₦airaland Forum

goodguy:
At those who say there's no God, read about Antony Flew.

At those who say there's a God (particularly the Christian God), read about Joseph McCabe

goodguy:
There is a God.

Remember, not all that seems rational is right; and not all that seems irrational is wrong.

Charles Darwin came with a very rational approach. But does that make him right?

Righter than most, and righter than the many supernaturally based explanations before and after him.

The Bible came with what seems irrational to most people. But does that make it wrong?

Depends on how you choose to interpret what was written, but yeah.

Don't be deceived, don't be fooled. You have a mind of your own. Think. Think deeply. You've done that several times? Well, just do it again, with a genuinely inquiring mind, and you'll come to the realisation of the truth.

God exists.

No Gods exist. QED.

Uche2nna:
Like I have said before I do not intend to hold brief for the Almighty.

That's fair enough, I don't think anybody has asked you to anyway.

You complain that I should bring on the evidence when i said you should visit a library but you comfortably advised me on a google search when i asked for some clarification.

You skipped my post, didn't you? Didn't you?

You guys are really funny.

At least we're not the joke.

Anyway, I know I can not prove to you guys the Existence of God just like I can not count the number of hairs on my head.

Nobody is asking you to prove the existence of any God, at least not at the moment. We are (I am) simply asking for evidence for the many claims you've made in this thread. They don't even have anything to do with Gods.

If you don't feel like providing any evidence for your claims, maybe we should just move on to why you think the theory of evolution is wrong, or maybe Big Bang theory?

However,just because you do not see the air does not mean it does not exist.THERE IS MORE TO THIS WORLD THAN THE HUMAN EYE CAN DECIPHER. Have a NICE DAY

The properties of air can be examined, and tested. Empirical evidence for air exists, etc, and yes there's more to the world than the human eye can decipher. Have a good morning.

Uche2nna:
Yeah Mendel went to the University of Vienna not to become a scientist but a teacher.Even in contemporary society there is still a difference bw faculty of Education and the Faculty of Life sciences.Anyway,he did not even pass the teacher certification test,so officially he did not even qualify to become a teacher not ot talk of a scientist.

Darwin was a scientist and Mendel wasn't, because. -----?

Darwin theory was the prevalent one at that time and you need to be a very brave scientist to go against that.Well I have mentioned De Vries as one of those very few.Can u educate me on those many that really attacked Darwin's theory.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin#Reaction for example.

See: http://www.hhmi.org/cgi-bin/askascientist/highlight.pl?kw=&file=answers%2Fgeneral%2Fans_069.html too.

Morgan proved him right 50 years after but he actaully started out as a Darwinist.

And proved Darwin wrong? Don't just make statements without backing them up with evidence. Lying for Jesus isn't an admirable trait you know

You want evidence,,,go to the library

LoLz, I guess that settles it.

kimba:
@KAG

U missed it, even the first question:
The question is: WHERE WERE YOU?

Where I was becomes a moot point, when the question itself is wrong about the details. It's like me asking: "where were you when Mushu the enchanted Elf created the flat Sun that orbits the Earth". Not only are the details wrong, but the character is also non-existent. So rather than simply leaving it "mu", I decided to correct the error (or at least worded in a way that looks wrong) because correcting the error itself would show that the character asking the question was faulty as well.

All unbelievers of your taste wont and definitely don't have the same answers that you have given. Amongst yourselves Aethists and unbelievers, you don't agree.

EXTRA READ ALL ABOUT IT: There's no coalition of atheists and unbelievers. Apparently they all have minds of their own - amazing I know; they are to be pitied and scorned for that.

Trying to make things funny only revealed that you have no clue, as you just tried to 'say something. Anyway, you are wrong and yall wrong.

That's swell.

Think deep and answer the first question: where were you?

When what?

Uche2nna:
You are a  funny very person KAG.

I try (especially at the person part).

How can you accuse me of being a poor student and yet u have not heard of Larmacks theory of use and disuse That was the basis of  his interpretation of Evolution.

