benzics:
hehehe now the 38 millionth time, "since you believe in this god, well let us all judge him from your point of view".. .. Or you still don't get it? Just like you never get anything?

Lol...
I think you should focus from your own point of view...
If you don't believe in God there is no need to quote Him or concern yourself with anything pertaining Him except there is something amiss we don't know of.

hopefulLandlord:


its funny how theists usually pull the Thomas Aquinas argument which in summary is simply using logic of "something must create something" but Aquinas then abandons the logic when it gets to his version of god

its using law of infinite regress, regressing it further and further, then using "god" (whatever version) to terminate the regress

NB: don't be intimidated by these people's memes and jibes

what else do you have to offer, other than baseless argument??

cheer him up!

randomperson:

Wow!! That's amazing!! Such a concise and clever comment

Desperate measures for desperate situations

benzics:

Lol, I hate arguing with people with beliefs, because clearly they are lacking at some point in life..

Whatever we don't understand, religious people open their dirty mouths and say "it is god", it is not god you dumb f.ucks! It is what we don't understand yet!!!

how again did you arrive at this conclusion?

4everGod:


Why the vitriol? Get a grip and fight or die like a man. You are being encouraged to fight even though you not only beat yourself silly with your own arguments but you also got owned repeatedly by Deepsight While your atheist crew kept cheering you on to your death.

that's what hopefullandlord aka CAPSLOCKED pastafarian FSMs is doing to him.

DoctorAlien:
Just a little(very very very little) dose of critical thinking will cure this case of acute ignorance:

I am telling you

randomperson:
I read his reply to you and I see what you are saying now

good!

randomperson:
The onus of proof is on you... .

that's the usual anthem.

randomperson:

Nature is not evidence of god... If anything, it's evidence that there is no god... There are plants that kill people, there is a worm whose lifespan is only to eat the eyes of human beings, there are NATURAL disasters... People die from winter's frostbite and summer's heatstroke...
U cannot ascribe the beauty of nature to god whilst ignoring it's ugliness

this delusion is getting worse. You are simply misinformed.

I am just tired today.

DoctorAlien:

So, according to your logic:
1. Plants kill people. Therefore there is no GOD.
2. Worms eat the eyes of human beings. Therefore there is no GOD.
3. Natural disaster exists. Therefore there is no GOD.
4. People die from winter's frostbite and stroke. Therefore there is no GOD.
Very logical arguments. Conclusive proofs that there is no GOD. Wow!

that's it.

ambassagod:


who is this kid?

Oya Oya ask your....

KingEbukasBlog:


This is a called a red herring . Please provide a germane response to his request .

lol

randomperson:
So when a boy asks you, who created god... What would you say?

still asking this question of who created God??
something must be wrong with your head.

DeepSight:


What you are referring to is the problem of an infinite regress. An infinite regress is existentially illogical and it is with sure and sound logic that we assert that there must exist a permanent and eternal something which is what we call God.

In basic logic, these would be the premises for my saying so.

Premise One: The Universe is something, and exists

Premise two: Something cannot emerge from nothing.

First Inferment The universe thus emerged from something pre existing

Second Inferment: Thus for anything to exist: there must have always been something already in existence

Conclusion: It is rational to see thus, that for anything to exist, there must exist a permanent something.

The nature of that permanent something is what you should discuss.

Now, I say to you that there are necessary or self-existent things: things which exist by default and do not require creation.
This very fact alone, resolves the problem of an infinite regress: for there needs be no infinite regress once we recognize the existence of self existent things - and this cannot logically be denied.

Here are a few examples of self existent things:

1. Eternity
2. Infinite Space

Now let me pause here and see if this makes any sense to you before we build our thought development further.

If you really want to go philosophical, let's do it.

Premise two is false. It is based on a hasty generalization of conservation laws. All conservation laws only apply in this specific universe. If there exists a multiverse, there definitely will be universes that do not have conservation laws.

