TATIME:
Many books have been written by different intellectuals and we've also read through many of these books!
None is able to say something pertinent to the course of our existence or why we're here except a documents found amongst the Jews. According to historians, this documents was originally written in three different languages, Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek.
Later intellectuals combined all these documents together in one big volume and called it Bible. It reveals how a spirit being started all these but what really arouse my interest is the efficacy of this big book in the foreknowledge of certain things we later discovered to be just as this book says!
For example it talks about our vast universe and SPECIFICALLY mentioned that life could ONLY be found on earth! Now this has been proven to be true as space travelers have gone far only to discover that the earth is the ONLY planet where life could flourish. Just as this book said that the spirit being actually PREPARED the earth for living creatures! Genesis 1:1-31
Though other intellectuals criticized this book for it's illustrative presentations but NONE can explain how this ancient book that was written by those primitive dwellers knew that life ONLY could be found on earth!

It can not be prove that life only exists on earth.

Evangkatsoulis:

It can not be prove that life only exists on earth.

Please have you seen or heard of any form of life ib any other planet apart from earth?
Please if you do,let's know because we're dying to throw away this book called Bible that has captured the minds of honest hearted persons with it's foreknowledge of all these!

TATIME:
Please have you seen or heard of any form of life ib any other planet apart from earth?
Please if you do,let's know because we're dying to throw away this book called Bible that has captured the minds of honest hearted persons with it's foreknowledge of all these!

That life has not been found on another planet doesn't mean all the other billions of planets don't have life.

Evangkatsoulis:


That life has not been found on another planet doesn't mean all the other billions of planets don't have life.

So until one is found, the Bible remains just as it claims to be GOD'S WORD!

In my quest for meaning in life, I have come to the conclusion that the atheist position is a reasonable position but one that I personally have rejected as wrong .

It is very easy to say that the reason most cultures have a concept of a creator is because of the knowledge gaps or we can say that all humanity hold a connection to the creator of the universe.

I also refuse the theory that the universe is eternal (science has refuted that claim). If this is true something must have caused the universe and to avoid an illogical conclusion there must exist a first cause that is in itself eternal.

This is a logical fact.

If you choose to call this creator Alah, Jehovah , Chineke , or an eternal force... it is up to you.

Now you can specifically claim that the way people choose to worship this creator through organised religion is false but to boldly claim that the universe is an accident is simply illogical

nwabekeyi:
as long as the universe is concerned, life has no purpose. Things are just existing to maintain universal balance.

In the actual sense, no one lives or dies, everyone is just a reservoir and recycler of atoms and energy. Life itself is a mirage.

You also ignore the obvious question, why is there a thing called universal balance. Why can't there be universal imbalance? Why should a universe exist in the first place?


Why not nothing instead of something?


By logic it is obvious that there must be an uncaused cause, the prime mover for anything to happen and this prime mover by deduction is beyond space and time as we know there was a big bang (the start of time) and obviously whoever or whatever caused the big bang existed before then.

GeneralShepherd:
In my quest for meaning in life, I have come to the conclusion that the atheist position is a reasonable position but one that I personally have rejected as wrong .

It is very easy to say that the reason most cultures have a concept of a creator is because of the knowledge gaps or we can say that all humanity hold a connection to the creator of the universe.

I also refuse the theory that the universe is eternal (science has refuted that claim). If this is true something must have caused the universe and to avoid an illogical conclusion there must exist a first cause that is in itself eternal.

This is a logical fact.

If you choose to call this creator Alah, Jehovah , Chineke , or an eternal force... it is up to you.

Now you can specifically claim that the way people choose to worship this creator through organised religion is false but to boldly claim that the universe is an accident is simply illogical

You are making an illogical leap from something caused the universe to that thing is an eternal uncaused thing and you claim it is fact. Fact? You observed it? In what way have you established that it is fact? It revealed itself to you? It created another universe as you observed?

Atheist don't claim the universe is an accident. The atheist position is very simple, no belief in gods of any kind. Says nothing about how the universe formed or what caused it.

LordReed:


You are making an illogical leap from something caused the universe to that thing is an eternal uncaused thing and you claim it is fact. Fact? You observed it? In what way have you established that it is fact? It revealed itself to you? It created another universe as you observed?

