viaro:

Hello thehomer,

Hello viaro.

viaro:

I would rather not assume that aletheia cheapened Ross' discovery, in so far that the former's post in mentioning the latter was in direct reply to the OP's challenge to cite just an example. There's no hint in aletheia's posts about Ross sitting passively to stumble upon his discovery. Perhaps this resource might be helpful to anyone wishing to learn a bit about Ross in connection with prayer and his work:

That's a point also made in the book by Henry Sloane Coffin, excerpted above.

Nonetheless, it is a spiritual exercise all the same - whether decisions by some are based on prayer, or that prayer is seen in some other way to some other ends, they are all some form of spiritual experiences.

Yes it is a spiritual exercise but the attitude needs to change for those that view it as something more than just a spiritual exercise.
From your quote on the book, it is clear that he worked hard for this achievement. Implying that it was simply by prayer is to me analogous to saying that some Indian mystic discovered curative effects of some herbs by chanting ignoring the hard work and observation that went into it.

viaro:

I don't have any problem with having a healthy form of skepticism, as long as we don't hide behind that as an excuse for some cheap arguments. Scientists in many instances adopt a skeptical approach to issues that border around the various sciences; but skepticism as a worldview is indeed a mindset - and its claims are what we must question.

To this end, when someone proposes a "skeptical society" or group as a movement for like-minded adherents on the basis of slurring other people's worldviews, we should begin to ask questions of the proposed skeptical society. In this case, I very much question the validity of the claimant's proposal as an alternative that promises a 'liberation' to Nigeria's problems. Since the OP seems to confuse between prayers and inventions, one must ask how his own skepticism has helped towards nation building - what technologies have his skepticism invented; how many graduates has his skeptical society employed among thousands who pour into the streets with a degree in hand? What does the OP actually say that shows he knows his onions and can demonstrate a good understanding of what it takes to help towards nation building?

I feel his group should first function before we conclude that he aims to slur other people's worldviews. The promise of liberation needs to be made. I feel it is a form of advertisement. He has to make some claims but it is still up to him to live up to them or his cause will be abandoned.

viaro:

The sort of skepticism being broached as an alternative is even far more blind - and that comes on the heels of the fact that many skeptics who rise to complain about Nigeria's problems just do not demonstrate a clear understanding of the diversity of the country's problems! To make a cheap argument, such skeptics narrow everything down to religion - and yet, they cannot tell us how their own skepticism as an alternative can promote national development in the scheme of things.

I still do not understand how the skepticism he proposes is worse than what we have now in Nigeria. I have noticed that when people start becoming skeptical, it tends to spread into other aspects of their lives. You do agree that some amount of skepticism is acceptable. And in my opinion, a skeptics group may just be one way of trying to educate people on some methods of thinking rationally.

profibadan:

Viaro, I will not dignify your intellectual poverty and weak reasoning with responses as you have failed to address the issues I raised but take it upon yourself to be a Crusader for what can never be proven.

Please stop being such a cheap slowpoke. What have you ever addressed in any of your post? Did you stumble across the word "intellectual" and so just use it anyhow without a clue what it means? What have you "proven" in any line of your posts? You have absolutely NOTHING worthy of a serious glance, that is why you can't respond to simple issues - would I be surprised at all?

profibadan:

If only you can tell me the true God among the over 1,000 gods and goddesses in the world. Sketpics do not claim to have answers to all of life experiences but we do not subscribe to weak escapism by proposing concepts that are irrational, like trinity and God creating Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden only for Cain to kill Abel and Cain was said visit the city of Nod to marry a wife after we had been told that only 4 people existed in the world.

The irony escapes you, no doubt. To make it all easier for you and your cheap lot, I asked you to leave out the question of any Creator and show me any truth in your affirmation that "the universe does not have a created" (sic). You made a claim, address it and stop pretending that others are making irrational statements and only your cheap shots are rational.

profibadan:

Please Viaro, We skeptics are careful to make blind and silly conclusions, what we do not know, we dont attribute to God or spirits. please go and preach your gospel ton intellectual imbeciles like yourself

Thanks for the mouthful, haha . . . your skeptic imbecility has shown itself to be loud and lazy all along. And please remove that lie that you skeptics are "careful" to {not} make blind and silly conclusions - because you actually do. The difference is that when you make them and are asked to present evidence for what you assert, you begin to castigate other worldviews and yet never ever show anything for what you assert! Your skepticism is trash - I feel sorry for those who want to cause themselves more problems in addition to the ones Nigeria is facing.

viaro:

I offered you a very simple outline earlier, you ranted all you wanted and yet produced absolutely nothing for your arguments. Nevermind the duplicity of trying to read your own argument into thehomer's posts, I went ahead to simplify it for you again in post #53, and yet again you baulked. Why do you guys play fast games and after all the noise you end up with such blowouts? Dude, please go it easy on your flat tyres - if you don't have anything to say, just shut up.