Because not only haven't I claimed to have studied Larmarckian evolution, I haven't studied Larmarckian evolution.

And please there is no way u can isolate Genetics and Evolution.One is used to try and explain the other.

I suppose. who proposed isolating them though?

Mendel was a scientist.I wonder where you got that from.Yeah U can say he made a scientific discovery but he was not conventionally trained in the lab.Like I said he even dropped out of  school because of financial constraints and his lab was just a patch of Garden (reminds me of the Garden of Eden where man was first created ).That was even the reason why for many years the scientific community never believed in that theory.

"In 1851 he was sent to the University of Vienna to study, returning to his abbey in 1853 as a teacher, principally of physics." I'd say that made him a scientist.

"Gregor Mendel, who is known as the "father of modern genetics", was inspired by both his professors at university and his colleagues at the monastery to study variation in plants. He commenced his study in his monastery's experimental garden. Between 1856 and 1863 Mendel cultivated and tested some 28,000 pea plants. His experiments brought forth two generalizations which later became known as Mendel's Laws of Inheritance."


I'd say that made him a scientist. What would you call Darwin?

P.S. You believe humans and all the animals on Earth were created in a garden ---- years ago?

most if not all followed,Darwin.Except for a few,like De Vries.However,De Vries could not convince a lot of people.So in came T. Morgan.It was 50 years later that Morgan actually proved that Mendel was right all along.It was then that the scientific community stopped calling Mendel that obscure monk,altho that moniker stuck even till this day.But even Morgan that proved mendel right did not start as an apostle of Mendel.He believed in the more polished and conventional scientist,Darwin.To him also,Mendel was just an obscure monk.So he actually set out to prove Darwinism correct and Mendelism wrong.

Wait, you think Darwin was a scientist, but don't think Mendel was one? Explain. Also, Darwin's (and Wallace's) theory of evolution were actually attacked by many.

But all that is history now as he  did the exact opposite!

He did? Evidence, please.

Y r u talking about Mutation.Darwin never knew what mutation was,I just wish that you will go back and read Darwin's stuff !

Darwin is dead.

You can explain inheritance now perfectly(both Dominant and Reccesiveness) because you have been taught Mendelian Inheritance.

Indeed

Darwin could not,and that was the major loophole in his theory.

Explain what you mean by loophole, because I have no idea what you're talking about. Darwin may not have known the exact mechanics for evolution, but he knew enough - he certainly knew about natural selection and inheritance. The theory of evolution has moved on since Darwin, and is still, as yet, unfalsified.

Like every shrewd scientist he knew that something was wrong with his theory.If only he had opened that obscure monk's letter,

Could you at least give some evidence of this unopened letter you keep going on about? It will help a great deal.

 

A thoery is not just made for the sake of being made.A theory is formulated to explain certain phenomenon,and the major extrapolation of Darwin theory was that of Intermediacy of species.So it really beats me that u are not conversant with that fall out of Darwin's theory.I do not know if when u read stuff u just pick those that suits u and leave out those that does not

Why don't inform me - and if not me the rest of the forum - about the fall of the theory of evolution.

NOTHING COMES OUT OF NOTHING,

Except when a virtual particle does.

ALL CELLS COMES FROM PRE EXISTING CELLS,

Except when a protocell is mentioned.

1Moreover the LORD answered Job, and said,

2Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it.

3Then Job answered the LORD, and said,

4Behold, I am vile; what shall I answer thee? I will lay mine hand upon my mouth.

What a Arrow.

JOB 41
1Canst thou draw out leviathan with an hook? [all of that]

Now you're just making stuff up, and I just realised I've been responding to questions that an alledged God asked someone he had practically tortured (he allowed it, same difference) for sh*ts and giggles. The second sign of madness (the first would be attributing silly questions to a childish God)?

JOB 39
1Knowest thou the time when the wild goats of the rock bring forth? or canst thou mark when the hinds do calve?

