RealMrNigerD:

O common! you know them. The laws of science all point to the existence of god. The first law of conservation of matter is interpreted to mean God was the uncreated first cause.
Then again is the equilibrium that exists in the universe, shows that a god guided by justice has to be behind sustaining the universe, else there should be no equilibrium. It takes a lot of intellectual investment to bring balance when you have so many forces at work. Every engineer knows that.
Then you have the order that exists in the universe. We don't come into a very well arranged house and think it just happened. All scientific laws point to order rather than chaos which is expected when things just happen. There must be an intelligence to create and maintain order. When you see a robot, you don't have to wait to meet the manufacturers before you believe they exist, do you? We have never seen an accidental robot, not to talk of a well organized universe as gigantic as ours...
Should I go on?
Now don't forget my challenge to prove evolution while you're on this.

Again with the leaps of faith. The universe has physical laws that constrain it that is not proof of a law giver. That is proof that you have a very active intuition. Intuition is not proof. In other to prove that the physical laws were indeed the creation of an intelligent being you have some ways to do so.

1. Is to show us a universe that wasn't designed by intelligent being for comparison. Why? Because this is how we discern design, by comparing it with what is not designed.

2. Show us the process by which the designer designed these physical laws. Why? Because that is another way we recognise design, we see the designers at work. We can look at their process and watch the transformation.

3. Create a theory that can predict with high degree of confidence what this universe operates like based on what you consider as fact that it is being worked by an intelligent designer. Why? Because this is the process for scientific inquiry. If you must insist that science proves your intelligent designer then do science, don't do speculation.

I am sure people have thought of even more interesting ways for your intelligent designer to be shown but these are my thoughts. Can you do any of the above or do you know of anyone who has?

As for evolution take a look here:

www.humanorigins.si.edu/evidence

Firstnebo:
There is a person that has the authority and the power to be identified as God because he alone ever existed. He is the source of life. He created all things. He inspired the holy book known as the Bible (for the purpose of bringing man to his original purpose of creating the earth).

God is the most powerful, the wisest, with the most love, and the most just of all other persons or things that live or have ever lived, whether in heaven, or on earth.

Atheism in its basic form is the belief that there is no God. Their major attack is on Christianity and especially on the Bible. They promote the theory of evolution.

So here is the challenge, I want Nairaland atheists to come and prove my Belief in the God I described above and his word the Bible as false.


In logical order. One point at a time before we move to another. With evidence and logic. No insults.

Attack...You are getting it wrong son.


No one gives a shiit if you are a Christian.

If someone believes there is no God then he has no business in ensuring Christianity is trashed. None

Thegamingorca:



Attack...You are getting it wrong son.


No one gives a shiit if you are a Christian.

If someone believes there is no God then he has no business in ensuring Christianity is trashed. None

There must be a noticeable reason why the person should have such a business.

If you see a person dependent on you, let's say a wife, husband, or another relation, giving a great amount of their energy (and resources) for their belief in a God who you know doesn't exist, you must be concerned. Won't you?

That's when you would have to prove he doesn't exist.

LordReed:


1. Is to show us a universe that wasn't designed by intelligent being for comparison. Why? Because this is how we discern design, by comparing it with what is not designed.

The guy said prove to him that the universe came about by chance.

You yourself said show me a proof that the universe came from God.

Then he answered you by stating that from the law of science, nothing complex and orderly ever came about without an intelligent designer.

Then you yourself came up with this quote you made above. Do you think that this quote is in your favour on in this guy's favour?

Let's see. You said that for him to prove that the order seen in nature is a proof of an intelligent first cause, he must show a universe without an intelligent first cause so that we can see if there is order in it or not.

Now answer this question, is the absence of a chaotic Universe not more proof that our own must have someone behind? Because if the theory of evolution asserts that the order is as a result of mere miracle in the early stages, why are there no other Universes that hasn't experienced this miracle?

Now let's take it in another angle. Since we have no other universe to compare our own with, let us now come within our universe to experiment with what we have.

When it comes to order, scientific observation has find that there is nothing of order that does not have something that caused it.

If you go inside a rarely travelled forest and see a tree that has a human face carved in it, your conclusion is that something or someone must be behind that carving.

If you go inside a forest and see many trees that fell here and there, you don't worry, you decide it's wind that blew them down all over.

But if you move a little down the forest and see loads of wood mortars and pestles packed one corner, you immediately conclude that someone in the business of wood mortars and pestles is responsible.