You offered nothing at all, all you did as usual was to take a point and try to give it a meaning of your own, i tried to simplify the argument for you but as usual instead of addressing it you went your usual way of chasing you very long tail. . .keep on keeping on, Keep chasing your shadow and lets see if you can run faster than it. . . .

You must be on cheap gin. What 'science' argues anything about God anywhere? This is worse than straight lying without shame on your part. I shoulda known you won't bring anything to the table for serious discussion - that is why you will make so much noise about science up and down the street and yet confuse yourself all the more.

Science does not argue about any God but it shows that the God hypothesis needs to be relagated to its myth status. . .Example modern astronomy as relegated the way your god (and other gods) said the created the universe to the cofines of mythology as such christain cosmologist have relegated the narrative of their God to the realm of mythology by stating that the way he said he created the universe is an allegory. . . .

No worries, mazaje. . . I still hold this part of your post as the only honest remark you made tonight:
Enjoy plenty.

. . . .I know you are more intrested in chasing your tail and trying to see if you can run faster than your shadow. . Enjoy. . . .  

thehomer:

Hello viaro.

Yes it is a spiritual exercise but the attitude needs to change for those that view it as something more than just a spiritual exercise.

Hi thehomer. I agree with your statement there ^^. The problem is that many people fail to see things for what they are and so arrive at generalizations that muddy the waters in discussions.

thehomer:

From your quote on the book, it is clear that he worked hard for this achievement. Implying that it was simply by prayer is to me analogous to saying that some Indian mystic discovered curative effects of some herbs by chanting ignoring the hard work and observation that went into it.

I don't suppose that anyone was saying that Ross achieved his feat merely by prayer alone and nothing else. The whole point was that he sought prayerfully for guidance - and in addition to that, he worked hard to seek answers while in his day the usual answer to the malady was that "No, not yet; we seek the laws". Again, it was not that Ross just sat down and prayed and did nothing else.

thehomer:

I feel his group should first function before we conclude that he aims to slur other people's worldviews. The promise of liberation needs to be made. I feel it is a form of advertisement. He has to make some claims but it is still up to him to live up to them or his cause will be abandoned.

You see, you even have a more reasoned approach to issues here - which have been pointed out already. If the 'prof' wanted to solicit membership to join his society, we won't have any problems with that. But trying to sell whatever he was advertising on the back of his misplaced ideas about "religion" is not going to help his CV. Nigeria has problems, so let's address them by first highlighting those problems and not cheapening them to excuses about "religion". Did he take care to even attempt addressing that? No. People who don't have a clue about the problems they want to address are themselves a bigger problem to the entire nation.

thehomer:

I still do not understand how the skepticism he proposes is worse than what we have now in Nigeria. I have noticed that when people start becoming skeptical, it tends to spread into other aspects of their lives. You do agree that some amount of skepticism is acceptable. And in my opinion, a skeptics group may just be one way of trying to educate people on some methods of thinking rationally.

Like I said, I do acknowledge that some form of skepticism is both acceptable and indeed necessary. What I disdain is the idea that we can hide behind "skeptical" societies to make noise about "problems" we have no clue about nor are willing to address. That is just bunkum. One does not have to be religious or atheistic if he/she wants to talk about resolving problems in a country towards development or a better cause for the polity of a nation.

It is when that person begins to argue away from the real problems for his or her selfish ends that we must question (and indeed challenge) such silly snake-oil salesmanship. I say this regardless of what kind of leadership (political, business/economic, religious, academic, or even atheist) such a claimant or proposer represents, as I noted in post #17.

mazaje:

You offered nothing at all, all you did as usual was to take a point and try to give it a meaning of your own, i tried to simplify the argument for you but as usual instead of addressing it you went your usual way of chasing you very long tail. . .keep on keeping on, Keep chasing your shadow and lets see if you can run faster than it. . . .

When people make these very sob replies, I laugh and leave them to fool themselves further. Apart from being so dubious (which I never dreamed was possible of you), you simply refused to show me anything about what I requested. The posts are still up there - make of them what you will, I sometimes never take you any seriously these days.

mazaje:

Science does not argue about any God but it shows that the God hypothesis needs to be relagated to its myth status.

Where does science - any science - say a word about 'God'? This is the irony that escapes you. First you admit that science does not argue about God; but mazaje would rather foist his own wild misplaced ideas upon science to make it say what it does not say, innit? Perhaps that explains why up until now you can't show anything beyond just sounding like a broken record. Enjoy the endless loop.

mazaje:
Example modern astronomy as relegated the way your god (and other gods) said the created the universe to the cofines of mythology as such christain cosmologist have relegated the narrative of their God to the realm of mythology by stating that the way he said he created the universe is an allegory.