I think you misunderstand the concept of Nothing. Take outer space. It is not nothing. it contains a so called dark energy that keeps it from collapsing and in fact expands it. it obeys laws and updates itself at the speed of light. even though it seems to be nothing. Imagne a single dimension. a single dot. all of this is nothing. In nothing, there is no time or space, there is no concept of anything. the human mind is quite incapable of imagining nothing because it cannot normally imagine anything with dimensions lesser than two or more than four.

Hence, if you consider the concept of Nothing, you must quickly realize that any concept of "Must" and "cannot" are meaningless because in Nothing, there are no laws, no rules, everything is possible. Therefore, to observe Nothing and say Something cannot come from nothing is a capital mistake because Nothing is the exact sort of thing that can produce anything simply because there are NO rules or limitations.

Because One of your premises is faulty, your whole argument is questionable and an infinite regress immediately arises. in order to solve this, you Invented a concept of self-existent objects. When in fact, they are quite unnessesary. Any object can and will create itself if there are no laws to prevent it.

DoctorAlien:


Guess what I do for fun/when I'm less busy? Scaring these "atheists" with real logic/poking holes in their "intellectual" arguments. I was actually amused when he replied me "I don't know for sure." He is no longer sure. But he sounded sure when he said "every human is as a result of reproduction."

lol

that's the way most of them behave.

randomperson:

Exposed?? The claims of the bible are neither evidence or proof. The idea that man was created by god is as credible as the idea of the earth bring created by oduduwa... I don't need to prove the non- existence of a fact by bringing positive arguments or evidence. I only need to show that the claims of the bible have not been confirmed and are not sufficient proof of creation...
That's how it works in a court of law BTW

you guys are simply missing out something about God.

I would have asked you to open a thread on that, so we can have a very intelligent discussion over this GOD topic. But just time.

Anas09:

4everGod, what did you do? All these atheists are denying Science all of sudden.

lol

benzics:
you dey mind those people? They've dodged questions a lot in this thread alone, it's their normal behavior, dodging questions

Shut your mouth! Is there any part of the OP you even weakly attempted? You lot claim to be intelligent but when real intelligence confronts you, you all start throwing red herrings everywhere.

Teempakguy:
Your logical fallacy is: Ridiculous comparism.

every soul in the world knows that liquid flow is variable. This is why fluid mechanics is one of the most difficult areas of physics and mathematics today because it is almost impossible to predict. The age of the earth on the other hand is based on methods that have been repeatedly proven to be constant. So don't come here to say another thing.

Shut your mouth dia. Every scientist says the dating methods are not perfect but close to it and you alone are saying thay have been repeatedly proven to be constant. Do you even know why i used the water analogy? Its because water being difficult is akin to the billions of years man claims the universe is when they never witnessed the very first occurrence but only assume.

I believe 4kings can school you better as i doubt if you know a jot about science.

Can you disprove the OP?

Every single atheist who graced this thread suddenly went unscientific and all began to shy away from using science to disprove the OP. Is there no atheist brave enough to attempt a detailed demolishing of the OP or are they all as cowardly as i thought and full of nothing but BS and red herrings and continuous acts of deception?

I dare any of them to disprove the OP with science same way the OP has disproved evolution with the same science. If evolution is true then disprove the OP.

4everGod:
Every single atheist who graced this thread suddenly went unscientific and all began to shy away from using science to disprove the OP. Is there no atheist brave enough to attempt a detailed demolishing of the OP or are they all as cowardly as i thought and full of nothing but BS and red herrings and continuous acts of deception?

I dare any of them to disprove the OP with science same way the OP has disproved evolution with the same science. If evolution is true then disprove the OP.

Evolution still remains what it is, a theory. Many atheists don't even necessarily believe in evolution. But it holds greater appeal to reason than the creation story.
And I don't know why u suddenly have the idea that disproving evolution makes creationism more credible

ambassagod:


let me get it straight.

do you lack faith in religion or in God?

you seem to be confused.

