KingEbukasBlog:


Its fun to watch .

Peter griffin is a clown... The guy too dumb chai

felixomor:


What u have only showed here is difference in language.
No sense made.

Difference in language.. i see. Like how the xtian God says he sent his only son to die for the sins of many but the Muslim God says he didnt beget no son or how Odin says his thor(god of thunder) is the god of mankind or perhaps the greek king of the gods- Zeus who resides in mount olympus is similar to Yahwey.. God-s ways are myserious indeed.

Scalord:


Difference in language.. i see. Like how the xtian God says he sent his only son to die for the sins of many but the Muslim God says he didnt beget no son or how Odin says his thor(god of thunder) is the god of mankind or perhaps the greek king of the gods- Zeus who resides in mount olympus is similar to Yahwey.. God-s ways are myserious indeed.

Please go n use ur original moniker

felixomor:


Please go n use ur original moniker

This is my real Moniker

Scalord:


This is my real Moniker

No oga landlord

felixomor:


No oga landlord

Help me here. What should it be?

AgentOfAllah:

You're clearly a smart person, so I urge you to resist the temptation of equating your smartness to knowledge. This sort of arrogance is the downfall of many a smart person.

I repeat, there are physical phenomena that are immaterial. I assume you've heard of electromagnetic waves!

Electromagnetic waves are material. They are constituted by photons moving at different frequencies. Again that statement is a contradiction.

AgentOfAllah:
Physics is obviously not your forte, but that doesn't mean you should espouse this voluntary aversion to education, and with such crass savagery, no less.

Let's see..

AgentOfAllah:

1) "Basic form" has a specific meaning, so does "matter". When you say matter in its basic form, you're referring to matter in its most elementary state known to man. As far as the definition of "basic form"/"elementary" goes, a "composite" can never be a basic form of its constituents for obvious linguistic reasons (Mr. Comprehension). Quantity, "most" or few, has absolutely noting to do with it.

A composite can be a basic form this is true of self-repeating patterns such as fractals where a pattern is composed of similar smaller patterns constituted as with all geometry by connected points.

AgentOfAllah:

2) There is absolutely no evidence for the claim that most materials are composed of atoms. Let me educate you. Matter makes up about 30% of the known universe. of this, baryonic matter (to which all atoms belong) is estimated to be about 5%. Also, not all baryonic matter is composed of atoms (neutron stars for example). So the claim that most materials are composed of atoms is made out of ignorance. Correct it!

And most of the baryonic matter you first mentioned are composed of atoms. It should be obvious I'm talking about visible baryonic matter. Until dark matter (which constitutes the other 25%) is found it is of no consequence to me.

AgentOfAllah:

3) Since you believe "basic properties" ("in itself" ), connotes "basic form"; and then claim that "being composite doesn't prevent something from being basic (form)", haven't you plunged yourself into an awkward dilemma?! For I may then ask, if composite atoms can be a basic form of matter as you claim, then what stops the brain from also being a basic form of matter? The brain is no less a composite of baryonic matter than atoms are, is it?

Brains are macroscopic and therefore cannot be basic. Neither are brains fundamental to the properties of other materials like atoms are: the more crucial point.

AgentOfAllah:

4) Not all "particles" exist in space and have mass simultaneously (recall the definition of matter). In particle physics, "particles" are just called that out of convenience, because of the energy mass equivalency (Remember the famous E = mc²?), not because they occupy space and have mass. Sure enough, many of these particles have "masses" which are actually measured in units of energy (KeV, MeV, GeV), but they do not really occupy space, so they are merely high energy phenomena, not matter. Examples of such subatomic particles are quarks, neutrinos, pretty much all bosons (like photons which occupy neither space nor have any mass).

I recall matter as anything existing in space. Your statements are demonstrably idiotic. Anything that exists in space is extended in space and has movement in space. Quarks, neutrinos and photons all move. Movement is defined by a change of location in space. So the idea that subatomic particles don't exist in space is idiotic.

AgentOfAllah:

I implore you again, heed my previous advice about resisting that temptation to misconstrue your smartness for knowledge.

Take your own advice. You sorely need it.

It’s not easy to use mere words as evidence, but give this a read. You might be convinced about God.

https://www.nairaland.com/4998253/death-proof-higher-power-god

Good Day Believer's,

I had a question , about God, and I made the following assumptions about God to ask it;

God can do Anything
God Knows Everything
God loves Everyone Equally
When Sinners die , they go to hell


And someone , who claims to be born again made the following statements in his attempt to answer my question;

God Cannot do Anything
God Does Not know Everything
The soul of dead sinners are destroyed, they do not go to hell.



Most importantly , Not only did he claim God does not love Everyone , he also claimed that God loving everyone is a very stupid idea.



Is that truly what most Believer's believe in ? I am honestly shocked by his views.. especially on that about God's love.



Here is the link to the question I asked,

https://www.nairaland.com/5007574/argument-god-does-not-exist#75489803


Please , try and help me understand how God Exists , and who he is. Thank you