Please mazaje, just show us where science ever infers that the UNIVERSE was not created. That is all I ask - show that simple thing and save the rest. WHY is that such a problem for you personally? I am more interested in the science - that's all. If you can't show the science, just shut up. You don't pay tax for making noise - so continue if that is all you want to do. But if you have any substance, calmly walk me through such a "science", that's all.

mazaje:
. . . .I know you are more intrested in chasing your tail and trying to see if you can run faster than your shadow. . Enjoy. . . . 

I guess you're describing what you do in your day job, hehe. Mazaje, just don't make me laugh (by the way, if you are in touch with toneyb, could you help connect us? I lost the e-addy he left me and have regretted not emailing him).

viaro:

When people make these very sob replies, I laugh and leave them to fool themselves further. Apart from being so dubious (which I never dreamed was possible of you), you simple refused to show me anything about what I requested. The posts are still up there - make of them what you will, I sometimes never take you any seriously these days.

You are the one that is being dubious my friend, but I will just allow you to keep running after your shadow. . .Lets see if you can run faster than it. . .Your request had NOTHING to do with the topic of discussion but rather a cheap escapist tactics. . . .

Where does science - any science - say a word about 'God'? This is the irony that escapes you. First you admit that science does not argue about God; but mazaje would rather foist his own wild misplaces ideas upon science to make it say what it does not say, innit? Perhaps that explains why up until now you can't show anything beyond just sounding like a broken record. Enjoy the endless loop.

True science does not say anything about God but science has SHOWN that Yahweh the God we are talking about here did NOT create the universe, The way he said he created the universe is there for all to see, That is why I keep repeating that Christians cosmologist agree and as such they have relagated Yahweh's creation narrative to the cofines of mythology by saying its an allegory. . . As usual you wouldn't want to address that part, you'll always prefer to be chasing your tail. . . .Enjoy

Please mazaje, just show us where science ever infers that the UNIVERSE was not created. That is all I ask - show that simple thing and save the rest. WHY is that such a problem for you personally? I am more interested in the science - that's all. If you can't show the science, just shut up. You don't pay tax for making noise - so continue if that is all you want to do. But if you have any substance, calmly walk me through such a "science", that's all.

The question is not about if the universe was created or not, the question is about if God(The Christian God) created the universe, and if that assertion can be supported by science, That is the argument here not your equivocations. If we are to go by the way he said he created the universe then science has shown that he did not create the universe, because his creation account is flat out false. . . .

I guess you're describing what you do in your day job, hehe. Mazaje, just don't make me laugh (by the way, if you are in touch with toneyb, could you help connect us? I lost the e-addy he left me and have regretted not emailing him).

Dey there . . . .

@mazaje,

There's nothing you have shown in any science that I requested. I shall leave it at that with a simple invitation - whenever you can find the science that answers to the simple question I proffered, oblige me a discussion.

Now this:

mazaje:
Dey there . . .[][][][][][][][][][][][]. . . .I'll cancel the email address as soon as you get it. . .

Thanks - I got it now.

^^

Nothing do you my man, we disagree all the time but I always enjoy having you around. . .

viaro:

Oh puhleease!! NO "science of astronomy" past, present or future has made any observations that the universe emerged on its own! If you have any such sciences that draws such a conclusion, please highlight it here for us.

daviddylan's question was on how the earth came in to existence. So I was speaking of the formation of the earth. From observations of planet and star formation in the cosmos, there is a difference between this and the opinions proffered in the bible.

thehomer:


daviddylan's question was on how the earth came in to existence. So I was speaking of the formation of the earth. From observations of planet and star formation in the cosmos, there is a difference between this and the opinions proffered in the bible.

Exactly what I was telling my man but he was busy running around as usual. . .

thehomer:

From observations of planet and star formation in the cosmos, there is a difference between this and the opinions proffered in the bible.

I believe in the bible. To be honest with you, I am unaware of these 'opinions proffered in the bible', which are incompatible with findings from the 'observations of planets and star formations in the cosmos'. Perhaps you can enlighten me a bit. Thanks.

thehomer:

daviddylan's question was on how the earth came in to existence. So I was speaking of the formation of the earth. From observations of planet and star formation in the cosmos, there is a difference between this and the opinions proffered in the bible.

The Bible talks about the truth not opinions, the truth which is more reliable than facts is what we believers base our faith on and makes it solid.

The Creator God gave us two foundamental sources of informaton of His Truth which are: His Word and the World.  The Word (The Bible) teaches that God is the Creator of all things (visible and invisible); and also through the World (Creation), which is the evidence that there had to be a Creator.  Christians are at liberty to use these two sources to ascertain the truth.  Let us take the universe as an example, if we are to use logic and science that you claim to follow then we can deduce the truth by finding out where the universe came from.

