GeeCee:

I would rather live my life as if there is a God, and die to find out there isn't, than live my life as if there isn't, and die to find out there is.

Oro Gojigo:

E tire me o! Man dey live on borrowed life, breathe the air e no fit explain, use a brain that has more fundtion than a computer, etcetram etcetram. Still man say question and querry the existence the Supernatural One . Data or no data, Christianity is real; God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost don't merely exist, they are alive. Unfortunately, your point of view have no effect on that fact.

eeman:

if christianity is not a sham then christians ought to honour judas for ensuring that jesus died on the cross.
you guys call him a betrayer but he did it so crist could died for you ,so give honour to whom it is due

Papparassi:

The facts about Christianity are overwhelmingly true.Jesus Christ existed and preached the gospel.

Papparassi:

If he did not exist the issue of Da Vinci Code and this outrageous idea of him having a child named ''Sarah'' with Mary Magdalene would never have been an issue.

Papparassi:

Christianity is all about faith and so as to other religions such as Hindu,Confucianism and others .It boils to down to what you choose to believe.

Papparassi:

But, have you not considered that other religions have something positively unique to say about Jesus Christ.

eeman:

if christianity is not a sham then christians ought to honour judas for ensuring that jesus died on the cross.
you guys call him a betrayer but he did it so crist could died for you ,so give honour to whom it is due

somze:

Christianity is not just faith, it is faith with reason. Christians should endeavour to research about their faith.

http://www.apologetics.com/ebooks/farinaccio-faithwithreason.pdf

somze:

What is our concern with Judas? Its up to him and God. By your logic we should honor racist because without them equality wont have existed in US, or Hitler should be honored since his killing of millions of jews led to their returning to their land or lets honor criminals because without them we wont have laws to protect us. Your logic is gravely flawed.

nferyn:

Another one of those weak apologetical intellectually coated attempt at reasoning that even a cursory reading of the argumentation within the book can easily demolish. Just one example:
The defense on the rationality of the Christian world view rest on the argument that all world views have certain presuppositions or premisses and that these have to be accepted by faith. The main problem with that argument is the premisses of Christianity as presented in the book are not nearly reductionistic enough and as a matter of speaking must [b]also [/b]presuppose [b]all [/b]premisses of the materialistic world view as well (I'm not going to delve into the caricature of atheism the author makes, because that would lead us too far).

nferyn:

Christianity must not only accept revelation on faith, but must also accept the overall lawfulness of nature and the applicability of logic, the [b]only [/b]presuppositions of naturalism. A whole lot more faith, it seems to me.
Besides, to 'prove' revelation, one can only use the presuppositions of the naturalistic method, but one can easily toss out the same method when it contradicts that revelation.

dblock:

On what basis, there are so many contradictions and uncertainties in the good Book.

I better go to church tommorow, I've strayed away from christianity for a very long time, I might just become an Athiest.

somze:

What do you mean that there are not nearly reductionistic enough?

somze:
Even you can't meet your outrageous standards.

somze:
Do you want the author to write about all the religions and belief systems in the world? Did you study all those systems before you decided on atheism?

somze:

I'm thinking you hardly went through the book.

somze:

Much less faith than you need to prove the inexistence of deity or disprove the designer's argument

somze:

-where there is a design there must be a designer(which the author refers to).

somze:

Or can you show clear and incontrovertible evidence that God does not exist?

somze:

My guess is you needed your own bunch of presuppositions to arrive at that belief (faith).

somze:

Now about Judas not being "properly evidenced." - here with your standards again.

somze:

What then is your definition of "properly evidenced." and how does it fit with the culture that was existent more than 2000 years ago?

nferyn:

Quite simply that the presupposition that revelation is true is a composite truth claim and that it in itself is contradictory because the different elements of revelation contradict each other (e.g. the impossibility of the omnimax god).

nferyn:

For a specific deity, such as the Judeo-Christian Jahweh on the other hand, I can most definitely support my claim of non-existence. Start by clearly defining your God and his characteristics and we can talk, as Jahweh is a different entity to different people.

somze:

@nferyn
First of all i notice the futility of this discussion. I'm not here to be convinced of the existence of my God (Jehovah/Yhwh - both christians and jews believe in thesame God) neither are you genuinely here to be convinced otherwise (no such thing as a God but bing bang, evolution etc), but for clarity sake and for those on the wall here goes:

somze:

The Design Argument (theory) is:

somze:

(1) Everything we’ve encountered that appears to have been designed does in fact have a designer;

somze:

(2) The universe does appear as if it has been designed;

somze:

(3) Thus, the universe has a designer;

somze:

(4) This designer is God.”

somze:

Wanting to narrow this down a bit, i'll deal with - "There is no design, ergo, no need for a designer. Why don't you start by bringing evidence for the existence of design in the natural world (I'm not referring to design by humans)?"

