mukina2: i sent both na

will resend to ur fbk and yahoo.

Muki send it to my fcbk too ....im need oo

jtmoneyjt: ah! Person no dey learn finish o! Me mah i stil b boy wey dey try na dem mkmyers my guy b oga! Lol

Take time ooo

EU is quite weak....

buzugee: lol you must be in iraq. its afternoon in the saner parts of the world

maybe

jsh_eng:

GBP/USD is strictly higher than 1.565 BET WON 1-0 still counting

we dey now oo

buzugee: entropy ko atrophy ni

This early morning?

LagosShia: Quranist or not,the Holy Quran says Jesus (as) was neither killed nor crucified but was made to appear unto them.

we are also told God caused Jesus (as) to "die" or into a state of slumber,and then raised him up to Him.now whether he is still in that state,God knows.we cannot tell if he died or was in a state of slumber because the word used "mutawaffika" is also used in the Quran to refer to us in a state of sleep and can also describe someone who dies a natural death.

Ok, So its uncertain...Can you give me the verse where God was said to put him in the slumber state?

wiegraf:

Ok, so you're just bouncing ideas. On the point platteon makes, I've also wondered why theists believe it more logical for something complex to pop out from nowhere rather than simple to complex.

Its a discuss for the house as i am not espousing it as certainty...the idea of simple to complex system is more logically as it is most free occurring in nature...

Mcdondayan: Are u a christain or a muslim. If you are a christain, your question is of no religous relevance, nd if you are a muslim..... I dont want to abuse u

Are you a quranist? can you answer the question? I will very much appreciate an answer

P.S: where is usisky?

rightlagos: yep. it also builds self-confidence. i am trading. i just sold eur usd around 10 am and usd jpy around 7 30. waiting till afternoon to put anoda trade.

It will be great if you drop you trades as you make them....What system do you use to trade?

rightlagos: I av been following this thread and find it very interesting I also trade betonmarket. I wish 2 join in contributing, but i see it challenging contributing 2 d thread and trading at the same time.

It can be fulfilling if you try...are you trading at the moment?

plaetton: This is quite interesting.
I have stated on previous threads that I think energy is the only thing that is ever present in the universe and perhaps beyond it. And that energy oscilates from simple vibrations to more complex vibrations. Most importantly what I posited is that what we call consciusness, sentience and intelligence might simply be just a stage of complexity of energy interactions,as a result of complexity of energy interatctions, rather than being the originators or prime cause of complexity ,as Deepsight and other theists would want us to believe.

In other words, if there is or should be a universal consciousness, then the universe probably evolved into it or is evolving towards it.

A very great probability i must say but we may never know can we?

wiegraf: The way I understand/stood entropy to work was stuff get's more disorganized as time moves on. It's a major issue to some futurists as far the end of the universe is concerned, as it's irreversible. As time goes on, heat dissipates and stretches out, energy scrambles and scrambles and becomes less organized, till gzillions of years from now matter/energy would be more or else useless. Nothing will be able to convert/use it for any good. In essence, the end of the universe. But it seems you're using it in a different context.

Edit: oops we seem to be saying similar stuff. Should have read it properly. I guess I can't see what building an ultimate intelligence (aka a god, with its shrike, anyone?) has to do with this. Random, even it would fall to entropy in the end, would you look at that

The building of such an intelligent being is a may...and even at now we don't truly have such energy. Well i see the similarities....

I was just wondering what Quranist's think on Jesus..Is he dead or alive?

@Jsh-eng how far? make we enter mkt now?

Ubenedictus: simply put d soul is d fundamental principle of life. Materialism has fail to explain man, d complexities his thought, feeling, desires conciousness and rationality. A material man will be a computer program but man has shown that greater than a computer, man is a living and learning being who excercise a reasoning ability so complex that he believes himself to be d pinacle of his immediate world. Man hardly seems to be a puppet and science has failed to explain the 'substance' of life.

that is because im not a computer, there is an immaterial subconcious in man. And each man precieve thing in different ways. To believe in a soul as a principle of life and reason is necessary for me because there is no material or scientific explaination of the 'substance' of life. Just try and give me a scientific definition of life.

when i say transcends i mean faith extend reason it widens and broaden its scope i dont mean it is oppose to or fight with or triumphing over it.

who said spiritual matters can never be understood? You need d broadener called faith to understand religious matters. It can be understood but some religious matter cant be fully grasped by d intellect.
ur arguement suggest it but you can inform me otherwise. I hope to hear from u soon.
Peace.

@First Bolded:Please define 'soul' and 'substance of life'

@Second Bolded: Please answer bolded one first...

@Third Bolded: Ok, you have your own definition of transcend? hmm...the dictionary thinks otherwise

@Fourth Bolded: Are you insinuating that indeed religion is faith and not logic?

mollie12:

Well what can I say? You seem to have finally carved out a new religion for yourself, with a new god - the universe. Don't understand this train of LOGIC of yours at all.


If you make the universe a god based on complexity and encompassing unity you can also make me - or any other human around you - a god based on the same qualities. Heck, you could do the same to the ocean, the mountains, and practically any other entity. In other words, even you will have to admit this is a descent into foolishness.

As humans, we ascribe glory - and godhood - to what is ultimately, indisputably, unshakably higher than ourselves. And Yahweh fulfils those qualifications - and more. I can't ascribe godhood to the universe - which man can and is finding even more and more ways to control.

Ok, miss dont go faster than your shadow ok?

@First Bolded: I didn't carve anything out but we are logically looking at a complexity which fits the term 'god' as defined by many.

@Second Bolded: Please how is a human an encompassing unity? Is he in isolation or part of a universe?

@Third Bolded: Please can you fully list out the properties?

@Fourth Bolded: lol at man controlling the universe...sorry miss but can you elaborate your point of control because that seems far-fetched

philip0906:
Good point. . .
Now,do these points I raised now make science illogical? So therefore, picking out some things from the Bible which we feel "defies" logic, is not enough to term Christianity and the Bible illogical. There are loads of "Logical" concepts in the Bible and on which the Christian belief is founded on e.g The law of "sowing and reaping" which is a part and parcel of the christian belief is a very logical concept.

Not all who sow bad reap suffering in the material world....

philip0906:
Were u there? Did you see it? How did it happen? Is there any video evidence to that effect?Kindly provide visible proofs,no big grammars and theories. . .
Moreover, there's a monkey in my grandma's compound, yet 2 change to a human. . .so i'll also love to know-with visible proofs- how u changed 4rm a monkey to human.
Thank you

You asked for Evidence of the big bang not evolution so i will save you the embarrassment as now where did i mention belief in evolution although its a sequential process that cannot be discounted...

Observational evidence


The earliest and most direct kinds of observational evidence are the Hubble-type expansion seen in the redshifts of galaxies, the detailed measurements of the cosmic microwave background, the relative abundances of light elements produced by Big Bang nucleosynthesis, and today also the large scale distribution and apparent evolution of galaxies[54] predicted to occur due to gravitational growth of structure in the standard theory. These are sometimes called "the four pillars of the Big Bang theory".

Hubble's law and the expansion of space


Observations of distant galaxies and quasars show that these objects are redshifted—the light emitted from them has been shifted to longer wavelengths. This can be seen by taking a frequency spectrum of an object and matching the spectroscopic pattern of emission lines or absorption lines corresponding to atoms of the chemical elements interacting with the light. These redshifts are uniformly isotropic, distributed evenly among the observed objects in all directions. If the redshift is interpreted as a Doppler shift, the recessional velocity of the object can be calculated. For some galaxies, it is possible to estimate distances via the cosmic distance ladder. When the recessional velocities are plotted against these distances, a linear relationship known as Hubble's law is observed:
v = H0D,
where
v is the recessional velocity of the galaxy or other distant object,
D is the comoving distance to the object, and
H0 is Hubble's constant, measured to be 70.4 +1.3
−1.4 km/s/Mpc by the WMAP probe.
Hubble's law has two possible explanations. Either we are at the center of an explosion of galaxies—which is untenable given the Copernican principle—or the Universe is uniformly expanding everywhere. This universal expansion was predicted from general relativity by Alexander Friedmann in 1922 and Georges Lemaître in 1927, well before Hubble made his 1929 analysis and observations, and it remains the cornerstone of the Big Bang theory as developed by Friedmann, Lemaître, Robertson and Walker.
The theory requires the relation v = HD to hold at all times, where D is the comoving distance, v is the recessional velocity, and v, H, and D vary as the Universe expands (hence we write H0 to denote the present-day Hubble "constant". For distances much smaller than the size of the observable Universe, the Hubble redshift can be thought of as the Doppler shift corresponding to the recession velocity v. However, the redshift is not a true Doppler shift, but rather the result of the expansion of the Universe between the time the light was emitted and the time that it was detected.That space is undergoing metric expansion is shown by direct observational evidence of the Cosmological principle and the Copernican principle, which together with Hubble's law have no other explanation. Astronomical redshifts are extremely isotropic and homogenous, supporting the Cosmological principle that the Universe looks the same in all directions, along with much other evidence. If the redshifts were the result of an explosion from a center distant from us, they would not be so similar in different directions.
Measurements of the effects of the cosmic microwave background radiation on the dynamics of distant astrophysical systems in 2000 proved the Copernican principle, that, on a cosmological scale, the Earth is not in a central position.[57] Radiation from the Big Bang was demonstrably warmer at earlier times throughout the Universe. Uniform cooling of the cosmic microwave background over billions of years is explainable only if the Universe is experiencing a metric expansion, and excludes the possibility that we are near the unique center of an explosion.

Cosmic microwave background radiation

WMAP image of the cosmic microwave background radiation. The radiation is isotropic to roughly one part in 100,000.[58]
In 1964 Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson serendipitously discovered the cosmic background radiation, an omnidirectional signal in the microwave band.Their discovery provided substantial confirmation of the general CMB predictions: the radiation was found to be consistent with an almost perfect black body spectrum in all directions; this spectrum has been redshifted by the expansion of the universe, and today corresponds to approximately 2.725 K. This tipped the balance of evidence in favor of the Big Bang model, and Penzias and Wilson were awarded a Nobel Prize in 1978.
The surface of last scattering corresponding to emission of the CMB occurs shortly after recombination, the epoch when neutral hydrogen becomes stable. Prior to this, the universe comprised a hot dense photon-baryon plasma sea where photons were quickly scattered from free charged particles. Peaking at around 372±14 ka,[22] the mean free path for a photon becomes long enough to reach the present day and the universe becomes transparent.


The cosmic microwave background spectrum measured by the FIRAS instrument on the COBE satellite is the most-precisely measured black body spectrum in nature.The data points and error bars on this graph are obscured by the theoretical curve.
In 1989 NASA launched the Cosmic Background Explorer satellite (COBE). Its findings were consistent with predictions regarding the CMB, finding a residual temperature of 2.726 K (more recent measurements have revised this figure down slightly to 2.725 K) and providing the first evidence for fluctuations (anisotropies) in the CMB, at a level of about one part in 105.John C. Mather and George Smoot were awarded the Nobel Prize for their leadership in this work. During the following decade, CMB anisotropies were further investigated by a large number of ground-based and balloon experiments. In 2000–2001 several experiments, most notably BOOMERanG, found the shape of the Universe to be spatially almost flat by measuring the typical angular size (the size on the sky) of the anisotropies.
In early 2003 the first results of the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) were released, yielding what were at the time the most accurate values for some of the cosmological parameters. The results disproved several specific cosmic inflation models, but are consistent with the inflation theory in general. The Planck space probe was launched in May 2009. Other ground and balloon based cosmic microwave background experiments are ongoing.

