₦airaland Forum

Basalt:
(1) If there is no Deity, what scientific phenomena explains the situation where men of God see vision about somebody they have not met before?
Example TB Joshua will tell you everything about you and all the things done against you.
If there is no spirit directing the prophet, how can he see something that was done in his absence.
Is there any logic that can explain a situation where humans have the power to see things that happened in their absence without any link to spiritualism?

You see why there would always be con artists, and magicians and pastors, because they would always be people like you that they rip off with their gimmicks

(2)second question is this, if there is no spirit, how can somebody (man of God) raise the dead or heal the sick without any medication?
How do magicians perform some magic?

Please show me a case of where a man of god restores a lost limb(like a hand or leg grows back), and a dead person being raised from the dead and then when would talk about the spirit they used... and moreover most magicians are atheists...(smh)

(3) If there is no God, how did the world come into existence.
Who created the Proconsul, Kenyapithcus, Homoerectus and honosapians?

I am sure you can browse, you are obviously on Nairaland, open a new tab, type www.google.com, a search box would appear, type in "Evolution", you would see links from very trust worthy sites, visit it, read and learn...

KingEbukaNaija:
Just look at donnffd viewing the thread , lepasharon and sweetcocoa never show ?

Look at all the wars carried out by atheists, None of them was Atheistism related, Communism yes, but not Atheistic...Nobody kills other people or bombs himself up because he wants others to also Not believe in God, but some wars are fought in the name of Religions

Those that mean All Religious people are bad, NO, doesnt it mean that Religion is bad, Maybe...but the idea of this thread is just fallacious

Dejideji1:
Consciousness has nothing to do with memory. It's just a state of awareness and it's immaterial as you can't see, feel, measure or quantify it.

Consciousness cannot be simply the
result of meat (the brain) because
consciousness is a property entirely
separate from matter. Consciousness
has an irreducible existence .

Regardless of how complex a material
thing such as a brain gets through
evolution, it remains just that… a highly
complex material thing , and not a
conscious or personal thing.

Now we need to do some definitions, Consciousness is a state of being aware(i agree), Humans are conscious, Dogs are conscious, Rats are conscious even Mosquitoes and Ants are conscious.

I am sure you dont think that these animals' consciousness survive their death, you would say humans are special, and for good reason i would agree.

So lets agree that the kind of consciousness you are talking about is the Human Kind, the one in which we are not just only aware, but also Self-aware.

If you are self-aware, then you have a sense of self, you know you have a name, a family, feelings, goals and so on.

Now if that is immaterial and can survive after the brain dies, then why is it that if people have accidents, the lose bits of this "self-awareness", some dont remember their names, many dont remember their families.

Alzheimer disease is one illness that degrades "self-awareness", how is it that something immaterial would be degraded in such a way

Now, Finally, because we dont know how Self-awareness arised(which would probably do in a few years), doesnt mean we dont know what causes it, remove the pre-frontal cortex in the human brain, and you have a human that is no different from a walking pig.

If truly "Self-awareness" survives the dismantling of the brain, why does that happen?

Dejideji1:
Now consciousness is immaterial while the body is material how does a material body produce something that is immaterial?

I really dont know, but it is obvious that without the material, the immaterial component cannot be...why is it that some people have injuries to the head and forget who they are or some parts of their lives?, if consciousness is really immaterial and transcends the material brain, why does that happen?

Which one can exist independent of the other? This questions were raised as a result of the many accounts of patients that have had NDE. Believe me scientists are yet to fully understand consciousness (i read an article on this)

Ofcos, consciousness is something noone fully understand but there is no such indication that it can survive the material body...NDE always hav a regular pattern, either a tunnel with a bright light and all that, it is possible that its the way an oxygen-starved brain works.

Dejideji1:
Don't worry we will all find out on that last day when we are taking our last breath. It's just a matter of time.

Lol, i would still defend a guy, if he also ddnt respond...

Lol, you know i get that alot, when we take our last breath, we shall know...the painful part of it all is that when we eventually die, i cant tell you i told you so because you and i wont even know we are dead, we wont know anything at all...knowing is not a trait the dead has

Dejideji1:
Now if you read the use of the word
"Atheist" in her argument then you will
know she's confused. And that's what led to all this unnecessary argument.