There are three possibilities from where the universe came from:

[list]
[li]1). the universe created itself;[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]2). the universe has always existed, and [/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]3). the universe was created.[/li]
[/list]

1. The universe created itself: 

Can something create itself?  Can nothing create something?  We all know that something cannot create itself and nothing can't create something.  From Latin we have the phrase "ex nihilo, nihil fit" meaning "from nothing, nothing comes."  Those who claim that the universe created itself are violating the law of cause and effect, which says for every effect there must be a cause.  The effect can't be greater than the cause and nothing cannot be greater than something.  Therefore, based on the laws of science and logic, the universe couldn't have created itself. 

2. The univese has always existed: 

Lets go to the 2nd law of thermodynamics that basically teaches that "the whole universe is losing usable energy for doing usable work."  This means that the usable energy in this universe is wearing down.  The universe as a whole is losing energy.  In other words, molecules as a whole are slowing down.

Therefore, if this universe has always existed we will be in a virtual heat death.  This means that there will be virtually no molecular movement.  Everything would have lost its available heat energy for doing work. 

Therefore, the universe cannot be eternal, it must have had a beginning.  The theory that the universe has always existed or is eternal has to be false based on the law of science and logic.

We are now left with one possibility based on science and logic and this is:   

3. The universe was created: 

"In the Beginning God created the heaven and the earth." -- Genesis 1:1  QED

Now tell me who said that the Bible proffers opinions and not the truth which is solid than facts?

@ Olaadegbu,

People of faith won't accept that the Universe created ITSELF aka BIG BANG. They insist that they must be a creator but Where Did GOD come from.

1. God created Himself. Is this not the same as BIG BANG? Out of Nothing in empty space God Appeared or Created Himself!

2. Something or Someone created God. If God did not created or appear out nothing in empty space, some higher power must have created him.

thehomer:

daviddylan's question was on how the earth came in to existence. So I was speaking of the formation of the earth. From observations of planet and star formation in the cosmos, there is a difference between this and the opinions proffered in the bible.

Okay, thanks for clarifying - although it does not appear that's how the gist follows. Davidylan, if I recall, stated simply: "You believe God didnt create the earth right?" That is the heart of the question - if God didn't create the earth, then perhaps "someone else" did: which was why he asked - "Where is your proof that anyone else did?"

It was not a question of the "formation" of the earth, but rather whether or not the earth was "created". If it was created, WHO created it? If it was "anyone else", WHO?

Thus, when you replied that "the evidence is in the science of astronomy", I wondered if you were indicating that astronomy shows that "anyone else" had created the earth (see post #49). I had broadened my enquiry to include the UNIVERSE, though (and it was indeed the "universe" that mazaje started arguing on and on about). The basic question is one of whether the universe created itself or was created by someone at all: thus, if it created itself, I was very interested in any science of astronomy that demonstrates that inference - not to mention that the atheistic idea that the universe 'had always existed' is now long abandoned completely.

mrmayor:

@ Olaadegbu,

People of faith won't accept that the Universe created ITSELF aka BIG BANG. They insist that they must be a creator but Where Did GOD come from.

1. God created Himself. Is this not the same as BIG BANG? Out of Nothing in empty space God Appeared or Created Himself!

2. Something or Someone created God. If God did not created or appear out nothing in empty space, some higher power must have created him.

Both of them are statements of faith expressed by the atheist - and so the atheist is the one who should provide answers as such. When you draw a conclusion that asserts strongly that some higher power must have created God, then it's all up to you to show us indeed what/who that higher power is.

The theist does not draw such conclusions, does not posit such arguments (whether 1 or 2) - rather, the atheist often asserts them, and it is the atheist that should grapple with what he asserts. The funny thing is that, when you can tell us who/what it is that "must have" created God, then you would also be demonstrating your own faith in two powerful indices:

     (a)   that there must be a God  -
     (otherwise, where is the premise in [2] above for your assertion
     that a 'higher power' must have created Him?)

     (b)   that there must be a God  -
     (otherwise, where is the premise in [1] above for your assertion
     that God appeared or created Himself?)

The one thing I often notice is that atheists also assert their own "faith", and it does not matter how much they want to deny that it is "faith". The basic question thus far is this: did the Universe create itself; or was it created by "another"? Leaving all "faiths" aside, where is the evidence that the Universe created itself?

@Viaro,

I noticed how you picked on a small portion of my post, maybe I should have stated ASSUMING THAT GOD EXIST. how did he come to be?

1. Did God, All Knowing, All Powerful just appeared in empty space without cause, just like Big Bang?

I don deride any faith system, I only critique people who use faith based teachings to control billions in the world

viaro:

The one thing I often notice is that atheists also assert their own "faith", and it does not matter how much they want to deny that it is "faith". The basic question thus far is this: did the Universe create itself; or was it created by "another"? Leaving all "faiths" aside, where is the evidence that the Universe created itself?

