₦airaland Forum

UyiIredi:
Because there is strong evidence for God.
Could be doesn't mean it is false.
Whether he exists or not is important to the crucial question of the origins of the universe and humanity. The satisfaction gotten from the answer to that question is of great help.

frank317:
Ya, even Ebuka and flexiomor thinks he made sense. Lol @ atheism thinks nature is dumb.

Theists think God has ears and digestive system... They also think God poos

Abdulgaffar22:
See what the atheists must believe and accept wholeheartedly; They must believed that; 1.Nature CAN NEITHER LIVE NOR DIE, yet a creature THAT CAN LIVE AND DIE evolved from the same very nature 2.Nature is BLIND, yet a creature that can SEE evolved from the same very nature. 3.Nature is DEAF yet a creature that can HEAR evolved from the same very nature. 4.Nature is DUMB, yet a creature that can TALK and SPEAK different languages evolved from the same very nature. 5. Nature is NOT a KNOWLEDGEABLE entity ,yet a creature that CAN KNOW and SEARCH for KNOWLEDGE to the extent of OBSERVING ITS OWN BRAIN in the laboratory evolved from the same very nature. 6.Nature is NOT INTELLIGENT, yet an INTELLIGENT creature evolved from the same very nature. 7.Nature is NOT SELF-AWARE, yet a creature with FULL SELF AWARENESS evolved from the same very nature. 8.Nature CANNOT THINK yet , a creature that CAN THINK logically and formulate a rational argument evolved from the same very nature. 9.Nature CANNOT MOVE VOLUNTARILY AND CONTROLLABLY yet a creature that CAN MOVE VOLUNTARILY AND CONTROLLABLY evolved from the same nature. 10.Nature CAN NOT EXPERIENCE ANY EMOTIONAL FEELINGS, yet a creature that CAN EXPERIENCE FEELINGS LIKE LOVE, ANGER HAPPINESS, SADNESS etc evolve from the same very nature. 11. Nature is MORALLY NEUTRAL, yet a creature that can MORALLY DISTINGUISH between RIGHT AND WRONG evolved from the same very nature. 12. Nature CANNOT FOUND ANY CIVILIZATION, yet a creature CAPABLE OF FOUNDLING CIVILIZATIONS like Education, Marriage, Politics, Sports and Entertainments,Religion etc evolved from the same very nature.See what the atheists must embrace without any iota of doubt- A chain of amazing and wonderful features which are NOWHERE to be found in any part of the nature were later evolved from the SAME VERY nature as a result of ACCUMULATED RANDOM PROCESS - an illogical and contradictory belief. Yet the same people will be blaming and laughing at the religious people for believing in God. Which one is more reasonable and logical: to believe that those amazing and wonderful features possessed by human being were deliberately created by God or to believe that these features just evolved due to random process accumulated over billions of years

UyiIredi:
Because there is strong evidence for God.

Could be doesn't mean it is false.

Whether he exists or not is important to the crucial question of the origins of the universe and humanity. The satisfaction gotten from the answer to that question is of great help.

UyiIredi:
Atheism is not self-contradictory but it is illogical. There is strong evidence for God from the fact of the genetic code in lifeforms and the presence of consciousness esp in humans. As such, atheism ignores the evidence for God. I find it curious though that atheists expect direct evidence of spectacular miracles to occur to believe in God. And yet they don't apply such reasoning to universal common descent which can't be observed but is inferred from circumstantial evidence.

frank317:
Again, who e help?
If u claim God created the world and LEFT it to run isn't that a sign that acknowledging him is useless?
If any God wants u to acknowledge him he will tell u.
Why worship a God who has left?




It could be true or false... So?





So now that u believe he exists how has that helped anyone understand the origin or universe and humanity? In what way is the satisfaction of great help when it provides no answer?

A long time ago, people were satisfied with the assumption that the earth is flat... Is satisfaction now an answer?

ValentineMary:
Consciousness and DNA are proofs of God existence abi? I ignored ur other argument about mutation because I did not feel it was worth my time. But this one is misinformation spread generously by u theist and I can't keep quiet anymore.

ValentineMary:
As for consciousness, I am currently on the hypothesis that it is caused by the need of biological system to maintain an internal environment void of xeno destructive bodies. This is likely an evolutionary trait to aid survival. As organisms get more complex, more specialized systems are "designed" by natural selection to aid our survival.

UyiIredi:
Deist not theist. Let us see if I misinformed anyone.



RNA and DNA are stable molecules. DNA moreso than RNA.

Consciousness is immaterial and as such can't be explained by evolutionary mechanisms which deal exclusively with physical trait. As an immaterial trait, and a unique substance consciousness defies evolution. That said, natural selection doesn't 'design' anything, random mutations does the 'designing' while natural selection spreads it through a population.

ValentineMary:
I said VIRAL DNA. They are highly unstable. Do ur assigning well.

ValentineMary:
Let us take another example. How does bacteria know when an environment is inconvient for it? through receptors on the cell surface. Those receptors send message to the nucleaus and it understands that it is inconvinient. When foreign bodies are about to invade a bacteria, the passage for molecules does not allow it because it lacks receptors for it. These are physical characters with immaterial manifestations. It is in no way metaphysical. And who made the law thatevolution can't account for consciousness?

SirWere:
Because deism plays with the word "God".

They remove it and tag it with every concept you can imagine.

A deist can say "God is energy".

And we can't fault his definition.
However, he has shortchanged the word "God"

4kings:
@bolded
I think u are mistaken deism for mysticism or something else.

UyiIredi:
I have never heard of viral DNA and even if there were viral DNA is different from the DNA used by lifeforms.

The bacteria doesn't know or understand in any real sense. This is simply a case of physical detection with fully physical responses. In no way immaterial as consciousness is.

ValentineMary:
Viral DNA is the DNA of virus. Ans it shows that DNA were not selectively put together.

You know that u have to be a bacteria to speak so authoritatively about how it feels? And moreover I said these are modified by evolution into specialized organs that carry out functions more accurately.

SirWere:
Some do.

Some say the universe is God.

Some say otherwise.

The point I'm trying to make is ;

Deism can define God in a multidignous array of ways and cannot be refuted.

However; their definiton do not represent the traditional and generally accepted way of defining God.

There in lies my main p.

4kings:
This is Pantheism
Deism simply defines God as a non-interventionist Creator
Agreed

ValentineMary:
Viral DNA is the DNA of virus. Ans it shows that DNA were not selectively put together.

ValentineMary:
You know that u have to be a bacteria to speak so authoritatively about how it feels? And moreover I said these are modified by evolution into specialized organs that carry out functions more accurately.

SirWere:
See Uyi's post and ask whether or not that's how he sees Deism.

They don't really. Deism generally defines God as a Creator who made the world and left it to run. Simple as that. Your reason is a poor one.

raphieMontella:
seriously did you honestly think you made any sense?

UyiIredi:
I've read the Wikipedia article on a virus and nowhere does it state that viral DNA are unstable.

No, I don't need to. Entities without brains or less-developed brains have no consciousness whatsoever. Understand the argument: consciousness is immaterial and so can't be explained by evolution which deals with physical traits.