Edybleketara:
I'm really enjoying ur article, i like facts. U have scientifically proven dat something cannot come out of nothing. So who is d almighty creator dat created d universe?

ValentineMary:

Actually when.we talk of theory in science, we actually mean making deductions from. observations. We have observed d facts surrounding the theory. Yes we can get matter and anti matter from a vacuum. But we were not there at d origin of the universe, so we don't say it's d absolute ans but it's a likely ans.

Decker:
The idea of the universe's infinite regress, is incomprehensible and mystifying for theists, and in their bid to deal with this perplexing revelation, they create the idea of God. But in doing that, they unintentionally transfer this same problem of an infinite regress to God, whose incomprehensible infinite existence, surprisingly, doesn't seem to be an issue for them, neither does it threaten their beliefs, which is really astonishing, I must say.

How come theists are rejecting the atheist's stand on the origin of the universe, just because they don't agree with the concept of the universe originating from nothing, yet, they are comfortable with the fact that they don't know the origin of God, who supposedly, began from nothing. This is absolute hypocrisy in my opinion.

aaronson:
Does God exist? Hell yes, God exist, since the bible is your embodiment of proof. But you wanna know something else?

Does spider man exist? Hell yes, He does, I have a comic book of spider man series I read and that's my proof he exist.

Oluwaseytiano:
Kudos to you op. Most theists should learn how to create reasonable thread.

Splinz:

Be sincere with your own self and accept what is proven and fact.

My own God told me to "PROVE ALL THINGS" and hold fast to that which is good, i.e, to what is true. So we say, "let us first of all prove that You (God) exist".

Valentine, it is this proofs that we're here for, proving God's existence with even that which you professed and placed your sealed of signature on.

More updates later.

HardMirror:





I have always said, I believe in God as a Nomenclature for whatever originated matter, energy and time.

Splinz:

I understand all of your points. Trust me, we're not being hypocritical. As we move on, you and I will see why we can never be a product of some blind and dumb luck or chance.

Stay tuned.

Weah96:


Don't mean to throw a spanner in the works, but it appears to me that the God you are trying to prove here using facts is the deist God.

Deists believe that we all have a deliberately intelligent source, and usually provide common sense reasons like what you're doing right now.

Abrahamics like yourself go one 419 step further than that, no offense. They actually claim that the deist God ignored the deists and decided to SPEAK with them! So when a Christian uses the word God, he's not talking about an unknown creator entity, but the well known one who not only commissioned the Bible but is even speaking TODAY.

As you prove your God, don't forget to also provide evidence for the conversation which led to the instruction manual called the Bible. Because outside of the Bible, we are left with the deist God who, like mother Nature, doesn't write textbooks for human beings.

aaronson:
Does God exist? Hell yes, God exist, since the bible is your embodiment of proof. But you wanna know something else?

Does spider man exist? Hell yes, He does, I have a comic book of spider man series I read and that's my proof he exist.

aaronson:
Does God exist? Hell yes, God exist, since the bible is your embodiment of proof. But you wanna know something else?

Does spider man exist? Hell yes, He does, I have a comic book of spider man series I read and that's my proof he exist.

Edybleketara:
I'm really enjoying ur article, i like facts. U have scientifically proven dat something cannot come out of nothing. So who is d almighty creator dat created d universe?

Weah96:


Don't mean to throw a spanner in the works, but it appears to me that the God you are trying to prove here using facts is the deist God.

Deists believe that we all have a deliberately intelligent source, and usually provide common sense reasons like what you're doing right now.

Abrahamics like yourself go one 419 step further than that, no offense. They actually claim that the deist God ignored the deists and decided to SPEAK with them! So when a Christian uses the word God, he's not talking about an unknown creator entity, but the well known one who not only commissioned the Bible but is even speaking TODAY.

As you prove your God, don't forget to also provide evidence for the conversation which led to the instruction manual called the Bible. Because outside of the Bible, we are left with the deist God who, like mother Nature, doesn't write textbooks for human beings.

This is why atheism is necessary, we are the necessary balance. We don't fight gods, we fight the selfish self-centeredness of religion, we fight the desire of religion to subjugate people.

Splinz:

First, which of these are you: Atheist, deist, theist, agnostic? Yes, evidence for the Bible? That, you shall have. But before then, we'll first of all finish this very subject we're dealing with at hand, to prove to atheists that indeed, God exist not just as a nomenclature but as a Supreme Being in whom emanate all lives.

But note, the Authority of the Bible will be another subject on its own that will required another thread.

Splinz:
The Great Proof of Creation

We have established that creation demands a Creator. The next few paragraphs introduce some amazing scientific proofs of creation.

The theory of evolution is shot full of inconsistencies. Evolutionists have seized on many theories, within the overall theory of evolution, in an attempt to explain the origins of plants, animals, the heavens and the earth.

Over and over, these “theorists” try to explain how life evolved from inanimate material into more complex life forms until it reached the pinnacle—human beings.

