butterflyl1on:


You do believe in creation but not the bible kind judging by your very last comment. You said "nobody knows the truth about creation" ( implying intelligent design) . As an atheist you should have said "nobody knows the truth about how we got here".

same thing we are saying.

butterflyl1on:


You do believe in creation but not the bible kind judging by your very last comment. You said "nobody knows the truth about creation" ( implying intelligent design) . As an atheist you should have said "nobody knows the truth about how we got here".

one thing am sure of is that the earth is not less than 10,000years old according to biblical calculation. Scientists suggested that the earth might be 4.5billion years. To be honest both claims haven't yet be proven but it's almost certain that the bible account of the earth is wrong.

segunojo866:
one thing am sure of is that the earth is not less than 10,000years old according to biblical calculation. Scientists suggested that the earth might be 4.5billion years. To be honest both claims haven't yet be proven but it's almost certain that the bible account of the earth is wrong.

I don't understand you. You said based on biblical calculations you are sure that the earth is not less that 10,000 years old. Scientists say 4.5billion years old. Yet you say the Bible account of the earth is wrong?

I don't get it. Or is it your punctuation marks in your comment that is sending the wrong message?

butterflyl1on:


You do believe in creation but not the bible kind judging by your very last comment. You said "nobody knows the truth about creation" ( implying intelligent design) . As an atheist you should have said "nobody knows the truth about how we got here".

am convinced that there was an intelligent designer of the universe, Albert Einstein also acknowledge it. If you study Charles Darwin and Richard Dawkins books about the human cells and genes. It's obvious that there most be a designer. The question is who was the designer? Obviously it's not the religious god's.

butterflyl1on:


I don't understand you. You said based on biblical calculations you are sure that the earth is not less that 10,000 years old. Scientists say 4.5billion years old. Yet you say the Bible account of the earth is wrong?

I don't get it. Or is it your punctuation marks in your comment that is sending the wrong message?

what i meant is that the Bible claim that the earth is less than 10,000years is not acceptable

segunojo866:
am convinced that there was an intelligent designer of the universe, Albert Einstein also acknowledge it. If you study Charles Darwin and Richard Dawkins books about the human cells and genes. It's obvious that there most be a designer. The question is who was the designer? Obviously it's not the religious god's.

And what if the designer is not a God?

What if we are just laboratory experiments?

What if everything is just a mirage/illusion?

I don't bother myself again about evolution or no evolution

segunojo866:
am convinced that there was an intelligent designer of the universe, Albert Einstein also acknowledge it. If you study Charles Darwin and Richard Dawkins books about the human cells and genes. It's obvious that there most be a designer. The question is who was the designer? Obviously it's not the religious god's.

Well I will not go into the "obviously " part you mentioned at the end because this thread is not for that. However I appreciate the fact that you admit to intelligence in the design for creation which means you believe there is a higher being responsible for this design but even if it were God it cannot be the religious adaptation. Am I correct?

adepeter2027:
This topic is good even tho I everything is like a mirage/illusion to me.

To me, they both look false and fake.
Tho some aspect of evolution make sense and plausible

Some aspects of evolution makes sense and sound plausible, but over all it is pure bunk in my opinion. It relies too much on the opinion and alleged intelligent guesses of its proponents. Some of its assumptions are out rightly false.

butterflyl1on:


Well I will not go into the "obviously " part you mentioned at the end because this thread is not for that. However I appreciate the fact that you admit to intelligence in the design for creation which means you believe there is a higher being responsible for this design but even if it were God it cannot be the religious adaptation. Am I correct?

you are so right

adepeter2027:

And what if the designer is not a God?

What if we are just laboratory experiments?

What if everything is just a mirage/illusion?

I don't bother myself again about evolution or no evolution

The designer is a God

We are programmed laboratory experiments with a set of will and can determine how we end the experiment based on reward for good behaviour or reward for bad behaviour.

Everything is a mirage and an illusion because this world and our bodies are not the real us. This world will pass away and so will our earthly bodies. The real us is what our bodies is covering as a suit.

segunojo866:
you are so right

I am Okay with your position of believing in a higher power behind the intelligence of creation and you have to agree that the inherent intelligence in creation is amazing. It's just a beautiful display of super human intelligence.

dalaman:


Creationism does NOT offer any summary. Creationism only offers an assumption and supposition, that is why it remains empty and can not be used to know or understand anything about nature or what it assumes.

Creationism for example just assumes that something called God created, but it can never tell you how God created anything, it can not tell you why God created, when he created and for what purpose.

A creationist will tell you that God created the earth, ask him to explain how God created the earth's magnetic field for example and he'll start crying because he has no idea at all. He is just runnig on wild assumptions.

Science is based on facts and on theories based on facts.

Religion is based on belief in spite of facts; usually religion is based on a "holy book" which pretends to be a book describing "events" that actually "happened". No wonder religious people detest science, although they now pretend to "support" science (as a general -- and, for them, meaningless -- proposition).

