Nmeri17:

lol. calm your tittties fam. I'd love to think that on the front line of the battle of advantages with eras preceding ours, the most lethal weapon in the armoury of the 21st century man, is his open mindedness. But sadly, very few are really making commendable use of such a powerful tool. I simply mentioned God and you're all going bonkers about me 'attributing something I don't understand to God.'

Now this is an unnecessary chatter ..

Actually, I do believe in God (or whatever name you choose to call the superior and unfathomably advanced intelligence responsible for what we know today as nature) and at the same time, I'm just as much an evolutionary theorist as yourselves.

Now this is the difference, You think nature as it is was a handiwork of some supreme intelligent person that somehow doesn't need something else to cause it into existence.

I on the other hand do not believe such assertion of some form of person causing the universe but rather agrees to the fact that everything we see are manifestations of natural fluctuations in different levels.

If nature must be caused by something intelligent then it appeals to logic that same thing must require another intelligent cause before it can exist, if it doesn't it means something can exist without some form of intelligent cause being behind it and so nature had none..

You don't just go assume up some consciousness to explain yours and forget that consciousness must then require explanation it self.

And don't just go assuming people are evolutionists until they assert so themselves

You don't simply rule out the existence of things you do not know just because they go over your head.

Oh you take claims as they are until tangible empirical substantiation is provided...

But would you open minded enough to see things from my perspective?? See it this way: God built the observable (and non observable) universe literally.

And by God you mean some form of intelligent person somewhere, that is a claim thag requires substantiation.

Because if the universe that is a chaotic interactions of causality is the work of an invisible deity then the sand dunes of a desert which is the action of wind on sand is the work of an invisible artist.

You don't expect [size=20]Him [/size]to have carried those rocks that constituted the big bang theory manually like a bricklayer from point A to point B. He, from the omnipresent standpoint, did the background work and set these things in motion which we uncover today and study as the origin of the universe. The other universes are most likely earlier workbenches.

Now from the bolded word all can discern what you call God is a form of a person that you think caused the universe..

-That person existed literally forever
-Got bored and then pointed the Big bang
-then sat back for 13billion years

Well one can see that this claim remains an unfounded one until your provide empirical substantiation of such anthropomorphical entity.

Cus last i checked

Infinite singularity
Quantum fluctuation
Parallel or alternate universes

are hypothesis of universal origin, one can simple see you are trying to anthropomorphically represent these values as a person which i would disagree.

Recently I was quite fortunate to come across this eye opening mind opening article on the timeline of events
http://www.bbc.com/earth/bespoke/story/20150123-earths-25-biggest-turning-points/index.html

These things weren't merely happening on their own; it was someone working. Why not look at it this way??

[b]

Yea as i expected another way to attribute natural interactions and results to be the work of some unfounded deities you assume up.

Nature do not have one way of manifestation, action of Gravity on matter makes stars and planets, Galaxies colliding on another can either rupture the interacting bodies or form one huge galaxy.

These are all interactions of simple values that produces results. . Sand dunes in a desert show a form of artistic precision going by your logic it was done by some invisible intelligent artist somewhere because it can't just happen on its own, can it?

You see the absurdity of such ideas, Sand dunes didn't just happen on their own because they only happen when two values comes into Interaction which is Wind and Matter (dust)

This doesn't make it the work of an intelligent artists somewhere, shows that chaotic interactions can produce results that can be perceived to be artistic in all serenity.

Please am not here to banter words over deities, if you want to ruminate over that you can head to the religion section ..[/b]

^^^ I simply asked you to take a moment to see things a certain way, and you're coming at me in such a brash manner. But it's owky. Shalom

Their must be a different between a creator, creation and creature.

Studying the creation is not the best way of arguing the existence of the universe.

I won't debate with you people until you are able to differentiate between life and existence.


Laws of motion and gravity are much reason to accredit adequate acknowledgement to God.

Until you admit that the universe was created, you will still argue the need for a creator.

I think i understand life better.

HCpaul:
Their must be a different between a creator, creation and creature.

Studying the creation is not the best way of arguing the existence of the universe.

I won't debate with you people until you are able to differentiate between life and existence.


Laws of motion and gravity are much reason to accredit adequate acknowledgement to God.

Until you admit that the universe was created, you will still argue the need for a creator.

I think i understand life better.

See you

The birth of CGI's product.

Lol, that moment when a pastor sees that his members are getting more wiser,he starts preaching against the use of smartphone,lmao

I just pity those who are still blind to the common truth and still believes there is some god up there, whereas they're pointing to another planet