So if we go by the query in your post, the evidence is for an intelligent Creator, and against a mindless evolution.

Firstnebo:


You and I both know that something is not everywhere at the same time, does not mean that it doesn't exists. For example, that your bed is inside your room at a particular time, and not in every room of every house in Nigeria does not mean that your bed doesn't exist.


Besides it's glaring that you have a handicapping lack of knowledge of what the Bible actually says. For ever alleging that the Bible said that God is omnipresent is low mark on your knowledge to actually blanket it as a mythological book.

You first have to see what it states before you show your utter lack of ignorance

From this argument, what I've gotten from you so far is that...
God isn't Omnipresent
There's no hell
God turns a blind eye on purpose to the cries and pleas of the innocent.
God is not perfect as his creation turned out to be different from what he had intended.

RealMrNigerD:

You need to revisit the laws of conservation of matter. it answers your question. the god is the uncreated first cause spoken of. Don't forget you're on my hotseat too to prove evolution scientifically.

Abeg stop disturbing me about evolution... I never claimed to believe such theory.

Firstnebo:

I'm done with this argument... You haven't been able to prove anything at the end of the day.
You were asked for physical proof of God and you said the Bible written by men serves as a physical proof.
I can't see anything more dumb than that....
Good day...

kingxsamz:


From this argument, what I've gotten from you so far is that...
God isn't Omnipresent
There's no hell
God turns a blind eye on purpose to the cries and pleas of the innocent.
God is not perfect as his creation turned out to be different from what he had intended.

(1) It's true God is not omnipresent. He lives in heaven.

(2) There's no hell. God did not and have not planned to burn people in fire forever because of something they may have committed for mere 70 or 80 years of life.

(3) God has a keen empathy and concern because of the suffering that was brought on us by what Satan, Eve, and Adam did early in human existence.

Because of his compassion, he has proposed a way to end this evil suffering forever. That is called God's government. He will replace human government with his own government.

Why did he wait so long. Well, in Eden, Satan did not challenge God's power to rule. If he had challenged God's power to rule, it would have been quicker to showcase his power.

But Satan challenged two things. Firstly, he challenged THE RIGHT God has to rule over human. He told Eve that they could rule themselves if they have the "knowledge of good and bad". Secondly, he challenged the GOODNESS OF GOD'S RULE (THE RIGHTFULNES OF GOD'S RULE). He implied that God is withholding something from them. So he challenged them to take that thing back from God. He called God a liar.

In order for God to prove all these, time has to pass (If someone said that you are not strong, you could do a quick show to prove you are strong. For example, you could lift a heavy weight in front of everybody. But if he said that you are a liar, to prove that you are truthful, time has to pass, those people he was talking to have to witness you do and say things for a period of time to ascertain you are truthful). Now many centuries has passed, man has ruled himself, experimenting with different form of governing - autocracy, democracy, communism, socialism, capitalism, etc. All to no lasting solution. Now everybody, including Satan, the Angels, the demons, and humans, have finally seen that man cannot rule himself.

Jesus Christ asked us to pray "Our father who is in the heavens, let your government come"!

(4) That there has been a small glitch in the outworking of human race in the course of time is no proof that God is not perfect.

A very good clay potter can have a clay vessel that he is making spoil in his hands, but because he is good, he remakes it, polishes it and makes it shine.

It has been a hectic history for man so far, but soon under God's government, he will polish us, and make us shine, forever. And these few millenniums of suffering-existence for man would be a mere small point in history when we would have lived 20 billion years without suffering, sickness, or death.

kingxsamz:


Abeg stop disturbing me about evolution... I never claimed to believe such theory.

Lol. Look at you.

If you don't believe that there is God, and you don't believe in evolution, how then do you suppose we are here?

Make up your mind already King

Firstnebo:


You and I both know that something is not everywhere at the same time, does not mean that it doesn't exists. For example, that your bed is inside your room at a particular time, and not in every room of every house in Nigeria does not mean that your bed doesn't exist.

Yes..my bed exists.. because there is EVIDENCE to show that it exists. I can see, touch, quantitatively and qualitatively analyse the materials my bed is made up of.

I can unassailably claim that my bed exists and provide mountains of evidence to back it up.

Your god..on the other hand.. has no such evidence. Or who knows if you have one. Can you present it? If yes, you're doing what 3 billion + people have been unable to do.

