₦airaland Forum

truthislight: Your inability to comprehend the creator of the universe from your finite mind does not erase the reality we see around us here, that intelligent things exist in reality. Do you denie that ?

That you closed your mind to this reality, does that automatically means they came by chance as you will have us belief ?

Neither does it means that the status quo with all things had always been this way.

If your mind cannot deal with the reality we can see, of what significance is the one above your comprehension going to serve you ?

*that a fish living in water to survive cannot comprehend why we humans stay out of water and survive does not change the reality/fact that we humans really can survive out of water*

What do you have to say to specifically address the issue of God's mind? I'm waiting.

The Op said the beauty and intricate nature of the Universe suggests a Creator and as a general principle; the beauty and infinite intricate nature of God's Mind suggests a creator also!!

truthislight: You ^ lack the nacessary capacity to know/understand the intricacies of design and procedural functions in bringing about a functional system, hence you narrow mindlessly give in to chance when you see/read one.

But for them that appreciates the rigors, meticulousness needed to partan a process even imperfectly to work will surely wonder with great wonderment in the attainment and perfection of such marvels in nature let alone to let it constantly fly for as a "chance", devoid of intelligence even when the process is perfect.

What else but shallow ? Just shallow. Smh.

The intelligent mind of God itself, can be said to be a Marvel, a marvel that preconceived and reflects the Universe! Would you now shoot yourself in the foot by claiming such marvellous Mind appeared out of nowhere?! Or has been existing since eternity and yet you see a small simple dot, you claim its intelligent design!

JMAN05: Must there be an uncaused cause? your answer.

For there to be an uncaused cause, such entity lacks the capacity to change, because causation in deed change. A cause is a change, so also an effect.

Therefore an uncaused "cause" or God cannot create the universe for the lack of the capacity to change.

Ola, you still did not tell us what distant sister means

^^

Your "friend" the op said that Science supports the uncaused cause!

Longest time oh, you rather disappeared

@truthislight

Can an intelligent being such as a man be uncaused?

What is the scientific proof for uncaused?

@Ola what does distant sister mean??

JMAN05: Ya the undesigned God. the uncaused. You ve not also stated anything to show he does not exist. My write up shows that their must be an intelligent designer who is endowed with wisdom and power to bring what humans cannot be able to make into existence. That it is unreasonable to assert that chance did the work.

Why can we say God is uncaused and a pen isn't or the multiverse?

OLAADEGBU: God had to outlaw marriage between siblings because of the risk that genetic problems brought which was as a result of the curse accompanied with sin.

I understand your rationale however the law isn't still eternal as a fact!

The problems of the above:

1. The limitation of language. As long as you keep using the pair "Creator and Creation" , cosomological problems will remain elusive. Such terms have its own baggage with unnecessary assumptions which further burden and deny clarity. Generally, cosmology necessitates causes, yet the word Creator by its natural meaning negates the need for a cause, that if used for any phenomenon such a chair, our mind suddenly cease to make further inquiries about the chair.

Just as the mere use of Creator is same with Creation, creation is naturally tied to creator, it readily appeals, yet it is still shallow thinking.

2. You have not still proven the Being of God, rather you mistake Being for consequences. You are not talking about God, rather about the complex and beauty of nature/universe. You are talking about Nature, not God. Since you have not led evidence as to God's Being, then we cannot intelligibly know his actions or deeds!

3. I'm sure you believe God is the single and only exception that everything is designed. The undesigned God.

For the purposes of the trinity debates, the proper term to be used, is Being not person. Companies, trustees and cartoons can be persons, but a Being is independently existent.

Therefore if Jesus is a being, so also the holy ghost and the Father, the three cannot be merged into one being. If God (the fourth part) is a being also, he cannot be any of the three.

However everything changes if personalities can be used as a mask to guard/conceal a deeper personality. There could be layers and layers of personalities, each with its diverse appearances. Now, in the case of the Trinity, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, the Father are not Beings, but personalities and social roles which the one God plays. They are appearances, illusions, false (not in the detrimental sense), masks which the omnipotent God uses to to interact with mortals and fragile souls.

