TheBigUrban2:



Put down the weed

Stop been coward

FOLYKAZE:

Good Monday morning. . . . .

We are saying the same thing. . . .but it seem you are doing everything to avoid a crucial point here which is 'God'. Case of definition is exceptional. Atheist who disbelieve in God is confused. . . . .this is when God is defined. That is the whole point which you have been avoiding.

When god is defined and given attributes and roles then it can be shown that all gods are false. . .

God under pantheism has meaning. . . .it is simply DIVINITY. It has role and attributes. . . .I have shown you Iyale in Yoruba and referenced you to wiki where Mother Earth is been defined with her role. I seriously do not know what else you are looking for.

Not true god under pantheism has no role, isn't defined and has no attributes. .. The mother earth you showed was part of other gods in various polytheistic god concepts. . .Even if I am to agree with you on that the attributes you ascribed to such a god shows that it is false and is non existent. . .Example you said mother earth god you said she can not die. . .This is obviously false because the earth will die away in the future. . .The earth exist but not as a god. . .The attributes you have ascribed to your earth mother god shows that it is false and not to be believed. . .Once you ascibe attributes to any god it can be shown to be false. . .

Paganism is practically nature worship. . . . .deity worship here is pantheistic, bringing us to scientific or naturalistic pantheism. So it like saying naturalistic pantheism is the same thing as nature worship or paganism. This is the bell I, macof and pagan9ja have been ringing into your ears. When God is mentioned in paganism, we are not referring to some imaginary beings but natural entities. You cant fuse pantheism into pagainsm. . .it essentially constitute part of pagan system. Being a pagan is naturalistic or scientific pantheism. . . . . .which God/god in it system you can not disbelieve in.

god in naturalistic pantheism has no role, isnt defined and has no attributes. . .What are the attributes of the universe as god?. . .What role does it play?. . .The to the naturalist pantheist everything that exist is god, no proper definition, no role and no attributes. . .The universe exist as the universe, doesn't exist as any god. . .List the attributes of your universe god, the role it plays as god and define it properly and i'll show you that it is non existent. . .

Th questions you asked are irrational. It has nothing to do with being God. This is some of the fictional attachment you tag to the imaginary being you created out of your brain for the purpose of disbelieve.

The questions I ask are very valid, that is the only way to separate god from nonsense. . .When you claim god, you must define it, state its attributes and role so that it can be known and differentiated from other things. . .

God could mean different thing to different people. It pains me that someone like you could be beaten blue with A concept of God. . . .do you mind if I bring in branches of this concept like Panpsychism. Here everything is conscious and God, meaning consciousness is define as God. Would you throw those your incoherent questions to consciousness too? In Egypt, kings are refer to as god, would you throw those unthoughtful questions about this God who is a king?

Consciousness is consciousness, it is NOT god. . .God should be shown to exist on its own independent of other things. . saying that your house is god means nothing unless if you define how your house is god, the role it plays as god and its attributes. . .Youir house is your house, it exist as your house and not as any god. . .

If you can believe in God (pantheist concept), then you are no more an atheist. . . . .

This is my point exactly.

I do not believe in any pantheist god. . The universe exist, but it does NOT exist as god. . .It exist as the universe. . .The earth exist, but it does NOT exist as any god it exist as the earth. . .If you claim the earth exist as god then it is up to you to describe how the earth exist as god, the role it plays as god, its attributes and why you chose to claim it exist as god and not as the earth. . .

TheBigUrban2:



Let me mirror your foolish argument

The pink Unicorn is nature.......is there no evidence for nature?



Saying God is nature is a lazy man's argument. What is God?

We can define nature independently of God ie without God.

However, you cant define God without nature. God has no objective existence

You have just ended this endless back and forth with this statement. . .saying that the universe is god is just nonsense since the universe already exist as the universe. . .For it to exist as god it must be shown unless if god is just a tittle. . .

FOLYKAZE:


God is a name or simply label.