Firstnebo:

Besides it's glaring that you have a handicapping lack of knowledge of what the Bible actually says.

Oh it's straight to the ad hominems You're making a rod for your own back here

Firstnebo:

For ever alleging that the Bible said that God is omnipresent

Please show me where I said the Bible said god is omnipresent. If you cannot then you're debating dishonestly.

Firstnebo:

is low mark on your knowledge to actually blanket it as a mythological book.

No, if anything. It exposes your own personal credulity and lack of common sense if you're unable to classify a book that talks about talking donkeys and talking snakes as mythology.

A book that was written across different periods in time by different authors, with different contradicting accounts of the same event, lacks contemporary sources to back up its authenticity can as well be classified as mythology. Anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot.

Firstnebo:

You first have to see what it states before you show your utter lack of ignorance

Yes..I have seen what the Bible states. Things like

1. Slavery
2. A global flood
3. Talking donkeys
4. Talking snakes
5. Misogyny
6. Wholesale genocide
7. Infanticide
8. Homophobia
Etc

Bacteriologist:


Please show me where I said the Bible said god is omnipresent. If you cannot then you're debating

In trying to prove a point about your assertion that God is not omniscient, you brought up an analogy about him not being omnipresent. By bringing up omnipresent to explain why he is not omniscient, you are indirectly claiming the Bible also said God is omnipresent.

Bacteriologist:
If god chooses to not appear somewhere at any point in time. Then god is not OMNI-present.

The concept of "OMNI" means "ALL" the time.

Firstnebo:


The guy said prove to him that the universe came about by chance.

You yourself said show me a proof that the universe came from God.

Then he answered you by stating that from the law of science, nothing complex and orderly ever came about without an intelligent designer.

Then you yourself came up with this quote you made above. Do you think that this quote is in your favour on in this guy's favour?

Let's see. You said that for him to prove that the order seen in nature is a proof of an intelligent first cause, he must show a universe without an intelligent first cause so that we can see if there is order in it or not.

Now answer this question, is the absence of a chaotic Universe not more proof that our own must have someone behind? Because if the theory of evolution asserts that the order is as a result of mere miracle in the early stages, why are there no other Universes that hasn't experienced this miracle?

Now let's take it in another angle. Since we have no other universe to compare our own with, let us now come within our universe to experiment with what we have.

When it comes to order, scientific observation has find that there is nothing of order that does not have something that caused it.

If you go inside a rarely travelled forest and see a tree that has a human face carved in it, your conclusion is that something or someone must be behind that carving.

If you go inside a forest and see many trees that fell here and there, you don't worry, you decide it's wind that blew them down all over.

But if you move a little down the forest and see loads of wood mortars and pestles packed one corner, you immediately conclude that someone in the business of wood mortars and pestles is responsible.

So if we go by the query in your post, the evidence is for an intelligent Creator, and against a mindless evolution.

Do you know the meaning of conjecture? That is what you are employing. When we are talking about scientific inquiry conjecture is worthless. We cannot simply say there is a universe constrained by physical law therefore an intelligent creator exists. That may be sufficient for faith based position but it is not for scientific study. If you are want to accept that an intelligent designer made everything by faith that is fine but do not call that being scientific because it is not.

The evidence points to a universe operating on physical laws and nothing else. We have never encountered a disembodied mind or anything of the sort. I have simply pointed out ways you can show that a scientific enquiry can proceed to show the demonstrability of this intelligent designer, you want us to take it on faith. No way, Jose.

Firstnebo:


In trying to prove a point about your assertion that God is not omniscient, you brought up an analogy about him not being omnipresent.

Yes. So where in the statement did I mention that the Bible said is omnipresent?

Firstnebo:

By bringing up omnipresent to explain why he is not omniscient, you are indirectly claiming the Bible also said God is omnipresent.

No. That's **YOU** putting words in my mouth.

Firstnebo:


Lol. Look at you.

If you don't believe that there is God, and you don't believe in evolution, how then do you suppose we are here?

Make up your mind already King

Lol, look at you too...
It's dumb to think that just because one doesn't agree to acknowledge the existence of an unseen being, then he must believe in the theory of evolution.
No one actually knows how we got here...
Making up crappy stories doesn't prove anything.
Tell us where you stand and provide physical proof about how we came into existence.
I'm done with this... Please don't quote me again untill you have physical proof...

