An atheist professor & his smart student :)

An atheist professor & his student
An atheist professor of philosophy speaks to his class on the problem science has with God, The Almighty.

He asks one of his new Muslim students to stand and

Bateesta

Why dont the student , in the 1st place , answer all the questions that been asking by the profesor
THEN.........
He or she can do what ever he/she want , i'm not impress at all with this story , sori guys

Originally posted by Bateesta at 30-4-2007 06:22 PM
Why dont the student , in the 1st place , answer all the questions that been asking by the profesor
THEN.........
He or she can do what ever he/she want , i'm not impress at all with this st ...

why you are not impress??!! ..
becouse he or she did not answer in the 1st place ???!!!!!!!!!

and i dont know why she or he did not answer in the 1st !!

maybe she/he want the frofesor to say all what he want to say ..so he/she can
answer every thing ... and maybe to see what hes point !! ..arrno !!

and maybe he/she was afraid

anyway ..

thanx for passing here

bye ..

ussopp

nice one ya

thanks...

[ Last edited by  ussopp at 30-4-2007 07:11 PM ]

Bateesta

Originally posted by moona at 30-4-2007 06:58 PM



why you are not impress??!! ..
becouse he or she did not answer in the 1st place ???!!!!!!!!!

Yes , 2 be fair 2 all , one must answer when been asked by some1 else instead of asking another question , thats r total crap

and i dont know why she or he did not answer in the 1st !!

I know y he dint answer the question , bcoz he didnt know or didnt have the answer , and divert it by creating another question , its vey obvious and typical, thats y i'm not impressed at all

maybe she/he want the frofesor to say all what he want to say ..so he/she can
answer every thing ... and maybe to see what hes point !! ..arrno !!


anyway ..

thanx for passing here

bye
and maybe he/she was afraid

4 some ppl , a person who cannot answer questions and divert it by creating another question consider smart as long if he/she IS ONE OF THEM , but 4 me , i didnt buy that stuff, fact is a fact , dont deny it

But like previous ocasion , it is what it is  and u cannot change ppl's mind once god have fix it no matter u do , it is a read only attribute

I rest my case , take care

mziskandar

for me... nice one!

Robotech

Cerita kat atas tu pernah aku posted di Asiafinest forum.

Itu pun tak silap aku, the original story appeared on the thetruereligion.org forum. Aku mmg regular forummer kat situ. Tp citer ni cukup bagus sbb waktu tuh, geng kapir tobiak sebok menafikan kewujudan Tuhan, last skali member seforum kuar citer ni ... depa tak dpt kata apa2.

Nice to see the story is still around ....

Wassalam.

gigi.tembaga

that student is Prof AR Kalam, the President of India

that is not a fair comparison at all.
after the professor dies, an autopsy can be done on him and his brain can be seen. or they could do a ct scan and prove that the professor's brain exists. in other words it has the ability to be proven true in the near future. but what about god? you cant do an operation of the sky to prove that god exists, because god is simply something that cannot be proven true (or proven false).

oh, and evolution, why cant it be observed? "evolution by natural selection", that is darwin's theory. natural selection can definitely be observed, experiments have been done. for example treat a group of individuals of a certain species with radiation, change their environment, only the ones mutated to become more suited to the new environment will survive. that is observable, therefore it exists.

this argument between the student and the professor makes no sense at all.

on the problem of evil, the professor should instead have quoted this:
揑s God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

ussopp

about evolution you can have a good reading here....

http://forum3.cari.com.my/viewth ... &extra=page%3D4

BeanDiesel

For your info, another version of the story

An atheist professor  of philosophy speaks  to his class  on
          the problem  science has with God.


               Asking one of  his new students to  stand, he says, "You are
          a Christian, aren't you, son?

               "Yes, sir," the young student replies respectfully.

               "So you believe in God?" the professor asks accusingly.

               "Absolutely, sir," came his quick reply.

               "Is God good?"

               "Of course," came the confident reply.

               "Is God all-powerful?"

               "Yes."

               The  professor  continues  by saying,  "My  brother  died of
          cancer  even though he  prayed to God to  heal  him.   Most of us
          would attempt  to help  others...........................

ussopp

mungkin masalahnya ialah ketulenan cerita nie.....

tp ia masih argument antara theist dan atheist....

BeanDiesel

Originally posted by ussopp at 11/2/07 04:59 PM
tp ia masih argument antara theist dan atheist....

oh definitely. Just like Socratic dialogs. Nobody knows if they are any true, but something can be learned from them.

Kerengge

bagi haku ada pengajaran dr citer tuh........aper2 pon dlm situasi seperti ini.......akhlak, hujjah yg bernas dan berhikmah amat perlu diutarakan.............pendekatan melalui perdebatan amat tidak digalakkan........

BeanDiesel

Originally posted by Kerengge at 11/2/07 07:48 PM
pendekatan melalui perdebatan amat tidak digalakkan........

because?

blastoff

Originally posted by deathcraze at 3-11-2007 12:34 AM
but what about god? you cant do an operation of the sky to prove that god exists, because god is simply something that cannot be proven true (or proven false).

God has no form , is not limited to space and time hence uncomparable to any of His creations therefore you cannot prove God's existence by using your 5 senses .  But you can use your common sense to verify His existence .

Originally posted by deathcraze at 3-11-2007 12:34 AM
oh, and evolution, why cant it be observed? "evolution by natural selection", that is darwin's theory. natural selection can definitely be observed, experiments have been done. for example treat a group of individuals of a certain species with radiation, change their environment, only the ones mutated to become more suited to the new environment will survive. that is observable, therefore it exists.