Now tell me how logic boy or other name like God does not exist . . . . .

So now god is just a label, and I have wasted all my time discussing with you?. . .What a senseless joke this is. . .

mazaje:
You have just ended this endless back and forth with this statement. . .saying that the universe is god is just nonsense since the universe already exist as the universe. . .For it to exist as god it must be shown unless if god is just a tittle. . .

hehe...

no long thing.

nature is nature. Referring to nature as God just makes God a title

TheBigUrban2:

hehe...

no long thing.

nature is nature. Referring to nature as God just makes God a title

He himself admitted that god is just a tittle. . .

mazaje:

So now god is just a label, and I have wasted all my time discussing with you?. . .What a senseless joke this is. . .

You never wasted your time. And this is not a joke.

God is nobody's name. . . .there is even a particle called God. This is mere label.

Actually you kmow what I mean when I mention God. . . .the nigga you want to disbelieve in

FOLYKAZE:

You never wasted your time. And this is not a joke.

God is nobody's name. . . .there is even a particle called God. This is mere label.

Actually you kmow what I mean when I mention God. . . .the nigga you want to disbelieve in

mazaje:

When god is defined and given attributes and roles then it can be shown that all gods are false. . .

Lol

Let me use this logic pls.

Oppoutunity is an idea. . . .when it came knocking at my door, I welcome him in.

^^^oppourtunity here has role, attribute and defined. This you know unless you want to deny.

Oppourtunity does not walk. . . This is mere personification. Does this make my statement false?

Why is it false?

If it not, why do you choose attributes of pantheist god as false?

mazaje:
Not true god under pantheism has no role, isn't defined and has no attributes. .. The mother earth you showed was part of other gods in various polytheistic god concepts. . .Even if I am to agree with you on that the attributes you ascribed to such a god shows that it is false and is non existent. . .Example you said mother earth god you said she can not die. . .This is obviously false because the earth will die away in the future. . .The earth exist but not as a god. . .The attributes you have ascribed to your earth mother god shows that it is false and not to be believed. . .Once you ascibe attributes to any god it can be shown to be false. . .

Let me deal with death here.

Agagu other name is kokumo (meaning 'wont die again), does this mean that featured name is false?

I think you would tell me poet are are liars. When they pen down there mind, they include personification, figurative expression and sometime turns love to funny things. . ,making it have roles and ttributes. Does this make love false?

mazaje:
god in naturalistic pantheism has no role, isnt defined and has no attributes. . .What are the attributes of the universe as god?. . .What role does it play?. . .The to the naturalist pantheist everything that exist is god, no proper definition, no role and no attributes. . .The universe exist as the universe, doesn't exist as any god. . .List the attributes of your universe god, the role it plays as god and define it properly and i'll show you that it is non existent. . .

Pantheism is not about universe alone. It about TOTALITY. You are right just like Eledumare does not relate with the human race.

Despite, we are part of the whole. . . .ALL IS DIVINE.

This is attribute shey? Lie?

Dont you know the role played by the sun?

mazaje:
The questions I ask are very valid, that is the only way to separate god from nonsense. . .When you claim god, you must define it, state its attributes and role so that it can be known and differentiated from other things. . .

From the dictionary, an admired, adored, influencial person is GOD.

To me Fela fits in. . . .can you ask those silly questions when I call fela god?

It is not valid. . .

mazaje:
Consciousness is consciousness, it is NOT god. . .God should be shown to exist on its own independent of other things. . saying that your house is god means nothing unless if you define how your house is god, the role it plays as god and its attributes. . .Youir house is your house, it exist as your house and not as any god. . .

Logicboy logic. . .lol

God is not ones name but a title.

People call Car god (ogun).
They call gun, cutlass, knife god (Ogun).

They call palm kernel god (Ikin).

Plants have god name. . . .

Even your mouth is God. . . .

If you go by 'god does not stand independent', then mazaje does not exist because this is a tag and not independent.