Yes it can't get to you since you are agnostic. I only wanted to use it to create a doubt in your mind. Thought you were gnostic

Bro, she wasnt confused, because you dont understand her stand doesnt mean she is confused...

Atheism is not a belief system in which you must adhere to a set of rules.

Then this your ploy of throwing the words gnostic and agnostic around like asif being agnostic gives you hope.
I am an agnostic in the sense that i am not 100% certain dat no deities exist but i believe the chances of their existence is freaking low, i can comfortably say your god or every other god that has existed in human history doesnt exist, now is there something out there that we dont know of, maybe, i dont know but of the ones i have been told of, they absolutely dont exist...

Dejideji1:
Yes the definition is the same everywhere but an average Nigerian will take you to be Gnostic



Yes it sounds silly but for the purpose of an argument like this you must state it. That's what i meant by being clear and concise, you know people are always looking for loopholes to fault you in an argument.

Smh...this is a cop out answer

Dejideji1:
Bro, i don't want us to argue this issue any further because you seem not to get the way I'm viewing it. Now for the above if you call your self a Christian we will further probe you to know if you are a "born again" Christian or not. If you are not born again then you are not different from a pagan, an agnostic Christian is not a born again Christian.

You seem to be upset at atheists because you think (i.e if they dont put the agnostic in front) that they have 100% certainty that there is no god...but funny enough, you are guilty of the same crime, so you are 100% certain that there is a god.

You later call us close minded and all that...smh

As per your original posts, it ddnt get me to think because there is nothing up there i havent heard before

Dejideji1:
Bro you didn't get my point., if you call yourself an Atheist here in Nigeria, you are automatically saying that you DO NOT believe in the existence of God without any doubt.

This is simply not true, there is no different definition of atheist in "Nigeria", being an atheist is just the lack of belief in the all of the aforementioned gods in human history

Nobody will be patient enough to know if you are Gnostic or Agnostic Atheist. Check her comment again, she was arguing from the Agnostic Atheist point of view yet she chose to say "Atheist". How am i to know if she is Gnostic or Agnostic?

Atheism and agnosticism are two different branches of philosophies, so the idea that when you state one, you must state the other is plain silly...
From your logic, anytime you tell someone you are a christian, always remember to tell them also if you are a gnostic christian or an agnostic Christian...

Only two guys here have confessed they are agnostic. That was why i faulted her. As a science student you must be clear and concise.

So be concise with your beliefs too...like i mentioned earlier...

NB: just because you are an agnostic doesnt mean the idea is on a 50:50 scale, i am an agnostic atheist but i believe the chances of a deity existence is pretty low the same way you would claim to be an agnostic to the idea of a santa clause, but i am certain you would say the chances of that being true is just as low...

Brillant question...i keep asking myself the same question, which leader takes a vacation in a foreign country...like seriously, who does that?

Dejideji1:
Oga she is still wrong. As she didn't specify, stop trying to cover up for her.

You are being judgemental and irrarional...

Atheism is not a position of absolute knowledge, its is just the lack of belief in a god or gods...

Please be intellectually honest to maintain the respect i had for you because right now, you are just playing the typical theist game

If you dont know the difference between being an atheist, theist, gnostic and an agnostic, i suggest you do some research first before sounding really low here

Is this the so called research that would trigger our reasoning?...disappointed

Dejideji1:
OK, i can see most of what you quoted up there are from the Bible with the exception of the flying horse though. so are you saying that the Bible contains no truth at all? because you find somethings that are naturally/logically impossible in it. (when reasoned with human understanding)

I never said the bible contains no truth, on the contrary, it contains alot of poetry and literature worth noting of...

What i am saying is If the foundation of all religions are based on claims that can be tested and have been and seen to be false, then whats the reason paying attention to it in the first place?

Dejideji1:
But you will agree with me that it influences wannabe Atheists. And at the end of the day during an argument you all resort to scientific theories to back up your claims look at cloudgoddes quoting all what she learnt from biology while attempting to answer a question i posed . It's not common to find Atheists in other field of studies outside science. Most of the Atheists i know are science students.

