Workch:
I am not here to argue strawman.
Just provide evidence for your beliefs that we can test

neither am I a garulous individual, once you are grounded with knowledge. I will count you a serious atheist, back in those years , we used to have smart athiest on nairaland, people like budatum, agent of allah etc. Not this type of wannabe .

I just told you that even in the body of science that uses empherical model as a standard of evidence which is axioms is simply assumed not testable , it is in this foundation, science was birth . It is called axioms .

vaxx:
neither am I a garulous individual, once you are grounded with knowledge. I will count you a serious atheist, back in those years , we used to have smart athiest on nairaland, people like budatum, agent of allah etc. Not this type of wannabe .

I just told you that even in the body of science that uses empherical model as a standard of evidence which is axioms is simply assumed not testable , it is in this foundation, science was birth . It is called axioms .

There's nothing smart about believing without evidence.
It's always wrong.

Workch:
can't you see how I avoided him like a plague?

For my own peace of mind..I will continue to do so.

vaxx:
neither am I a garulous individual, once you are grounded with knowledge. I will count you a serious atheist, back in those years , we used to have smart athiest on nairaland, people like budatum, agent of allah etc. Not this type of wannabe .

I just told you that even in the body of science that uses empherical model as a standard of evidence which is axioms is simply assumed not testable , it is in this foundation, science was birth . It is called axioms .

You think he is a wanna be? His question is very valid and his points are very grounded. You didnt say anything worthy of note but you want to call someone a wanna be. See these people ooo. Ei asem ooo.

kimco:


You think he is a wanna be? His question is very valid and his points are very grounded. You didnt say anything worthy of note but you want to call someone a wanna be. See these people ooo. Ei asem ooo.

His question is founded on empherical evidence, we need to tackle the foundation of empherical itself before we begin to tackle the evidence of religious beliefs, if he is so stone and not ready to scrutinized such foundation , then I count him a wannabe . He doesn't have a theory to apply . Awam fuo

vaxx:
His question is founded on empherical evidence, we need to tackle the foundation of empherical itself before we begin to tackle the evidence of religious beliefs, if he is so stone and not ready to scrutinized such foundation , then I count him a wannabe . He doesn't have a theory to apply . Awam fuo

So you enlighten us then...let's see. Tackle the foundation of "empirical" so we learn.

vaxx:
neither am I a garulous individual, once you are grounded with knowledge. I will count you a serious atheist, back in those years , we used to have smart athiest on nairaland, people like budatum, agent of allah etc. Not this type of wannabe .

I just told you that even in the body of science that uses empherical model as a standard of evidence which is axioms is simply assumed not testable , it is in this foundation, science was birth . It is called axioms .

Careful with "we used to have" abeg.. budaatum is here, alive and kicking. hahahaha. long I saw agentofallah though. Many are just speculators now. Getting tired of arguing back and forth with people who use the object of scrutiny-the bible, as their source of "verified evidence".
Take for example :

kkins: Kobo, the Bible is like any other book, not absolute.
Kobojunkie : the Bible is d living word of God because Jesus in the Bible said "bleh bleh bleh"..
kkins: the Bible holds water because the Bible claims it holds water? *muda me already please** facepalm*...

kkins25:
Careful with "we used to have" abeg.. budaatum is here, alive and kicking. hahahaha. long I saw agentofallah though. Many are just speculators now. Getting tired of arguing back and forth with people who use the object of scrutiny-the bible, as their source of "verified evidence".
Take for example :

kkins: Kobo, the Bible is like any other book, not absolute.
Kobojunkie : the Bible is d living word of God because Jesus in the Bible said "bleh bleh bleh"..
kkins: the Bible holds water because the Bible claims it holds water? *muda me already please** facepalm*...

kkins25 , what is with the inaccurate portrayal of my person here. Is it all so you can score imaginary points of some sort?

I don't believe your Bible to be what you claim and I have made this severally clear so why do you resort to lying using my moniker? Why not focus instead on debating your own beliefs assuming you have any?

Kobojunkie:
kkins25 , what is with the inaccurate portrayal of my person here. Is it all so you can score imaginary points of some sort?

I don't believe your Bible to be what you claim and I have made this severally clear so why do you resort to lying using my moniker? Why not focus instead on debating your own beliefs assuming you have any?

My Bible?? are u atheist now? Or are trying to score points as well? lol.. My "beliefs" exist as the opposition to yours. in other words, if "thou art religious, i am thy nemesis"

kkins25:

My Bible?? are u atheist now? Or are trying to score points as well? lol.. My "beliefs" exist as the opposition to yours. in other words, if "thou art religious, i am thy nemesis"

I have never said your Bible is the Word of God. Never once!

As for you being my nemesis,you are nothing close. You instead assume that in your confusion about your own beliefs are mine.

It is not my job or place to provide you or anyone with proof which you seem so desperate for. No human provided me with such during my own search for God so for you to think I owe you that means you are definitely operating under some sort of delusion of your own making. Ascribing silly claims to my person will not change this.

Kobojunkiee:
I have never said your Bible is the Word of God. Never once!

As for you being my nemesis,you are nothing close. You instead assume that in your confusion about your own beliefs are mine.

It is not my job or place to provide you or anyone with proof which you seem so desperate for. No human provided me with such during my own search for God so for you to think I owe you that means you are definitely operating under some sort of delusion of your own making. Ascribing silly claims to my person will not change this.

.. So does that mean, the writer could be wrong in claiming that the holy spirit killed annanias? Since it isn't the work of God, it'll be more logical to claim that Peter killed the man wouldn't it.