How is it more logical to say we came from bacteria instead of God?

Question

And please don't play dumb........

and if you think its more logical to say we came from God let me know.

Either way which do you think is more logical?

Answer 1

Saying we came from bacteria would be a "logical" statement. Saying we came from God would be based upon BELIEF.

Answer 2

Well, we have science that can trace the evolution of life with extraordinary accuracy. This does not mean that the trail is complete, only that it it mostly there, quite plain, makes logical sense and can (and has been) verified through countless physical processes and hard evidence (stuff you can hold in your hand).

On the other hand, the notion that we came from God, cannot be traced accurately at all. The books that purport to tell the stories of life originating from God have been clearly demonstrated to have human origins, and contemporary religions borrowed heavily from former (dead) religions. Religion offers no evidence at all that God created anything, and in fact demands faith - that is, a belief without the benefit of evidence and often even in direct opposition of available evidence - that God exists.

Such unsupported belief is, by definition, illogical.

Answer 3

There is a great force of creation. It has created ALL life & living matter. Some call it GOD. Humans are full of bacteria, but no one knows for sure which came first. That's like asking the age old question about the chicken & the egg. No one really knows the answer, except the great force which has created ALL life! Logic deals with facts based on reality.

Answer 4

well, like you said, it's called logic. if you don't think the theory of evolution is more logical than the virgin Mary or what have you, then there's not much i could say that will convince you otherwise. but then again, i might say something like go take a course in logic, and then read the Darwin's Origin of Species and the Bible. See if you can figure out the difference

Answer 5

It is more logical that we came from a single cell than that we came from nothing.

The reason is because we are made up of trillions of billions of millions of cells, so believing that we evolved from a single cell is easy to believe. Also, if you were to study child development, you'd know that each and every one of us begins as a single cell, which divides then multiplies and multiplies and multiplies to form our bodies. Knowing that every person is created when one cell implants DNA into another cell and that SINGLE cell develops into a human, it's easy to believe that we have evolved from "bacteria" as you so say.

Answer 6

When you understand evolution, it's perfectly logical.

Bacteria is alive, and it adapts to its environment. (You can observe this today in laboratories.) Over a billion years, many life forms could evolve from it (you can observe parts of this process in the fossil record).

God, on the other hand, hides his face from us (if he even exists). If he speaks to us at all, he speaks through ambiguous feelings and a very old book that nobody can agree about. Believing God created us isn't dumb, but it requires a huge leap that believing in evolution does not.

Answer 7

Why is it logical to assume that all single-celled organisms are bacteria?

Answer 8

Bacteria has proof. God doesn't.

Answer 9

What makes more sense, a painter creating a painting or the theory that the paint will "join together" to make a masterpiece over a long period of time?

Answer 10

Even a very long explanation where each step is logical is better than a short story that starts and ends "magic".