₦airaland Forum

Maamin:
check my pics on my profile..am far from bald ..i dont find it offensive a bit. Is just that your analogy was used wrongly.

asalimpo:
If you dont "rightly divide the word of truth " you'll find urself in knots in certain areas.

sinequanon:
You are so locked into ToE defence mode, that you are totally clueless and incapable of following the OP. I even predicted your behaviour.

Weah96:
Wait a minute. You do know that the horizontal gene transfer is responsible for the algal dna found in the slug, right?

dorox:
One fundamental aspect of my belief system as a christian is that it is only under God's kingdom headed by Jesus Christ that humans will finally have indefinely long lives, not by any other means.
So, if it happens that humans can now do what I hold "impossible", it would be proof enough that my belief is wrong, and perhaps there is no God. But it won't stop me from enjoing life forever.

italo:
Or you're here to talk about God...a way to put away that innate fear that he might exist after all is said and done.

Aren't you one of those who say that God or gods may exist?

Or do you claim that God or gods have 0% chance of existing?

italo:
But we know you're not here for me. You're here to discuss God.

sinequanon:
This is the sort of nonsense post I warned about in the OP.

Yes, we can all quote "subcellular endosymbiotic relationship with the alga Codium fragile" from wikipedia, well done.

The rest of your post is junk.

sinequanon:
Between the slug and the moth?

I am sure their is no database of slug or moth genomes, let alone slug vs moth.

And what were you looking for, exactly? A list of tens of millions of base pairs?

italo:
You're still here. You just can't have enough of God.

italo:
We both know God fills your thoughts.

It's obvious. No need to be ashamed of it.

italo:
Go and sleep...nobody shoves anything on you.

You could be on nairaland talking about sports, science, politics or anything else...but you spend all your life talking about God.

Maamin:
Wrong analogy

italo:
Bald people dont spend all their days attacking hair.

I KNOW you know or fear God exists, that's why you can't find rest.

You're always on God's case.

italo:
I largely ignore all these names you mentioned.

Many Atheists cant ignore God because they fear or know he is real. They spend all their lives and energy talking and thinking about him.

It's a little like when a girl is always saying something bad about a guy...most times, she wants him. If she didn't she'd just ignore him and act as though he didn't exist.

italo:
It's not laughable to him. He just uses that to mask his fear...fear of confronting the idea that God might exist.

italo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vz9L2EYjjsc#

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/vz9L2EYjjsc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Proffdada:
spirit is what powers ur consciousness. it defines from an animal.

honourhim:
Chei I pity your understanding. Even with the husband and wife, girlfriend and boyfriend example that I gave you you still don't get my point rather you are calling your colleagues to support you. Quite a shame.

The very first time a couple sees their unclothedness they feel shy, subsequently do they continue feeling shy? If you can't relate this to the issue at hand to get my point then its really a pity.

tevinsolt:
sure why not

BossTtdiamonds:
If you believe in me, you should believe that any action I take, I take based on facts that have been substantiated/proven to be true by my person.
So davien, do you truly believe in me, or tis' is just one of the quips you make so there's somethin' to laugh at?
So have I portrayed intolerance and absurdity, and on what grounds do you justify such actions to be intolerant and absurd??

tevinsolt:
this is the explanation of the Work of William Lane Craig a Theology philosopher

There is no other logical possibility.

Either some things are caused, or nothing is.

If nothing is caused, then I never wrote this. But I did write this, so at least some things are caused.

If some things are caused, either their causing is the result of a previous cause, or it isn't. In other words, either something caused it to cause, or nothing caused it to cause.

If every cause is the result of a previous cause, or, if everything is caused by something else, then we have an "infinite regress" of causes.

An infinite regress of causes is logically incoherent. To suggest that there have been an infinite regress of past causes is to suggest that we have come to the end of an infinite series. An infinite series, however, is by definition a series with no end. So this would mean that we have come to the end of a series with no end, which is logically incoherent.