So far NOTHING has been shown to have created the universe. . . .NOTHING. . . .If you have any evidence to show that anything created the universe just point to that thing and show how or when it was creating or when it created the universe. . . .Your evidence to show that the universe did not create it self is WHAT?. . . .

mazaje:

So far NOTHING has been shown to have created the universe. . . .NOTHING. . . .If you have any evidence to show that anything created the universe just point to that thing and show how or when it was creating or when it created the universe. . . .Your evidence to show that the universe did not create it self is WHAT?. . . .

In law theres what is called the law of logic i.e what issues become so complex and stubborn beyong logical conclussion then probability comes in the settle the matter. This i have been a party to at the several Nigerian courts mostly in Lagos.

The formation of man is very complex likewise the universe. Man and the universe have been intelligently designed thats why its been difficult for man to create a new man from the scratch not even Craig venter can boast to have done same. If such matters is beyond the powers of man and science one may probably link it to a mysterious Being who cant be seen or easily understood due to his more complex nature than man and the universe.

mazaje:

So far NOTHING has been shown to have created the universe. . . .NOTHING. . . .If you have any evidence to show that anything created the universe just point to that thing and show how or when it was creating or when it created the universe. . . .Your evidence to show that the universe did not create it self is WHAT?. . . .

Do u have evidence that the universe indeed created it self? All evidences available from the physical and biological sciences, fields of astronomy, cosmology, and abiogenesis (the origin of life) have provided extremely compelling evidences for a designed. mazaje, u must Prove a new theory to us here on NL that the universe designed it self

toba:

Do u have evidence that the universe indeed created it self? All evidences available points that the universe must have been designed by a designer. Prove that the universe designed it self

And why must the universe behave like the human society where everything must have a creator? Why can't the universe create itself? Nothing has been shown to have created the universe, So many things have been alleged to have created the universe without any evidence at all. . . .We see new stars emerging out in the cosmos on their own without any thing creating them. . . .Since nothing has ever been shown to have created the universe i concluded that It created it self(my opinion of course). . . .I am not supposed to be arguing with you since I know that you god did not create the universe, the universe he created in in genesis 1. . . .That is not the universe we see and live it. . .

mazaje:

And why must the universe behave like the human society where everything must have a creator? Why can't the universe create itself? Nothing has been shown to have created the universe, So many things have been alleged to have created the universe without any evidence at all. . . .We see new stars emerging out in the cosmos on their own without any thing creating them. . .

I just edited my post to make it more elaborate.
The similarity between man and the universe is that both are complex and till date no known scientist have tried to practicalize or designed the universe or man to show that both can easily be done like jets, cars, houses, robots etc.
The universe has a beginning is a known fact.For it to have a beginning makes it comparable to man that also have a begining i.e both will expire one day.I mean the normal law of life and death applicable to man.

mazaje:

Since nothing has ever been shown to have created the universe i concluded that It created it self(my opinion of course). . . .I am not supposed to be arguing with you since I know that you god did not create the universe, the universe he created in in genesis 1. . . .That is not the universe we see and live it. . .

Thats a bad and illogical conclusion from u that nothing could have created something that is getting tired and worn out. Same way u concluded that theres no God since u haven't since one physically. Theres no theory anywhere that can be acceptable that the universe created it self. Science wouldn't dare.

Well i dont know anything about god creating the universe, but i can ascribe the universe to have been created by an intelligent designer called [size=45pt]GOD[/size]

mazaje:

So far NOTHING has been shown to have created the universe. . . .NOTHING. . . .If you have any evidence to show that anything created the universe just point to that thing and show how or when it was creating or when it created the universe. . . .Your evidence to show that the universe did not create it self is WHAT?. . . .

You're quibbling. The choice is simple and you can't be falling all over yourself on that. It is either the Universe has always existed (which many atheists have held until that idea self-destroyed and became redundant), or the Universe had a beginning and was brought into existence. The best you can do is quibble forever on the basic question and deny all you want - but after all your arguments, you will still have to come back again to the starting point: the Universe did not emerge on its own. Beyond that point, just quibble on.

mazaje:

Since nothing has ever been shown to have created the universe i concluded that It created it self(my opinion of course). . .

And your evidence for that personal conclusion of yours is . . . WHAT?

You see the problem with letting your atheism run wild. You blow hot and cold about the creation of the Universe; when others give their own persuasion that the Universe did not emerge on its own but was created by God, you ask for evidence. Meanwhile, you conclude that the Universe created itself . . . and your evidence is . . . NOTHING! Well done, my man! Your faith is superior to the last thing I heard yesterday!

mazaje:

And why must the universe behave like the human society where everything must have a creator? Why can't the universe create itself? Nothing has been shown to have created the universe, So many things have been alleged to have created the universe without any evidence at all. . . .We see new stars emerging out in the cosmos on their own without any thing creating them. . . .Since nothing has ever been shown to have created the universe i concluded that It created it self(my opinion of course). . . .I am not supposed to be arguing with you since I know that you god did not create the universe, the universe he created in in genesis 1. . . .That is not the universe we see and live it. . .

