:52 · answer #2 · answered by Chyhanna 2 · 0 0

4. I do that because sure, we can create amino acids in simulated environments, but they can't get them to form together into a living organism. Look at how complex our bodies are, and try to figure out how to create something that complex from random events. That is like taking all the parts of a house, dropping them from 30,000 feet and expecting them to land into the perfect shape of a house with no help at all.

2006-06-27 10:45:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers