Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
Reward Points: | 1 |
Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 100% |
Arguments: | 4 |
Debates: | 0 |
Please give an example of an explosion that has resulted something so orderly like our solar system and has created time. We all have seen explosions in one way or another, and they have all resulted into chaos. Therefore, your argument is invalid.
Have you tried examining the evidences (i.e. the Bible) presented by the Creationists in context?
Just a question, if you think that God does not exist, then how do you think life originated?
I think we can all agree that there is a beginning to everything. Many known scientists have, in fact, believe that God exists or admit the possibility of it. Galileo Galilei, for example, noted that the Bible cannot err and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the Biblical texts. Isaac Newton, in Principia stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being." Albert Einstein recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe. He stated, ""Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Many atheists carelessly say that believers cannot prove the existence of God. I'm afraid all they ever do is contradict without understanding what they attack. In a law court, the prosecutor always examines the evidences presented by the defendant. That is only fair and just. But in the case of disproving God, many atheists fail to examine nor read Biblical passages in context and just jump-start on a standard contradiction or stick to their own ideology of how the solar system was formed without examining other possibilities. Until up to this point, no one can disprove the existence of an Intelligent Creator. If you don't believe in Creationism then you must be a Materialist/Evolutionist; and thus, you believe that we all came from an accidental collision. If this were so, then you must believe that everything from genetic formation to the cycle of life and to the processing of thoughts are mere products of accident? Would you also say that this discussion happened to be a result of an accident; thus, disclaiming the fact that we actually think because we are intelligently designed to do so. Life is formed with complexity, and it takes more than a leap of faith to believe that everything fell into place because of an accidental collision. We all have seen explosions. Have you seen an explosion that has resulted to anything so orderly? No. Dr. B. G. Ranganathan said, “…the probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop” (Origins?, p. 15). And this only speaks to the likelihood of any life at all, rather than the most highly complex forms such as large animals or human beings—let alone all the different kinds of life that exist today.
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know! |