According to the atheists, lifeless and physical nature is DUMB, yet after some millions of years a creature that can TALK and SPEAK different languages suddenly emerged from the same very nature WITHOUT any external intervention; see the contradiction!


Just consider our ability to talk and speak in a COHERENT manner:


1. How are we able to select an appropriate word at a particular point in time from vast number of words stored in our brain during speech production ?


2. How does the brain even managed to store and retrieve those words ?


3. How does the vocal apparatus ( which consist of the tongue,lips, teeth etc) managed to be informed within the shortest period of time regarding the words selected by the brain ?


4. How did this vocal apparatus manage to coordinate its activities to ensure the CORRECT PRONUNCIATION of those words ?


5. How and why did present human species manage to have over SIX THOUSAND languages given that children ALWAYS speak the language they heard from their parents ?


6. Are we to suppose that the FIRST human parents on earth were naturally BESTOWED with thousands of languages ?



7. How are we able to SWITCH voluntarily from one language to another during speech production?



8. How are we able to PAUSE and then RESUME to speak voluntarily during speech production ?



9. How are we able to change the TONE of our voice voluntarily during speech production ?



10. How are we able to increase or decrease voluntarily the LOUDNESS of our voice during speech production ?



Any natural process can ONLY be based on CHANCE or follow some predetermined set of LAWS .

Therefore, if all activities going on in our brain is purely and ultimately determined by a natural process, the only instrument in an ATHEISTIC WORLD, then the manner of our speech production will be ;

(a) based purely on CHANCE or

(b) based on some PREDETERMINED SET OF
LAWS.

Under these conditions all the events enumerated above would be absolutely IMPOSSIBLE as they obviously not based on chance or any predetermined set of law:

They are are purely VOLUNTARY actions based on intensional decision.

This simply shows that all the activities going on in our brain is NOT purely and ultimately determined by a natural process, the ONLY INSTRUMENT present in an atheistic world.

If this is the case, there must be an addition of SUPERNATURAL INGREDIENTS for those voluntary actions to take place during speech production. This automatically destroy the back bone of atheism. Therefore, God must exist

Is there any atheist to answer all the questions cited above ? Especially the question 5 and 6

Bwahahahaha! See how I rushed here to see something interesting, only to see argument from personal incredulity and argument from ignorance. SMH. LMFAO!

LordReed:
Bwahahahaha! See how I rushed here to see something interesting, only to see argument from personal incredulity and argument from ignorance. SMH. LMFAO!

Answer questions 5 and 6 if you are very sure that there is no any supernatural power .

If children ALWAYS speak the language they heard from their parents or from their immediate environments, then WHY and HOW over 6,000 different languages came to exist ?

Are we to suppose that the first set of human generations on earth were naturally bestowed with thousands of languages ?

Abdulgaffar22:
Is there any atheist to answer all the questions cited above ? Especially the question 5 and 6

Language develops and changes over time even within our lifetime we have seen the development of pidgin English. One of the way languages develop is when a group of people separate geographically from a population then over time changes in languages in the 2 populations become pronounced. You can see it in the difference between American and British English, you can see it in the Edo language dialects.

Abdulgaffar22:


Answer questions 5 and 6 if you are very sure that there is no any supernatural power .

If children ALWAYS speak the language they heard from their parents or from their immediate environments, then WHY and HOW over 6,000 different languages came to exist ?

Are we to suppose that the first set of human generations on earth were naturally bestowed with thousands of languages ?

Answered.

LordReed:


One of the way languages develop is when a group of people separate geographically from a population then over time changes in languages in the 2 populations become pronounced.

What actually causes the changes in language BEFORE it became pronounced ?


The word "come" is translated as "wa" in Yoruba, "zo" in Hausa and "bia" in Igbo and so on with other languages. What is the MAIN FACTOR responsible for all these changes ?

Abdulgaffar22:



What actually causes the changes in language BEFORE it became pronounced ?


The word "come" is translated as "wa" in Yoruba, "zo" in Hausa and "bia" in Igbo and so on. What is the MAIN FACTOR responsible for all these changes ?

Do you pronounce every word the same way it was intended to be pronounced? Do you even know the proper pronunciation of every single word in your vocabulary?

LordReed:


Do you pronounce every word the same way it was intended to be pronounced? Do you even know the proper pronunciation of every single word in your vocabulary?

Even if we are not sure that the PRONUNCIATION are different, we are 100% sure that SPELLING are different. Therefore, knowing the proper pronunciation is irrelevant. So what causes different spelling ?

