here guys what would rather have to live with? and also which seems a bit more believable?
Divine Creation or spontaneous generation
Purposeful Design or Random Accidental Order
Intricate Order or Chaotic Mistakes
Infinite God or Infinite Odds
Life from Life or Life from Non-life
God=Creator or Time=Creator
Entropy or Evolution
Catastrophe or Gradualism
True Bible or True Theories
God's Purpose or No Purpose
Absolutes Exist or Everything is Relative
Mutations are Harmful or Mutations are Beneficial
Relatively Young Earth or Extremely Old Earth
Civilization from Start or Slow Development of Civilization
Degenerate Man or Man Getting Better
A Future Hope or Hopelessness
you make the decision.
2007-09-03 18:09:07 · 19 answers · asked by Skynyrd Lover 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Divine Creation. How can you explain the perfectness of our bodies, like our eyes, all our organs, how our bodies were designed. A man and a woman were made perfectly to fit one another for reproduction... how can you believe that we accidently became so near to perfect?
OK now for the answers...
Divine creation
Purposeful design
Intricate order
Infinite God
Life from life (?)
God=creator
True Bible
God's purpose
Absolutes exist
Mutations are harmful
Relatively young earth
Civilization from the start
Degenerated man
2007-09-03 18:17:50 · answer #1 · answered by ϑennaß 7 · 0⤊ 5⤋
Spontaneous generation
Random Accidental Order, guided by evolution.
Chaotic Mistakes, again guided by evolution.
Finite Odds
Life from Non-life
God=Creation Time=Time.
Evolution and entropy. There is no contradiction here.
Catastrophe and Gradualism. Just all natural.
True Theories
No Purpose except the replication of life.
Everything is Relative
Mutations are Harmful or Mutations are Beneficial - both. Most have no effect.
Extremely Old Earth
Slow Development of Civilization
Man Getting Better
A Future Hope. I just do not need a sky daddy to give me one.
I will go with the evidence. You can live in your delusions if you want to, but there is a real world out there, waiting for you to catch up.
2007-09-04 01:19:57 · answer #2 · answered by Simon T 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Your main objective is to argue with an appeal to emotion, then you add the only question that really matters in at the last minute...
It doesn't matter which one you like more. Liking the idea of something doesn't make it true.
The explanation that is more believable is the one with the most evidence to back it up, which would in this case be natural scientific theories.
Fail. Try again.
2007-09-04 01:16:47 · answer #3 · answered by Snark 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
I wish you creationists would explain who created your creator because you don't seem to understand that a creator is not always needed to account for a creation. If you can believe that is true for this god you believe in, why can't you just get rid of the superstition and believe that the universe just happened? Evidently you believe that god just happened. I don't get you people.
2007-09-04 01:18:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
You're asking which is more believable when most of your B options are obvious the minute you pick up any encyclopaedia?
Then again I suppose this is expected of you, you're the guy who thought the Big Bang was analogous to dynamite blowing up trees and creating a log cabin. Do we really need to point out the obvious errors in your argument?
2007-09-04 04:57:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Sigh. I recommend warm milk if you having trouble sleeping.
Evolution is not random. Facts are not democratic. Creationism is not a scientific alternative. And atheism is not nihilism, nor is everything hopeless.
I'm off to bed. Here's to sweet dreams! Did I mention that I'm not religious, and I enjoy my life?
2007-09-04 01:15:07 · answer #6 · answered by Dalarus 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
It is creationism which is the alternative. It is there with all the other explanations of the creation of the world and all. Every religion has one and claims it to be the truth. So the stark reality is choose your myth or choose the scientific - researched - observable reality of evolution.
2007-09-04 02:13:59 · answer #7 · answered by Freethinking Liberal 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You make it sound like there is a decision, there isn't, what is, is; what's not, is not.
Funny how you refer to evolution as an "alternative" Anyone with a brain would be able to pick up the bias off of that.
2007-09-04 01:16:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Im not about to follow your twisted premises... Give it up. Next thing you know you will be the next Rush Limbaugh, sucking down oxycotton and expousing pretzel logic.
None of your comparisons make any sense at all..
2007-09-04 01:29:43 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
B
B
B
B
B
B
A/B (these terms are not mutually exclusive)
B
? (I don't understand what you mean)
B
B
A/B (most mutations are harmful, but enough are beneficial that evolution can occur at a slow but steady pace)
B
B
? (Not sure)
A/B (that's a personal opinion, it can vary with or without religion. I'm somewhat of a pessimist, but I still have hope).
-Atheist
2007-09-04 01:19:26 · answer #10 · answered by eV 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