That, my dear good friend, is an opinion that is flawed on so many many levels.

You are beginning to sound like you're cornered and even recognise how ungrounded the so called 'atheistic evidences' against the existence of our God, are. 'Why can't the universe create itself? You ask, well for one the materialistic universe is Not sentient. Secondly the universe (at least the materialists one) must succuomb to all the laws of physics.  For your information 'new stars' are NOT 'emerging out in the cosmos on their own without anything creating them'. At least that's not whta the 'science' says. Each 'star' within a particular 'universe' is all part of the space-time-matter-energy soup farted out by white holes. Pardon the pun, i just couldn't resist it! That, my good friend, is one of the postulates of your 'science'.

To be honest with you though; my opinion is that your highlighted opinion suggests that you are clutching at straws in an attempt to justify your 'unbelief'? I also can't help noticing that you've grown up from referring to 'God' with a small 'g'. That's movement in the right direction my friend. Continue to open up yourself to the truth. It will certainly embrace you!

In the beginning God created.

mrmayor:

@Viaro,

I noticed how you picked on a small portion of my post, maybe I should have stated ASSUMING THAT GOD EXIST. how did he come to be?

1. Did God, All Knowing, All Powerful just appeared in empty space without cause, just like Big Bang?

Howdy mrmayor,

I'm sorry to have highlighted a "small portion" of your post to base my queries upon. However, small or huge part, the inference is the same - you cannot assert so confidently that something seems to be as you say when infact you use such terms as "must have" - that is no longer an enquiry based on being agnostic (I don't know); but it translates into one of affirmative atheism (thus, "it must be so".

However, leaving that aside, let's take your explanatory re-statement: "assuming that God exists", then what? If the question is how He came to be, then the basic inference still leads to just one thing: "God exists". Whether or not anyone is able to explicate how He came to be, the underlying premise is still that He exists. Just because no one is able to explain the "how" of His existence, does not therefore remove all questions of His existence.

mrmayor:

I don deride any faith system, I only critique people who use faith based teachings to control billions in the world

Okay, I won't try to hang anything on you that you decline from. However, if you want to talk about critiquing people who use faith based teachings to control people, that is already being done in many belief systems, including atheism. Faith is a personal thing - no one needs to be "controlled"; but trying to critique what you don't feel inclined to, does not mean therefore that you can just make assertions that are deeply flawed.

viaro:

You're quibbling. The choice is simple and you can't be falling all over yourself on that. It is either the Universe has always existed (which many atheists have held until that idea self-destroyed and became redundant)

This was the view of many cosmologist in the past NOT the views of atheist. Different atheist have different views on the origin of the universe.

or the Universe had a beginning and was brought into existence. The best you can do is quibble forever on the basic question and deny all you want - but after all your arguments, you will still have to come back again to the starting point: the Universe did not emerge on its own. Beyond that point, just quibble on.

Ohh so now its about arguing about the origins of the universe again, And here I was thinking you had evidence to show that a particular version of God created the universe.

You see the problem with letting your atheism run wild. You blow hot and cold about the creation of the Universe; when others give their own persuasion that the Universe did not emerge on its own but was created by God, you ask for evidence. Meanwhile, you conclude that the Universe created itself . . . and your evidence is . . . NOTHING! Well done, my man! Your faith is superior to the last thing I heard yesterday!

Which of the Gods created the universe?  I am not really interested in any vague or wild claim of God created the universe. I am interested in specific claims. All the Gods that we constantly talk about on this forum(Allah and Yahweh) have talked about how they created the world in details. . . .Scientific and observable observations say those accounts are false. . . .Just like other christian cosmologist, you on one hand discard the supposed words of your God on how he SAID he created the universe because the account is ridiculous and has NO evidence to support it, but still claim that your God still created the universe. How so. . . .The genesis creation account is FLAT OUT WRONG when compared to the observable and scientific evidence. . . .

beneli:

That, my dear good friend, is an opinion that is flawed on so many many levels.

You are beginning to sound like you're cornered and even recognise how ungrounded the so called 'atheistic evidences' against the existence of our God, are. 'Why can't the universe create itself? You ask, well for one the materialistic universe is Not sentient. Secondly the universe (at least the materialists one) must succuomb to all the laws of physics.

 

You are getting it wrongly my friend. This is just a rhetorical question, Since you guys boldly asserts things without ANY evidence I also can assert things without evidence, no?

For your information 'new stars' are NOT 'emerging out in the cosmos on their own without anything creating them'. At least that's not whta the 'science' says. Each 'star' within a particular 'universe' is all part of the space-time-matter-energy soup farted out by white holes. Pardon the pun, i just couldn't resist it! That, my good friend, is one of the postulates of your 'science'.

You are also getting it wrongly the science does not say any God created them, That is the point I was trying to make. . . .

In the beginning God created.