Abdulgaffar22:


Even if we are not sure that the PRONUNCIATION are different, we are 100% sure that SPELLING are different. So knowing the proper pronunciation is irrelevant. So what causes different spelling

Propagated spelling errors, teaching quirks, copying errors, etc. Who says pronunciation is irrelevant? Did your forefathers have books or even know how to write? They lived in societies that relied on oral traditions so pronunciation was very relevant.

LordReed:


Propagated spelling errors, teaching quirks, copying errors, etc. Who says pronunciation is irrelevant? Did your forefathers have books or even know how to write? They lived in societies that relied on oral traditions so pronunciation was very relevant.

So propagated spelling errors, teaching quirks and copying errors are responsible for the formation of over SIX THOUSAND different languages we have presently in the world ?

Abdulgaffar22:


So propagated spelling errors, teaching quirks and copying errors are responsible for the formation of over SIX THOUSAND different languages we have presently in the world ?

I never said that, you asked what is responsible for difference in spelling.

If language can change within one generation, why are you surprised that language changes over 200,000 years can produce the number we see now?

LordReed:




If language can change within one generation, why are you surprised that language changes over 200,000 years can produce the number we see now?

Yes I agree that language can change within one generation. But my bone of contention is that such changes cannot be purely explained by natural process.
For example, syntax is the format in which words and phrases are arranged to create sentences. Do you even know that different languages have different syntax. So your theory of propagated spelling errors, if it is true, can only work for vocabularies. It can NEVER work for syntax and other properties of language. Language is too complex to develop from such natural process like spelling and copying errors.

Abdulgaffar22:


Yes I agree that language can change within one generation. But my bone of contention is that such changes cannot be purely explained by natural process.
For example, syntax is the format in which words and phrases are arranged to create sentences. Do you even know that different languages have different syntax. So your theory of propagated spelling errors, if it is true, can only work for vocabularies. It can NEVER work for syntax and other properties of language. Language is too complex to develop from such natural process like spelling and copying errors.

Gosh! What is wrong with you? I just told you I was answering your question on difference in spelling, now you are adamant on saying it doesn't explain language differences when that was not what I was explaining.

We are talking about processes that occurred over 200,000years so there was enough time for those processes to affect languages. Humans spread out from Africa to other continents over this period and the further the discrete populations got, the more language changes compounded. Consider that the romance languages (French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese and Romanian) developed from the Latin of the Roman empire, you will see that language can morph and change into completely different forms even from the same source.

How does this post prove that there is a God or that the supernatural exists?

LordReed:


Gosh! What is wrong with you? I just told you I was answering your question on difference in spelling, now you are adamant on saying it doesn't explain language differences when that was not what I was explaining.

Sorry !

LordReed:


We are talking about processes that occurred over 200,000years so there was enough time for those processes to affect languages. Humans spread out from Africa to other continents over this period and the further the discrete populations got, the more language changes compounded. Consider that the romance languages (French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese and Romanian) developed from the Latin of the Roman empire, you will see that language can morph and change into completely different forms even from the same source.

You just keep on saying that language can morph and change. But what actually causes the language to morph and change in an atheistic world ?

masterP042:
How does this post prove that there is a God or that the supernatural exists?

Any natural process can ONLY be based on CHANCE or follow some predetermined set of LAWS .

Therefore, if all activities going on in our brain is purely and ultimately determined by a natural process, the only instrument in an ATHEISTIC WORLD, then the manner of our speech production will be ;

(a) based purely on CHANCE or

(b) based on some PREDETERMINED SET OF
LAWS.

Under these conditions all the events enumerated above would be absolutely IMPOSSIBLE as they obviously not based on chance or any predetermined set of law:

They are are purely VOLUNTARY actions based on intensional decision.

This simply shows that all the activities going on in our brain is NOT purely and ultimately determined by a natural process, the ONLY INSTRUMENT present in an atheistic world.

If this is the case, there must be an addition of SUPERNATURAL INGREDIENTS for those voluntary actions to take place during speech production. This automatically destroy the back bone of atheism. Therefore, God must exist

Abdulgaffar22:


Sorry !




You just keep on saying that language can morph and change. But what actually causes the language to morph and change in an atheistic world ?

Watch this:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWDKsHm6gTA

Abdulgaffar22:


Any natural process can ONLY be based on CHANCE or follow some predetermined set of LAWS .

Therefore, if all activities going on in our brain is purely and ultimately determined by a natural process, the only instrument in an ATHEISTIC WORLD, then the manner of our speech production will be ;

(a) based purely on CHANCE or

(b) based on some PREDETERMINED SET OF
LAWS.

Under these conditions all the events enumerated above would be absolutely IMPOSSIBLE as they obviously not based on chance or any predetermined set of law:

They are are purely VOLUNTARY actions based on intensional decision.

