Abiogenesis too unlikey?

[drakim]

Abiogenesis being too unlikely is a common argument put forward by Christians. It's often followed up by some number with a lot of zeroes.

I don't really agree with those claims, but that's not what this thread is going to be about. Instead, I ask this question:

How likely is God?

Well? See, I say that unless you can know exactly how likely God's existence is, then you cannot claim that God's existence is more likely than abiogenesis happening. I mean, if I have five hundred apples (which is a lot), then I still cannot claim to know that I have more apples than you, if I do not know how many apples you have. You need both pieces of information to make such a prediction.

So, unless one can determine (with proof) how likely God's existence is, then one cannot claim that it's more likely than abiogenesis happening.

[Ryan Dozier]

I have already posted that God is not contingent. Rather I argued the God of the Bible is necessary. For if the Christian worldview (which is derived from the Bible) were not true it would be impossible to prove anything. Human experience and everything that is meaningful–sensation, induction, intuition, logic, free agency, morals– hinges on the truthfulness of the Christian worldview.

[drakim]

Feb 17, 2009 12:17:07 GMT -5 Ryan Dozier said:

I have already posted that God is not contingent. Rather I argued the God of the Bible is necessary. For if the Christian worldview (which is derived from the Bible) were not true it would be impossible to prove anything. Human experience and everything that is meaningful–sensation, induction, intuition, logic, free agency, morals– hinges on the truthfulness of the Christian worldview.

This indeed answers the argument in my first post. However, the argument that "Abiogenesis is too unlikely to have happened" still remains broken (an argument which is separate from the one you are presenting)