malvisguy212:
its look like time is the magic for the atheists ......If a fair maiden kisses a frog which instantly changes into a handsome prince, we would call it a fairy tale. But if the frog takes 40 million years to turn into a prince, we call it evolution.

Except evolution doesn't say a frog became a prince after 40 million years.

shadeyinka:

Joke of the century: the law of diminishing returns seem to apply to knowledge. Knowledge itself seem not to have the capacity to impart wisdom

When christians take such a position, they are called bigots, but scientists seem to escape that charge......when you look at what this people want to defend, Then you will understand why these evolutionary scientists are people of such extraordinary faith. How does the evolutionist explain the existence of that first one-celled animal from which all life forms supposedly evolved? the answer we always got from them "IT EITHER WE KNOW NOTHING ABOUT EVOLUTION " or there second answer is "I DON'T KNOW AND IT'S CANNOT BE GOD "

LordReed:


Except evolution doesn't say a frog became a prince after 40 million years.

so what did evolution say ? magic happen ? strong faith my brother , i admire your faith .

malvisguy212:
so what did evolution say ? magic happen ? strong faith my brother , i admire your faith .

Very impressive of you admitting you know little about evolution. It shows you are willing to learn instead of ignorantly strawmanning like some.


Below is some free school in answer to your question.
Evolution 101

LordReed:


Except evolution doesn't say a frog became a prince after 40 million years.

Don't you find it funny how they don't realise they do not know what they talk about and how their ignorance is obvious in what they do say?

Makes one wonder how they avoid admitting their ignorance to themselves, but one sees many like them believing even the Bible they never read. If they did read it they'd easily understand evolution.

malvisguy212:
so what did evolution say ? magic happen ? strong faith my brother , i admire your faith .

Evolution requires neither magic nor faith but understanding its principles which you clearly don't.

budaatum:


Don't you find it funny how they don't realise they do not know what they talk about and how their ignorance is obvious in what they do say?

Makes one wonder how they avoid admitting their ignorance to themselves, but one sees many like them believing even the Bible they never read. If they did read it they'd easily understand evolution.

Indeed my dear buda. They seem so invested in equating everything to magic.

LordReed:


Indeed my dear buda. They seem so invested in equating everything to magic.

That's how religion makes them reason. They fall on their knees and call for their daily bread from heaven despite evidence they are starving.

I quote [url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hosea%204%3A1-7&version=KJV]Hosea 4:1-7[/url] at them knowing they'd lack understanding and see only what they believe.

budaatum:


Very impressive of you admitting you know little about evolution. It shows you are willing to learn instead of ignorantly strawmanning like some.


Below is some free school in answer to your question.
Evolution 101

okay .understood , there was a cell , its just appear from the beginning

LordReed:


Evolution requires neither magic nor faith but understanding its principles which you clearly don't.

understanding principle that we are the product of luck . Doesn't it take more faith to believe that chance could produce life than it does to believe infinite intelligence could produce it?

malvisguy212:
okay .understood , there was a cell , its just appear from the beginning

You can not "understood" already because evolution is far more complex than that!

I recommend at least 5 years of learning, though a lifetime would be much better. And read your Bible from the beginning to the end to see God evolve and you will evolve in God's image such that when you say "Let there be light", light will be.

Amen.

malvisguy212:
When christians take such a position, they are called bigots, but scientists seem to escape that charge......when you look at what this people want to defend, Then you will understand why these evolutionary scientists are people of such extraordinary faith. How does the evolutionist explain the existence of that first one-celled animal from which all life forms supposedly evolved? the answer we always got from them "IT EITHER WE KNOW NOTHING ABOUT EVOLUTION " or there second answer is "I DON'T KNOW AND IT'S CANNOT BE GOD "

Atheists seem to be comfortable with "Any other reason other than God is okay!".

It's amazing that the definition of atheism is so loose that atheists who believe in magic and the supernatural exist. The first real life atheist I know in my life happens to be a lecturer who incidentally in much into Yoruba fetishism. Some atheists are even comfortable with the idea of creation by advanced Aliens from another planet.