LordReed:


Again with the leaps of faith. The universe has physical laws that constrain it that is not proof of a law giver. That is proof that you have a very active intuition. Intuition is not proof. In other to prove that the physical laws were indeed the creation of an intelligent being you have some ways to do so.

A leap of faith is not something tagged by Lordreed as so, but something done without reason. No sir, I see no leaps of faith here but pure reason. Law and order are the proof of a law giver, maybe he being the law himself, maintaining all things with a reference point??
The computer systems regulated by a written code/programme rather than unregulated nonsense, giving consistent results for specific input(law-guided), regardless of number of trials is proof of an intelligent programmer(lawgiver) behind it, whose intelligence is reflected in the program and the fact that there can never be such a computer system without a programmer is proof as well. This is true of every law abiding system. All I've shown up there are proofs of an intelligence behind creation.
And about leaps of faith, every scientific leap we take is actually a leap of faith, we would never do anything against the laws of the universe and expect favourable results but always make our designs based on the laws, not thinking they could change tomorrow. We believe these laws will never change and build on that belief. That my friend is a huge leap of faith. We're only safe doing this if god got his calculations right.
You have suggested how you would like to be convinced but I don't take that as a standard method to prove my point. There are standard methods to do that, which I am already using, that is deductive reasoning based on laws and principles.
But let's take the game to your own field, shall we.

1. Is to show us a universe that wasn't designed by intelligent being for comparison. Why? Because this is how we discern design, by comparing it with what is not designed.

‌1. We cannot show another universe but ours. Yet we can simulate within our universe, the condition you state. So let's take as a situation where intelligence is excluded and see what results we get. Use you for example, try to design a robot that will always give same results for same input signals. Like one that will always wave it's hand when I press a button. Can you do that without any intelligence. You can't. Is there anyone on earth who could without first acquiring knowledge of how to do this or who could accidentally achieve this. No.

2. Show us the process by which the designer designed these physical laws. Why? Because that is another way we recognise design, we see the designers at work. We can look at their process and watch the transformation.

‌2. Do I need to show the process of designing the device I'm using to know it was designed by intelligence. I can simply admit I'm not as intelligent as the designers.

3. Create a theory that can predict with high degree of confidence what this universe operates like based on what you consider as fact that it is being worked by an intelligent designer. Why? Because this is the process for scientific inquiry. If you must insist that science proves your intelligent designer then do science, don't do speculation. I am sure people have thought of even more interesting ways for your intelligent designer to be shown but these are my thoughts. Can you do any of the above or do you know of anyone who has?

‌3. The universe is too gigantic for us to do this but thank god the creator created smaller things in the universe. So, let's take the atom instead. All that has already been done in science. You can read up the atomic orbital models that were developed based on laws and principles, for matter. You can also read up Maxwell's predictions and models for electromagnetic waves around us, for energy.
‌

As for evolution take a look here:

Nah! The evolution part wasn't for you though but the only evidence I saw in there, going by scientific methods was the word written at the title of the page. All of those findings couldn't prove evolution but only existence of other non-human species and since we know you don't like leaps of faith, we won't make anything of them. Plus till today majority of scientists hold the position that there's no scientific proof of evolution, so let's not even go there.

kingxsamz:


Abeg stop disturbing me about evolution... I never claimed to believe such theory.

Easy man. So maybe you're among the smarter of the pack. ok then.

RealMrNigerD:

A leap of faith is not something tagged by Lordreed as so, but something done without reason. No sir, I see no leaps of faith here but pure reason. Law and order are the proof of a law giver, maybe he being the law himself, maintaining all things with a reference point??

A leap of faith is going from a premise to a conclusion without an intervening link. Example: All space craft commanders are men. Here is a man. Therefore this man is a spacecraft commander. That is not how things work. You need to show how this man fits into the class of spacecraft commanders because him being a man is not sufficient justification to conclude he is indeed a spacecraft commander. This is what you are doing with the existence of the physical laws if the universe. Because we class these things as law and because we know law givers exist, you make the intuitive faith leap that a universe creating lawgiver exists. You are not justified in making that leap hence it is indeed a faith leap.

The computer systems regulated by a written code/programme rather than unregulated nonsense, giving consistent results for specific input(law-guided), regardless of number of trials is proof of an intelligent programmer(lawgiver) behind it, whose intelligence is reflected in the program and the fact that there can never be such a computer system without a programmer is proof as well. This is true of every law abiding system. All I've shown up there are proofs of an intelligence behind creation.