Yes there is a design(non-human) take our solar system for example, every planet orbits round its axis at its speed and never deviates. If one planet was to be taken off, science says we would all squash into each other and that would be the end of our solar system. The planets revolve round the sun, we have a galaxy of our own that stays on its path without interefering with others. Even in our earth, we have a design, from the tropics to the antartic, every creation has a design. Insects, animals and humans.

. . . imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in'an interesting hole I find myself in'fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.

somze:

We humans have functions that every single part (organ, cell or system) performs. Earlier when the functions of some parts where unknown evolutionist thought it was proof to their theory (claiming the parts had funtions in primitive forms and after metamorphosis came into no use).

somze:

Now medical science indeed has shown the functions of those parts.

somze:

An indeed beautiful and intelligent designer must have been involved no doubt - and we are totally convinced that the designer is our God.

somze:

What convinces us is our bible -love it or hate it- its authenticity, its historical accuracy, its message. Nature also helps solidify our position, and even science does (from the little i've shown).

Bobbyaf:

Please take a look at these streaming videos that provide evidence that the bible's account of an instantaneous creation of the earth's granite or foundation rocks is indeed true, and likewise the account of the universal flood. Here is the link:

http://www.halos.com/videos/streaming-video.htm#yae

They each deal with:

1. The centre of the universe

2. The young age of the earth

3. Fingerprints of creation

Bobbyaf:

Simply choose the best downlad speed and watch for at least one hour the fascinating truth about what evolutionists have not yet discovered. Its so simple one wonders why they failed to see the evidence

Bobbyaf:

Even Jesus gave them a clue about the rocks crying out, and they still didn't heed the advice.

Bobbyaf:

God bless and enjoy the videos.

nferyn:

assumption 1, no evidence; Actually, when it come to biological complexity, the argument from design falls flat on it's face. The non-directional forces of natural selection, sexual selection and gene drift working on natural genomic variations within populations caused by mutations and/or sexual recombination are perfectly capable of explaining our biodiversity starting from simple organic replicators.

nferyn:

No it doesn't, it appears to be orderly, something different. A snowflake is orderly and complex, yet it finds it's origin in simple natural processes

nferyn:

Yet we have countless places in the universe where those conditions aren't present. Simple probability in the face of the vastness of the universe can account for the fact that our planet is suited for our form of life. Your argument is similar to this: The chance of winning the lottery are so staggeringly small that one cannot win the lottery. If there are enough people participating, someone is bound to win the lottery, you know. I won't touch on the creation/evolution thingy, as you'll bring forward your evidence for ID in another thread, aren't you?

nferyn:

Here's a quote from Douglas Adams which I find quite applicable: . . . imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking ,

nferyn:

Ah those evil evolutionists and what they claim. Glad to know you're accurately representing the TOE and are not talking from that place where the sun doesn't shine. Maybe you could find me one evolutionist that makes such a ridiculous claim?

nferyn:

Medical science, I see where you're coming from lol. Michael Egnor, anyone?
How little you need to be convinced, oh gullible ones.
There's indeed little you have shown, I must say.

somze:

I did give evidence - humans.

somze:

it does not fall due to biological complexity, kindly explain how.

somze:

Will search, i remember reading this sometime back.

Bobbyaf:

I doubt if you spent the time viewing the videos before making those remarks. Why not take the time to view them carefully for yourself. View them independently and then after we can discuss what was presented in a reasonable manner. I know you're a sensible person so act like one.

Bobbyaf:

Besides, you often make the claim that science is all about empirical observation. Well, here it is! Dr. Robert Ventry has challenged the status quo and has succeeded. If that weren't the case his works would not have been published in peer-reviewed science journals, and hence his works cannot be labeled "lies"

Bobbyaf:

Anyone who views those videos with an open mind could not rationally walk away saying what you said.

Again, this sentence is rather hermetic, but I will try to make sense out of it anyway. I assume you mean to say that I need to explain where the options come from on which natural selection works?
1. natural selection isn't the only mechanism in evolution
2. natural selection works on natural genomic variability, which is mainly caused by 2 processes: sexual recombination and mutations. Mutations can have several causes, but the main cause of mutations is DNA copying errors.
Upon that variability, the processes of natural selection and sexual selection work. This is basically what evolution is; a change of allele frequencies within populations over time.

dblock:

The earth is the optimum, place in our universe where life can be supported.

dblock:

That in itself is a one a billion equation,

dblock:

but that isn't the end of it, we the most intelligent beings on this planet also happen to possess the ability to either thrive and prosper, or suffer and Falter. The animals that accompany us on this planet also have skills of their own.

dblock:

The earth's magnetic field prevents us from cosmic bombardment and certain disintegration.

dblock:

The orbital shape of this planet, ensures that the temperture on this planet is suitanle for life.

dblock:

