coincidence should we call them 'coink-a-dinks'? Your thoughts please.
2007-10-17 04:55:39 · 48 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Woah.
Um...clever!
Actually...it's kind of cute. I like it.
-Sam
2007-10-17 04:59:05 · answer #1 · answered by Sam 4 · 4⤊ 4⤋
the two God created life, or it arose needless to say (by danger) from non-residing count and stepped forward to the factor that it relatively is now. the two God created the Earth, or it relatively is purely the consequences of another stress (massive bang, and so on.). What different thoughts are there? in case you do not have faith God exists, then creation is eradicated and, for this reason, you've faith in the different thoughts. in spite of in case you flow with the "extraterrestrial beings planted life on the earth" concept, that would not clarify the place the selection of life varieties got here from and how the Earth have been given right here initially. So that's it? even nonetheless you will possibly no longer consider it, a minimum of Christians have an evidence for the place life got here from. in case you're saying you do not have faith in creation and you do not have faith in evolution, then you certainly've eradicated the only thoughts you have. What then do you have faith? it relatively is the classic equation: the two "A" or "B" could be authentic. the two won't be able to be authentic. If "A" is authentic, then "B" is fake. If "A" is fake, then "B" could be authentic. the two the international (jointly with life) became into created, or it stepped forward needless to say. because of the fact which you have faith there is not any author, then it ought to no longer have been created, for this reason you've faith it stepped forward. If it became into no longer created, and it did no longer evolve, then it would not be right here.
2016-12-18 09:57:47 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
since the big bang and evolution don't rely on coincidence but the functioning of natural laws and accumulative improvement over time, not random chance or coincidence, it would be a totally incorrect name. but seeing that creationists have such a hard time understanding this simple and straight forward idea perhaps they ought to be called the 'numb skulls'.
2007-10-17 05:13:08 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
You're wrong on the coincidence part.. and we atheists don't usually nick name you Christians.. so this is a tacky question..
Also, can't you do better than that! If you want name calling you'll have to be more "creative"..
2007-10-17 05:02:06 · answer #4 · answered by gemma 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Too long. No one may be around to hear all of it. Why don't you settle for 'oink'. Godless will do as well, though a bit dog eared.
I thought that my disbelief in God entitles me to be an atheist. I see that I have bone up on cosmogony and the origin of species too. Well, life is hell for the Godless.
2007-10-17 05:48:36 · answer #5 · answered by A.V.R. 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Christians should not create nicknames for other people, even if those other people are atheists. They have a right to believe in what they want, even if its nothing. I am a Catholic and I have athiests friends who only make me stronger in my faith because I pray for them and hope they are happy healthy and safe just like i pray for everyone else to be. They are people do, they were born the same way we were =). They just don't believe the same thing. Peace be with ya brotha! and God bless ya too =)!
2007-10-17 05:02:05 · answer #6 · answered by Surin 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Little long, but I can live with it. How does the big bang theory rely on "coincidence"? For that matter, what does coincidence have to do with evolutionary theory? It asserts almost the opposite idea.
2007-10-17 05:00:39 · answer #7 · answered by Jas 2 · 4⤊ 2⤋
There are NO COINCIDENSES in the universe, but there is the law of Cause and Effect. Since matter exists, transforms and is indestructible, one can easily surmise that the universe needs no outside "creator."
But if one must insist to think (without any knowledge) that a causeless intelligent Cosmic Consciousness could live somewhere in a place pre-existing matter, pre-existing the universe and pre-existing reality, and that such Consciousness INTENTIONALLY thought it through and planned to "create" reality, matter, the universe and everything in it and be the responsible cause of everything that happens (there is no leaf that falls without God willing it!)...well we can see the result, but where is the cause? can you point to it?
2007-10-17 05:08:32 · answer #8 · answered by DrEvol 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I don't think we should ever call Atheists names.
1. It's impolite; and almost as importantly
2. That's what people do in debates, when they run out of argument favoring their position.
P.S. - Don't believe anyone who says the word "fact". Today's "facts" will be discarded, just like most other scientific theory.
2007-10-17 05:07:07 · answer #9 · answered by zeal4him 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I thought you guys came up with the nickname "monkies" [sic] yesterday? Make up your mind!
(Then again, I suppose that if you folks could do that, there wouldn't be 400 different sects of Christianity.)
Oh, and the physicist who first proposed the Big Bang model was also a Belgian priest. So much for the Big Bang being strictly for atheists.
2007-10-17 05:00:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 2⤋
I think it's rude.
It's rude to make fun of or ridicule anyone's belief system... even someone who chooses to believe there is no God.
Do you have nicknames for Jews too? Hindu and Bhuddists? Islamics?
Maybe some nick names for different Christian faiths?
You don't have to agree with the Athiest. You can feel bad for them for what they don't have in thier life. But to me being a christian also means a BETTER standard of behavior than they have.
But that's just me.
2007-10-17 05:01:17 · answer #11 · answered by gerry1of1 2 · 5⤊ 2⤋