Infinite regress would mean that we have iterated, one-by-one, through every single item of an infinite series. But an infinite series always has more items than those that have been iterated through. We would have iterated through something that cannot be iterated through, which is logically incoherent.

If we were to go backwards through each previous cause, and there were an infinite number of past causes, there would necessarily be some cause in the set of previous causes that we would never, ever get to. If that were not the case, it would not be infinite. If there is some supposed prior cause in the set of previous causes that we could never get to while iterating backwards through all previous causes, then, iterating forward from that cause to the present state, we would never arrive at the present state for the same reason that going backwards we could never arrive at the previous state -- namely, the infinite (or unending) number of causes in between the two.

Infinite regress would mean that we have completed something that cannot be completed. We have traversed something that cannot be traversed. We have itemized what cannot be itemized, counted what cannot be counted, spanned what cannot be spanned.

Infinite regress is logically incoherent. Therefore, not everything is caused by a previous cause.

This means, necessarily, that EVERY series of causes has its own first cause, and since this first cause is a FIRST cause, it is uncaused.

What we also see is that since this first cause is never the result of a prior cause, since it is in fact a FIRST cause, it does not cause involuntarily. In other words, nothing made it cause: it did it voluntarily -- on its own. The first cause, in every series of causes, is therefore necessarily volitional: it is willful; it has personhood.

Every uncaused first cause, since it is uncaused, either began to exist without cause, or else it did not begin to exist, and is therefore self-existent.

If it began to exist without cause, then having nothing, adding nothing to it, something results. Or, in other words:

0 + 0 > 0.

This is the same as claiming that zero is not zero, which is logically contradictory. I like to call this "Atheist Math".

Therefore, since nothing can be caused by nothing, every uncaused first cause is self-existent. It is eternal, permanent, and not subject to change over time. It simply... is.

When anyone talks about some kind of uncaused, self-existent, willful, eternal, personal entity that is the first cause of things, the label generally applied to such an entity is "God".

So we see that not only must some type of God necessarily exist because of the impossibility of the contrary, but also that He must be an uncaused first cause for the same reason.

In fact, Christianity is the only worldview that is logically coherent. All other worldviews fall victim to inherent logical contradictions within their most basic presuppositions, particularly wherever they diverge from Christianity.

For example, due to the lack of divine sacrificial substitutionary atonement in Islam, when Allah, who is always just, forgives, He is not just.

Due to the prophecies of the Messiah in the Hebrew Bible, Jewish prophecy is rejected by the Jews.

Due to the multiplicity of disagreeing gods in polytheism, wherever there is divine disagreement, things are and are not at the same time and in the same way.

The Christian God never contradicts Himself (2 Timothy 2:13); He fulfills the prophecies of the Jews (Acts 3:18); and the sacrifice of Christ makes it possible for the Christian God to be both just and forgiving at the same time (Hebrews 2:17).

Ultimately, only the Christian worldview provides a coherent understanding of reality and is not inherently contradictory.
- See more at: http://www.godcontention.org/compare-religions/how-can-god-be-an-uncaused-cause#sthash.xWgkYJ6d.dpuf

tevinsolt:
no to stop whatever you think is the cause of all these, there must be an "uncaused cause" for the Universe to have started to exist then the "First caused uncaused" is personal.

davidylan:
that is as unscientific as you can get and basically exposes the fact that most of you base your position on blind faith and emotion. The 4 papers posted have absolutely nothing to do with volcanoes, kangaroos or australia so all that is a red herring. If you have fundamental science-based questions about the published articles then state them.

You all spend so much time whining that there are no scientific papers refuting the ToE (false nonsense anyway). Now that some have been produced, you basically act like little children with your fingers stuck in your ears.

davidylan:
if you objected on the basis of actual science then you may have had a point. As of now, your emotional caterwauling over the paper simply based on who wrote it makes you irrelevant in this debate.