2Canst thou number the months that they fulfil? or knowest thou the time when they bring forth?

3They bow themselves, they bring forth their young ones, they cast out their sorrows.

4Their young ones are in good liking, they grow up with corn; they go forth, and return not unto them.

Mountain goats: Late November to early January.

Hinds: at two years of age, and then give birth each year. Hill deer often do not produce a calf until three years of age or older, and may give birth only every second year.

5Who hath sent out the wild ass free? or who hath loosed the bands of the wild ass?

6Whose house I have made the wilderness, and the barren land his dwellings.

7He scorneth the multitude of the city, neither regardeth he the crying of the driver.

8The range of the mountains is his pasture, and he searcheth after every green thing.

Er, no one. They are "free" because they were born that way.

9Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?

10Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?

11Wilt thou trust him, because his strength is great? or wilt thou leave thy labour to him?

12Wilt thou believe him, that he will bring home thy seed, and gather it into thy barn?

I wish! That wayward, good for nothing, headstrong Unicorn is a pain in the arse. See more on Gary the asshole Unicorn, here: http://www.freehorsierides.com/article.asp?cat=8&no=260

13Gavest thou the goodly wings unto the peacocks? or wings and feathers unto the ostrich?

14Which leaveth her eggs in the earth, and warmeth them in dust,

No, they evolved those traits. Had nothing to do with me.

15And forgetteth that the foot may crush them, or that the wild beast may break them.

16She is hardened against her young ones, as though they were not her's: her labour is in vain without fear;

17Because God hath deprived her of wisdom, neither hath he imparted to her understanding.

18What time she lifteth up herself on high, she scorneth the horse and his rider.

Lawlz, that would cetainly explain why ostriches are hard on egg thiefs.

19Hast thou given the horse strength? hast thou clothed his neck with thunder?

20Canst thou make him afraid as a grasshopper? the glory of his nostrils is terrible.

21He paweth in the valley, and rejoiceth in his strength: he goeth on to meet the armed men.

22He mocketh at fear, and is not affrighted; neither turneth he back from the sword.

23The quiver rattleth against him, the glittering spear and the shield.

24He swalloweth the ground with fierceness and rage: neither believeth he that it is the sound of the trumpet.

25He saith among the trumpets, Ha, ha; and he smelleth the battle afar off, the thunder of the captains, and the shouting.

Evolution 101.

26Doth the hawk fly by thy wisdom, and stretch her wings toward the south?

27Doth the eagle mount up at thy command, and make her nest on high?

28She dwelleth and abideth on the rock, upon the crag of the rock, and the strong place.

29From thence she seeketh the prey, and her eyes behold afar off.

30Her young ones also suck up blood: and where the slain are, there is she.

Yes for the first, and no for the second - although if I had an eagle, she would do just that.

Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

Nobody laid the "foundations of the Earth". In fact what the heck is the foundations of the Earth? The Earth isn't like some stationary building with a foundation (is that what you meant?).

Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;

LoL, see above. SMH at corner stone - some supreme being you are, don't even know what the earth looks like.

8Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?

   9When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it,

   10And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors,

   11And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?

How tides work

12Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; and caused the dayspring to know his place;

   13That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?

   14It is turned as clay to the seal; and they stand as a garment.

   15And from the wicked their light is withholden, and the high arm shall be broken.

Sun, moon, movement of the Earth.

16Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?

No, I haven't  , but never fear, this guy has.

17Have the gates of death been opened unto thee? or hast thou seen the doors of the shadow of death?

Nope. Not sure those exist, ecept if you meant them metaphorically.

   

18Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth? declare if thou knowest it all.

I saw a scale of the Earth once, you'd be pleased to know it has a radius.

 

19Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for darkness, where is the place thereof,

   20That thou shouldest take it to the bound thereof, and that thou shouldest know the paths to the house thereof?