This simply shows that all the activities going on in our brain is NOT purely and ultimately determined by a natural process, the ONLY INSTRUMENT present in an atheistic world.

If this is the case, there must be an addition of SUPERNATURAL INGREDIENTS for those voluntary actions to take place during speech production. This automatically destroy the back bone of atheism. Therefore, God must exist

That's a false dichotomy. Chance operates on predetermined laws so you cannot divorce chance from the laws that guide its outcomes. For instance if you took a 6 sided dice with numbers 1-6, the predetermined states that you can have are 1,2,3,4,5 or 6, you can not have 7 or 10, so its outcomes are limited already.

A better dichotomy is chance and not-chance. If chance is the percentage probability of a particular outcome then not-chance means a particular outcome is always expected. For example there is no chance in what will happen to a stone when you drop it, it will always fall down.

If you want to show that something is not a result of chance then you must show that its outcome must always be the same given the same set of circumstances every time.

What sort of fuckery is this? I am not even an atheist but this is probably the weakest argument against atheism I have ever seen. WT actual F?

Dear OP, the questions 5 and 6 u are harping on are probably the weakest in all the questions u posed there. So this calls your judgement into question.

The English of the Middle ages is not the same English of today. If that English is spoken to u or any modern English man, u will both find it barely intelligible. And that's just within England alone o. Now u are asking what again?

The problem with u religious guys is that u hardly do any research or bother to read anything beyond your religious books. Even that religious book is not even read with any great curiosity. So when the weakest arguments come to your head, u think it an irrefutable argument.

Abdulgaffar22:


Any natural process can ONLY be based on CHANCE or follow some predetermined set of LAWS .

Therefore, if all activities going on in our brain is purely and ultimately determined by a natural process, the only instrument in an ATHEISTIC WORLD, then the manner of our speech production will be ;

(a) based purely on CHANCE or

(b) based on some PREDETERMINED SET OF
LAWS.

Under these conditions all the events enumerated above would be absolutely IMPOSSIBLE as they obviously not based on chance or any predetermined set of law:

They are are purely VOLUNTARY actions based on intensional decision.

This simply shows that all the activities going on in our brain is NOT purely and ultimately determined by a natural process, the ONLY INSTRUMENT present in an atheistic world.

If this is the case, there must be an addition of SUPERNATURAL INGREDIENTS for those voluntary actions to take place during speech production. This automatically destroy the back bone of atheism. Therefore, God must exist

After all the dogon turenci u still made another assumption. Provide clear empirical evidence that God or supernatural exists or forever hold your peace.

masterP042:

After all the dogon turenci u still made another assumption. Provide clear empirical evidence that God or supernatural exists or forever hold your peace.

Abiogenesis is the creation of the first living cell from non living materials through a natural process.


Evolution is the process by which different kinds of living organism are believed to have developed from earlier forms during the history of the earth.


As we can see from above, there is no way we can divorce the theory of abiogenesis from the theory of evolution because without abiogenesis, evolution cannot take place.


But abiogenesis is impossible because of the natural law of entropy.


Natural law of entropy simply says things tend to become disorder when left to themselves. For example, dead cells tend to decay and disintegrate as time passes by.

Now let assume that nature want to create the first living and self replicating cell from non living materials (abiogenesis).

Remember that non- living materials are no way different from dead cells because both are "dead" already.

In fact, dead cells are even higher in quality than non-living materials because some of the organelles (which are no where to be found in the non-living materials) may still be present in the dead cells.

Now this is where I am going;

If natural law of entropy tends to cause the
DEAD CELLS TO DECAY AND DISINTEGRATE
ever more, then would such law of entropy
allow the NON LIVING MATERIALS TO BUILD
UP GRADUALLY until they reach the level of
"dead cell"-let alone jumping to the level of
"living and self replicating cell" ?


Of course, a prevailing condition in one community (i:e natural law of entropy) which always prevent all secondary school student (i:e all dead cells) from furthering their education to a University ( i:e living and self replicating cell) would NEVER allow a student from the same community to now jump from primary school level (i:e non living materials) to the same University.


This is not the issue of the gaps in scientific knowledge being used as evidence for God. Honestly, it is a matter of logical reasoning if you really understand the simple English I wrote up there.


Even if intelligent and conscious humans can give life to the dead in the future, then this will ONLY show that INTELLIGENCE and CONSCIOUSNESS is required for the miracle of abiogenesis to take place. It would NEVER prove that unintelligent and unconscious nature has performed this miracle in the past.


Therefore, if abiogenesis is impossible in a natural world (as we have just proved), then natural evolution has NOTHING to start with. This is how the theory of natural evolution collapses right from its foundation!