I honestly don't know how a belief in God affects the knowledge of science negatively.

Our knowledge is so advanced now that out professors cannot determine who a male or female is now. If a man feels feminine, then he must be female by gender.

shadeyinka:


I honestly don't know how a belief in God affects the knowledge of science negatively.

Any belief negatively affects knowledge, and a believe in what you do not understand, even moreso.

The issue is that you think both what you believe, and knowledge, are the same thing, which they are not. Just think. You can not believe your mother is your mother if you know who your mother is nor can you believe you have money in your bank account if you know there is money in your bank account.

I'm certain you are tempted to respond in the negative to the above but I recommend you think about it for a day or two to avoid responding how you have been programmed to believe.

You do not believe what you know, and if you believe then you really do not know.

malvisguy212:
understanding principle that we are the product of luck . Doesn't it take more faith to believe that chance could produce life than it does to believe infinite intelligence could produce it?

Doesn’t require any faith at all because that's not what the theory says. Also, you don't require faith to understand the water cycle and you'll be ignorant to continue to claim that rain is a product of some god's favour or magic or that it requires faith to believe that rain is a product of physical systems interacting.

shadeyinka:

Atheists seem to be comfortable with "Any other reason other than God is okay!".

It's amazing that the definition of atheism is so loose that atheists who believe in magic and the supernatural exist. The first real life atheist I know in my life happens to be a lecturer who incidentally in much into Yoruba fetishism. Some atheists are even comfortable with the idea of creation by advanced Aliens from another planet.

I honestly don't know how a belief in God affects the knowledge of science negatively.

Our knowledge is so advanced now that out professors cannot determine who a male or female is now. If a man feels feminine, then he must be female by gender.

Any atheist who believes in things that are not supported by evidence are also guilty of the same things we accuse you believers of. What we are comfortable with is irrelevant to the question why should we believe gods exist.

shadeyinka:

Atheists seem to be comfortable with "Any other reason other than God is okay!".

It's amazing that the definition of atheism is so loose that atheists who believe in magic and the supernatural exist. The first real life atheist I know in my life happens to be a lecturer who incidentally in much into Yoruba fetishism. Some atheists are even comfortable with the idea of creation by advanced Aliens from another planet.

I honestly don't know how a belief in God affects the knowledge of science negatively.

Our knowledge is so advanced now that out professors cannot determine who a male or female is now. If a man feels feminine, then he must be female by gender.

Science does not undermine the existence of. God, but rather reinforces it. i love the way you tackle them . more Grace bro

malvisguy212:
Science does not undermine the existence of. God, but rather reinforces it. i love the way you tackle them . more Grace bro

Thanks Bro!
And stay blessed!

LordReed:


Any atheist who believes in things that are not supported by evidence are also guilty of the same things we accuse you believers of. What we are comfortable with is irrelevant to the question why should we believe gods exist.

In other words just as you have atheists by reason, you also have atheists by choice.
I usually don't have problems with atheist by choice, I question atheists by reason for
1. Their reasons fail the scientific and logical test they uphold.
2. Their escapism: when science fail, they say science is evolving hence, tomorrow, the answer will come.

It thus mean that even though they feigned knowledge, their atheism is actually just an emotional choice!

budaatum:


Any belief negatively affects knowledge, and a believe in what you do not understand, even moreso.

The issue is that you think both what you believe, and knowledge, are the same thing, which they are not. Just think. You can not believe your mother is your mother if you know who your mother is nor can you believe you have money in your bank account if you know there is money in your bank account.

I'm certain you are tempted to respond in the negative to the above but I recommend you think about it for a day or two to avoid responding how you have been programmed to believe.

You do not believe what you know, and if you believe then you really do not know.

And my dear Buda, I have told you several times that I KNOW whom I call my God!

But obviously, you feel that it is impossible hence your feeling that I equate belief with knowing. I know the difference even though in the Christian faith, you are required to both know and believe in God.