Abundance of primordial elements

Using the Big Bang model it is possible to calculate the concentration of helium-4, helium-3, deuterium and lithium-7 in the Universe as ratios to the amount of ordinary hydrogen. The relative abundances depend on a single parameter, the ratio of photons to baryons. This value can be calculated independently from the detailed structure of CMB fluctuations. The ratios predicted (by mass, not by number) are about 0.25 for 4He/H, about 10−3 for 2H/H, about 10−4 for 3He/H and about 10−9 for 7Li/H.
The measured abundances all agree at least roughly with those predicted from a single value of the baryon-to-photon ratio. The agreement is excellent for deuterium, close but formally discrepant for 4He, and off by a factor of two 7Li; in the latter two cases there are substantial systematic uncertainties. Nonetheless, the general consistency with abundances predicted by Big Bang nucleosynthesis is strong evidence for the Big Bang, as the theory is the only known explanation for the relative abundances of light elements, and it is virtually impossible to "tune" the Big Bang to produce much more or less than 20–30% helium. Indeed there is no obvious reason outside of the Big Bang that, for example, the young Universe (i.e., before star formation, as determined by studying matter supposedly free of stellar nucleosynthesis products) should have more helium than deuterium or more deuterium than 3He, and in constant ratios, too.

Galactic evolution and distribution


This panoramic view of the entire near-infrared sky reveals the distribution of galaxies beyond the Milky Way. The galaxies are color coded by redshift.
Detailed observations of the morphology and distribution of galaxies and quasars provide strong evidence for the Big Bang. A combination of observations and theory suggest that the first quasars and galaxies formed about a billion years after the Big Bang, and since then larger structures have been forming, such as galaxy clusters and superclusters. Populations of stars have been aging and evolving, so that distant galaxies (which are observed as they were in the early Universe) appear very different from nearby galaxies (observed in a more recent state). Moreover, galaxies that formed relatively recently appear markedly different from galaxies formed at similar distances but shortly after the Big Bang. These observations are strong arguments against the steady-state model. Observations of star formation, galaxy and quasar distributions and larger structures agree well with Big Bang simulations of the formation of structure in the Universe and are helping to complete details of the theory.
Primordial gas cloud.
In 2011 astronomers have found pristine clouds of the primordial gas that formed in the first few minutes after the Big Bang. The composition of the gas matches theoretical predictions, providing direct evidence in support of the modern cosmological explanation for the origins of elements in the universe. The researchers discovered the two clouds of pristine gas by analyzing the light from distant quasars, using the HIRES spectrometer on the Keck I Telescope at the W. M. Keck Observatory in Hawaii. They saw absorption lines in the spectrum where the light was absorbed by the gas, and that allows them to measure the composition of the gas.

Other lines of evidence

The age of Universe as estimated from the Hubble expansion and the CMB is now in good agreement with other estimates using the ages of the oldest stars, both as measured by applying the theory of stellar evolution to globular clusters and through radiometric dating of individual Population II stars.
The prediction that the CMB temperature was higher in the past has been experimentally supported by observations of very low temperature absorption lines in gas clouds at high redshift.This prediction also implies that the amplitude of the Sunyaev–Zel'dovich effect in clusters of galaxies does not depend directly on redshift. Observations have found this to be roughly true, but this effect depends on cluster properties that do change with cosmic time, making precise measurements difficult.

bommaster:

doing fine here thanks, hope u okay as well at ur side?

not so good..i need to speak with you sha

mollie12:

*Deep sigh*

The universe cannot just manifest itself - all by itself! That was the first point I addressed on the topic matter - that's still evolution's biggest question.

So what's your beef with the reliability and consistency of the Bible? People everyday are finding in the Bible assurance, stability, explanation for the times they are in, and much more. I'm not sure if you have some areas you need clarification with.

The universe shares so many characters of defined gods so we can say that the complexity of the universe makes it a god...You can't just dismiss the possibility..the Cosmos is an all encompassing unity. If you still disagree then i want you to describe your god and how he manifested.

bommaster: morning house

Morning.how r u? Its been long we spoke

Obvious cheap scam..

mollie12: Hey pple. It's hard to keep up with the grandiose intellectualism (or highly confusing big words - take your pick) on this thread, but I'll try to drop in my two cents, in the simplest way I can. I'll be discussing from the Biblically christian stance.