I don't have "faith" cuz that's ignorance at it's peak.

And religion brought the idea of God, do you ever read??

[b] "In ancient times, religion was indistinguishable from what is known as `mythology' in the present day and consisted of regular rituals based on a belief in higher supernatural entities who created and continued to maintain the world and surrounding cosmos. Theses entities were anthropomorphic and behaved in ways which mirrored the values of the culture closely (as in Egypt) or sometimes engaged in acts antithetical to those values (as one sees with the gods of Greece). Religion, then and now, concerns itself with the spiritual aspect of the human condition, gods and goddesses (or a single personal god or goddess), the creation of the world, a human being’s place in the world, life after death, eternity, and how to escape from suffering in this world or in the next; and every nation has created its own god in its own image and resemblance. The Greek philosopher Xenophanes of Colophon (c. 570-478 BCE) once wrote:

Mortals suppose that the gods are born and have clothes and voices and shapes like their own. But if oxen, horses and lions had hands or could paint with their hands and fashion works as men do, horses would paint horse-like images of gods and oxen oxen-like ones, and each would fashion bodies like their own. The Ethiopians consider the gods flat-nosed and black; the Thracians blue-eyed and red-haired.
[/b]

Humans have basically imagined gods through out history and have got some kind of book written about these gods.. so when you tell me there is God I don't take you serious, but just know that the flying spaghetti monster is real, if only you can prove that's FSM is not real

randomperson:

Evolution still remains what it is, a theory. Many atheists don't even necessarily believe in evolution. But it holds greater appeal to reason than the creation story.
And I don't know why u suddenly have the idea that disproving evolution makes creationism more credible

Yes. It certainly holds greater appeal to reason that lightning struck a soup of chemicals(that came from nowhere) and suddenly amoeba appeared and then became a worm and suddenly dinosaurs are everywhere.

That's very very reasonable.

randomperson:

Evolution still remains what it is, a theory. Many atheists don't even necessarily believe in evolution. But it holds greater appeal to reason than the creation story.
And I don't know why u suddenly have the idea that disproving evolution makes creationism more credible

I guess the OP indeed was gibberish to you since you said thats what science looks like to you. So if science sounds like gibberish to you how then do you know what evolution is all about? Have you suddenly now known how to interpret scientific language?

Everywhere in the OP leading physicists and biochemists with nobel laureates have all denied evolution and their ramblings.

Since you are suddenly now science inclined can you attempt to refute the OP?

benzics:
I don't have "faith" cuz that's ignorance at it's peak.

And religion brought the idea of God, do you ever read??

[b] "In ancient times, religion was indistinguishable from what is known as `mythology' in the present day and consisted of regular rituals based on a belief in higher supernatural entities who created and continued to maintain the world and surrounding cosmos. Theses entities were anthropomorphic and behaved in ways which mirrored the values of the culture closely (as in Egypt) or sometimes engaged in acts antithetical to those values (as one sees with the gods of Greece). Religion, then and now, concerns itself with the spiritual aspect of the human condition, gods and goddesses (or a single personal god or goddess), the creation of the world, a human being’s place in the world, life after death, eternity, and how to escape from suffering in this world or in the next; and every nation has created its own god in its own image and resemblance. The Greek philosopher Xenophanes of Colophon (c. 570-478 BCE) once wrote:

Mortals suppose that the gods are born and have clothes and voices and shapes like their own. But if oxen, horses and lions had hands or could paint with their hands and fashion works as men do, horses would paint horse-like images of gods and oxen oxen-like ones, and each would fashion bodies like their own. The Ethiopians consider the gods flat-nosed and black; the Thracians blue-eyed and red-haired.
[/b]

Humans have basically imagined gods through out history and have got some kind of book written about these gods.. so when you tell me there is God I don't take you serious, but just know that the flying spaghetti monster is real, if only you can prove that's FSM is not real