Atheist don't claim the universe is an accident. The atheist position is very simple, no belief in gods of any kind. Says nothing about how the universe formed or what caused it.

The atheist claim is that there is no evidence for god or gods. Furthermore when questioned on the origin of the universe most atheists say they don't know which is true. I respect that as I use to be an atheist.



However, if you have given a tiny thought to the possibility of the origin of the universe. You would see that it is not a trivial question as most atheists claim it to be.

Furthermore, the probability that science would determine what existed before the big bang is really low and again something must have caused the universe.

This can be assumed from the laws applicable within our universe that energy cannot be created or destroyed. And it is an established scientific fact that the universe in itself is not eternal.

So what ever got the first ball rolling which is uncaused is what I refer to as God.

If you disregard the notion of a god or gods until we have further knowledge that is a fair point of view.

I choose to believe

GeneralShepherd:


The atheist claim is that there is no evidence for god or gods. Furthermore when questioned on the origin of the universe most atheists say they don't know which is true. I respect that as I use to be an atheist.



However, if you have given a tiny thought to the possibility of the origin of the universe. You would see that it is not a trivial question as most atheists claim it to be.

Furthermore, the probability that science would determine what existed before the big bang is really low and again something must have caused the universe.

This can be assumed from the laws applicable within our universe that energy cannot be created or destroyed. And it is an established scientific fact that the universe in itself is not eternal.

So what ever got the first ball rolling which is uncaused is what I refer to as God.

If you disregard the notion of a god or gods until we have further knowledge that is a fair point of view.

I choose to believe

First off intuitive thoughts are not facts. Facts are demonstrated truths not simply logical thoughts. There are many logical thoughts that are not necessarily true. It needs to be demonstrated before it can be established as fact.

Which atheist claim the origin of the universe is a trivial question talk less of most. What most atheist would say is the origin of the universe will only impact the question of the existence of a god or gods if it can be demonstrated that a god or gods did it, until then it is mostly irrelevant to the question. Why? Because possibly a god or gods was/were formed at the same time the universe was or sometime later. Our major concern is for a god or gods existence to be demonstrated unequivocally.

You are welcome to your beliefs, as long you acknowledge that it has nothing substantial backing it.

LordReed:


First off intuitive thoughts are not facts. Facts are demonstrated truths not simply logical thoughts. There are many logical thoughts that are not necessarily true. It needs to be demonstrated before it can be established as fact.

Which atheist claim the origin of the universe is a trivial question talk less of most. What most atheist would say is the origin of the universe will only impact the question of the existence of a god or gods if it can be demonstrated that a god or gods did it, until then it is mostly irrelevant to the question. Why? Because possibly a god or gods was/were formed at the same time the universe was or sometime later. Our major concern is for a god or gods existence to be demonstrated unequivocally.

You are welcome to your beliefs, as long you acknowledge that it has nothing substantial backing it.

Are you suggesting that it is illogical to conclude that if the universe is not eternal that there must be something, someone or a phenomenon that caused the universe?

I fail to see the illogicality in this, the only bone of contention is demonstrating that this first cause demands worship or at least if it is conscious .

The mother of illogicality is denying that there must be an eternal source from which everything came from

As per my beliefs in WORSHIPPING the creator, they are very personal and subjective. That is a separate argument on its own

GeneralShepherd:


Are you suggesting that it is illogical to conclude that if the universe is not eternal that there must be something, someone or a phenomenon that caused the universe?

I fail to see the illogicality in this, the only bone of contention is demonstrating that this first cause demands worship or at least if it is conscious .

The mother of illogicality is denying that there must be an eternal source from which everything came from

As per my beliefs in WORSHIPPING the creator, they are very personal and subjective. That is a separate argument on its own

Its illogical to assume that the cause is a somebody. Its illogical to assume the cause was eternal. How have you eliminated the possibility that the cause expired in bringing forth the universe? How have you eliminated the possibility that other possibilities that indicate that it was not something eternal that caused the universe?

Again you're free to worship universe creating pixies if you wish.