Christians are also fearful re: Evolution for solid theological reasons:

Evolution demolishes the idea of an "Adam and Eve," who are depicted as being created by "God" in the last part of Biblical Creation in the Book of Genesis. They are unrelated to any life form that came before them, per the Bible.

Without Adam and Eve . . . you have no disobedience based on
them eating the fruit from the wrong tree.

Without this disobedience -- called "Original Sin" -- you have NO reason for "God" to later send a "Redeemer" for the human race (each of whose members somehow "inherited" that "Original Sin" LOL) . . . and that Redeemer = Jesus. Without Jesus, you have no basis for Christianity. . . . hence, the panic that Christians feel re: Evolution and their goal to discredit it and –
instead – to pretend that a folk tale version of “Creationism accurately
describes what actually “happened”.

They're not arguing against evolution cuz its false; if the Bible endorsed evolution, they'll be its biggest proponents, they're arguing against it cuz it renders a big part of their folklore virtually useless

butterflyl1on:


The designer is a God

We are programmed laboratory experiments with a set of will and can determine how we end the experiment based on reward for good behaviour or reward for bad behaviour.

Everything is a mirage and an illusion because this world and our bodies are not the real us. This world will pass away and do will our earthly bodies. The real us is what our bodies is covering as a suit.

Assumptions without evidence.
Furthermore, your points sound like personal perception.

butterflyl1on:


Sorry I disagree. Of the 4 you listed there, for creation, WHY is the most important. When we know why then when, where and how fades into the distance.

You can only ask and get the HOW if it is replicable. Can man make man from his raw materials? Can man make even plants from its raw materials?

Why bother about HOW when such an information is useless to you.

Even ever since evolutionists claimed man came from a single celled organism have they been able to make or create anything with this information?

Why do you like making silly commentaries na? How do you know that the HOW is useless?

It is NOT. I for one will like to know HOW the first man or set of humans was/ were created.

I can not manufacturer a car but when I see the video recording of a car assembly plant I fully and truly appreciate the process involved even though I can't replicate it.

Creationism doesn't know the HOW and can not offer any verifiable ot true explanation so it skips ot and tries to explain the why(something that remains an assumption on its part ). The HOW, WHEN and WHERE are all very important questions and we are all very interest in them as human beings. Even many creationists try to answer them, it's just that they have failed with their attempts.

adepeter2027:

Assumptions without evidence.
Furthermore, your points sound like personal perception.

Your questions which I responded to look like we are both having the same personal perceptions wouldn't you agree?

dalaman:


Why do you like making silly commentaries na? How do you know that the HOW is useless?

It is NOT. I for one will like to know HOW the first man or set of humans was/ were created.

I can not manufacturer a car but when I see the video recording of a car assembly plant I fully and truly appreciate the process involved even though I can't replicate it.

Creationism doesn't know the HOW and can not offer any verifiable ot true explanation so it skips ot and tries to explain the why(something that remains an assumption on its part ). The HOW, WHEN and WHERE are all very important questions and we are all very interest in them as human beings. Even many creationists try to answer them, it's just that they have failed with their attempts.

Okay we are done. I have to stop responding to your comments now because as rightly observed you are now derailing and shifting the purpose of the OP.

Let's just say we agree to disagree. Thank you.

butterflyl1on:


Your questions which I responded to look like we are both having the same personal perceptions wouldn't you agree?

Yeah. And that's why I stated above that "both" look fake & false to me

adepeter2027:

Assumptions without evidence.
Furthermore, your points sound like personal perception.

Of course it is HIS personal perception and assumptions.

dalaman:


Which major claims of christianity or Islam can be subjected to critical thinking and found to make sense?

if you dare it... I will invite a Muslim to defend their claim likewise i will call butterflylion or any other to also defend the Christianity faith... You will see they will hold on to some logical reasons you yourrself will find it difficult to debunk....... I asure you i can defend my paganism faith logically....

hopefulLandlord:


Science is based on facts and on theories based on facts.

Religion is based on belief in spite of facts; usually religion is based on a "holy book" which pretends to be a book describing "events" that actually "happened". No wonder religious people detest science, although they now pretend to "support" science (as a general -- and, for them, meaningless -- proposition).

Christians are also fearful re: Evolution for solid theological reasons:

Evolution demolishes the idea of an "Adam and Eve," who are depicted as being created by "God" in the last part of Biblical Creation in the Book of Genesis. They are unrelated to any life form that came before them, per the Bible.

Without Adam and Eve . . . you have no disobedience based on
them eating the fruit from the wrong tree.

Without this disobedience -- called "Original Sin" -- you have NO reason for "God" to later send a "Redeemer" for the human race (each of whose members somehow "inherited" that "Original Sin" LOL) . . . and that Redeemer = Jesus. Without Jesus, you have no basis for Christianity. . . . hence, the panic that Christians feel re: Evolution and their goal to discredit it and –
instead – to pretend that a folk tale version of “Creationism accurately
describes what actually “happened”.