Knowing God:
Having a personal relationship based on experience with God
Believing God:
Trusting God for what he is yet to do
Or Trusting Gods Words/Promises

Dear Buda,
God has not created man to Live by Food Alone, neither has God Created any man to live by Faith alone, neither has God created any man to live by knowledge alone.

Man is created a logical being
Man is created a physical being
Man is Created a spiritual being
Man is created an emotional being
Man is created to acquire and apply knowledge.

Believing is JUST one aspect of the nature of man.
Even in science, we have a form of believe (hypothesis), we then test such belief/hypothesis. When such a hypothesis fail, it is discarded and a more reasonable hypothesis is proposed.

Therefore, it is NOT true that Any belief negatively affects knowledge.

shadeyinka:

In other words just as you have atheists by reason, you also have atheists by choice.
I usually don't have problems with atheist by choice, I question atheists by reason for
1. Their reasons fail the scientific and logical test they uphold.
2. Their escapism: when science fail, they say science is evolving hence, tomorrow, the answer will come.

It thus mean that even though they feigned knowledge, their atheism is actually just an emotional choice!

This is funny, tomorrow you will say science can't prove god but here you are disparaging those who rely on it. Unlike you we are not eager to posit gods as explanations for what we don't know, that was what our cavemen forebears did, we have passed that stage.

malvisguy212:
Science does not undermine the existence of. God, but rather reinforces it. i love the way you tackle them . more Grace bro

Yet you think evolution is magic. You don't like evolution because it clearly undermines what you believe.

shadeyinka:

And my dear Buda, I have told you several times that I KNOW whom I call my God!

But obviously, you feel that it is impossible hence your feeling that I equate belief with knowing. I know the difference even though in the Christian faith, you are required to both know and believe in God.

Knowing God:
Having a personal relationship based on experience with God
Believing God:
Trusting God for what he is yet to do
Or Trusting Gods Words/Promises

Dear Buda,
God has not created man to Live by Food Alone, neither has God Created any man to live by Faith alone, neither has God created any man to live by knowledge alone.

Man is created a logical being
Man is created a physical being
Man is Created a spiritual being
Man is created an emotional being
Man is created to acquire and apply knowledge.

Believing is JUST one aspect of the nature of man.
Even in science, we have a form of believe (hypothesis), we then test such belief/hypothesis. When such a hypothesis fail, it is discarded and a more reasonable hypothesis is proposed.

Therefore, it is NOT true that Any belief negatively affects knowledge.

Unfortunately, you do not see how you do not apply the distinction between your beliefs and what you claim to know of God when it applies to other things. If you did, you would not have stated your belief about atheists as if it were knowledge, which it clearly is not. As I said, you do not believe your mother is your mother unless you doubt whom your mother is, and you would not believe there is money in your bank account unless you are not certain there is money in your bank account.

Do know that a scientist who believes a hypothesis would be negligent in duty if they do not test that belief in order to know if it should be discarded or not, as in, become accepted theory, and no scientist worth study would claim what they believe is factual knowledge. It's why your science teacher did not teach you beliefs, but tried and tested factual theory.

But I'll go further. Jesus taught you to be a scientist, as in, a person who tests beliefs. He condemned those who peddled believes, claiming they do not believe what they tell you to believe. "Woe to them", he said, for giving scorpions instead of life giving bread knowledge. "They do not enter but block the path to those who would". And then he shed his blood so you may learn to use your senses, which is what science is, for which I say, Jesus is indeed Lord, for nothing more Godly can be done than the healing and teaching to use ones God given senses. Amen.

LordReed:


This is funny, tomorrow you will say science can't prove god but here you are disparaging those who rely on it. Unlike you we are not eager to posit gods as explanations for what we don't know, that was what our cavemen forebears did, we have passed that stage.

We are saying exactly the same thing. What you've just said in other words is:
"Even though we don't have the scientific answer, we know it can't be any God!"