The orbital speed, durartion, Angle of Rotation and Planetary rotation of this planet are fashioned effectively and efficiently to sustatin life

dblock:
The earth is self sustaining.

dblock:

If any of these factors where different, life would either be inexistent or chaotic and full of misery beyound comprehension.

dblock:

Yes it is true that all these things could stiill have being created by luck, but the probabilty of all of these factors to be present; is impossible unless They were actually fashioned by an onlooker.

dblock:

The earth has endured many disasters that could have easily destroyed this optimum enclave of ours ultimately. Many planets and satellites(moons) in our solar system are battered by Asteroids on a daily basis, and the earth could have being destroyed by calender comets, but due to the earth's magnetic field and it's distance from The sun, the earth lives on. This suggests that the earth was not just created but created, or shall I say "designed" to endure!

dblock:

Bliblical Sources say that the earth was created and in due time, it will be destroyed by God so that a New earth may be created. There are so many ways that the earth could be destroyed, yet this planet hangs on firm, as if awaiting that designated day.

dblock:

Again, this sentence is rather hermetic, but I will try to make sense out of it anyway. I assume you mean to say that I need to explain where the options come from on which natural selection works?
1. natural selection isn't the only mechanism in evolution
2. natural selection works on natural genomic variability, which is mainly caused by 2 processes: sexual recombination and mutations. Mutations can have several causes, but the main cause of mutations is DNA copying errors.
Upon that variability, the processes of natural selection and sexual selection work. This is basically what evolution is; a change of allele frequencies within populations over time.

Yes a change in Allele Frequencies due to changes in Medical exposure or a change in Environment in General can spur a biological change, but is this really how humans came to be? From changes in the enviroment and adaptations?

dblock:

If so then why haven't major signs of evolution or at least signs of the begining of evolution in animals or in Humans appeared.

dblock:

This period of great technological advancement, I believe is one of the sagas in earth's history with the most change.

dblock:

Can you reason or is your judgement conveniently based on a selective Hypothesis??

dblock:

Or are you oblivious to the events that are occuring in our blessed planet. Humans are releasing Toxic waste, clearing natural habitats yet Animals have showed no signs of adaptations or biological alterations. When we alter a natural environment, either by development or simply destruction in general, the inhabitants of the area don't attain new biological qualities but simply just die off.

dblock:

The people of today aren't living longer because of Allele changes, but simply because of Medical breakthroughs and advancements.

dblock:

It has not being proven that medicine over a extended period of time can make humans immune to a disease or Virus. Distributing vaccines and administering it, makes the individual immune to the disease being tackled but doesn't make offspring any less subjected to the disease (Except for maybe due to the disease being less Ubiquitos, but that's a different story).

dblock:

To summarize, the DNA structure of Humans isn't changing, so how can Evolution be a reality.

dblock:

If you are still in doubt, take the Plague (A.KA, the black death) No that Virus isn't long gone, scientists have the virus stored in three locations world wide, for potential reference, and the disease is as deadly to humans today as it was when it first appeared. Yes we would probably last longer, than people back then, but that is not because of any immunity, but due to the Medicines and vaccines that we have today. It doesn't make the Virus any less threatining, but simply numbs it.

dblock:

Evolution should be held as credible as Scientology.

dblock:

Once again Pastor Nferyn answered my well research work, with the usual Two worded Mumble.

dblock:

What exactly is TOE, and where does tee trunks come from.

dblock:

In your last post you haven'y answered anthing, ut simply replied, with No and Yes wherever convinient.

dblock:

Your reasoning gets more pathetic everytime. You always speak of assertions and "Begging the question" whatever that means.

dblock:

Well I simply pointed out the obvious this time around, and you couldn't even reply to it with the least bit of intellect, but with mumbles. You're getting Senile, men, take a break.

dblock:

Those who have lost all faith are lost forever.

dblock:

See, I could be wrong and you could be a genius, but you are thick so you do not acknowledge potential alternatives.

dblock:

I am not a therapist, so I don't know why you are so secluded, but for your own good consider the things around you, you never know,

dblock:

I might be the Genius and you might be the looney.

dblock:

I have answered with as much intellect as possible, considering that Religion is not based on regular observations, but predominantly on faith.

dblock:

If it comes down to a Ocham's razor scenario, yours is obviously the favoured story, but that doesn't make it true.

dblock:

Hope to continue this little debate of ours, but please emphasize when you reply.

nferyn:

If I look at the different alternative world views, then I have to conclude that what Christianity offers is not very convincing to me

nferyn:

Here you reach the core of the argument. On rational grounds, one cannot come to Christianity, but on emotional grounds I can see very well why people arrive at their religious belief; I don't dismiss people that arrive at a religious belief on emotional grounds and I don't even say that such grounds are less valid than other grounds. What I do dislike is that people say that their religious belief is rational. Anyone that claims his religious belief is rational is intellectually dishonest.