Name does not even exist. . . .it is not the something or someone refer to.

Nothing even exist including house.

mazaje:
I do not believe in any pantheist god. . The universe exist, but it does NOT exist as god. . .It exist as the universe. . .The earth exist, but it does NOT exist as any god it exist as the earth. . .If you claim the earth exist as god then it is up to you to describe how the earth exist as god, the role it plays as god, its attributes and why you chose to claim it exist as god and not as the earth. . .

Living in denial. . . .lol

The one that said disbelieve in pantheist God is not making sense. . . .

He is here taking the path of logicboy he look away from initially.

Pantheist define God as Everything or Totality.

When a pantheist ask if you believe in God, common sense should let you know he is referring to NATURAL ENTITIES, and not some imaginary being. You are not the one that should dictate what God should be. . . .

Do you disbelieve in God (universe)?

Yes or No?

TheBigUrban2:

Stop stalking me coward.

FOLYKAZE:

Lol

Let me use this logic pls.

Oppoutunity is an idea. . . .when it came knocking at my door, I welcome him in.

^^^oppourtunity here has role, attribute and defined. This you know unless you want to deny.

Oppourtunity does not walk. . . This is mere personification. Does this make my statement false?

Why is it false?

If it not, why do you choose attributes of pantheist god as false?





Let me deal with death here.

Agagu other name is kokumo (meaning 'wont die again), does this mean that featured name is false?

I think you would tell me poet are are liars. When they pen down there mind, they include personification, figurative expression and sometime turns love to funny things. . ,making it have roles and ttributes. Does this make love false?




Pantheism is not about universe alone. It about TOTALITY. You are right just like Eledumare does not relate with the human race.

Despite, we are part of the whole. . . .ALL IS DIVINE.

This is attribute shey? Lie?

Dont you know the role played by the sun?






From the dictionary, an admired, adored, influencial person is GOD.

To me Fela fits in. . . .can you ask those silly questions when I call fela god?

It is not valid. . .





Logicboy logic. . .lol

God is not ones name but a title.

People call Car god (ogun).
They call gun, cutlass, knife god (Ogun).

They call palm kernel god (Ikin).

Plants have god name. . . .

Even your mouth is God. . . .

If you go by 'god does not stand independent', then mazaje does not exist because this is a tag and not independent.

Name does not even exist. . . .it is not the something or someone refer to.

Nothing even exist including house.






Living in denial. . . .lol

The one that said disbelieve in pantheist God is not making sense. . . .

He is here taking the path of logicboy he look away from initially.

Pantheist define God as Everything or Totality.

When a pantheist ask if you believe in God, common sense should let you know he is referring to NATURAL ENTITIES, and not some imaginary being. You are not the one that should dictate what God should be. . . .

Do you disbelieve in God (universe)?

Yes or No?

The only thing you have done here is just claim that god is NOTHING but a label. . .The universe is the universe if you chose to label it as god then that is your problem, it is NOT god but the universe. Natural entities are what they are natural entities, a stone is a stone, a tree is a tree. . .You just seem to be speaking from both sides of your mouth, in one sentence you describe the mother earth as a god that accepts sacrifice and never dies, after showing you how false that is you now claim god is just a label. . . . .Now you have shifted god to mean just a tag or a label you give things. . .You are really a joke . . .

FOLYKAZE:

You never wasted your time. And this is not a joke.

God is nobody's name. . . .there is even a particle called God. This is mere label.

Actually you kmow what I mean when I mention God. . . .the nigga you want to disbelieve in

What do you mean when you mention god?. . .So far you have been jumping all over the place. . .You just said god is just a label. . .A name you give things. . .That's what you said your self. . .

mazaje:

What do you mean when you mention god?. . .So far you have been jumping all over the place. . .You just said god is just a label. . .A name you give things. . .That's what you said your self. . .

That is why I asked you to define God. . . . .the white beard nigga you hate to belief. . . .tell me who he is.