FYI:
God is not an explanation for what we don't know, God is the explanation for what we already know!

budaatum:


Unfortunately, you do not see how you do not apply the distinction between your beliefs and what you claim to know of God when it applies to other things. If you did, you would not have stated your belief about atheists as if it were knowledge, which it clearly is not. As I said, you do not believe your mother is your mother unless you doubt whom your mother is, and you would not believe there is money in your bank account unless you are not certain there is money in your bank account.

You paint belief in a negative light even though belief functions usually as a trust in the integrity/personality of a person you know.

Here are some statement to buttress:
I believe my wife would not betray me!
I believe I am well prepared for the exam!
I believe that the boy has the correct solution to that differential equation.

Throughout these examples, the word "believe" is based on knowledge enough to be confident even though the outcome is not determined yet

A belief isn't a wild guesswork! Any belief not based on knowledge is just a wild guesswork and cannot be trusted.

Knowledge however is based on facts/information enough to be certain of the outcome which is already determined

Example:
I know the snake will not bite me (why?: I know that it is already dead)
I know that the gun is empty (why?: I removed the magazine and emptied the chamber)

Finally,
"I know President Buhari"
and
"I believe in President Buhari"
Are two different valid statements about Buhari.

The first statement is about firsthand knowledge about Buhari.(past and present)
The second statement is about what Buhari can do (future)

budaatum:

Do know that a scientist who believes a hypothesis would be negligent in duty if they do not test that belief in order to know if it should be discarded or not, as in, become accepted theory, and no scientist worth study would claim what they believe is factual knowledge. It's why your science teacher did not teach you beliefs, but tried and tested factual theory.

Every scientist must believe in his hypothesis (this belief if based on his knowledge), this belief then has to be tested to ascertain it's validity. Otherwise, it remains a hypothesis!

By Definition:
A research hypothesis is a statement of expectation or prediction that will be tested by research.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://oakland.edu/Assets/upload/docs/AIS/Syllabi/Tayler_Research_Hypothesis.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjJ2Zi7wefuAhXyTBUIHU_yBV8QFjADegQIKxAF&usg=AOvVaw2HDu3idt6L82yfa4fZ-UB2

Science is not adverse to an educated guess (a belief) as long as it can be tested.

budaatum:

But I'll go further. Jesus taught you to be a scientist, as in, a person who tests beliefs. He condemned those who peddled believes, claiming they do not believe what they tell you to believe. "Woe to them", he said, for giving scorpions instead of life giving bread knowledge. "They do not enter but block the path to those who would". And then he shed his blood so you may learn to use your senses, which is what science is, for which I say, Jesus is indeed Lord, for nothing more Godly can be done than the healing and teaching to use ones God given senses. Amen.

Christianity is about both knowing God as who He is and believing God for what is yet to be.

Jesus said:
And you shall KNOW the TRUTH and the truth shall set you free!

Knowledge must come before freedom (future).

2Tim 2:15:
"Study to show yourself approved to God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

shadeyinka:

You paint belief in a negative light even though belief functions usually as a trust in the integrity/personality of a person you know.

Here are some statement to buttress:
I believe my wife would not betray me!
I believe I am well prepared for the exam!
I believe that the boy has the correct solution to that differential equation.

Throughout these examples, the word "believe" is based on knowledge enough to be confident even though the outcome is not determined yet

I guess this is where you accuse me of insulting you because I am about to call you a liar or at least claim you are being dishonest.

None of the examples you post above are based on any knowledge you claim to have, which is why they are beliefs. If you knew you would say so instead of merely believing and evidence might in time prove you wrong.

shadeyinka:

A belief isn't a wild guesswork! Any belief not based on knowledge is just a wild guesswork and cannot be trusted.

Knowledge however is based on facts/information enough to be certain of the outcome which is already determined

Example:
I know the snake will not bite me (why?: I know that it is already dead)
I know that the gun is empty (why?: I removed the magazine and emptied the chamber)

Finally,
"I know President Buhari"
and
"I believe in President Buhari"
Are two different valid statements about Buhari.