Like i said, Science doesnt make you an atheist, Logical reasoning do

If you know from scientific means the earth is 4.6billion years and the bible says its 6000, you would be logical

If you were told about Noah and the great flood, and you know it cant be possible scientifically, you would be logical

If you were told God made man from dust, and you know about evolution and biology, you would be logical

If you were told that a prophet went to heaven on a flying horse, and you know space is all thats up there, you would be logical

if you were told that a virgin gave birth, and you know that only a sperm can fertilize an egg, you would be logical

if you know that being all merciful and all just is a logical contradiction, you would be logical

So many more...but thats just a tip of the iceberg

KingEbukaNaija:
You can do your research .



The atheist scientists are culpable for that

*face palm*

So that means your view is tentative , more like conjectural , and you have no right whatsoever to claim there is no God . Am I wrong ?

What?, I said God doesnt have anything to do with science...what does that have anything to do with my right to claim anything
please be coherent...

Dejideji1:
That is why i just laugh at the so called Atheists here on NL because all you read is theories postulated by some individuals. How deep have you gone in scientific research and practicals?

Those who have gone really deep (those that postulated those theories you thrive on) have come out to say there must be a creative mind behind everything in existence. I'm even thinking of creating another thread for this so that I can fully confront all of you.

Bro, relax, its not fight...

You have the right to believe in a supernatural being same as atheists having the right not to believe in it

The idea that we read "theories" and that makes us Atheists is so so wrong

Science doesnt make you an atheist, Logical Reasoning(and to some extent, religious beliefs and their holy books) does...



KingEbukaNaija:
From my above yarn , you can deduce that some members of the science community are being coerced to accept certain scientific theories so they won't be seen as encumbrances to the progress of these science theories .

Thats not true, nobody is coerced to believe anything in science when the evidence is right there and glaring for all who has doubt to see.

You should also note that a priest called Georges Lemaitre in 1927 proposed what has turned out to be the prevailing cosmological model - the Big Bang Theory - that somewhat explains the origin of the universe .

Scientists who accept Evolution are theistic evolutionists - they believe God did it through Evolution . The Catholic Church has accepted the creation story in the bible as allegorical , so you see the scientists who are Catholics are part of that statistics . And the Catholic church make up more than 50 percent of the number of Christians .

I couldnt agree more, then why do you or most theists think those theories are conspiracies by scientists to disprove God?

The OP tacitly agreed that science refutes God - that explains the title of his thread , "God is dead "

I dont know if he specifically mentioned it, but science doesnt refute God, infact science doesnt have the time for God, God is an hypothesis which cant be tested or verifiable, so obviously God has nothing to do in Science

Dejideji1:
@urahara, cloudgoddes, donnffd and
Co, I'm currently compiling some
ground breaking evidences from
modern physics that will shatter your
believe system. I will also post some
comments from Max Planck, Einstein,
Eugene and other renowned physicists.

Afterall, this are some of the guys that
are giving you the theories you are
thriving upon. Unfortunately
cloudgoddes and donnffd are not
physics student, I don't know of
urahara. So that you can appreciate
the terms in the context, although
nothing complex no equations or
mathematical models just some
findings on matter and quantum
physics. @jonnydon22 will appreciate
better.

I wasnt a physics student but i am a physics enthusiast and i try to keep in touch with it so trust me when i say, i would really appreciate it...

Although, siting that physicist who believed in God should be a determinant for all to believe in God is absolutely wrong...

NB: Einstein ddnt believe in a personal God(e.g yahweh, allah e.t.c), he believed in the God of Spinoza, God of order and beauty, the summation of the Physical laws of the universe.

KingEbukaNaija:
There are quantum physicists who are religious people . If science or quantum physics refutes God then all scientists would have been atheists , but that's not the case . There are more religious scientists worldwide than non-God believers who are scientists .

The above alone defeats the terminus ad quem of your thread . Deal with it , a conscious eternal creator - God - exists .

