1. believing that Someone created you and gave you a fully functional working body
2. believing that you magically appeared after the 'big bang'?
2006-10-09 09:15:25 · 24 answers · asked by Nikki 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Your use of the word magic, as always, is mind-numbingly ironic...
Edit - You know, I'm not sure this chick is really this stupid. Come clean, you're actually just one of the atheists trying to make Christians look like idiots, aren't you?
2006-10-09 09:20:25 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
I find it funny that you mentioned "magically" and "big bang" in the same sentence. Science has nothing to do with "magic". Creation on the other hand does believe in "magic".
You think this is logical??: an old man in the sky making man from dust? a woman from a rib bone? talking snake? a tree that produces magic apples?
btw- you apparantly didn't read the news last week. Every majors newspaper in the country ran the story about the fact the the BIG BANG was proven by 2 nobel prize winnning scientists.
2006-10-09 16:24:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
What's more logical?
1: Making a comment that demeans science without knowing what the **** you're talking about
2: Learning something about science before you dismiss it?
No one believes we "magically" appeared after the Big Bang. The Big Bang set things into motion, releasing elements into the universe. Stars and planets were formed from compressing dust clouds of these elements, and stars would explode and their dust would be compressed to form new stars and more planets. In that process, the Earth was created with the proper elements and conditions to create life.
Shut up, because you're just making a fool of yourself.
2006-10-09 16:21:14 · answer #3 · answered by fiveshiftone 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Both are ridiculous. Oh, unless you remove the "magically" part and actually take a moment to learn about even the tiniest portion of the science behind it. Things make sense when you use your brain. What a concept. An all-powerful being creating the universe out of nothing and humans out of dirt, now THAT'S magic. Or rather, getting so many people to fall for the story is.
mag‧ic
1. the art of producing illusions as entertainment by the use of sleight of hand, deceptive devices, etc.
Sounds about right to me.
2006-10-09 16:20:36 · answer #4 · answered by The Resurrectionist 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Actually, both cases are "magically appearing", so neither is more logical.
There are other options, such as
3. believing that you NATURALLY appeared after the 'big bang'.
2006-10-09 18:20:40 · answer #5 · answered by Zhimbo 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
"Magically" appeared? That's a new one to me. I think the theory actually states something (much oversimplified) to the effect that the tremendous energy released during the explosion of particles, that were released during that cosmic collision, created an environment that was conducive to sustaining life. And under these conditions a single cell organism similar to an amoeba was formed. This oranism continued to evolve, along with the evolving environment until it eventually reached the human state.
2006-10-09 16:30:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Neither is logical.
I can observe processes in the natural world. Application of reason to the processes I observe leads to the conclusion that the entire observable universe was once contained in a singularity. As to the origin of that singularity, I have no knowledge, only speculation. I have no idea if it was the "beginning" of the universe. It might have been simply one in an endless series of expansions and contractions.
What knowledge do you have about the origin of God? If God has no origin, how do you criticize me for saying that the universe has no origin?
I'd ask you in return: which is more logical: to believe in what our senses and rational analysis tell us about the universe, or to believe in an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent supernatural person who allegedly controls the entire course of cosmic events?
2006-10-09 16:20:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
As an engineer, I believe that nothing as complex as the human body happenend to come about by chance. I studied biomechanics in college and that was enough to show me that there is obvious design in the structure of the human body.
Whether or not you believe in evolution is irrelevant. It has never been considered fundamental religious doctrine. But to think that your body is a result of genetic mutation and random chance would be silly.
2006-10-09 16:33:05 · answer #8 · answered by LeBizzle 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
big bang. It's not magic. It's science. Is it magic how plants create oxygen? Or is someone up "there" just blowing all the oxygen we need down on the leaves, and we've just made big mistake? Get real, chick.
2006-10-09 16:20:40 · answer #9 · answered by kevvsworld 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
who created the "someone" who created me?? or performed the "magic" that made the big bang happen? I think both would be considered magic.
2006-10-09 16:20:12 · answer #10 · answered by naughtykitty94 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
How about choice number 3, God created life and it evolved into being everything living on the planet.
2006-10-09 16:25:02 · answer #11 · answered by AuroraDawn 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