They're not arguing against evolution cuz its false; if the Bible endorsed evolution, they'll be its biggest proponents, they're arguing against it cuz it renders a big part of their folklore virtually useless

You are always nailing it.

What I really find astonishing is this Adam and Eve mythological folklore. It is demonstrably FALSE.

vaxx:
if you dare it... I will invite a Muslim to defend their claim likewise i will call butterflylion or any other to also defend the Christianity faith... You will see they will hold on to some logical reasons you yourrself will find it difficult to debunk....... I asure you i can defend my paganism faith logically....

I've debated muslims and christians here for years. I was a former christian myself. If Christianity made logical sense to me, I will still be one.

We can start with your paganism. I don't know anything about it so you can tell me it's major claims so that we can examine them.

hopefulLandlord:


Science is based on facts and on theories based on facts.

Religion is based on belief in spite of facts; usually religion is based on a "holy book" which pretends to be a book describing "events" that actually "happened". No wonder religious people detest science, although they now pretend to "support" science (as a general -- and, for them, meaningless -- proposition).

Christians are also fearful re: Evolution for solid theological reasons:

Evolution demolishes the idea of an "Adam and Eve," who are depicted as being created by "God" in the last part of Biblical Creation in the Book of Genesis. They are unrelated to any life form that came before them, per the Bible.

Without Adam and Eve . . . you have no disobedience based on
them eating the fruit from the wrong tree.

Without this disobedience -- called "Original Sin" -- you have NO reason for "God" to later send a "Redeemer" for the human race (each of whose members somehow "inherited" that "Original Sin" LOL) . . . and that Redeemer = Jesus. Without Jesus, you have no basis for Christianity. . . . hence, the panic that Christians feel re: Evolution and their goal to discredit it and –
instead – to pretend that a folk tale version of “Creationism accurately
describes what actually “happened”.

They're not arguing against evolution cuz its false; if the Bible endorsed evolution, they'll be its biggest proponents, they're arguing against it cuz it renders a big part of their folklore virtually useless

not all religion is base on books......unstructured religion like pagan. Do not follow any particular standard.... The whole idea is DO It YOUR SElf...... To me a pagan is a free thinker.... He does not follow any rules or standard , he only follow the principle rules of nature....

dalaman:


I've deabated muslims and christians here for years. I was a former christian myself. If Christianity made logical sense to me, I will still be one.

We can start with your paganism. I don't know anything about it so you can tell me it's major claims so that we can examine them.

lol to avoid deralling.... You can create a topic on it and mention me......or may be I myself will call you in my next topic...

vaxx:
lol to avoid deralling.... You can create a topic on it and mention me......or may be I myself will call you in my next topic...

Ok then.

adepeter2027:

And what if the designer is not a God?

What if we are just laboratory experiments?

What if everything is just a mirage/illusion?

I don't bother myself again about evolution or no evolution

am not saying the designer was Yahweh or Allah. I believe in an higher been, you can say i believe in God but my opinion about God Is that God Is science and nature. I don't believe in the religious and supernatural type of God

segunojo866:
am not saying the designer was Yahweh or Allah. I believe in an higher been, you can say i believe in God but my opinion about God Is that God Is science and nature. I don't believe in the religious and supernatural type of God

Nature and science are not behind creation so God cannot be nature and science.

God is apart from nature as he created nature.

God is apart from science as his creation caused science as we know it to exist and scientists to have jobs.

butterflyl1on:


I am Okay with your position of believing in a higher power behind the intelligence of creation and you have to agree that the inherent intelligence in creation is amazing. It's just a beautiful display of super human intelligence.

so wrong. Every religion has their own description of god and my own description is science.

segunojo866:
honestly i didn't read your post. As an atheist i don't believe in evolution theory. It's so unreasonable and irrational. The bible story of creation is completely absurd and lack critical thinking. Nobody knows the truth about creation

as for me am in between.... Scientifically I support science and logically I support creationist ..... Not the Bible version anyway.... The yoruba concept....I created a thread on it... I will post it for you if you like...

vaxx:
as for me am in between.... Scientifically I support science and logically I support creationist ..... Not the Bible version anyway.... The yoruba concept....I created a thread on it... I will post it for you if you like...

please post it

segunojo866:
so wrong. Every religion has their own description of god and my own description is science.

The same science you said It's evolutionary theory is unreasonable and irrational? Yet this same science based evolution is seen as God by you? You are confusing bro.

segunojo866:
please post it

https://www.nairaland.com/4014537/yoruba-story-creation-fact-fiction

Try to read it....

butterflyl1on:


The same science you said It's evolutionary theory is unreasonable and irrational? Yet this same science based evolution is seen as God by you? You are confusing bro.

I really like you your new style of handling debate now... No insult.... Hope you can continue.... It shows you have a balance mind