Er, I don't know how to tell you this, Mr ranting "God" sir, but light doesn't have a dwelling place per se. Here's what causes light: http://www.btinternet.com/~k.trethewey/where_does_light_come_from.htm

   

21Knowest thou it, because thou wast then born? or because the number of thy days is great?

No, I know it because of great men and women who didn't think "Goddidit" was a good enough answer.

   

22Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail,

   23Which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?

In the words of the sweet virgin Mary, "come again?"

   

24By what way is the light parted, which scattereth the east wind upon the earth?

See "where does light come from", then read up on stars like our dear  old Sun.

   

25Who hath divided a watercourse for the overflowing of waters, or a way for the lightning of thunder;

   26To cause it to rain on the earth, where no man is; on the wilderness, wherein there is no man;

   27To satisfy the desolate and waste ground; and to cause the bud of the tender herb to spring forth?

Nobody.

   

28Hath the rain a father? or who hath begotten the drops of dew?

   29Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it?

No, of course not.

   

30The waters are hid as with a stone, and the face of the deep is frozen.

   31Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?

No.

P.S. Don't you think you're taking the whole "Orion's belt" thing a little too seriously?

   

32Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?

Don't even know who or what they are. Lawl.

 

33Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?

Heaven? I think it's in the mind; so yes, I know the ordinances of heaven of my mind. Not too sure of the dominion thing, except if it's of the mind too.

   

34Canst thou lift up thy voice to the clouds, that abundance of waters may cover thee?

I'll need a mega, mega megaphone, and a weather forecast, but it is possible (I think).

35Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go and say unto thee, Here we are?

Lightning doesn't talk, lawlz.

36Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts? or who hath given understanding to the heart?

You mean brain; teachers.

   

37Who can number the clouds in wisdom? or who can stay the bottles of heaven,

Nobody.

   

38When the dust groweth into hardness, and the clods cleave fast together?

   39Wilt thou hunt the prey for the lion? or fill the appetite of the young lions,

   40When they couch in their dens, and abide in the covert to lie in wait?

   41Who provideth for the raven his food? when his young ones cry unto God, they wander for lack of meat.

No, and no one.[quote][/quote]

Uche2nna:
I need not prove the Existence of God to you.God can adequately do that for HIMSELF. You notice that I did not use biblical quotations.No need using something that u don't believe in.
Anyway my whole point about the Mendel story (like I said it is my own opinion) is to draw your attention to the fact that the finding of the 2 laws by Mendel,which is the underlying mechanism scientist now use to explain the whole theory of Evolution was made not in a lab but in the Monastery,was made not by a scientist but by a Monk.

Mendel was both a monk and a scientist. By the way, what does the location for his experiments have to do with anything?

And what strikes me as being more than a coincidence was the very fact that this startling discovery was made when the whole scientific community was stumped by the inadequacy of Darwinism.

Really? You wouldn't happen to have evidence for that would you?

@ KAD You were asking what was wrong with Darwinism.Well, his theory was very fine until you take into consideration of the various kind of diversity that existed in species.His theory was based on the fact that when 2 organisms mate that they would produce an offspring that is an intermediate of the 2 parents.Well,u can begin to imagine the loopholes in this theory when u want to apply it to evolution.Darwin knew that and he died trying to fix that.

Er, NO!

The theory evolution doesn't say that, and neither did Darwin (at least from my understanding of the word "intermediate". Basically, an offspring will share most of its parents characteristics, but it will (may) have several differences due to mutation. That's not evolution, that's reproduction. Evolution happens when the allele frequency of population is sufficiently different from its "parent".



[QUOTE] Larmack had a theory of use and disuse.Good theory.If you do not use one of your organs for a long time you lose the function of that organ.Ok! So if u used it too often then you will grow a bigger better one.You can begin to imagine how slippery this is.I will just give u one example: The human Appendix.[/quote]Never heard of the Larmarck theory of use and disuse. Heard about Larmarckian evolution though. Falsified.