I have helped you and sited some conception of God pantheistical and also defined it as label (adored, admired and revered person). . .

So I need to know what and what you are disbelieveing in. And the same word holding another meaning that you refuse to disbelieve.

mazaje:

The only thing you have done here is just claim that god is NOTHING but a label. . .The universe is the universe if you chose to label it as god then that is your problem, it is NOT god but the universe. Natural entities are what they are natural entities, a stone is a stone, a tree is a tree. . .You just seem to be speaking from both sides of your mouth, in one sentence you describe the mother earth as a god that accepts sacrifice and never dies, after showing you how false that is you now claim god is just a label. . . . .Now you have shifted god to mean just a tag or a label you give things. . .You are really a joke . . .

See how this old man is living in denial.


When you checked mother earth on wiki, is she not a goddess? Is she not at the same time personified nature? So who is speaking with double mouth when I am drawing my point from a source?

Nothing does not even exist. Been a label, it remains something. The universe and the natural entities are God not because I choose but because I see everything as Divine. Logicboy in his atheism and spirituality thread call the divinity feeling of awe. For been divine, it is God. An admired person is part of Nature defined as God in many dictionaries.

Going by your fallacy, universe does not exist because it just a mere tag of an entity. Word does not even exist. . . .including you mazaje because it is all mental construct. Nothing even exist. . . . This is how dumb your argument is.

So far you claim to be an atheist disbelieving in God, you are entitle to tell us what God is. . . . . . And if at all I am to inform you what God is, I have done that defining God pantheistically and borrowing a definition from the dictionary, I have the right to ask you if you disbelieve in God defined in some concept. The choice is yours. . . .but all you have done is dodge and run away from question. All the way, you shot yourself many times.

Disbelieving in God defined pantheistically is not making sense. . . .this is your words.

Pantheists have defined God as Universe. . . . . You have play the dice and lose completely. . . .this patching helps not. God's particle is a label givin to a particle, you cannot dictate to them for the romoval of God from the label because it doesnot fit to the imaginary being you created out of your head.

God is god until you you define what you disbelieve in and the rest you would believe or until you define god and prove how you disbelieve in all definitions.

Or better stop making joke of yourself

FOLYKAZE:

See how this old man is living in denial.


When you checked mother earth on wiki, is she not a goddess? Is she not at the same time personified nature? So who is speaking with double mouth when I am drawing my point from a source?

Nothing does not even exist. Been a label, it remains something. The universe and the natural entities are God not because I choose but because I see everything as Divine. Logicboy in his atheism and spirituality thread call the divinity feeling of awe. For been divine, it is God. An admired person is part of Nature defined as God in many dictionaries.

Going by your fallacy, universe does not exist because it just a mere tag of an entity. Word does not even exist. . . .including you mazaje because it is all mental construct. Nothing even exist. . . . This is how dumb your argument is.

So far you claim to be an atheist disbelieving in God, you are entitle to tell us what God is. . . . . . And if at all I am to inform you what God is, I have done that defining God pantheistically and borrowing a definition from the dictionary, I have the right to ask you if you disbelieve in God defined in some concept. The choice is yours. . . .but all you have done is dodge and run away from question. All the way, you shot yourself many times.

Disbelieving in God defined pantheistically is not making sense. . . .this is your words.

Pantheists have defined God as Universe. . . . . You have play the dice and lose completely. . . .this patching helps not. God's particle is a label givin to a particle, you cannot dictate to them for the romoval of God from the label because it doesnot fit to the imaginary being you created out of your head.

God is god until you you define what you disbelieve in and the rest you would believe or until you define god and prove how you disbelieve in all definitions.