First note, my Lord Jesus made mention once that it the kingdom of God has to be received as a little child. And that has really helped as a guide for me when discussing spiritual issues. A quick test run with my Sunday school kids on any supposedly christian doctrine - and once they begin to scratch their heads I start suspecting it. The ways of God, as mysterious as they are, are simple and straightforward once it becomes a desire for you to find out more about him.

To the issue of existence of a God, a Creator, a Person with infinite power over the universe, its pretty simple. If you walked past a house, you won't ask what made it exist, you'd ask WHO built it. If you see a beautiful painting you won't ask what painted it, you'd ask WHO painted it. Created things always point to the existence of a Creator. Even science, with all its vast hypothetical calculations, cannot come up with a sure-fire way of bringing systems into existence without external help outside the system. That remains the big question mark of evolution.

On the veracity of historical accounts, characters, stories that form the doctrine of the christian faith, none of them can be verified scientifically. And that's because they are not supposed to be verified that way! Asking for a scientific proof of the miracles of Jesus, etc is like asking for a scientific proof that George Washington was the first president of the US! You can't verify historical data with the scientific method - which depends on things that are measurable, observable and repeatable. There's a way historical data is verified: its the same way evidence in a court case is verified - by corroboration, reliability and internal consistency. And the events in the Bible fulfil all of that. For more details look for a message on Youtube by Min Voddie Baucham on 'why the bible is true' or do your own private google/public library research. There is enough logical basis for the christian faith.

Hope this is helpful.

Are you saying that the reasonable truth (logic) about god is that someone must have created everything? What if that someone/god/creator is the universe itself manifesting and evolving through energy? The bible is reliable and consistent?

deandavid: this is faith, my bible told me God knew me even b4 i was born, jesus also said, i know my sheep, and my sheep listen to my voice, therefore there are some other sheep that aint jesus's. Probably the muslims, pagans and other non christian religions. U get that?

Ok so some people are created by god to be born,live,die and go to hell?

mimifonwon:



well our traditional beliefs(non european christian God etc) has both faith and in many ways the logic of science if carefully examined. It is sad that we allowed the white man to dictate to who we should worship and therefore end up shunning our own religion and roots our ancestors worshiped for ages and never had a problem, truly things have fallen apart especially when the centers no longer hold.

Care to draw comparism to show logic in african animsm?

O.D.B.:
NO.

I believe in a creator, a grand architect because our universe conforms to laws and definitions but religion is b.s. It assumes a personnel description based on "faith" and as always will end up being superstitious.

Care to make full definition of your creator?

Maximus85:
Maybe i used a wrong Language. But the fact remains that nobody, i mean nobody, including Jesus Christ can tell of the time when the end will come. So how can we come out and post a date.
As for the references, for you to accept a reference, it will be justified to see the original article. I didn't choose to be a Jehovah's Witness overnight, i checked through and i was convinced. We based all our teachings on the Bible. There's no set date for the end of this system of things in the bible. You can visit our website www.jw.org and check our publication bank.

Are you saying the dates including 1914 given by jw are false?

MyJoe:
I was enjoying you till I read this. In fact, you almost fall my hand. Nothing in that wiki extract is unfounded. Not one. You will note it is well referenced. Please read it again and write a befitting response.

Im disappionted in the OP too

Valueé: If what the ops meant was can the authenticity of religion be logical?
My reply would be YES!!! Only if one could attain a higher level of wisdom...
If a thorough exploration of the ecosystem, shows that the system itself is logical. And religion is a way of life that helps maintain the structure in place....then it can be deduced that religion is Logical.

maintain which structure? Ecosystem? I don't understand...

@Ubenedictus im mobile nw but we will continue our discuss soon

philip0906:
[size=18pt]Balderdash. . . d'u have any evidence 2 d big bang theory apart 4rm d stories ur dear scientists tell u?[/size]

Yes, we have evidence that are currently supporting the theory