Hahaha just kidding man , i just hate to remember what you've said on that time yah know i have no idea why you're telling that "buti nalang hindi ako nakapag aral"Tsk tsk tsk...this guy can't even read...
kung susuriin ko ugali mo. mataas tingin mo sa sarili mo, mahilig ka talaga makipagtalo sa mainit na paraan, gusto mo bumida. gusto mo ipangalandakang marami kang alam.
so wala nga kameng pakealam.
makapagreply ka sa bawat isa dito parang halos lahat gusto mo awayin e. hahaha
Hahaha just kidding man , i just hate to remember what you've said on that time yah know i have no idea why you're telling that "buti nalang hindi ako nakapag aral"
Then after that you started typing English , what a shame for me hahaha
kung susuriin ko ugali mo. mataas tingin mo sa sarili mo, mahilig ka talaga makipagtalo sa mainit na paraan, gusto mo bumida. gusto mo ipangalandakang marami kang alam.
so wala nga kameng pakealam.
FYI, there is a scientific theory that our universe is just one of the infinite bubble universes in the so called multiverse. Of course, this is highly speculative. However, this scientific speculation is not totally unsound. Now, the Big Bang that caused this universe we observed, did not really came into being from nothingness but it came from the multiverse. Multi-dimensional realities, parallel universes, bubble universes, many worlds possibilities etc etc comprise the infinite multiverse. If you ask how the multiverse came into being, it is simply there and it can not not be there since it is all there was. Do you have any idea on the indestructiblity of matter? Or, can you have the direct evidence that God made the universe or multiverse? How could you demonstrate in scientific and/or empirical manner that matter or reality needs God to exist? Is it necessary that there was nothing before and then something came into being? Can you prove with direct evidence that matter came from absolute nothing? Can you prove that God is necessary into the existence of matter?
"If you ask how the multiverse came into being, it is simply there and it can not not be there since it is all there was"
kung totoo man yang multiverse nyo at ganyan lang sasabihin mo... sa bible pa rin kami maniniwala.nasa 2nd heaven ka pa lang bro.pagaralan mo rin yong 3rd heaven.at saka mas maraming scientist pa rin ang naniniwala sa Dios kumpara sa grupo nyo.may kalahi kayo na nagsabi na 90 percent daw ng mga scientist ay athiest na ewan ko kung totoo yong source nya.kung alam mo paki share na lang kung realable ba yong source nya.
IMHO, you can not rebut the atheist's claim by presenting theosophical knowledge. How can you convince the atheist in his own turf scientific-nauralism-materialism if you drag heaven in the discussion? That in itself is being questioned-the heavenly realms in the perspective of the religious. The way to grapple with the question is to show to the non-believer that scientific conclusions or findings do not necessarily lead to atheism or atheism as the absolute truth. You can not simply dismiss scientific truths(theories) as if they were false )unless you have the right specialization in science that these theories were incorrect (MjLove already explained to you the meaning of 'theory'). You have to show to the atheist that his worldview is erroneous. Some just used scientific theories to forward their presupposed ideology. However, I believe that some theories are conceived to undermine religious beliefs. There are theories that did not intend to sweep erroneous religious notions but by accidental by product of that theories. If some of these theories demystified some superfulous religious notions and practices, does it mean religion or believe in God is unnecessary? IMHO, no. Our thinking should adopt in a changing reality. There is no clear-cut victory for atheism...neither theism. If some arguments for God's existence are no longer tenable, then discard. Atheism and theism both can not directly demonstrate the absolute-ness of their conclusions. If atheism is true and death is the ultimate oblivion, nobody can verify its truthfulness because the dead can never go back to life and to say "in death there is nothing nor God therefore, atheism is true".
Meanwhile, statistics does not forcefully or necessarily lead to truth or the ultimate truth. It is a case to case basis. The opinions of the scientists on the question of God's existence do not lead inescapably or inevitably that there is no God - or there is a God. What if the majority is mistaken? Or, how about some exploration to the minds of the philosophers, poets, musicians, novelists, essayists, statesmen, journalist, painters, barbers, cooks, etc etc...? Are the scientists the sole arbiter of truths? Aren't we entitled to assert the truths we believe even if we're not scientists by profession? We need not though to dismantle good and proven scientific truths. Leave that to science. It is philosophy and religion that interpret scientific truths.
hahaha nadale mo paps.Kantahan mo na kita bro.ha:
" ako'y isang anak mahirap
mababa raw ang aking pinag-aralan
grade-1 lang ang inabot ko
no read no write pa ko
pano na ngayon ang buhay ko"
Alam mo ba na dito sa phc karamihan mahirap nagtyatyaga sa promo para makatipid,at karamihan di nakatungtong ng college.ano ang gusto mong i portry sa klase ng pakikipag-usap mo.gusto mo bang ipakita sa amin na above ka sa karamihan?gusto mo bang ipakilala ang sarili mo na nagkamit ka ng higit sa kaninoman na makakabasa sa comment mo?yan ba ang rightiousness na natutunan mo sa napili mong estado sa buhay?
Anong lahi ka ba bro.nasaang bansa ka ba?para si juan ay english-englisin mo.di ba dapat ibatay mo ang salita mo doon sa alam na salita ng kausap mo?kung yong kausap mo english makipagusap doon mo dapat ginagamit yan bro.pero kung hindi sa hangin ka lang nakikipag-usap.