The first statement is about firsthand knowledge about Buhari.(past and present)
The second statement is about what Buhari can do (future)

Note that you say "Knowledge however is based on facts/information, but can't say the same about beliefs.

Why is that?

shadeyinka:

Every scientist must believe in his hypothesis (this belief if based on his knowledge), this belief then has to be tested to ascertain it's validity. Otherwise, it remains a hypothesis!

By Definition:
A research hypothesis is a statement of expectation or prediction that will be tested by research.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://oakland.edu/Assets/upload/docs/AIS/Syllabi/Tayler_Research_Hypothesis.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjJ2Zi7wefuAhXyTBUIHU_yBV8QFjADegQIKxAF&usg=AOvVaw2HDu3idt6L82yfa4fZ-UB2

Science is not adverse to an educated guess (a belief) as long as it can be tested.

Key word, "tested". The scientist does not claim an hypothesis is fact, and neither does the scientist believe in an hypothesis or they would not bother testing it, I would have you consider instead of just parroting beliefs at me please!

shadeyinka:

Christianity is about both knowing God as who He is and believing God for what is yet to be.

Jesus said:
And you shall KNOW the TRUTH and the truth shall set you free!

Knowledge must come before freedom (future).

2Tim 2:15:
"Study to show yourself approved to God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

I agree that Christianity is about knowing what many refer to as God. The question is, What is the meaning of knowing God? Is it not true that you show knowledge of God by how you relate to those you see here, and that inasmuch as ye have done unto those here whom you see the Lord God in Heaven is pleased?

Perhaps read up on the Parable of the Orangutan who knew nothing about God but whom Christ said emulate as opposed to those who definitely believed.

When Christ said "become as a child", he meant test all that you believe. He also said it is as difficult as a camel going through the needle's eye, a fact you are proving here to be correct.

budaatum:

I guess this is where you accuse me of insulting you because I am about to call you a liar or at least claim you are being dishonest.

None of the examples you post above are based on any knowledge you claim to have, which is why they are beliefs. If you knew you would say so instead of merely believing and evidence might in time prove you wrong.

I believe my wife will not betray me is a statement based on the knowledge of her anticidence and character. This is the knowledge required to take such position.
In truth, I have no control over my wife's choice (it is not cast in stone nor predetermined)


I believe I am well prepared for the exam! is a position based on knowledge of the fact that I have to the best of my ability covered the syllabus and rehearsed enough probable questions. (the result is based on how adequate my propagation is, my state of health and other variables I have no control on)

I believe that the boy has the correct solution to that differential equation: is the position taken because I have to the best of my understanding of mathematics gone through his solution of the differential equation to take a position. (I am not infallible and subject to error of judgement in mathematics)

budaatum:

Note that you say "Knowledge however is based on facts/information, but can't say the same about beliefs.

Why is that?

Knowledge applies when there is virtually no room for uncertainty!
I can say, I know that the sun will come up tomorrow! (Why shouldn't it?)
I know that 2+4 is SIX? (There exist no other answer)
I know that I am male! ( What else do you expect!?)

Believing however even though is based on knowledge, the factor of fluidity of action and reaction, external factors, human nature, unforseen circumstances etc lead to a situation where we cannot say with all certainty that the resultant will be as predicted. Hence in human language, we use the word believe.

It is recklessness for a person to believe what he has no adequate information about.

Atheists actually really believe that God doesn't exist (Forget the play of words that atheism means a "lack of believe" in God): for their lack of belief is based on their imperfect knowledge.

budaatum:

Key word, "tested". The scientist does not claim an hypothesis is fact, and neither does the scientist believe in an hypothesis or they would not bother testing it, I would have you consider instead of just parroting beliefs at me please!

Scientists are careful to state the difference between when an explanation is a LAW or a HYPOTHESIS! A Hypothesis is simply an EDUCATED guess (a belief to be tested). A Law is a verified Hypothesis. A hypothesis is a fact only after is has been tested and verified as consistently true.