I said the more that I study Genetics the more I believe in the existence of God.I still stick to it.If you really go into the study of the genetics of organisms you will begin to find out that there is just no way that the intricate mechanism,the highly balanced and highly regulated pathways could just come out of something as random as evolution.

You either haven't studied evolution and how it relates to genetics, or you're a poor student. Your choice. That is not to say that you can't see the hand of a Creator or God when you study genetics, it's just to say that you have the wrong idea of evolution.

My belief is that there is a creator who is Omniscience and HE alone could come up with such intricate design.

I don't begrudge you the right to hold that belief.

I mentioned that just 2 laws from the Monastery and the scientific community went gaga.When scientists found applications to these two laws they actually thought that they could explain everything with those two laws.Now they know better.There are plenty exceptions to those laws, Penetrance,Disjunction,sex linked Characters,Recombination and more recently Epigenetics.These exceptions that are not explained by Mendelian inheritance points us to the fact that there are others laws of the creator that we do not know yet.
We are just begining to understand a tip of the ice berg and it seems to us we know a lot.
THERE IS STILL A LOT OUT THERE THAT DEFIES HUMAN KNOWLEDGE and only HE that was there when the world was being formed hold the answers to these.

That's swell.

gbade. x:
Dude,

i take it u're atheist, right? Now let me break it down for ya. atheism is a negative of theism. If u say there's no proof of the existence of God, then what proof is there that there's no proof of the existence of God?

I'd say the lack of empirical eveidence for a being with so many characteristics is evidence enough.

If u base it on psychical appearance, then i might as well give u proof of fulfilled Biblical prophecies.

Will get back at ya with more.

A couple a time if you don't mind.

alexis:
deathadder,

Look at the sky, look at the mountains, do you think it was made by man?

No.

feelgood:
There is no God, hmmm, yeah. Of late, I've been wondering too where eggs come from.Deathadder, sure will
appreciateyour letting me know where they come from please. Really looking forward to your wise answer.

Amniotic egg.

deathadder:
Believe me guys, I'd love to believe, I just canna,

Apparantly t' mountains and lakes are all formed fromthe big bang

http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy/universe/b_bang.html

No.

Ya know I've lost family and friends close to me throughout me life and
wish they in some nice place, just don't think they are,

Who knows, maybe I could be convinced otherwise.

My condolences.

Uche2nna:
Hi deathhadder
your thread just reminded me of my secondary school days.At that time I was so interested in biology especially the field of genetics.This my interest inevitably led me to the evolutionary theory of Darwin,Larmacks theory of use and disuse,I even went as far as trying to read Plato's works.In my naive mind then these guys were very brilliant(they still are) and their words were laws!

Agreed

How wrong was I.Darwin made a blunder in trying to explain how life came about,

Darwin may have given his offhand opinion on how life may have arisen, but I don't recall him explaining how life came about.

Lamarck did not do better either.

He did better than most before him though.

As for Plato et al,their teachings were mere speculations without any scientific truth, I am sorry to say this but I have always regarded classical philosophy as that!

So men were trying to explain the theory of life and disprove the existence of God.

No, men trying to explain based on observation and many other methods how life and everything may have come to be. That their works have "disproved" the existence of God(s), or made the existence of Gods unnecessary doesn't mean they set out to do just that.

They could not succeed.

Many have.

All of their theories,tho misleading to a lot of people,could not adequately explain their abundance diversity of life on earth. Darwin at the later stages of his life knew that there was something really wrong with his theory.

Ever heard of the theory of evolution? It explains adequately the diversity of life on Earth. Also, where or when did Darwin say something was really wrong with his theory?

If u follow the logic of his evolutionary theory,then all species will be tending to homogeneity ie all species will start to look alike at some point in time. Darwin realized that and spent all his later life trying to fix his theory to that effect.

Why?

{snipped history revisionism]

Real history of Mendel and whatever interaction he may have had with Darwin: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregor_Mendel

Those two laws gave birth to the field of GENETICS. Just two laws from an obscure monk! These two laws is still the driving force behind the molecular and biotechnological industries that we have.

