asalimpo:

issues about the existence or non existence of God will eventually bother on some core questions which if couched in lay logic,common sense, would disqualify certain absurdities pushed by science and atheists.
Like, where did man come from?
How did this world come to be?
Why is there evil in the world?
Why does man die?
Etc

some questions are more fundamental than others.
The bible view is more complete and persuasive than the materialistc world view.
Wat's more is the real life corroborations of the bible (amidst fakes) tht cannot b objectively disqualified by any rational argument.
Added together, there's no case for sayg God doesnt exist.

Dude, your target is at the centre, but you keep shooting in all 360 cardinal directions. Let's focus on one thing at a time to make the conversation manageable for us both. Our focus is evolution for now. When we're done, we can talk more about god.

Your arguments about, requirg substantial education to understand evolution is a smoke screen ur usg to dismiss an argument.

I made no such argument. In fact, by trying to engage with you, I'm doing the exact opposite of dismissing your argument.

Askg me to not mention evolution, is like sayg i shud stay hush about an absurdity.

Au contraire, I'm not asking you to hush about evolution, I'm actually quite interested in what you have to say about it, which is why I'm engaging you. So please, spell out the supposed "absurdities".

An absurdity, strongly presented can bcome acceptable, but the initial reaction to it ,is usually geniune and unadulterated.from the heart. Remember how people initially reacted to instances of homosexuality?

Yes, the same way people (and especially the church) initially reacted to Galileo Galilei's heliocentric argument. Their reactions were, of course "from the heart"...except he was right and they were wrong! So much for genuine unadulterated reactions, eh?

Your question on evolution and morality is barren at most . You are are sayg, evolution imputed this trait in man,how? By juxtaposition of man's genetics (since its a materialistc world view) but this defies the very nature of randomness, which shud have distributed varyg quantities of the same trait in other species!

My question is not barren at all (I don't even know what that means...lol). I really want to know why you think evolution cannot account for morality. 'Morality' is a beneficial behaviour that ensures the continued survival of the homo-sapient species. Of course, other animals have been suggested to exhibit apparently moral behaviours too, the homo sapient species is unique in its ability to abstractify morality and, as a result, adopt excess moral baggage (like religion) as long as it believes there's some kind of benefit to be gained. Although, in a very interesting 1967 study, "Cultural acquisition of a specific learned response among rhesus monkeys" by G.R. Stephenson, other primates were shown to acquire excess "moral" baggage even when they didn't know why. What this proves is that morality is not a 0/1 attribute, it is actually a spectrum, with humans having the highest degree of it, and (co)incidentally, the highest capacity for destruction too, as a result.

There shud be other species rivalling and/or surpassing man in intellect. That's how randomness and chance work.
That man only has the highest and non-negligible concentration of a developed intellect destroys any argumnt for chance/accidental design but to purposeful design.

Yes, I agree that randomness/chance cannot explain man's intellect, or the diversity of life for that matter. But whence comes the presumption that evolution is a random, chance dictated process? It is far from. While mutations may occur by chance, evolution doesn't. It favours the mutations that prove beneficial to the organism, and if such a mutation doesn't prove beneficial, the organism might still keep it provided the organism has other mutations that provide net benefit. Otherwise, the organism would do away with it or die out eventually. As a result, you'll find a lot of unnecessary complexities in organisms (no intelligent designer makes things unnecessarily complex). Imagine you made a t-shirt, and sewed another t-shirt to that t-shirt for no reason. This is the sort of complexity we find in biological organisms, and this is consistent with evolution, which forces organisms to shed harmful mutations or die out (dormant mutations, e.g male nip.ples and wisdom teeth may needlessly remain).

Attributg purposeful design from chance, by injectg the element of time is hogwash. Even, scientists know this. It's only supported because of course nobody can go back in time to observe the process - to prove it. So it's a theory (a conjecture).
On a small scale, evolution is scientifcally unreplicable. E.g,
take basic life forms, suspend them in an observable medium for a long time, say 50yrs, will they morph into higher more advanced life forms? No.
Assumg, by fluke of chance they did, are u sayg, there's a law that basic life forms+time = progressive more advanced life forms?
Wat injected the element of progressiveness into the trend? Time?
Theyre only 3 states those organisms cudve sunk into:
no progress, retrogression/decay,
advancement.

I hope, from my previous explanation, we can now agree that evolution is not chance/random process. For more information on this, click HERE
Another misconception you seem to have is what constitutes scientific theory. Scientific theories aren't conjectures at all. They are explanations built upon experimentally demonstrated facts. Actually, attaining the status of 'theory' in science is the highest possible scientific acknowledgement any proposition can achieve after extensive, rigorous scrutiny (e.g. electromagnetic theory which has provided us with mobile phones, internet, GPS and so on).

And contrary to your false assertion, evolution has actually been witnessed on small scale in labs here's an example. I hope you change your stance on that. It is a lot more difficult to witness it on macroscale as this takes several thousands of years to manifest, which is beyond the timescale of a human's lifetime.