LordReed:


Its illogical to assume that the cause is a somebody. Its illogical to assume the cause was eternal. How have you eliminated the possibility that the cause expired in bringing forth the universe? How have you eliminated the possibility that other possibilities that indicate that it was not something eternal that caused the universe?

Again you're free to worship universe creating pixies if you wish.

I said something/someone or a phenomenon. I didn't make a claim about the nature of this creator, my choice to worship this creator is personal (and my use of personal pronouns is a personal choice)

It is not illogocal to assume that this creator is illogical, it is however illogical to assume that a cause that is technically outside of time is not eternal.

The universe is strict terms cannot die as energy cannot be created or destroyed. But it is a scientific fact that there was a beginning at time t=0.

And it makes logical sense that something that exists outside time caused the universe. Now if you argue that this creator became the universe itself, then I cannot say it is illogical. It is a perfectly valid possibility.


The current nature of God, I do not claim to understand but the existence of an uncaused first cause is a logically solid position .

Lastly, I do not expect you to change your worldview and I respect your position. Live and let live.

May God bless you

LordReed:


Its illogical to assume that the cause is a somebody. Its illogical to assume the cause was eternal. How have you eliminated the possibility that the cause expired in bringing forth the universe? How have you eliminated the possibility that other possibilities that indicate that it was not something eternal that caused the universe?

Again you're free to worship universe creating pixies if you wish.

Lol, the dude even said the first cause demand a worship, did he assume this or he knows.

Some people and their delusion.

Speedyconnect15:
At times, I wonder why were born

To live.

tintingz:
Lol, the dude even said the first demand a worship, did he assume this or he knows.

Some people and their delusion.

I never said the creator demands worship. Are you arguing against what I never said?

My decision to worship this creator is personal! I did not claim to have any divine knowledge of this creator.

TATIME:
You slighted some other viewpoints my brother! There are Muslims, Buddhists, Indus and many others but at least you've opened a fine thread for intellectuals to reason along.
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF LIFE?
My favorite question that led me to the TRUTH!

And what's the truth?

tintingz:
To live.

What is the aim? Why do we have to live?

Going by our solar system (I have not made a claim for the whole observable universe) , it can be said that we are unique as no other life form has been discovered yet in anywhere other than earth .

One of the many reasons , I asked that question is that as per our knowledge now there seems to be no apparent reason for our consciousness.

We could have as well been efficient calculating intellogent beings without being conscious.

So as far as science is concerned for now, we are indeed rare. Fermi's paradox postulates that if indeed there were other intelligent beings out there , they should have made contact by now.

It is safe to conclude that we are special and if tomorrow new knowledge comes out to prove we are not special, I will accept this new piece of knowledge.

And please drop this attitude that everyone who doesn't hold an atheistic worldview must be an illiterate .

GeneralShepherd:


I never said the creator demands worship. Are you arguing against what I never said?

My decision to worship this creator is personal! I did not claim to have any divine knowledge of this creator.

Why did you personally think the creator need to be worship?

tintingz:
And what's the truth?

It's exactly what is pulling all of you together to having this extensive discussion.
But what baffles me is ATHEISTS assertion that there shouldn't be a MIND CONTROLLING institution! Whereas if it's the TRUTH every right thinking person must bow to the same ideology!
It's senseless debating or arguing if the purpose is to tell every individual to hold onto his/her personal ideas.
The TRUTH should binds sincere and honest hearted minds together under one controlling unit!

https://www.nairaland.com/1485822/mankind-god#18962419



This has been discussed before.

GeneralShepherd:


What is the aim? Why do we have to live?

Going by our solar system (I have not made a claim for the whole observable universe) , it can be said that we are unique as no other life form has been discovered yet in anywhere other than earth .

One of the many reasons , I asked that question is that as per our knowledge now there seems to be no apparent reason for our consciousness.

We could have as well been efficient calculating intellogent beings without being conscious.

So as far as science is concerned for now, we are indeed rare. Fermi's paradox postulates that if indeed there were other intelligent beings out there , they should have made contact by now.

It is safe to conclude that we are special and if tomorrow new knowledge comes out to prove we are not special, I will accept this new piece of knowledge.

Just live and give your life a meaning, purpose, aim, you don't need someone to tell you why you're living.