Y am I saying all this when u start reading theories, try thinking about it yourself.There is more to it in this world that meets the eye.

Indeed (you should also try not to misrepresent history too).

I am a phd student in molecular biology and the more I study about Genetics the more I see the handwork of God.Obviously a lot of my proffessors do not agree with me.They still see Genetics (Biology) as a tool to disprove the existence of God.I see it as my tool to explain HIS existence!HE just showed us two laws and everything went crazy.

Yes, the Christian God came down from heaven, showed Mendel how to do genetics, planted a false memory in Mendel and everyone that was involved with Mendel - he especially made them forget the period Mendel's work remained obscure. Anyway, you see  a God's hand in it, others don't. It's the way the world wrks.

I winder what will happen when he shows us more of his laws of creation.
Anyway,if I have time again I will take up that your Big Bang theory!

Go on then, I'm curious.

After we have talked about it you can then draw your conclusion.But I will leave with on take home:
Orderliness begets orderliness while Disorderliness begets Disorderliness

Huh?

Gamine:
It is a Sin.

Why? Is it also just as bad as lying to save a child's life? What about stealing to feed an entire country?

Gettolove:
PLEASE CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE DOWNLOAD PROCESS

I think you click on free download, and it tells you what to do.

Gamine:
Homosexuality is as Wrong as Murder and shouldnt be condoned at all

my statement is as true and real as that

Why and how?

Asi-oqua:
one might wonder, how did he so far in the christendom without being noticed? was he true christian in the first place?

Yes he was, but like many people, he was a hypocrite and a pathetic troubled Christian.

I can see what he means, but his proposed solution is blindingly idiotic.

Drusilla:
Seun,

What other lifestyle do you know of that leads to 90+ domestic abuse, drinking/drug problem, etc, etc?

The heterosexual lifestyle?

To the point where some homosexuals want to get aids and aids is up in their community? http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/5939950/bug_chasers

There are freaky fetishists of all sexual orientations.

Of course homosexuliaty is a problem. And it's been a bigger problem in the past where the boys were being raped and old Greeks used to have whole towns of boys practicing holding their breathe underwater because that is the way one Greek Ruler liked sex.

That would be pedophilia then - peodephilia with another fetish it would seem.

Who are we to say we know better than them and we have never faced these types of community's? Where homosexuality seems rampant?

We are empathic human beings who shouldn't let injustice, bigotry etc. go unchecked. We shouldn't also advocate intolerance under faulty premises and flimsy pretexts.

Drusilla:
Donzman,

So if it is common and 86 percent of the American population claims to be Christian. Then where could any talk of Christian intolerance be coming from?

From the fact that there are intolerant Christians.

No where. It's a false charge in America against Christians.

Sure, they made it up just to spite Christians - even going as far as creating people like Fred Phelps to spearhead their "America against Christians" campaign. Those bastards!

TayoD:
@Seun,

Neither Ted nor any Christian advocates intolerance towards homosexuals. We condemn the sin of homosexuality while praying for, admonishing and loving those who are caught in this vilest of sins.

That we condemn stealing does not mean we are intolerant towards thieves. I hope you will make that correction in your mind and not hold to the current one so as to remain an ally with those who have an agenda.

Actually, there are Christians that advocate intolerance towards homosexuals - look through this thread for just one example. I'm not overly familiar with Ted Haggard's preaching, but it seems many believe he was advocating intolerance against homosexuals and the rights of homosexuals.

Donzman:
Drusilla, are you drunk? Homosexuality is common in white and black communities in America atleast.

Good question and good point.

Ynot:
You don't have to look far. The above says it all.

His wife's name is [b]GAY[/b]le?

donmayor:
He admitted to sexual immorality but not gay sex. He admitted to buying drugs but not using it.