Hence, if evolution is really true as the evolutionary scientists want to us believe, then it must be orchestrated by a supernatural being.

The only reasonable candidate to occupy the sit of this supernatural being is God. Therefore, God must exist.

Abdulgaffar22:


Therefore, if abiogenesis is impossible in a natural world (as we have just proved), then natural evolution has NOTHING to start with. This is how the theory of natural evolution collapses right from its foundation!



Hence, if evolution is really true as the evolutionary scientists want to us believe, then it must be orchestrated by a supernatural being.

The only reasonable candidate to occupy the sit of this supernatural being is God. Therefore, God must exist.

There u go again with your assumptions, but I will overlook that. You're talking of abiogenesis and shii, god being the cause the first cell creation, that it is impossible and not natural, bla bla bla.
But you believe that something as complex as god, that created the whole world from word of mouth, came from nothing, probably created himself; is possible to exist and makes sense to you. I'm even surprised at myself for trying to have a logical argument with a god believer on religious issues. Whatever works for you though. I wish you the best.

masterP042:

After all the dogon turenci u still made another assumption. Provide clear empirical evidence that God or supernatural exists or forever hold your peace.

If you're not satisfied with that, here is another empirical evidence that God or supernatural exists;




PREMISE 1; Something must be eternal


Why ; If there is absolutely 'NOTHING' in the long past, then there is no way we can have 'SOMETHING' at this present time because something can NEVER come out from absolutely nothing. Therefore, something must be eternal i:e always exist and infinitely old. So what is this very something that is eternal ?


There are only two options; Universe itself or any invisible Being outside the Universe. Let depicts any invisible Being outside the Universe as God.
Of course it would not make sense to assume that both God and Universe are eternal. So only one thing must be eternal.

Now how are we to know which one is eternal ? Is it Universe that is eternal or is it God that is eternal?


PREMISE 2 ; Anything that is ETERNAL (i:e something that is always exist and infinitely old) would not have a CHANGING characteristic.


Why; for anything to CHANGE, an EXTERNAL cause is required to trigger this change. But as we have established above in premise 1, only one thing (i:e either Universe or God) must be eternal. Therefore, in the long past, nothing exist except this ETERNAL entity. Consequently, there was no any external cause that can trigger a change in this ETERNAL entity. Hence, anything that is ETERNAL would not have a "changing" characteristic.


OBJECTION ; Why is it only an EXTERNAL cause that can trigger a change in an eternal entity ? What of internal cause within the eternal entity ?



REPLY ; if "all the cause" necessary to trigger a change in an eternal entity is INTERNAL (i:e already present inside the entity), then no change would be observed because the final state would always precede the initial state.
For an illustration, let assume that three drops of an indicator (i:e all the necessary cause) is required to CHANGE the colour of an alkali from colourless to pink. That is to say, immediately I finished dropping the third drop, the color will suddenly change from colourless to pink. You will agree with me that "all the three drops" are EXTERNAL CAUSE (i:e outside the alkali). Now if all the three drops of indicator is already inside the alkali right from the beginning of its production (i:e INTERNAL CAUSE), then the INITIAL color of the alkali would be pink instead of colorless. So "changing" from colorless (INITIAL) to pink (FINAL) would never be observed because the initial color of alkali is already pink not colorless. That is to say, the final state has preceded the initial state. Yet for a CHANGE to occur, the initial state must always precede the final state.
Therefore, it is only an EXTERNAL cause that can trigger a change in an eternal entity ( or anything )

But there was no any external cause that can trigger a change in an ETERNAL entity because in the long past nothing exist beside this eternal entity. Hence, anything that is ETERNAL would not have a "changing" characteristic.



PREMISE 3 ; Universe (or nature) has a CHANGING characteristic.


Why; In the long past, no part of Universe (or nature) can see, can hear, can speak, can think and can move voluntarily . But now some part of the Universe (i:e human beings) can see, can hear, can speak different languages, can think and can move voluntarily. Therefore, Universe has undergone a drastic CHANGE.

Hence, follows from Premise 2, Universe is not eternal because of its CHANGING characteristic.

But we have already established from Premise 1 that "SOMETHING (i:e either Universe or God )" must be eternal. And since universe is not eternal because of its CHANGING characteristic, then God must be eternal.

But are we 100% sure that this very God actually exist ? If God does not actually exist, then Premise 1 would be wrong because nothing would be eternal. Remember that we have already proved that Universe is not eternal. Hence, if God is also not eternal due to His non existence, then Premise 1 would be wrong.

But Premise 1 is perfectly true. Therefore, God must actually exist.