Reply #10: Neither, Or Both

[iamjoy]

both theories make a lot of assumptions, but let's not make the mistake of assuming everyone talking about "intelligent design" (or questioning evolution/natural selection) believes Genesis is to be taken literally.

Who is to say Occam's Razor is the right theory anyway? The simplest explanation is not always the right one. I could give some examples, but don't want to turn this into a political debate about stolen elections or other conspiracies.

Since you have already framed the debate in terms of Occam's Razor, however, here goes

You are making an assumption that the universe could have been created and destroyed several times and that our existence is pure serendipity. The odds for such a thing could in the billions, but, as you stated, given enough time, anything could happen.

Your friend assumes that some higher power helped this all happen.

When you strip away all the convuluted explanations of the theoriesand get right down to it the core assumption is either
"It just happened"
"A higher power made it happen."

Let's put a different spin on Occam's Razor, which is easier to explain to a four year old -
the big bang (but why? but why?) or an omnipotent creator who is anthropomorphized as a parent? Of course, when you anthropomorphize, you are making assumptions.

I'd say it's a wash.

BUT - to a person with no faith, nothing is satisfactory proof for the existence of a divine being.
To a person of faith, everything is satisfactory proof for the existence of a divine being.