AlfaSeltzer:
Why do religious people have tiny brains?

HCpaul:

Why do unreligious people have big but deluded mentality.

God does'nt exist--- PROVE IT.


Until you are able to define existence, you are giving up to a reprobate mind.

Weah96:
You don't understand the argument against your position. Could have saved you some time.

The universe has a beginning. If you don't like the word beginning, and prefer to use god, that's your business.

Now, can you prove to me that the beginning of the universe, abi, god, speaks to you? Can you prove to me that the beginning of the universe commissioned a book?

tonie123:




Yes sir, the prove are written in the book, if you read with your eyes and mind open, you will see.


I hear from God directly!!!
We've heard of prophet of God,

You can say we hear from evil spirit, that ok!!

Anything that has a "bad version" must also have a "good version" somewhere.

"Bad"wouldn't exist if there is no "Good"


If there are "evil spirits" then there are "good spirits" somewhere, and we call them angels....

If there is a leader of the "evil spirit" there is a leader of the good ones and we call him Jehovah or God (depending on your understanding of him)

Weah96:


Good. I've been waiting for you. Can you send a message to your deity for me?

BTW, when was your last direct conversation with the thing that started the universe?

tonie123:


Waiting for me? Do you know me before now?

Last conversation, was this morning..... when I woke up.

If you have a message for him, he too has a message for you..... if a thing of personal experience now, build a personal relationship with him and you can exchange messages for free, no airtime needed...

Lol

asalimpo:
Then, the bible would be a myth.
It would be a man made book full of lies.

asalimpo:

Any evidence, invalidating the theory that life is only physical would
shatter atheism foundation.

asalimpo:

They are many reported /documented occurences that defy physical explanation, hence
life cannot be physical only. therefore, there's more to life than the physical hence atheism is false.
And just a notion.

Weah96:


Tell the thing to call me. Can you do that or is it too much to ask?

tonie123:


What's "tell the thing to call me"? I don't get

Weah96:


The thing you talk to, tell it to call me on my head phone. Hahaha. I meant the phone in my head.

tonie123:


You are deaf and blind spiritually..... no be curse, lol

Even if they call, you no go hear the ring tone....lol

asalimpo:
some examples that do raise questions about the physical view being the absolute view of life.

1) guts/instinct.
------------------
pre science etc. Call it what you may. Instinct, the ability to sense a future event,
and in some cases predict them defies all physical laws. Why?
Because, to be explained physically, the person would have to be living ahead of time.

asalimpo:
Go into the future, experience the event then return (assuming its non fatal ).
Nostradamus made many predictions that were spot on. How can that be explained from a physical
viewpoint, without stretching things.

asalimpo:

2) physically impossible feats
-----------------------------------
A monk who drills his head with a powerful electric drill and is unhurt.
A man who starts a fire by simply concentrating his hands on an object.

asalimpo:
Physically, these are impossible but they've been demonstrated.
From a physical viewpoint, the toughness of the skin would crack up under a drill.
If one wants to throw in the "power of the mind stuff", note that the mind is just a physical
organ with chemicals firing off in the brain. It is nothing but a chemical process.
Thoughts and will are chemical reactions in the brain.
So what chemical reaction, when fired up, could make the skin,bone so dense and powerful,
it becomes tougher than steel ?

Weah96:


Here we go again. I've read the Bible stories. Humans were hearing the thing with normal ears and eyes. In Nigeria, humans need spirit ears and eyes. Na wa oh? I tire.

lepasharon:
If life is not only physical. How does that prove god?

asalimpo:

It disproves atheism.
And provides very compelling grounds for proving God.

CoolUsername:


But instinct is nothing more than a function of the brain. Or can you say that instinct is never wrong? Is it 100% accurate?



Nostradamus made predictions that were 'fulfilled' 100s of years late
r. Right now I can make a vaguely worded 'prediction' and if given enough time, then something can be rationalized to be the fulfillment of that 'prophecy'. Here goes:

"Deep in the recesses of the concrete jungle, rivers of fire will consume life, darkening the skies and consuming the sun for a time. Man, woman, child, and beast would perish" -CoolUsername

Now that is just fancy talk for a volcanic eruption or probably a forest fire.





I've talked about magicians who make you see only what they want you see. Since these men are the performers in a sense, the audience only gets a limited amount of information from each act. If all facts are given to us, there would most likely be an explanation.

As the old saying (which I totally made up) goes:
"Absence make the heart grow fonder.
Mystique makes the mind go yonder and wander."



Now let's employ a bit of logic, if these men are indeed using supernatural powers to perform these feats, then that raises a few questions, how can supernatural energy, fill a physical space or interact with physical energy or matter? For example concentrating to ignite an object would require 'super' energy to create an exothermic reaction.

From chemistry, exothermic reactions give off heat to the surroundings, heat is a form of physical energy, so would it be safe to say that fire is a medium for converting supernatural energy to physical energy? If so, then why do all combustion obey the law of conservation of energy? An undetectable energy source should theoretically cause an imbalance in the enthalpy, right? But we just don't see that.