Finally, while basic lifeforms may evolve and change their methods of adaptation, they do not always have to evolve into complex lifeforms. In fact, this hardly happens, as it does seem there are more unicellular organisms than multicelullar ones in existence. This supposition is difficult to confirm mainly because we don't have a full list of the more readily observable multicelullar organisms, talk less of unicellular ones.

I dont even want to talk about the assumed multiplicity from a singularity, evolution glides over.

I don't know what you mean.

mazaje:


Dr Eben Alexander is a liar for Jesus. . .he has already been debunked. . .

*Esquire writer accuses famed doctor and author Dr. Eben Alexander of potentially embellishing story and leaving out key details
*Investigation shows alleged disparities in Alexander’s account of the afterlife as told in his book “Proof of Heaven” and by others familiar with the story
*Key personal details about Alexander’s background were withheld from the public, Esquire alleges
*ER doctor who treated the neurosurgeon gives contradictory account of events that unfolded at the hospital during Alexander’s near-death experience

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/07/03/did-the-famed-neurosurgeon-who-claims-he-saw-god-and-visited-heaven-lie-article-exposes-alleged-inconsistencies/

Dr Eben Alexander only reminds one of people like Rebecca Brown & Robert Liardon.
Rebecca Brown was a doctor in the United States who claimed she was having a spiritual battle with witches in her area; she sold many books; she was later found to be schizophrenic. Her medical licence got revoked because of unethical claims & practices.
Robert Liardon wrote a book ' I saw heaven'. Today he has lost all the reverence he had because he was found to be homosexual( got nothing against gays anyway).
Lesson: any body can write any book to make wild claims. A non- peer reviewed manuscript holds no value in the modern world!

abdulwastecx:


The ugly truth is cave men creates God in their own image becauae they couldn't provide answer to many things around them.

cave men want answer to why we have the sun, moon, where we came from, where we are going, why it rains, why human dies etc...they find it diffucult to phantom the fact that these could just happen without a designer which must be some pale skin daddy living in the sky ( since all the known prophet of God religion are Caucasians).

Synagogue church is a business venture with a strong marketing strategies... lot of staged performed miracles to attract gullible minded poor and needing Africans.

A man of God that needed a television station to show is miracle....smh

Who told you that I agree with what goes on in the TB Joshua's Synagogue? For all you know, I might be more disagreeable as to his beliefs than you. However, that is another topic entirely.

I guess you want to tell me that Dr Eben said he was testifying as a Christian, isn't it? No, he wasn't. I cited his (and the little boy's) case to prove that there is a SPIRITUAL WORLD.

BraveGuy:


Who told you that I agree with what goes on in the TB Joshua's Synagogue? For all you know, I might be more disagreeable as to his beliefs than you. However, that is another topic entirely.

I guess you want to tell me that Dr Eben said he was testifying as a Christian, isn't it? No, he wasn't. I cited his (and the little boy's) case to prove that there is a SPIRITUAL WORLD.

So people's unverifiable claims are what you call evidence. eh?. . .Will you accept the same claims about people that claim to have reincarnated as evidence for reincarnation?. . .There are countless videos of people on the internet claimging to have reincarnated. . .Does that count as evidence for you?. . .You are just too ridiculous. . .

mazaje:


So people's unverifiable claims are what you call evidence. eh?. . .Will you accept the same claims about people that claim to have reincarnated as evidence for reincarnation?. . .There are countless videos of people on the internet claimging to have reincarnated. . .Does that count as evidence for you?. . .You are just too ridiculous. . .

That is their prerogative. It's YOUR problem if you want to disbelieve there is a spiritual world or not. Continue to claim your foolishness that there is no God in the face of facts.

I am yet to see any of you so-called atheist prove there is no God; in fact, how many of you carry a mobile phone device around (I am sure all of you), which of you has ever seen the wireless frequencies connecting you to the Internet? None!

Yet you try to argue about a spiritual world someone claims to see because you have not seen it?

Continue in your foolishness (Psalm 14:1).

BraveGuy:

That is their prerogative. It's YOUR problem if you want to disbelieve there is a spiritual world or not. Continue to claim your foolishness that there is no God in the face of facts.

What facts?

I am yet to see any of you so-called atheist prove there is no God

No atheist can prove there is no god any more than you can prove that there is no flying spaghetti monster. It is simply impossible to prove a negative.

in fact, how many of you carry a mobile phone device around (I am sure all of you), which of you has ever seen the wireless frequencies connecting you to the Internet? None!

Errr..I have seen the frequency. With an oscilloscope, you can as well.

Yet you try to argue about a spiritual world someone claims to see because you have not seen it?

No, it was YOU who tried to ram the existence of an ever elusive spiritual world down our throats without evidence. Check the title of your thread.

Continue in your foolishness (Psalm 14:1).

Alright clever guy.

AgentOfAllah:

What facts?

Go and look in the mirror..... the person you see is a living FACT/PROOF that you are creation not an accident.

Ask that person how you got there?
Ask the mirror, too.... how it got there?

That is the most minimal fact/proof that you need.

BraveGuy:

Go and look in the mirror..... the person you see is a living FACT/PROOF that you are creation not an accident.