In view of the foregoing, isn't it ideal to worship the reality?!

I'm definitely not the right person to direct question at

Joshthefirst: several species.

Sorry for the late response.

Humans are homo sapiens -- a specie

It is very possible, for humans to have a evolutionary relationship with other apes, and possibly homo erectus, homo habilis etc. In so far they are of the same kind, which obviously they shld.

Divine laws ought to be eternal, the fact that this particular law against incest has not always been there, is proof that the law isn't absolute or eternal.

^^

This lacks weight as it is merely a subjective belief. You for reasons of your gullibility accept the contents of a book as true without the due reasonable doubt!

I don't believe the bible is true and less, I don't believe its the word of any God nor an inspiration thereof. The fact that the bible writers claim divine inspiration, doesn't remove the possibility that they are lying!

OLAADEGBU: Someone Said: "Where did Cain get his wife?"

Many ask this question thinking they've found a "mistake" in the Bible—that there must have been other people besides Adam and Eve. Scripture tells us that Adam is "the first man" (1 Corinthians 15:45); that there were no other humans when he was created, because God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone" (Genesis 2:18); and that Eve is "the mother of all living" (Genesis 3:20). Cain and Abel, then, must have married distant sisters. All of the first-generation siblings married each other in order to populate the earth. At that time there was no law against incest. But as the population grew large enough, and as the risk of genetic problems increased because of sin's curse, God outlawed marriage between siblings.

From, The Evidence Bible

So even divine laws are not unchanging

What does Hell look?

Ukuts gp: muslim are nt different from the pagans who dnt believe in death, burial and resurrection of Jesus christ.

Note: The following post is inspired by God.

God is Dead

^^
Is the Good Samaritian in Hell also or better still does he deserve to be in Hell?

Joshthefirst: the truth hurts. Gods word is truth. When we try to make edges around it and deny it, we end up hurting ourselves.

Prove it!

@ukut gp

Who in particular wrote the Book of Job?

Ukuts gp: the bible is the word of God and i believe it. It stated that they were inspired of God and i believe it. GOD is d only true God and his son Jesus died 4 me. Why should i doubt the words of God. I dnt know of d koran. I only trust in the bible. And we should it at that.

That's just your belief

@Ukuts eg

So if I state in any of my posts on nairaland that such posts are divinely inspired, you would believe me?! In other words, what is the yardstick for belief?

@ukuts

Provided you understand the question, we can move ahead. At least point out the error.

Reyginus: Let me surprise you by turning the question slightly up-side-down.

The problem with your question is that, it is assuming that there is no document that claims to proof the existence of god.
It is assuming that there is no portion or group of men who have already, laid claim to proof of god.

You failed to consider that with this limited perception, observational techniques and experimental technologies, these men are certain that god is in existence.

Since this is so, a simpler way of deducing if he exists is by looking into the claim presented by these group of humans. You may wonder why we shouldn't just ignore them and go ahead with the search, but, that in itself, will be a futile search for nothing.

The moment we begin to search for him outside the qualifications and so-called proof his worshippers relate with him we are then not searching for god but something else, but if we are to use the qualities attributed to him, we can only do this by questioning and deducing from their so-called evidence.

God as defined and qualified by the theist cannot be identified by any technology. If it happens, then what you have as the christain or muslim god is certainly not in existence.

So it is not a question of prooving it by scientifical means.

Beautiful! Just one day in the shoes of an atheist and you read his mind well!

Ukuts gp: they were able to discribe hell cos they were inspired by God.

Did God tell you HE inspired them or they wrote God inspired them?

^^^ but none of the writers of the bible have gone to either heaven or hell prior to writing their contribution to the bible?

@joshthefirst

Does your definition of "kind" cover just a species or several species?

Ukuts gp: self control and discipline can prevent u from masturbation but lack of it will lead to it.

In the eyes of Jesus, masturrbation is as bad and evil as the lack of self control and discipline.

Lack of self control and discipline is THE sin.