LoL, I don't think Teddy is being totally honest - except if he just bought drugs just to feel the thrill of buying drugs - for three years (he was probably holding them for a friend too). And as for the sex thingy, he was probably the giver in his various trysts, and he probably got the men to wear makeup and a wig so technically he could claim - by fundy logic maybe - that it wasn't gay sex.

gaby: nobody is born gay they re sick peeps they all need to be gassed, idiots

Dr. Mengele, I presume. This must be Christian charity I've heard so much about.

Drusilla:
Freelance,

On a certain level, sure your right.

A Holy Spirit filled Christian trying to explain God to an Athiest, is akin to a human trying to explain quantum physics to an ant.

So from a certain point of view, they just look ignorant. To us.

However that does not make them ignorant about other issues.

Ants do fine at doing what ants do.

As Jesus said: They do not even understand human things, how the heck could they understand heavenly things?

i.e. Ants have no reasoning about what they themselves do or are in this world, how could they understand what humans are up too?

But once again, ants are fine at ant things, those are instinctual and no need for thinking about it.

So calling them ignorant is out of place and arrogant they would just feel attacked about the "irrational human things" you are trying to explain.

Interesting, calling atheists ignorant is out of place and arrogant, but asserting they are ants to your quantum physics understanding human is all fine, dandy, and certainly not hubristic. Nice. Good to know the arts of fundamentalist diplomacy and no sense of irony aren't dead and buried yet.

They would try to impose their ant thinking on you, to prove that your human thinking has to be irrational.

Indeed.

Butty:
As salam to everyone, i just read the story of cat stevens and i was given two of his islamic albums by a friend, after reading his story, I found him as a source of inspiration, although i am not trying to be like him but i have learnt from his islamic teachings and da awah.
I know some of us have heard about him but i want to know more about him especaially sites that i can download his islamic songs.

here are some of my findings about him

www.vibrani.com/cat.htm
www.yusufislam.org.uk

I have a Yusuf Islam album, Yusuf Islam - I Look, I See

Link:

http://rapidshare.de/files/19258368/Yusuf.rar

Password: kell1v1s10n

Pity he thought he had to go away.

nferyn:
They probably labeled themselves as atheists because they [b]rebelled [/b]against God. the irony

True. Probably also why many think that's what atheism is.

Bobbyaf:
@ Dru

I very much agree with you here.

The funny thing is, self-professed athiests would very much like for us to think they are not even remotely thinking that there might be a Creator-God in the universe. No one knows what is going on in their minds when they lay in their beds at night all alone with their thoughts.

You'd be surprised, if you could see the struggle they experience.

I suppose then that you're some kind of an expert on the struggles atheists experience, yes?

This is where you say you were once an atheist -

olabowale:
I think we should stick to the core question. We may use relevant arguments to make our points. So, my opinion is this, atheist do not believe in God. I now want to know if atheist believe in Hell?

Atheists don't believe a God exists, and they don't believe in hell.

What do atheist believe Hell to be?

When associated with a religion, then probably the creation of the religion in question.

As a muslim, Islam's books, the Qur'an is the dictation of God to Muhammad (AS), through Angel Jibril (AS), except few verses in the second chapter that Muhammad got directly from God. The sunnah/hadith collections are the actions and words and what are permit by Muhammad (AS). But the sunnah/Hadith are categorized from strong and sound to weak and probably false, based on the chain of narrations.

Havent said the above, I want to make it clear that any objective minded individual, will discover the existence of God upon studying the Qur'an and the authentic sunnah/hadith. How? Study the life of Muhammad itself. How is it possible that an illiterate could give such exegeses with tremendous accuracy in many specialized disciplines that the best minds of today are just discovering it! We must never forget that this man existed over 14 centuaries ago. His materials, the Qur'an and the Sunnah/hadith were and are still superior sources of academic informations, even though they are religious materials. Inshort, the books challenge mankind to reason, think, refect, observe, ponder, etc.

It would seem the many events that have involved irrational, unthinking, etc Muslims are in direct contradiction of what you think the Quran and hadiths challenge mankind to do.