Actually, my mum told me how I came to be. Apparently, I was an accidental discharge

Ask that person how you got there?

Huh?? So you talk to images?

Ask the mirror, too.... how it got there?

And you also talk to mirrors?

That is the most minimal fact/proof that you need.

SMFHFY!!! Pfft. Your religious delusions know no bounds!

BraveGuy:




I am yet to see any of you so-called atheist prove there is no God.

Funny, I haven't seen any of you prove his existence either.

BraveGuy:

That is their prerogative. It's YOUR problem if you want to disbelieve there is a spiritual world or not. Continue to claim your foolishness that there is no God in the face of facts.
I am yet to see any of you so-called atheist prove there is no God; in fact, how many of you carry a mobile phone device around (I am sure all of you), which of you has ever seen the wireless frequencies connecting you to the Internet? None!
Yet you try to argue about a spiritual world someone claims to see because you have not seen it?
Continue in your foolishness (Psalm 14:1).

What facts have you provided?. . .all you have done so far is throw ideas of others that have not been verified as facts. . . You are a joker. .

Life is simpler for me these days because i stopped debating religious folks. @ Plaetton please take note.
Anybody who chooses to practice religion for more than 20years and does not see the intense lies in it should be left to himself/herself.
Summary: its a waste of time and effort debating 99.9% of religious people. They do not operate with reason but with an 'imaginary' faith in an 'imaginary' daddy. Parallel lines do not meet.

mazaje:


What facts have you provided?. . .all you have done so far is throw ideas of others that have not been verified as facts. . . You are a joker. .

Let me educate you. Claiming an all-knowing God doesn't exist means u are all-knowing. Tell me the address of where I am 4 a start.

Misogynist2014:
Let me educate you. Claiming an all-knowing God doesn't exist means u are all-knowing. Tell me the address of where I am 4 a start.

Who claimed that an all knowing god exist?. . .Can you show me when and where the god made the claim himself, don't point to writings of men, just show me when where the god made the claim himsel, only then will I know that you have an idea of what you are talking about . .

Misogynist2014:
Let me educate you. Claiming an all-knowing God doesn't exist means u are all-knowing. Tell me the address of where I am 4 a start.

Now, let me educate you. Claiming an all knowing flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist means you're all-knowing. Tell me the band gap of an AlGaN multi-quantum well semiconductor material with well width of 3nm and 65%Al concentration for a start.

In PEJ's voice ; that man must surely be made in China.

Oduduwaboy:
Life is simpler for me these days because i stopped debating religious folks. @ Plaetton please take note.
Anybody who chooses to practice religion for more than 20years and does not see the intense lies in it should be left to himself/herself.
Summary: its a waste of time and effort debating 99.9% of religious people. They do not operate with reason but with an 'imaginary' faith in an 'imaginary' daddy. Parallel lines do not meet.

The debate is worth it, if only for the 0.1% that may become reasonable. By "Law of large numbers", regression to the mean will always assume preponderance.

AgentOfAllah:


The debate is worth it, if only for the 0.1% that may become reasonable. By "Law of large numbers", regression to the mean will always assume preponderance.

I will agree with you. But after two or three exchanges with some people we must quickly determine whether they lie within the 'hopeful' 0.1% or the 'hopeless' 99.9%. I discovered that most of the entities we debate in this section of nairaland sadly fall into the 99.9% and often times they drag one into the mud-pit of hauling insults & invectives. It may not be worth it you know.
Anyway, on a lighter note,why your moniker? If Ayatollah Khomeini were still alive , am sure a price would be on your head.

Oduduwaboy:

I will agree with you. But after two or three exchanges with some people we must quickly determine whether they lie within the 'hopeful' 0.1% or the 'hopeless' 99.9%. I discovered that most of the entities we debate in this section of nairaland sadly fall into the 99.9% and often times they drag one into the mud-pit of hauling insults & invectives. It may not be worth it you know.
Anyway, on a lighter note,why your moniker? If Ayatollah Khomeini were still alive , am sure a price would be on your head.

I literally used to be an agent of Allah...I'm now a rogue agent though.

AgentOfAllah:


Now, let me educate you. Claiming an all knowing flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist means you're all-knowing. Tell me the band gap of an AlGaN multi-quantum well semiconductor material with well width of 3nm and 65%Al concentration for a start.

Even flying monster has not claimed it exist. So to me its a fiction until proven otherwise.

Misogynist2014:
Even flying monster has not claimed it exist. So to me its a fiction until proven otherwise.

Good man, now substitute "flying monster" with "yahweh", and presto! We now understand each other

In a sense, you're an atheist to all the gods whose existence you deny, yes, including flying spaghetti monster. The only difference between us both is that I deny one extra god, yours.

AgentOfAllah:


I literally used to be an agent of Allah...I'm now a rogue agent though.

Okay. i now understand where you are coming from; you were in the 0.1%...you were won over by Reason!

Oduduwaboy:

Okay. i now understand where you are coming from; you were in the 0.1%...you were won over by Reason!

There you go.