In the case of God (for everyone) whether through knowledge or hypothesis we would got to know God in ANOTHER dimension at DEATH!

This brings up another question:
There are some knowledge that are factually constant truths (eg 2+3=Five).
But, Can some knowledge (known as facts) be wrong?

Pluto used to be the Ninth planet of our solar system but not anymore!

budaatum:

I agree that Christianity is about knowing what many refer to as God. The question is, What is the meaning of knowing God? Is it not true that you show knowledge of God by how you relate to those you see here, and that inasmuch as ye have done unto those here whom you see the Lord God in Heaven is pleased?

Perhaps read up on the Parable of the Orangutan who knew nothing about God but whom Christ said emulate as opposed to those who definitely believed.

When Christ said "become as a child", he meant test all that you believe. He also said it is as difficult as a camel going through the needle's eye, a fact you are proving here to be correct.

Knowledge of God is simple: it just means having a personal relationship with God in terms of experience of communication with Him, knowing His character in dealing with you, knowing what He approves of and what He doesn't etc.

The knowledge of God ALSO make you know that God is also residing in people around you (your neighbors). When you go out in love to help your neighbor attain peace, joy, comfort, satisfaction etc, you do that actually for God.

Mat 25:34-40:
"Then shall the King say to them on his right hand, Come, you blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungered, and you gave me meat: I was thirsty, and you gave me drink: I was a stranger, and you took me in: Naked, and you clothed me: I was sick, and you visited me: I was in prison, and you came to me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we you an hungered, and fed you? or thirsty, and gave you drink? When saw we you a stranger, and took you in? or naked, and clothed you? Or when saw we you sick, or in prison, and came to you? And the King shall answer and say to them, Truly I say to you, Inasmuch as you have done it to one of the least of these my brothers, you have done it to me."

I guess that is why the greatest commandment is LOVE God and LOVE Man!

Can one really love a person who is not known?

shadeyinka:

Believing however even though is based on knowledge, the factor of fluidity of action and reaction, external factors, human nature, unforseen circumstances etc lead to a situation where we cannot say with all certainty that the resultant will be as predicted. Hence in human language, we use the word believe.

Read the above again. Now go back and read all I've been saying about believers.

shadeyinka:

It is recklessness for a person to believe what he has no adequate information about.

I believe you are being reckless.

shadeyinka:
Atheists actually really believe that God doesn't exist (Forget the play of words that atheism means a "lack of believe" in God): for their lack of belief is based on their imperfect knowledge.

Such atheists are believers and are no different to their religious counterparts.

Gods exist in the minds of those in whom Gods are created. If God is created in your mind God exists for you, and if you do not create Gods in your mind you ought to know its not there. It is for this reason some can worship stones.

shadeyinka:
Can one really love a person who is not known?

Yes, shade. Humans are complex like that, both lied to and believed. When they get to know the person they say they love they sometimes stop loving them. For instance when it is discovered their loved is a partner beater or cheater or thief or murderer or just irresponsible, all things they might discover after being in love for years. Here's an example.

budaatum:


Read the above again. Now go back and read all I've been saying about believers.

I believe you are being reckless.

Such atheists are believers and are no different to their religious counterparts.

In summary: Belief is based on knowledge.

Adequate knowledge is a relative term. In different frame of reference, you can't determine what adequate information or knowledge is.

Whether it be Theist or Atheist, Believing based on inadequate knowledge is recklessness! Just as you can't claim all Atheists are gnostic, not all Theists are reckless in their beliefs.

budaatum:

God's knowledge (edited) exist in the minds of those in whom Gods are created. If God's knowledge (edited) is created in your mind God exists for you, and if you do not create Gods in your mind you ought to know its not there. It is for this reason some can worship stones.

I will prefer that you present it as the knowledge of the unknown God written in every heart rather than God EXISTING in people's mind.

Knowledge can be deleted, corrupted, distorted or replaced. I don't think one can delete God.