Noone said Science refutes God, i dont know where you heard that, it completely untrue

The percentage of religious scientists is about 7%, but out of that 7% , 83% accepts Evolution, the big bang and the rest of science...which most of you theist believes is a conspiracy by scientists.

urahara:
The obvious reason god is the right one is because it is in the bible .

Lol

urahara:
All this points u have listed are all equal with the god hypothesis .

I wasnt listing points, i was asking how he was sure his God is the right one and not any of the other possibilities

sirthisthickkal:
for every question you asked I gave my honest opinion with simple and straightforward example so that you can grasp easily, I compared and contrasted all my point for you to understand, I even asked questions to get your feedback. In spite of all, you have failed to provide answers to those questions while I continue to give you my countless and structured opinions.

If you have run out of ideas, don't be ashamed to admit it. Besides Nobody knows it all.. Meanwhile if you can provide answers to my questions, feel free to inundate my mentions. I am willing to learn.

Gracias!

Trust me you are not willing to learn...

I gave a description of how the theories of natural selection came to be, you called me a liar and declared darwin wrong...how do you expect me to respond to that?

I would give you one more chance and ask again

How can you be sure that it was jehovah that created the universe, it could have been Zeus or Allah...whats gives you the assurance that your God is the right God?

sirthisthickkal:
Very simple!


1.) He has given us freewill to choose whatever we want, he is never going to hold us against our will neither will he punish us for whatever decision we make. Even though you deny his existence, you are still benefiting from the rain and the sun he has created. He his not like some of those false and demi gods you watch in movies like you mentioned who demand sacrifice or dues in return for their so-called blessings.


2.) He has given us varieties. Varieties of fruit, varieties of food, varieties of colors, varieties of birds, varieties of fish, varieties of meat, varieties of raw materials, varieties of emotions, varieties of women etc. Imagine a world whereby we eat eat only mango, we eat only beans, we wear only black, we see only dove in the sky, we eat only crayfish, we eat only beef, we discovered only oil from the ground, we only cry to express our feelings all the time, and we only see fat and robust women catwalking on the street every time , most definitely life would be so so boring and sad and folks would be committing suicide on a daily basis. But happily we serve a God who has a sense of humor, he knows what will make our live enjoyable for us all. No doubt, variety is the spice of life.

So far I have given you enough evidence to show that there is God not because I think but because I know. Unfortunately you have not given me concrete proofs to support your beliefs.. I guess that is the difference between you and I, you only base your beliefs on if's, assumptions, and doubts but we base ours on facts and the Bible.


Gracias!

Look, if you structured your arguments well and a little bit more intellectually honest, then maybe we would have a reasonable debate, but has of now, your arguments have been swallow, incoherent, baseless and full of conspiracy bits.

I asked how you know that jehovah created the universe, why couldn't it have been thor or zeus or allah...and just look at your response, it doesnt even correlate

sirthisthickkal:
The almighty God has created many things so that we can know he exist even though we can't see him

How do you know it was God(Yahweh) that did it?

what if its Allah or Zeus or Krishna or Vishnu or Thor or Odin or Sango or Amadioha or Poseidon or Apollo

what if the universe was simulated by an intelligent alien kid for his school assignment

what if what caused the universe is inanimate or not intelligent at all

what if the universe is the group work of many entities that came together to create a masterpiece

how can you be sure that your God is the right one

ettaetta:
but i have heard many athetst saying they belive in evolution. Now tell me

what then do you believe in?

The Idea that if you accept Evolution, you must be an atheist is wrong...

Very Intelligent Religious people accept it as a scientifically fact

KingEbukaNaija:
I asked you a question . Do you know ?

I dont understand your question, are you saying God used Evolution to design humans?

KingEbukaNaija:
Do you know that evolution is a concept of design ?

Oh really?

[quote author=sirthisthickkal post=46590689][/quote]Your first paragraph: The Universe is here, thats why we are trying to understand it and know where it came from...Nobody in Science is trying to understand God or find out where God came from, You know why? because God is not here, we dont see him, we are not even sure he exists, so why bother on that and not focus on what is here?

Your second paragraph : ok

Your third paragraph : cool

blueAgent:
There is nothing like Homo sapiens.stop believing all those Evolution crap.invented to decieve people.