There are natural systems that give rise to complex designs with no intelligence behind them. Example snowflakes, there is nobody sitting in the sky designing snowflakes yet by the constraints of the physical laws these things can take myriad of unique forms. This is what we see repeated in the universe.

And about leaps of faith, every scientific leap we take is actually a leap of faith, we would never do anything against the laws of the universe and expect favourable results but always make our designs based on the laws, not thinking they could change tomorrow. We believe these laws will never change and build on that belief. That my friend is a huge leap of faith. We're only safe doing this if god got his calculations right.

Wrong. No scientific leap is a leap of faith. Every scientific leap was built on principles that proceeded it and backed by thorough and continuous investigations. If as you say there is an intelligent designer that has worked this all out then my no 3 challenge should be very easy. This intelligent designer can provide everything about how this universe operates very easily but do we see that? No, instead men have worked steadily to increase our knowledge of the universe with out the help of any such intelligent designer.

You have suggested how you would like to be convinced but I don't take that as a standard method to prove my point. There are standard methods to do that, which I am already using, that is deductive reasoning based on laws and principles.
But let's take the game to your own field, shall we.

Well then I never said mine were standard. I specified that they were indeed my thoughts on the matter. If you think your deductive reasoning is standard then you have failed since your deductions have failed to meet the standards of deductive reasoning.

‌1. We cannot show another universe but ours. Yet we can simulate within our universe, the condition you state. So let's take as a situation where intelligence is excluded and see what results we get. Use you for example, try to design a robot that will always give same results for same input signals. Like one that will always wave it's hand when I press a button. Can you do that without any intelligence. You can't. Is there anyone on earth who could without first acquiring knowledge of how to do this or who could accidentally achieve this. No.

Then there is no means by which you can call this universe on the face of it a designed one since you have nothing to compare it with.

‌2. Do I need to show the process of designing the device I'm using to know it was designed by intelligence. I can simply admit I'm not as intelligent as the designers.

Yes if you were claiming to know the designers or you were standing in a courtroom being challenged on patent rights, which is sort of what we are doing. You claim to know a designer designed this universe, leaps of faith don't cut it. A practical demonstration of process is more than sufficient.

‌3. The universe is too gigantic for us to do this but thank god the creator created smaller things in the universe. So, let's take the atom instead. All that has already been done in science. You can read up the atomic orbital models that were developed based on laws and principles, for matter. You can also read up Maxwell's predictions and models for electromagnetic waves around us, for energy.

I am not asking you to point to things already done I am asking you provide models of things we don't know yet. Surely an intelligent designer can provide that, can't it?

‌

Nah! The evolution part wasn't for you though but the only evidence I saw in there, going by scientific methods was the word written at the title of the page. All of those findings couldn't prove evolution but only existence of other non-human species and since we know you don't like leaps of faith, we won't make anything of them. Plus till today majority of scientists hold the position that there's no scientific proof of evolution, so let's not even go there.

Wrong again. A majority of scientists hold evolution as true because the evidence backs up the theory quite well. There are no leaps of faith here, just following the evidence where it leads.

The only evidence you saw were words? So all the fossil records and dna sequences are just words? LMFAO! You must be joking.

Adam heard God's voice and saw so many things he did for him ranging from food, a mate, prospect of leading all his yet unborn generations in worshiping God and of course taming all other living creatures to his own taste based on their abilities.
But Adam just wanted more than that, everything he had came from someone he can't see and it's like this person can't do more than what he has done, so Adam chose to become a God on his own in order to do better things or do things better!
To do this he needed to free himself from the seeming bongage of always having to be subjected to whatever this unseen benefactor decides. Hence when Eve (Adam's pair) made the move to rebel against their unseen God and father, Adam quickly welcomed the development.
Today what they started back then has caused a great problem for their children. Most of us can't hear God's voice and since we heard that he once spoke to people, each of us demands he must not only speak to us in person but also solve our personal problems!
Well that was how ATHEISM came in!
To be continued...

What 99.9% of people reading the Bible don't realize is that God never intended talking with all humans directly !

The arrangement is for one person to hear him and pass the info to others, and since Adam is our father that everyone knew to be alive before anyone else he will be the one telling all his children (including Eve) what he heard from our God and Creator, while each person in turn pass on the information to his own child!