Salvation is a gift of grace!

budaatum:

Yes, shade. Humans are complex like that, both lied to and believed. When they get to know the person they say they love they sometimes stop loving them. For instance when it is discovered their loved is a partner beater or cheater or thief or murderer or just irresponsible, all things they might discover after being in love for years. Here's an example.

This is why as humans, we use the word Belief when dealing with personalities. This is why it is more reasonable to say:
"I believe that Donald Trump mean the best for America!"
than
"I know that Donald Trump mean the best for America!" (Did you enter his mind!?)

shadeyinka:

Simple!
Can order come out of chaos?

Can entropy reduce without an external input of a constraining force?

Can intellegence (life) result from random collection of subatomic particles?

That is the point being made!

It's impossible for nothing to exist.
The universe is just another arena of randomness.
Life is absurd.

shadeyinka:

In summary: Belief is based on knowledge.

Adequate knowledge is a relative term. In different frame of reference, you can't determine what adequate information or knowledge is.

Belief is based on opinion. Once you have sufficient knowledge you'd stop believing and instead know. It is for this reason you do not just believe your mother gave birth to you if you know who your mother is, and also why it is written that belief makes demons tremble as the ignorant do.

www.nairaland.com/attachments/11663600_20200604102351774_jpeg_jpeg0a6707a5c919e2761327fab9920679aa

HellVictorinho:

It's impossible for nothing to exist.

No Sir!
We only found out that things exist, there is nothing that says there couldn't have been nothing in existence. The amount of empty space in the universe buttress that.

The only thing we can say is that
1. Our Universe had a beginning
2. Our Universe will end (increasing entropy)
3. Everything in the universe has a cause
4. Space, Time and Matter existed simultaneously
5. There must have existed an UNCAUSED FIRST CAUSE of everything

HellVictorinho:

The universe is just another arena of randomness.

But this isn't true. The laws of Physics are fairly constant since the formation of matter. The cycles of nature oppose this your view

Are you a random contraption? Then how come you create order within your immediate environment?

HellVictorinho:

Life is absurd.

It cost the earth a lot of energy to maintain and sustain the cycle of life. Yet, the cycle keeps absorbing energy to sustain itself. Why should it? Why should there exist the food chain? Why is there a life cycle? Why should such lives end up dying? Why should so much effort be involved in keeping life alive?
The food chain tells me that for the cycle to sustain itself, the sun must shine for the plants to grow, the plants must grow for the herbivores to eat, the herbivores must grow for the carnivores to grow, ...but without these consumers, the carbon cycle will cease and plants will die of suffocation in their own oxygen and only the sun will keep up shining until old age kills it in future. One wants to ask the question: all these for what purpose?

Life isn't absurd! Life exist not because of man but because of God. Of a truth, Man/Life has no purpose other than what his Creator made Him for.

Can a beautiful flower understand its purpose in a garden outside the owner of the garden!?

Only Outside man's Creator is man purposeless and absurd!

budaatum:

Belief is based on opinion. Once you have sufficient knowledge you'd stop believing and instead know. It is for this reason you do not just believe your mother gave birth to you if you know who your mother is, and also why it is written that belief makes demons tremble as the ignorant do.

www.nairaland.com/attachments/11663600_20200604102351774_jpeg_jpeg0a6707a5c919e2761327fab9920679aa

Note: the word sufficient is a relative term!. A knowledge could be complete or not

1. A Belief is based on EDUCATED opinion!
2. It is impossible to have a complete knowledge about things you don't have control over. This is why there is an aspect of Mathematics called PROBABILITY and another aspect of Mathematics called STATISTICS: for not everything in this world is EXACT!

Rephrased:
Once you have complete knowledge you'd stop believing and instead know

Is it possible to have a complete knowledge of any personality?


1Cor 13:12:
"For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known."

This scripture above is why Faith and Believing cannot be expunged from the knowing of God.

I repeat:
It is recklessness for a person to believe what he has no adequate information about.