And please drop this attitude that everyone who doesn't hold an atheistic worldview must be an illiterate .

Lol, I never said this tho.

There are illiterate atheist.

tintingz:
Why did you personally think the creator need to be worship?

It is not based on any objective basis for this decision and neither have I tried to convince or anyone to worship God.

My only strong argument is that there exists an uncaused first cause and logic supports this proposition.

Fun fact, my post history will show you that I am always will to change my views. I am not dogmatic.

TATIME:
It's exactly what is pulling all of you together to having this extensive discussion.
But what baffles me is ATHEISTS assertion that there shouldn't be a MIND CONTROLLING institution! Whereas if it's the TRUTH every right thinking person must bow to the same ideology!
It's senseless debating or arguing if the purpose is to tell every individual to hold onto his/her personal ideas.
The TRUTH should binds sincere and honest hearted minds together under one controlling unit!

You didn't answer the question, what's the truth?

tintingz:
Just live and give your life a meaning, purpose, aim, you don't need someone to tell you why you're living.

Lol, I never said this tho.

There are illiterate atheist.

Some people and their delusions. This suggests that my arguments are so ludicrous and dumb.


I guess the word I was looking for is implying that anyone who isn't an atheist is DUMB.

GeneralShepherd:


It is not based on any objective basis for this decision and neither have I tried to convince or anyone to worship God.

My only strong argument is that there exists an uncaused first cause and logic supports this proposition.

Fun fact, my post history will show you that I am always will to change my views. I am not dogmatic.

You don't reasons you worship the first cause?

GeneralShepherd:


Some people and their delusions. This suggests that my arguments are so ludicrous and dumb.


I guess the word I was looking for is implying that anyone who isn't an atheist is DUMB.

Delusion does not mean dumb, what I meant in my context is people who fantasize things and thinks it's kind of the truth.

tintingz:
Delusion does not mean dumb, what I meant in my context is people who fantasize things and thinks it's kind of the truth.

delusion
/dɪˈluːʒ(ə)n/
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.
"the delusion of being watched"

I have not heard any argument that renders a first cause illogical

GeneralShepherd:


delusion
/dɪˈluːʒ(ə)n/
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.
"the delusion of being watched"

Did you see dumb there?

I have not heard any argument that renders a first cause illogical

A first cause can be logical and as well illogical, its contradict the logical statement "something must come from something". The idea of a first cause is just an assumption, theist just add "first" to a cause to support their supreme deity.

And if we're to agree on a first cause, it's unknown.

GeneralShepherd:


I said something/someone or a phenomenon. I didn't make a claim about the nature of this creator, my choice to worship this creator is personal (and my use of personal pronouns is a personal choice)

It is not illogocal to assume that this creator is illogical, it is however illogical to assume that a cause that is technically outside of time is not eternal.

The universe is strict terms cannot die as energy cannot be created or destroyed. But it is a scientific fact that there was a beginning at time t=0.

And it makes logical sense that something that exists outside time caused the universe. Now if you argue that this creator became the universe itself, then I cannot say it is illogical. It is a perfectly valid possibility.


The current nature of God, I do not claim to understand but the existence of an uncaused first cause is a logically solid position .

Lastly, I do not expect you to change your worldview and I respect your position. Live and let live.

May God bless you

But you did make a claim about its nature, you claimed it was logical fact that it is something eternal. I am not interested in your personal reasons for worshipping. I want to know how you leap from there is a cause to the cause is eternal.

It is illogical to assume you even know what the attributes of an outside time would be like since you neither have the experience nor the observational data to support any assertion.

An uncaused first cause is what is known as special pleading. You are making a special case for your assumed cause , what makes this not be the case for the universe? That the universe itself began as an uncaused phenomenon?

I am only interested in why you make assertions without any support.

GeneralShepherd:



I have not heard any argument that renders a first cause illogical

Thats because you've not been paying attention.

tintingz:
Lol, the dude even said the first cause demand a worship, did he assume this or he knows.

Some people and their delusion.

They have to make a special case of revelational knowledge or else they've got nothing.

tintingz:
You didn't answer the question, what's the truth?

TRUTH is whatever compels you and i to agree without force or tension!