EDIT: Grammar x Formatting

lepasharon:


How?

asalimpo:

if instincts are only brain functions, then no premonitions or fore knowing would occur.
Anything that hints to the future from the present ,accurately , would never and can never be explained
by creatures living in real time only.
And by hint, i dont mean, conjectures made from analysing past data/records.
While they're fake and false instances. They are real documented instances that defy science/logic.

asalimpo:
If nostradamus predictions were all vague ,they wouldnt spark so much interests and controversy as they have. Some of his predictions were uncannily accurate.

asalimpo:

When you say magicians, you are putting a twist on things.
You are asserting and classifying all para-normal occurences as frauds.
You are also dismissing the credibility and insulting the intelligence of reporters of those phenomena-
sorry, even this technique is biased and wrong.

asalimpo:

To your last question,
look at it in this light. The supernatural/spiritual simply is a higher level than the physical.
Trying to 'reason' logically about occurences from that realm with human logic can fail sometimes.
Because, there arena's where logic fail.

How can an axe head float?
How can a man walk on water?
How can a tree die after being spoken to?
How can a man ascend upwards , defying gravity?
How can certified dead people come back to life?

millenia after these events, science can't still answer these questions.
Writing all these off as hogwash, is actually unscientific. And therefore illogical.

CoolUsername:


You'll need to cite some sources of clearly worded predictions with a reasonable time frame that were fulfilled.

They're too many uncanny accounts of incidents of this nature.
too many. extra qualification, doesnt disprove them.



They are vague because he speaks in generic 'metaphors' without giving accurate time frames of when the predicted events would occur. They have only sparked so much interest among people who chose to believe.

Maybe , you dont know who nostradamus is. For the whole world to be enamoured with his predictions,
means they were startling enough to arrest many people's attention. Not giving accurate time frame
is just extra qualification imposed by you to water down his accounts.
The extra time frame is'nt the issue. It is that his prophecies had enough detail in them, amidst
the absence of full details on other issues, to resemble events that happend later such that
when those events occured the striking similarity with his prophecies sparked interest in his works.
I don't need to give examples, just do your research. Fraud or not, the central theme remains,
this fraud isnt possible if man is solely a physical and complex machine.



I am not calling all of them frauds, I'm calling them mysterious. I'm calling them mysterious in the sense that not all the information is made available to the public. Therefore people fill up these gaps with the supernatural explanations.

They'll never be enough qualifying information to satisfy all sceptics.
Two, accounts of these nature have been reported by many many people.
To be false, all these people have to be liars or deluded- that's stretching it.


Now, THAT is biased and wrong because the scientific method has expected properties, can be used to make predictions and lastly, has been successful with it. On the other hand, the supernatural is yet to affect the world in any meaningful manner.

Scientific methods can only verify physical phenomena. or phenomena subject to physical observation.
The supernatural doesnt need to affect the world. their merits or demerits is not the issue.
One genuine true account of supernatural encounter dismantles the assumption of science/atheism.
that's all that's needed.
The other alternative is for atheism/science to debunk all such claims as forgeries and lies.



Once again, these stories you cited are contained within the pages of a Bronze Age book of mythology that has had several of its conjectures disproved by science (eg: Noah's Flood is quite laughable).

To use that as a source of information is biased. To pick that particular book's mythology over all the other mythology that exists is also biased.

There's no biase there. The bible is well known. And its supernatural stories are well known.
The point i was making was that they're occurences that defy logic/science.
Science can only comment on the physical, when something is above the physical science becomes inadequate.
So those things disproved by science may just be science squinting at the supernatural and denying it.
Bronze age book - think again.

asalimpo:
They're too many uncanny accounts of
incidents of this nature.
too many. extra qualification, doesnt
disprove them.

asalimpo:

Maybe , you dont know who nostradamus
is. For the whole world to be enamoured
with his predictions, means they were startling enough to arrest many people's attention. Not giving accurate time frame is just extra qualification imposed by you to water down his accounts.
The extra time frame is'nt the issue. It is
that his prophecies had enough detail in
them, amidst
the absence of full details on other issues,
to resemble events that happend later
such that
when those events occured the striking
similarity with his prophecies sparked
interest in his works.
I don't need to give examples, just do your
research. Fraud or not, the central theme
remains,
this fraud isnt possible if man is solely a
physical and complex machine.

asalimpo:

They'll never be enough qualifying
information to satisfy all sceptics.
Two, accounts of these nature have been
reported by many many people.
To be false, all these people have to be
liars or deluded- that's stretching it.

asalimpo:

Scientific methods can only verify physical
phenomena. or phenomena subject to
physical observation.
The supernatural doesnt need to affect the
world. their merits or demerits is not the
issue.
One genuine true account of supernatural
encounter dismantles the assumption of
science/atheism.
that's all that's needed.
The other alternative is for atheism/
science to debunk all such claims as
forgeries and lies.

asalimpo:

There's no biase there. The bible is well
known. And its supernatural stories are
well known.
The point i was making was that they're
occurences that defy logic/science.
Science can only comment on the physical,
when something is above the physical
science becomes inadequate.
So those things disproved by science may
just be science squinting at the
supernatural and denying it.
Bronze age book - think again.