Yet, as one geologist wrote, “It must be significant that nearly all the evolutionary stories I learned as student…have been debunked” (Dr. Derek V. Ager, Dept. of Geology, Imperial College, London, The Nature of the Fossil Record, Proceedings of the Geological Assoc., Vol. 87, 1976, pp. 1132-1133).

Perhaps the biggest reason that so many theories within the overall theory of evolution collapse is because they contain terrible logic requiring great leaps in faith to believe. Here is one example of a “debunked” theory: “Many evolutionists have tried to argue that humans are 99% similar chemically to apes and blood precipitation tests do indicate that the chimpanzee is people’s closest relative. Yet regarding this we must observe the following: ‘Milk chemistry indicates that the donkey is man’s closest relative.’ ‘Cholesterol level tests indicate that the garter snake is man’s closest relative.’ ‘Tear enzyme chemistry indicates that the chicken is man’s closest relative.’ ‘On the basis of another type of blood chemistry test, the butter bean is man’s closest relative’” (Morris, Henry M., The Twilight of Evolution, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1967).

Complexity of Life

Everyone has witnessed explosions. Have you ever seen one that was orderly? Or one that created a watch or a clock? Or one that produced a single thing of exquisite design—instead of the certain result of chaos and destruction? If you threw a million hand grenades, you would see them produce chaos and destruction a million times! There would never be an exception.

Consider the following quotes, involving the likelihood of an explosion creating the entire natural realm of life all around us on Earth—let alone the beautiful magnificence and order seen no matter how far one looks out into space.

Dr. B. G. Ranganathan said, “…the probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop” (Origins?, p. 15). And this only speaks to the likelihood of any life at all, rather than the most highly complex forms such as large animals or human beings—let alone all the different kinds of life that exist today.

Another scientist, Sir Fred Hoyle, an English astronomer and professor of Astronomy at Cambridge University, stated, “The chance that higher forms have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein” (Nature, Vol. 294, Nov. 12, 1981, “Hoyle on Evolution,” p. 105).

Okay, it's time for break. Stay tuned!

Weah96:


You don't need to prove that a Supreme Being is the source of the universe. No one is arguing with you. All beings don't look alike. Some may be subatomic particles, others may be photons. So when you say that a Supreme Being is the source of all life, you have really said very little at all. In fact that is exactly where science is at the moment. Stuck at a force behind the big bang, or a Supreme Being depending on how excited you feel.

The Supreme Being that you must prove here unfortunately is the famous Yahweh. You have to show us why the source of the universe is Yahweh or Jesus from the Bible.

I'm sorry to say, but I don't think that you understand the argument against your position. You could have saved yourself a lot of time with this write-up.

Weah96:


Go and read the argument against your position again. You are asserting something, which is that your God from the Bible is the source of the universe. Throughout this whole thread, you have yet to provide a shred of evidence.

All you've been doing is trying to show that the universe was deliberately conjured up by something that possesses intelligence. This thread is about why your god IS that something.

We know that we came from something, had a source bla blah blah. The source is intelligent maybe. Maybe not. That too is unimportant for this discussion. But I'm willing to concede that we come from an intelligent source. How does that prove or have anything to do with proving that your Bible god is the source in question?

Splinz:
The Second Law of Thermodynamics

The SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS is best summarized by saying that everything moves toward disorder—or a condition known as entropy. This bears some explanation and we will consider several examples.

Remember that evolutionists teach that everything is constantly evolving into a higher and more complex order. In other words, they believe things continue to get better and better instead of worse and worse.

If water being heated on a stove is at 150 degrees Fahrenheit, and the burner is turned off, the temperature will drop instead of rise. It will move toward colder rather than hotter. If a ball is placed on a hill, it will always roll downhill and not uphill. Energy used to perform any particular task changes from usable energy to unusable in the performing of that task. It will always go from a higher energy level to a lower energy level—where less and less energy is available for use.

When applied to the universe, the second law of thermodynamics indicates that the universe is winding down—moving toward disorder or entropy—not winding up or moving toward more perfect order and structure. In short, the entire universe is WINDING DOWN!
Even evolutionists admit that the theory of evolution and the second law of thermodynamics are completely incompatible with each other. Consider: “Regarding the second law of thermodynamics (universally accepted scientific law which states that all things left to themselves will tend to run down) or the law of entropy, it is observed, ‘It would hardly be possible to conceive of two more completely opposite principles than this principle of entropy increase and the principle of evolution. Each is precisely the converse of the other. As (Aldous) Huxley defined it, evolution involves a continual increase of order, of organization, of size, of complexity. It seems axiomatic that both cannot possibly be true. But there is no question whatever that the second law of thermodynamics is true’” (Morris, Henry M., The Twilight of Evolution, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1967, p. 35).