But since the communication between God and Adam had been broken, humans need someone to take over Adam's place as the mediator between us and God, none of Adam's descendants perfectly fit in to that position because we knew little about the one talking, that's why God transformed an angel in an embryo in the womb of a Jewish virgin named Mary, this child will grow up to become a PERFECT man equivalent to Adam and can now be our new father who will teach us what Adam failed to teach us about our heavenly father!
To be continued...

God began talking to Adam's descendants after the rebellion in Eden, but that's not to solve their problems (consequences of their father's blunders). The communication was to guide them until the one prepared to replace Adam come to the earth. Ever since humans heard that God spoke to some of them each demands hearing him and expressing their discomfort in the situation they found themselves. But God will not change his own program to fit in to their demands, rather it's for humans to find out what he wants them to do, and NOT to expect any favour in return for their obedience now.
Billions of Adam's descendants have come and returned to non-existence, God kept the record of the obedient ones and those who lived as prisoners of conscience, to give them the opportunity of learning about him from the new father in replacement of Adam!
So while some are contented with God's provision, majority keep murmuring against the arrangement as not good enough due to the anxieties of life and their present condition. They felt God should do better than just passing some information which they found as useless since it's not meeting the demands of their hearts.
This gave some of God's spirit sons (angels) the opportunity to pursue so many desires of their hearts that they've been nursing for long.
How does it feel to live in the flesh and enjoy fleshy things like Sex, Dominance, Oppression and to be free from the life of ever been on constant attention to their heavenly father. So they came down, made materialised bodies for themselves and began living as humans in the midst of Adam's descendants! By that time Adam was dead so there was no one to tell his children that this good looking, charming and highly intelligent men aren't natural humans! Genesis 6:1-5
They had sex with female humans and got them pregnant, but children born to them turn out to be gigantic villains causing trouble everywhere!
To be continued...

God destroyed the earth back then NOT because of the descendants of Adam but because of the giants causing trouble and forcing everyone to behave like them!
After the flood all the descendants of Adam died living just eight survivors (four pairs).
But what about the spirit sons of God?
Well they returned to heaven as spirits again since they can easily dematerialize the bodies they formed, but God did not allow them to continue serving with faithful angels! 1Peter 3:19-20; 2Peter 2:4;Jude 6
These are the spirits behind all the spiritistic acts done throughout the earth and people began WORSHIPING THEM AS GODS, because they're ready to put on materialised forms to appear, disappear, talk and give in to the demands of their adherents even if such ones demands the death of those who offend them!
That's how peoples of the nations throughout the earth got their gods apart from Israel the one and only race God chose as his mouthpiece to speak to the rest!
To be continued...

RealMrNigerD:
Ask the atheist to disprove the existence of God. They can't. Ask them to prove evolution scientifically, they can't either. Atheism is not just denial and stupidity,it's being unscientific about it.

What a slowpoke. Evolution is the reason why scientists are struggling to find a vaccine for HIV and a reason why ppl need to take a flu shot every year. Evolution is all around you.

Today whoever refuses to take simple, sincere and honest hearted instructions on what each and every other human around him must do to live happily with LOVE JOY and PEACE in this hard times should know that he/she is part of those causing the problems facing mankind!
Many are claiming to be Worshipers of God, some don't care for whatever God had to say still other are blaming God for the things they feel they're missing or not enjoying presently. All these people are ATHEISTS!
The only Worshipers or friends of God are the ones who are asking "what exactly did God ask us to do? We are ready to do his will no matter the condition we find ourselves!" These ones will acknowledge one true source of guidance for all humans, strive within their capability to live by it and continue encouraging others to do the same.
They will not demand that God speak with them in person because they realized that information is from mouth to mouth NOT directly from God!
Each of them will train his child to live by the principles agreed upon by humans from all races discovered as directives from God.
They'll be happy and joyful in doing this, and they will be contented with whatever situation they found themselves, hoping that God will restore sanity to the earth when all evil is gone for good! Psalms 37:7-11

Apart from this set of humans, all others are ATHEISTS but just few are claiming so!
Thanks!

Firstnebo:


Thank you my brother. There is more evidence in proved science to support the Bible than the evidence to support evolution.

For example Science has now agreed all human race can be traced to a single ancestor. Something they can't say about the ape family!

I like the question you posed to him. What is his evidence that the world came about by evolution?

Adam and eve were white.
Does science tell you they were white too?