According to the hypothesis your God created the earth with plants in it before the sun and all the stars out there. . .Very interesting. . ,

mazaje:

This was the view of many cosmologist in the past NOT the views of atheist. Different atheist have different views on the origin of the universe.

Don't forget that For atheism to be true, there must be an alternate explanation other than a Creator for how the universe and life came into existence, which is exactly what u are claiming on this thread that no one could have created the universe isn't that true?

mazaje:

This was the view of many cosmologist in the past NOT the views of atheist.

What do you mean by 'NOT the views of atheist', mazaje? Are you trying to deny that NO ATHEIST ever held that view? What then was the prevailing view of the atheist (if any different) when such an idea was making the rounds? I really don't know what you're trying to deny here in plain sight.

mazaje:

Different atheist have different views on the origin of the universe.

Maybe. But that again does not mean that NO ATHEIST held the view that the Universe had always existed, if that is what you trying to tell us here.

mazaje:

Ohh so now its about arguing about the origins of the universe again, And here I was thinking you had evidence to show that a particular version of God created the universe.

Mazaje, what have I been trying to bring to your attention? If you do have anything else to show that NOTHING created the Universe, please show us your evidence. You're the only person I have come across drawing the conclusion that "the Universe created it" - and if that is different from the "origin of the Universe", please explain the difference. What I see you doing here is running wild with cheap statements and producing nothing - so, if you have anything, anywhere, any science, any other substance for concluding that the Universe created itself, please show us.

mazaje:

Which of the Gods created the universe?  I am not really interested in any vague or wild claim of God created the universe. I am interested in specific claims. All the Gods that we constantly talk about on this forum(Allah and Yahweh) have talked about how they created the world in details. . . .Scientific and observable observations say those accounts are false.

You must either be one mischievous fellow if you keep repeating that obvious lie. WHAT 'science' has ever made any statement on "GOD", mazaje? Does the irony escape you up until now? Look, it's easy enough: if science says nothing about God (as you yourself have admitted several times), then what is this repeated drivel foisted upon "science" to make it say what it does not? And where infact did science now affirm your own fallacy that the Universe created itself? You keep making very cheap statements and have held on to your own wild assertions for far too long - that, my dear friend, is a faith thicker than my finger.

mazaje:
Just like other christian cosmologist, you on one hand discard the supposed words of your God on how he SAID he created the universe because the account is ridiculous and has NO evidence to support it, but still claim that your God still created the universe.

Please don't put words in my mouth, otherwise you will be showing how desperate you are! I did not discount the word of the God I worship - and yes, I affirm that God created the Universe. You, on the other hand are seriously breaking wind all over the place with strawman that even you cannot defend. Where is your evidence that the Universe created itself?

mazaje:
How so. . . .The genesis creation account is FLAT OUT WRONG when compared to the observable and scientific evidence.

More piffling from you. Even if for the sake of an argument, I let you set God aside from the discussion for the moment, please show me your own evidence for your assertion that the Universe created itself - that is what we want to see you prove FLAT OUT RIGHT! If you cannot show this, then shut up - I told you before that you don't pay tax for making noise, especially on things you can't defend.

mazaje:

You are getting it wrongly my friend. This is just a rhetorical question, Since you guys boldly asserts things without ANY evidence I also can assert things without evidence, no?

Absolutely NOT. . . unless you want to tell us that the best that the atheist can do is resort to rhetorics where he/she is running out of steam. It says nothing about your telling us anything about the knowledge you possess of any 'origins science' (make your pick, there are many "origins sciences" today). The basic question is this: did the Universe create itself? No one needs any 'rhetorics' to make any informed statements on that - and any "conclusions" you draw should also be questioned, NO?

mazaje:

You are also getting it wrongly the science does not say any God created them, That is the point I was trying to make. . . .

Pardon me (I know you're addressing beneli); but I wonder if any science says that God did NOT create them? That is the point we have been trying to make, mazaje - don't make science say what it does not say, for to do so is to boldly mislead your readers. If science has made any statements about "God" or "creation", then you would have a point; but to foist your own argument and plaster it on "science" saying this and that (which it does not say) becomes quite a worrisome trend to read in your posts.

mazaje:

According to the hypothesis your God created the earth with plants in it before the sun and all the stars out there. . .Very interesting. . ,

And your hypothesis that the Universe created itself is even far more interesting, no?

mazaje:


Which of the Gods created the universe?  I am not really interested in any vague or wild claim of God created the universe. I am interested in specific claims. All the Gods that we constantly talk about on this forum(Allah and Yahweh) have talked about how they created the world in details. . . .Scientific and observable observations say those accounts are false. . . .Just like other christian cosmologist, you on one hand discard the supposed words of your God on how he SAID he created the universe because the account is ridiculous and has NO evidence to support it, but still claim that your God still created the universe. How so. . . .The genesis creation account is FLAT OUT WRONG when compared to the observable and scientific evidence. . . .