Like a top or a yo-yo, the universe must have been “wound up.” Since the universe is constantly winding down, the second law of thermodynamics looms before us in the form of a great question: Who wound it up? The only plausible answer is God!

Okay, lets talk guys. Remember, no conclusions yet.

Splinz:
The Great Proof of Creation

We have established that creation demands a Creator. The next few paragraphs introduce some amazing scientific proofs of creation.

The theory of evolution is shot full of inconsistencies. Evolutionists have seized on many theories, within the overall theory of evolution, in an attempt to explain the origins of plants, animals, the heavens and the earth.

Over and over, these “theorists” try to explain how life evolved from inanimate material into more complex life forms until it reached the pinnacle—human beings.

Yet, as one geologist wrote, “It must be significant that nearly all the evolutionary stories I learned as student…have been debunked” (Dr. Derek V. Ager, Dept. of Geology, Imperial College, London, The Nature of the Fossil Record, Proceedings of the Geological Assoc., Vol. 87, 1976, pp. 1132-1133).

Perhaps the biggest reason that so many theories within the overall theory of evolution collapse is because they contain terrible logic requiring great leaps in faith to believe. Here is one example of a “debunked” theory: “Many evolutionists have tried to argue that humans are 99% similar chemically to apes and blood precipitation tests do indicate that the chimpanzee is people’s closest relative. Yet regarding this we must observe the following: ‘Milk chemistry indicates that the donkey is man’s closest relative.’ ‘Cholesterol level tests indicate that the garter snake is man’s closest relative.’ ‘Tear enzyme chemistry indicates that the chicken is man’s closest relative.’ ‘On the basis of another type of blood chemistry test, the butter bean is man’s closest relative’” (Morris, Henry M., The Twilight of Evolution, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1967).

Complexity of Life

Everyone has witnessed explosions. Have you ever seen one that was orderly? Or one that created a watch or a clock? Or one that produced a single thing of exquisite design—instead of the certain result of chaos and destruction? If you threw a million hand grenades, you would see them produce chaos and destruction a million times! There would never be an exception.

Consider the following quotes, involving the likelihood of an explosion creating the entire natural realm of life all around us on Earth—let alone the beautiful magnificence and order seen no matter how far one looks out into space.

Dr. B. G. Ranganathan said, “…the probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop” (Origins?, p. 15). And this only speaks to the likelihood of any life at all, rather than the most highly complex forms such as large animals or human beings—let alone all the different kinds of life that exist today.

Another scientist, Sir Fred Hoyle, an English astronomer and professor of Astronomy at Cambridge University, stated, “The chance that higher forms have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein” (Nature, Vol. 294, Nov. 12, 1981, “Hoyle on Evolution,” p. 105).

Okay, it's time for break. Stay tuned!

Splinz:

Relax bro! Are we not on a journey? Have I tell you we've arrived? Chill man...

Weah96:


No, you're here to prove that your god exists not that God exists. God means the source of the universe, so of course it exists. Re-tards know that.

Go back to your first post, the bolded part, where the guy says that he can only prove that God exists. He didn't say Bible god.

All of this is evidence for a source. Bible verses don't belong in that discussion.

I'm trying to stop you from wasting your time. God exists as the source of the universe. The Bible god is like a murder suspect who has already run his mouth before his lawyer arrives to speak on his behalf. You are the lawyer and the Bible is the testimony your client made.

ValentineMary:


These arguments are laughable and very naive but as I said earlier, I would not argue evolution again on NL. But as a biochemist, I would tell u that d ape blood, donkey milk is no longer used as a basis to "debunk" evolution since the emergence of molecular biology we can accurately say that apes are our closest SURVIVING relatives on the evolutionary tree. But I would leave u to not believe in evolution

Splinz:

You sef...... I don tire for you. What I'v said, I've said. [size=18pt]Shebi na Bible God you want proven?[/size] Cool down joor....

Weah96:


Do you have another God to prove? The Bible god to you is God the source, no be so again? So when you say God, in your head you mean the Bible god. Please, I don't mean to sound adversarial, it's just that I have to keep repeating the argument to different people. Tomorrow, some other Christian will tell me to look at a Rolex watch to see how the universe, like the watch, could not have appeared by chance. He will use that to say that God exists and probably quote biblical scriptures.

Edybleketara:
Dont mind dem. But just allow d guy ride on, and lets see where he is going. I'm actually enjoying his intelligent write up.

Splinz:

I salute your open-mindedness and sincerity at heart. I tell you, one of you is preferable to a thousand.

Please help me tell that brother that we're not fighting but engaging in "intellectual discourse". He's sounding so pained and frustrated!

Anyways, like they say, "The Truth Is Bitter".

Weah96:


[size=16pt]Irreducible Complexity =Jesus walked on water[/size]

Is that what you call truth?

csamii:


Chairman calm down. Mysterious things happen daily and these are things scientists and science disagrees with.

Splinz continue but know you haven't presented those facts and proofs so far.