Let's put natural selection aside for we are talking about a human being specifically . Can apes evolve into humans? I don't see any apes that we have nowadays evolve into anything other than their usual self so what proof to support this theory ?

[quote]Originally posted by deathcraze at 3-11-2007 12:34 AM

on the problem of evil, the professor should instead have quoted this:
揑s God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

migdal_bavel

Originally posted by deathcraze at 3-11-2007 12:34 AM
...oh, and evolution, why cant it be observed? "evolution by naturalselection", that is darwin's theory. natural selection can definitelybe observed, experiments have been done. for example treat a group ofindividuals of a certain species with radiation, change theirenvironment, only the ones mutated to become more suited to the newenvironment will survive. that is observable, therefore it exists.

natural selection is not an evolution itself. It's not a process of evolution either...It only suggests that the fittest organism must survive due to certain so-called preferable characteristics-phenotype (which may be due to genetic mutation which leads to change in genotype)....

You dun see the genes become mutated (by da way, mutation isn't equal to evolution)...de experiment only shows that due to the mutation of certain genes, certain species survive in certain environment...

to ussopp:

"God has no form , is not limited to space and time hence uncomparable to any of His creations therefore you cannot prove God's existence by using your 5 senses .  But you can use your common sense to verify His existence . "

i agree that according to the traditional sense of god, he cannot be compared to his creations. i was just showing that the student in the above story was wrong, as he compared the 'professor's brain' to 'god'.

by using my 5 senses, i cannot prove that god exists and cannot prove that he doesnt exist either. but by using my common sense, i can only come to the conclusion that there is a much higher probability that god doesnt exist. please tell me, what is the difference between the probablility (% of being true) that god exists, and the probability that santa claus exists?

"Let's put natural selection aside for we are talking about a human being specifically . Can apes evolve into humans? I don't see any apes that we have nowadays evolve into anything other than their usual self so what proof to support this theory ?"

yes, apes indeed have the potential to evolve into humans. of course you cannot see apes evolving now, how many years have you been observing apes? even science says that evolution of apes to humans occured over more than 200,000 years. by just observing them for say, 500 years, what are the chances that you see them evolving? just because you dont see them in such a short time, that is not a valid reason to say that apes definitely didnt evolve from humans. that is like saying, you throw a dice 10 times, and in that 10 times didnt land on the number '6', therefore the dice doesnt have a number '6' on it? what reasonable logic is that?

proof to support the evolution theory? what about this: http://www.holysmoke.org/cretins/transfos.htm

"We are the ones who make all of the choices in our life , to do something or not to do something is our very own choice so why blame God?"

true, we are the ones who make all the decisions. if you look closely at that poem, you will see that it is not blaming god, it is showing proof through logic that god cannot be omnipotent (can do everything), omniscient (knows everything), and benevolent (does good things) at the same time.
you can read more about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil

also, "evil" does not only refer to those that we do by our own conscious acts, anything that is not good is considered evil, for example things that 'could' have been prevented by god such as natural disasters.


===

to migdal_bavel:
im not quite sure what you are trying to state, but usually "evolution" and "natural selection" are mentioned together when talking about darwin's theory of evolution.
quoting from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinism:
"Darwinism is a term for the underlying theory in those ideas of Charles Darwin concerning evolution and natural selection. Discussions of Darwinism usually focus on evolution by natural selection, but sometimes Darwinism is taken to mean evolution more broadly, or other ideas not directly associated with the work of Darwin."

"the fittest organism must survive due to certain so-called preferable characteristics"

this is exactly what darwin believed to have caused evolution..

[ Last edited by  deathcraze at 4-11-2007 03:59 AM ]

blastoff

Originally posted by deathcraze at 4-11-2007 03:41 AM
but by using my common sense, i can only come to the conclusion that there is a much higher probability that god doesnt exist.

And how did you reach to this conclusion ?

Originally posted by deathcraze at 4-11-2007 03:41 AM
please tell me, what is the difference between the probablility (% of being true) that god exists, and the probability that santa claus exists?

We use our common sense to verify the source of the claims . For the existence of Allah , the source is the Quran . And for the existence of Santa Clause it's source is human tradition/culture . Human tradition or culture was based on unwritten hearsay hence its authenticity cannot be verified . But the Quran is there for all to see , therefore its authenticity can be checked and its content can be analysed thoroughly .

Originally posted by deathcraze at 4-11-2007 03:41 AM
yes, apes indeed have the potential to evolve into humans. of course you cannot see apes evolving now, how many years have you been observing apes? even science says that evolution of apes to humans occured over more than 200,000 years. by just observing them for say, 500 years, what are the chances that you see them evolving? just because you dont see them in such a short time, that is not a valid reason to say that apes definitely didnt evolve from humans. that is like saying, you throw a dice 10 times, and in that 10 times didnt land on the number '6', therefore the dice doesnt have a number '6' on it? what reasonable logic is that?  

proof to support the evolution theory? what about this: http://www.holysmoke.org/cretins/transfos.htm

But if this evolution from ape to man started more than 200000 years ago , then the scientist who first theorized it wasn't able to witness the event with his own eyes which means that his theory was based on a mere conjecture since no observation and experiment could be conducted . Its like someone found a hipbone of a dinasour and started to theorize about the dinosaur's complete life cycle based merely on a piece of hip bone alone !  That's no proof but merely an assumption.

ibnur

200,000  !!!  too short.  Even 10 million is short.  

Better get the right facts.  Even those website are giving wrong facts!!!