Little man stop throwing red herrings everywhere and derailing this thread if you cannot focus o the OP to disprove it then stop commenting or I will have you banned

KingEbukasBlog:


The Watchers may have been involved in getting those animals from different parts of the world to Noah .

so those watchers also took Tigers, porcupines, lions,cockroaches, different species of the flies we have, basically you are saying every specie we have today was in the Noah's ark.. So the watchers also took different species of snakes like the black mamba, anaconda, so they also took the over 20 thousand species of bees, over 10,000 species of birds, took the wolves, so what were they feeding animals that ate flesh? What were they feeding frogs that ate insects? What were they feeding the herbivores because they were in the ark for long and if at all they had leaves, it would have all dried up, or was there a farm in the ark..

And Noah took EVERY MALE AND FEMALE, do you know about the whiptail lizard that are all-female, they reproduce asexualy, so did God at a point tell Noah that some creatures he should only carry one of them?

Do you know about wood peckers? Were they also in the WOODEN ARK? What were they now pecking? Air? Lol, ya right, "air peckers"

Lastly, Noah COULDN'T have built an ark so big that it contained double of all the species we have on earth, and it's not possible to have a worldwide flood since the earth is not flat, and the water that came during the flood, where did the water come from? Because according to the story the water should be more than all the earth's water, so where did it come from??

When you believe that the Noah's ark is true, I don't see why I can't call you a child!

And I know some people will now be like "God works in mysterious ways".. Nonsense!

DoctorAlien:


Yes. It certainly holds greater appeal to reason that lightning struck a soup of chemicals(that came from nowhere) and suddenly amoeba appeared and then became a worm and suddenly dinosaurs are everywhere.

That's very very reasonable.

There is evidence, not proof of evolution. Gimme one evidence of creation.
And how does this make sense... A being never seen or heard who had been existing for eternity just decided one day to make the world. And then he says let there be light, bla, bla, bla... And he created light before he created the sun... Abeg where light come from....
The scientific inaccuracy of your stories alone render them ridiculous

4everGod:


Little man stop throwing red herrings everywhere and derailing this thread if you cannot focus o the OP to disprove it then stop commenting or I will have you banned

lol, waiting patiently to get banned

randomperson:

There is evidence, not proof of evolution. Gimme one evidence of creation.
And how does this make sense... A being never seen or heard who had been existing for eternity just decided one day to make the world. And then he says let there be light, bla, bla, bla... And he created light before he created the sun... Abeg where light come from....
The scientific inaccuracy of your stories alone render them ridiculous

Did you read the OP at all? Can you produce this evidence?

randomperson:

There is evidence, not proof of evolution. Gimme one evidence of creation.

Now, disprove the OP with that "evidence."

We are waiting.

randomperson:

There is evidence, not proof of evolution. Gimme one evidence of creation.
And how does this make sense... A being never seen or heard who had been existing for eternity just decided one day to make the world. And then he says let there be light, bla, bla, bla... And he created light before he created the sun... Abeg where light come from....
The scientific inaccuracy of your stories alone render them ridiculous

They should even ask themselves, since god has always been, that means the earth to has always been, because according to their folklore, he created the earth on the first day.

And they should ask themselves why this same god created, Jupiter Mars, Venus and other non-habitable planets, and why he created billions of stars in our galaxy.

They also claim that the three wise men saw a star that led them to Christ, when basically all Stars we see are dead stars, so a star died billions of years ago only to tell you that Jesus will be born in a billion year time? Ya right, sounds like Christianity to me, dumb as always!

Teempakguy:
Your logical fallacy is: Ridiculous comparism.

every soul in the world knows that liquid flow is variable. This is why fluid mechanics is one of the most difficult areas of physics and mathematics today because it is almost impossible to predict. The age of the earth on the other hand is based on methods that have been repeatedly proven to be constant. So don't come here to say another thing.

Can you please explain these methods?