Its GOD the intelligent designer that created man, that created the universe and not Gods. Its some how when u people keep talking about science. Has science been able to tell that the universe was not created?  has science been able to identify God after so so many years of search. The same universe u are talking about science cant create it neither can science create from basis man that dwells therein. I dont think ur science will ever be able to find the God that created the universe

mazaje:

 

You are getting it wrongly my friend. T[b]his is just a rhetorical question, Since you guys boldly asserts things without ANY evidence[/b] I also can assert things without evidence, no?

Guy dont be childish. I think we have gone past this stage of making excuses for ones statement. Im sure u didnt make a case for the universe creating it self without consciousness. U were actually going to prove some sort of new '[size=30pt]'mazaje's theory of universe creating it self'[/size] pls dont hide under any form of others' making assertions and u also wanting to do same. The theists that makes assertions do result to show u evidences which most athesits refuse to accept it that they arent empirical or materialistic. The above bolded is a big lie. If u are given evidence by the theist u purposesly turn it down.

Now u must back up your assertion/conclusion that the universe could have created it self with any form of evidence

viaro:

What do you mean by 'NOT the views of atheist', mazaje? Are you trying to deny that NO ATHEIST ever held that view? What then was the prevailing view of the atheist (if any different) when such an idea was making the rounds? I really don't know what you're trying to deny here in plain sight.

I laugh, So because some atheist hold the view that the universe was eternal means all atheist hold the same view eh?. . . .Some theist also believe that the universe is eternal, no?

Maybe. But that again does not mean that NO ATHEIST held the view that the Universe had always existed, if that is what you trying to tell us here.

So what exactly are you arguing about?

Mazaje, what have I been trying to bring to your attention? If you do have anything else to show that NOTHING created the Universe, please show us your evidence. You're the only person I have come across drawing the conclusion that "the Universe created it" - and if that is different from the "origin of the Universe", please explain the difference. What I see you doing here is running wild with cheap statements and producing nothing - so, if you have anything, anywhere, any science, any other substance for concluding that the Universe created itself, please show us.

That's all you want to do it seems arguing around chasing shadows. . .My position on this is well know, I have stated MANY times that no body fully knows for sure how the universe came about. My statement was just a rhetorical statement, The fact that the irony escapes you is truly laughable. Your posit that Your God created the universe, Without providing a SINGLE evidence to show, I also posited that the universe created it self rhetorically to show you how illogical your argument is. . . .I have always stated that NO one knows how the universe came about, and as such I will prefer when people say that they don't know instead of positing hypothesis that they themselves can not defend. . . .

You must either be one mischievous fellow if you keep repeating that obvious lie. WHAT 'science' has ever made any statement on "GOD", mazaje? Does the irony escape you up until now? Look, it's easy enough: if science says nothing about God (as you yourself have admitted several times), then what is this repeated drivel foisted upon "science" to make it say what it does not? And where infact did science now affirm your own fallacy that the Universe created itself? You keep making very cheap statements and have held on to your own wild assertions for far too long - that, my dear friend, is a faith thicker than my finger.

Scientist have provided some empirical evidence (at least) with regards to the nature of the universe and how its is evolving, Some of them even theorize their own origin of earth with some evidence to show for they theories, Those evidence can be observed and verified to some extent, when those observable evidence are compared with the way your God said he created the universe we see that your God's account of creation does not match any of the observable evidence and as such can be said to have been shown to be flat out wrong by scientific findings and observations. . . .

Please don't put words in my mouth, otherwise you will be showing how desperate you are! I did not discount the word of the God I worship - and yes, I affirm that God created the Universe. You, on the other hand are seriously breaking wind all over the place with strawman that even you cannot defend. Where is your evidence that the Universe created itself?

Still chasing after your tail? . . . .Ohh so the creation accounts in genesis is truly how the universe came around eh?. . . Why does the observable and scientific evidence point to another direction?. . . .Affirming that God created the universe is nothing but chasing shadows, Since all religions claim that their own version of God alone created the universe, I am only interested in discussing specifics. Your God very CLEARLY STATED how he created the universe in the bible, can that creation account stand scientific testing?. . . Do all the observable evidence we see show that the universe was created that way?. . . . .

More piffling from you. Even if for the sake of an argument, I let you set God aside from the discussion for the moment, please show me your own evidence for your assertion that the Universe created itself - that is what we want to see you prove FLAT OUT RIGHT! If you cannot show this, then shut up - I told you before that you don't pay tax for making noise, especially on things you can't defend.

The irony still escapes you. . . . You keep saying that your God created the universe without providing any evidence to show, I then asked a rhetorical question, It seems its only right for you to posit things without evidence but turn around and start crying when the same logic you are using is turned around on you. . . .Your evidence to show that the universe did NOT create itself is WHAT?. . . .Read between the lines and see what am getting at. . .