Para sa amin ang paglago ng kaalaman ay nagsasabi sa aming may Dios ayon sa biblia.papaano namin mapapaniwala ang hindi naman naniniwala sa biblia eh ayon nga sa biblia ang batayan.paano mo mapapaniwala sa hindi nakikita gayong ang kausap mo di naman naniniwala sa nakikita.ang science mo tinapos mo sa comment mo na ito:
"If you ask how the multiverse came into being, it is simply there and it can not not be there since it is all there was"
Period na kayo dyan...ang mundo nyo ay isang gatuldok lamang na pangyayari sa eternity.parang isang linya na walang katapusan na sa gitna ay isang tuldok na nagtapos sa isang iglap habang ito(linya)ay nagpapatuloy ng walang katapusan.
Kantahan mo na kita bro.ha:
" ako'y isang anak mahirap
mababa raw ang aking pinag-aralan
grade-1 lang ang inabot ko
no read no write pa ko
pano na ngayon ang buhay ko"
Alam mo ba na dito sa phc karamihan mahirap nagtyatyaga sa promo para makatipid,at karamihan di nakatungtong ng college.ano ang gusto mong i portry sa klase ng pakikipag-usap mo.gusto mo bang ipakita sa amin na above ka sa karamihan?gusto mo bang ipakilala ang sarili mo na nagkamit ka ng higit sa kaninoman na makakabasa sa comment mo?yan ba ang rightiousness na natutunan mo sa napili mong estado sa buhay?
Anong lahi ka ba bro.nasaang bansa ka ba?para si juan ay english-englisin mo.di ba dapat ibatay mo ang salita mo doon sa alam na salita ng kausap mo?kung yong kausap mo english makipagusap doon mo dapat ginagamit yan bro.pero kung hindi sa hangin ka lang nakikipag-usap.
Para sa amin ang paglago ng kaalaman ay nagsasabi sa aming may Dios ayon sa biblia.papaano namin mapapaniwala ang hindi naman naniniwala sa biblia eh ayon nga sa biblia ang batayan.paano mo mapapaniwala sa hindi nakikita gayong ang kausap mo di naman naniniwala sa di nakikita.ang science mo tinapos mo sa comment mo na ito:
"If you ask how the multiverse came into being, it is simply there and it can not not be there since it is all there was"
Period na kayo dyan...ang mundo(cosmos) nyo ay isang gatuldok lamang na pangyayari sa eternity.parang isang linya na walang katapusan na sa gitna ay isang tuldok na nagtapos sa isang iglap habang ito(linya)ay nagpapatuloy ng walang katapusan.
True.I am talking to a someone like you na 'ma-hangin'. Enough with your repetitive nonsense verbiage. This is an internet forum so expect na your comments or criticisms will not be easy go lucky. Napaka ironic naman. You criticize the beliefs of others without restraint, pero kapag ung other worldly highfalutin thoughts mo are being stung by the gadfly, you resort to self-deprecation as tactics. Maging fair ka at iwas sa ad hominem or character assassination. You mean you know me more than I know myself. You are bizzare. You are very thoughtless or clueless on the scientific and philosophical discussions. You have no idea that we are philosophizing about science and religion here.
Well, I am done with you. Perhaps, I am talking to a member of doomed cult.
True.I am talking to a someone like you na 'ma-hangin'. Enough with your repetitive nonsense verbiage. This is an internet forum so expect na your comments or criticisms will not be easy go lucky. Napaka ironic naman. You criticize the beliefs of others without restraint, pero kapag ung other worldly highfalutin thoughts mo are being stung by the gadfly, you resort to self-deprecation as tactics. Maging fair ka at iwas sa ad hominem or character assassination. You mean you know me more than I know myself. You are bizzare. You are very thoughtless or clueless on the scientific and philosophical discussions. You have no idea that we are philosophizing about science and religion here.
Well, I am done with you. Perhaps, I am talking to a member of doomed cult.
True.I am talking to a someone like you na 'ma-hangin'. Enough with your repetitive nonsense verbiage. This is an internet forum so expect na your comments or criticisms will not be easy go lucky. Napaka ironic naman. You criticize the beliefs of others without restraint, pero kapag ung other worldly highfalutin thoughts mo are being stung by the gadfly, you resort to self-deprecation as tactics. Maging fair ka at iwas sa ad hominem or character assassination. You mean you know me more than I know myself. You are bizzare. You are very thoughtless or clueless on the scientific and philosophical discussions. You have no idea that we are philosophizing about science and religion here.
Well, I am done with you. Perhaps, I am talking to a member of doomed cult.
parang ganito lang yan
juan: naniniwala ka bang may Diyos?
pedro: oo..
juan: nakita mo na ba ang Diyos?
pedro: hindi..
juan: o di walang Diyos..
pedro: ikaw ba may utak?
juan: oo
pedro: nakita mo nang utak mo?
juan: hindi..
pedro: o di wala kang utak
Gusto nyako lang malaman ang totoong faithful sa kanyaYour God is egocentric?
Diba sabi nya Stupid god ! ibig sabihin ? Directly nya sinasabihan si god na stupid . Ayon sa nasusulat iisa ang diyos !your god is stupid my god is perfect by pres. duterte