Can any right thinking individual with sound mind and good heart disbelieve in the existence after a thorough study of these noble sources?

Yes, even more so.

@KAG: The 'Command, BE" is the starting point "Button", that God The Almighty use to put any thing that He decrees to a manifestation. So for example, when He decrees the creation of the earth, He but put the whole thing into a craetion motion/mode by saying 'BE", and it is!

Ah! Like the Christian, "God said let there be, and there was".

About the continuous movement of the earth on its path,being explained away, by Gravity/motion under Keplers law, I will like to ask this question; Is Kepler's law completely explained everything and does Kepler knows everything?

No, Kepler did not know everything, but his laws help to explain orbits.

Kepler had limited knowledge and before him, the earth was already in its path and gravity was already in existence.

So?

God expained in the Qur'an's Surah Rahman that people should try to penetrate the space with the knowledge that he has. Please go to www.answering-christianity.com and look under the science and medicine in Qur'an and be dazzled.

I have, wasn't dazzled, I was dismayed by the several half truths, outright lies, spurious interpretations, and some of the bad science involved.

The earth not bursting even though there is platonic activity and other geological activities in its core because God put balance into all of the activities under, on and over the surface of the earth, so that mankind may reflect. Even though, under the earth surface, you have molten lava and steam which will creat expansion, yet God allows the atmospheric pressure (both kinetic and potential in all their forms) and the occasional steam letting valves ( earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, etc), the earth has continue to survice and support all of us, known and unknown. In the process of earth volcanic actvities, God allows the creation of the earth to continue. In this process, more land surface emmergies, often from under water as Island or part of already existing land mass.

That, or the Earth isn't that diffrent from planets like Mars, and therefore processes happen that don't require some God putting balances.

[quoteAs to your thought of mutation, it is impossible.

[/quote]No it really isn't - differences in nucleotides, just to give a quick example, are a testament to mutations.

[quote]First we as humanbeing are still discovering our earth. Just because we did not know it yesterday does not mean that it did not exist yesterday. It simply means that we did not know it then. One would ask why hasnt man mutated and function as 'normal since man appeared?

What? Not to be rude, but I couldn't understand any of that, so I'll just assure you that mutations do happen, they are not that mysterious, and they are certainly not a big secret.

I believe that Adam is the first man and he and me look exactly the same! Adam was created. Read the Qur'an. It is an invitation from your Lord and all who truly believe in Him.

Okay.

olabowale:
@nferyn: Could you then tell me how the universe and all that it contains are such in perfect order, consistently, for this long. I mean from the time of the Big Bang (Command; BE).

I'm curious: what does "Command; BE" mean?

Let use the earth as a very good example. How is it that it has remain to traverse its orbital ring, without going out of that charted path.

I'm guessing gravity and motion have something to do with that; look up Kepler's laws. Did you have a differing explanation?

How is it that it has not bursted and pulverized into dust, knowing fully well that there is a continous and active forces in its core, eg volcanic activities, platonic activities, below the earth surface,etc, etc.

Because the things you mention (especially platonic activities) wouldn't cause it burst and pulverize into dust.

Is there any mutation in the nature, that when it is examined, it will be separate and different from that one things its mutated from?

I'm not quite sure I completely understand what you're trying to ask, but it seems you're asking if speciation has been observed in nature. The answer is yes, and not just by looking at the nested heirarchies and similarities explainable (parsimoniously) only by shared ancestry, but also tested and examined cases.

Why is it that human physiology has remain distinct and has not mutated.So that you know, I am not a christian and therefore, I do not subscribe to the Bible. But i do believe in God the Almighty.

It hasn't really.

Brown-Eyes:
I doubt if the picture has been doctored just to get this point across. I just want to know if this happens because of Man's law or God's law. So far none of the people who follow the religion, that perpetuates this action, has replied.

No the pictures aren't doctored, the event was doctored.

Snopes is usually reliable, so:

http://www.snopes.com/photos/gruesome/crushboy.asp