RealMrNigerD:

by scientific methods was the word written at the title of the page. All of those findings couldn't prove evolution but only existence of other non-human species and since we know you don't like leaps of faith, we won't make anything of them. Plus till today majority of scientists hold the position that there's no scientific proof of evolution, so let's not even go there.

For your enlightenment:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acceptance_of_evolution_by_religious_groups

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

Maximus69:
Adam heard God's voice and saw so many things he did for him ranging from food, a mate, prospect of leading all his yet unborn generations in worshiping God and of course taming all other living creatures to his own taste based on their abilities.
But Adam just wanted more than that, everything he had came from someone he can't see and it's like this person can't do more than what he has done, so Adam chose to become a God on his own in order to do better things or do things better!
To do this he needed to free himself from the seeming bongage of always having to be subjected to whatever this unseen benefactor decides. Hence when Eve (Adam's pair) made the move to rebel against their unseen God and father, Adam quickly welcomed the development.
Today what they started back then has caused a great problem for their children. Most of us can't hear God's voice and since we heard that he once spoke to people, each of us demands he must not only speak to us in person but also solve our personal problems!
Well that's where ATHEISM came in!
To be continued...

...

RealMrNigerD:

I really don't claim to know what this god looks like and how many they are for now. I only wish to be scientific about showing that there must be god(s) behind creation.

What exactly is the benefit of accepting that there must be god(s) when we know absolutely nothing about it or them. Why is the the belief that a God exist more important than knowing that God exists and having better detail of him or her or them?

lepasharon:


Adam and eve were white.
Does science tell you they were white too?

I do not know what exactly you mean. I hope you clarify the point you are trying to make

frank317:


What exactly is the benefit of accepting that there must be god(s)

when we know absolutely nothing about it or them.

Why is the the belief that a God exist more important than knowing that God exists and having better detail of him or her or them?

You may know "absolutely nothing" about God. But that's because you choose so, not because the information is not there. The Bible gives enough information on the personal name, age, likes and dislikes of God. Then it tells us how he dealt with many people in the past. And what his purpose for our earth is

Firstnebo:


You may know "absolutely nothing" about God. But that's because you choose so, not because the information is not there. The Bible gives enough information on the personal name, age, likes and dislikes of God. Then it tells us how he dealt with many people in the past. And what his purpose for our earth is

Smh...
Are you talking about the same Bible written by man?

Firstnebo:


You may know "absolutely nothing" about God. But that's because you choose so, not because the information is not there. The Bible gives enough information on the personal name, age, likes and dislikes of God. Then it tells us how he dealt with many people in the past. And what his purpose for our earth is

It's their problems and present circumstances that's of utmost importance to them.
They want so many things their hands can't reach, they feel like it's been too long since mankind have been experiencing so much pain, they want to know when their time will come to do whatever they want, they don't want to hear the word NEED but WANT, and whatever explanation available is insufficient to quench their thirst because they want immediate solution, and they just can't wait to meet the one who has all the powers to do what they want!
Many of them are religious, they'll tell you they often heard God's voice, they know what to do to make God attend to them without delay, they want others to feel that it's worthless having faith in whom you can't see or talk to, the last time one of them publicly said he drank tea with God in his room!

These are the ATHEISTS!

Their mindset is fixed on seeing, hearing and touching whoever they need to trust (believe).

So nothing can satisfy their curiosity unless he (God) touch, speak or appear to them, that's why after so many years of demands without getting what they want, the religious ones amongst them will suddenly turn and become fierce enemies of the God who can't be seen, touch or heard. Others become demonized as fallen angels takes advantage of their anxieties to use them in misleading others!
When you hear someone says he visited hellfire while he is still alive, and so many other fabulous stories like that, just try to correlate their story with what is written in the Bible, then you'll realize it's demons that's been playing pranks with them!

Firstnebo:
There is a person that has the authority and the power to be identified as God because he alone ever existed. He is the source of life. He created all things. He inspired the holy book known as the Bible (for the purpose of bringing man to his original purpose of creating the earth).

God is the most powerful, the wisest, with the most love, and the most just of all other persons or things that live or have ever lived, whether in heaven, or on earth.

Atheism in its basic form is the belief that there is no God. Their major attack is on Christianity and especially on the Bible. They promote the theory of evolution.

So here is the challenge, I want Nairaland atheists to come and prove my Belief in the God I described above and his word the Bible as false.


In logical order. One point at a time before we move to another. With evidence and logic. No insults.

Why do you believe in the Christian God and not the Hindu God?