LOOOOOOL, ok sir, i would stop...lmao

People would never cease to amaze me

Dejideji1:
Being unable to proof the existence of something doesn't mean such a thing doesn't exist. It's dependent on our present level of scientific methods and technology. And besides, there are so many mysteries in the world and universe at large that scientists will not be able to unravel everything till the end of time. As long as the word "infinity" exits there will still be something unknown.

Ofcourse, but why do you ascertain that God is real when you acknowledge we are currently unable to proof it?

sirthisthickkal:
don't get me wrong! I never said getting answers to questions especially the about world is bad, what I mean is that it is impossible to get get answers to questions like the existence of God, where God came from,.. Etc
To me, those questions should be left unanswered.

If they should be left unanswered and God is the highly improbable answer to the where the universe came from question, then why dont u just say the same thing about the universe and not use God to answer it?

Do you support fossils record? And If those points I raised are conspiracy theories , can you unravel or shed more light on them ?

Evolution is a fact, we see changes in organisms, you cant tell me that you are the exact same person with your parents, you changed. The issue is how do you explain the changes and differences in all the species we see today and how is it that species are so well adapted to their environment, it bugged people for ages until the 18th century when two scientists came along, their names where Lamarck and Darwin

Lamarck's take on it was termed Theory of evolution by use and disuse. What he was basically saying was that organism acquire traits during their lifetimes and then pass it on to the next generation, and after successive generations, the organisms would have changed. His main example was the giraffe, he claimed that the ancestors of giraffes where short necked but over the course of their lives, they stretched their necks to reach higher branches and their neck grew longer and longer, and they were able to pass these new acquired trait to their offsprings, the reverse happens for the parts they dont use.

Darwin on the otherhand had a different opinion, his take was termed Theory of evolution by Natural selection. He argued that organisms produced far more offsprings than nature could cater for, so there tends to be competition, the organisms with the traits that enables it to survive better in that environment would do better than the others and pass its traits down to its offsprings, giving its offsprings a selected advantage over other members and after many generations, that trait would spread across the population and be the new normal trait which would cause another competition and selection, e.t.c

Now its important to note that these two men never knew anything about hereditary or genes or how they worked. Another famous scientists named Mendel was around the same time working on the foundation of what is now known as Modern genetics and he for the first time explained how hereditary works. You cant look it up, cant go into details but his works showed that lamarck got it wrong, you cant pass on traits you acquire during your life time, it doesnt work.
What happened to lamarcks theory of evolution, thrown into the dustbin, Nobody uses it anymore except for history purposes, i would guess this is the first time you are hearing of it.
On the otherhand, Darwin was vindicated, his theory fits exactly how hereditary worked, Mutation was a phenomenon discovered later which showed how new traits arise, which supported Darwins idea even more, and the Fossil record also supports darwin idea because it shows how older rocks contain simpler lifeforms and as it gets younger, the life forms becomes more complex...you cant see a rabbit bone in the rock from 1 billion years ago, if you did, you would win a nobel prize and dismantle Darwins theory which without any thought would be thrown inside dustbin like lamarcks own.
Noone and i mean noone was disproved darwin on the contrary every evidence we find points to one conclusion...Darwin was right.

If you are really impressed by the beauties and complexity of nature, don't you think someone powerful must have put those things in the right place and at the right time, or do think they came just by chance or by accident?

No, i dont think someone powerful put it there, the sky is blue because i interpret it as blue, if my brain was wired a different way, i could as well have seen the sky has black, Nature is not there to please you, its just there...because you have a brain that interpret what u see as colours doesnt mean those things actually have colours...its all in ur head

Dejideji1:
Considering the last question u asked about how i knew God is not bound by space and time.
Now I assume you must be a physics student., what can you tell me about "timelessness" in physics?

No, i am not a physics student sorry to dissapoint...

Now there really could be a God who is timeless if anything like that exists.
My main point was there was no way for you to know for certain because you are bound by space and time, and anything that exists outside it is unknowable because you cant leave space and time to get the knowlge of timeless and spaceless entity