Or better stop making joke of yourself

You keep deluding your self, the mother earth example you gave was not defined as a pantheist god but as a god in polytheism. . . One of the attributes you gave such a god is that it does not die means the god is false the god does not exist because the earth will die, you can not claim the earth is god and give it attributes the earth does not posses. . .define your god and see how it will be show to be false. . .The universe is not god, the universe is the universe. . .changing the name of the universe to mean the invisible pink unicorn doesn't mean it is the invisible pink unicorn it just means you just gave the universe a new label. . .define how the universe is god, its attributes and the role it plays as god and watch how it will be debunked. . So far you have just been tying with out knowing what you are saying. . .The universe exist on its own and it is not any god. . .changing its name to god means nothing. . .

FOLYKAZE:

That is why I asked you to define God. . . . .the white beard nigga you hate to belief. . . .tell me who he is.

I have helped you and sited some conception of God pantheistical and also defined it as label (adored, admired and revered person). . .

So I need to know what and what you are disbelieveing in. And the same word holding another meaning that you refuse to disbelieve.

Are you defining god religiously or socially?. . .Hope that you know that a person who is referred to as god socially is not the same as a religious god? . . .The concept of god you sited pantheistically has already been debunked. . .The attributes you assigned to the god has already shown the god to be false. . .You can not claim god is the earth and also claim it has some separate roles the earth can not play or does not play like accepting sacrifice or eternal. . .What does the earth do with the sacrifices the Yoruba people offer to it?. . .Does it bless them with it?. . .Can We can study the Yoruba race and see if they are more blessed than others that don't offer sacrifice to the earth? the earth is not eternal it will die off some day. . define your god, give it attributes and roles and watch how it will be debunked. . Unlesss if you just change labels then that remains just nothing but play on words. . .

mazaje:
You keep deluding your self, the mother earth example you gave was not defined as a pantheist god but as a god in polytheism. . . One of the attributes you gave such a god is that it does not die means the god is false the god does not exist because the earth will die, you can not claim the earth is god and give it attributes the earth does not posses. . .define your god and see how it will be show to be false. . .The universe is not god, the universe is the universe. . .changing the name of the universe to mean the invisible pink unicorn doesn't mean it is the invisible pink unicorn it just means you just gave the universe a new label. . .define how the universe is god, its attributes and the role it plays as god and watch how it will be debunked. . So far you have just been tying with out knowing what you are saying. . .The universe exist on its own and it is not any god. . .changing its name to god means nothing. . .

Death means many thing. It doesnt necessarily mean termination of life.

Yoruba would say knife has died. This doesnt mean it has lost it life but mean it is not sharpen. Same Yoruba would say Instead of the earth to die, it will become infertile. Commonsense would show you here that death in this context is not biological. . . . .I dont know why your brain can not be used expansively. There is nothing you debunk or false here, it is just not what you want to see.

Paganism is polytheism and at the same time nature worship. Abeg is nature worship not pantheism? In this case Mother earth is pantheism.

Again, you defined pantheism as Nature worship. . . . .Venerating mother earth is same thing as worshipping nature. This mean Nature worship is pantheism going by your definition. And Mother earth is pantheistic God. It suprise me you can turn the table around with balant lies just because you want to disagree with me. Unfortunately, you keep deluding yourself.

What the pantheist call God is the presence of Divinity in the Totality. To them, there is presence of totality in the universe. . .therefore it is God.

Spinozist like to spell Nature as God. Nature is there own God. Maybe you would go on deluding with yourself that Nature is nature and not God. Meanwhile, God is defined as Nature to them.

Forget about the name, what we are dealing is God. . . . .then believe you have in it when defined.

mazaje:

Are you defining god religiously or socially?. . .Hope that you know that a person who is referred to as god socially is not the same as a religious god? . . .The concept of god you sited pantheistically has already been debunked. . .The attributes you assigned to the god has already shown the god to be false. . .You can not claim god is the earth and also claim it has some separate roles the earth can not play or does not play like accepting sacrifice or eternal. . .What does the earth do with the sacrifices the Yoruba people offer to it?. . .Does it bless them with it?. . .Can We can study the Yoruba race and see if they are more blessed than others that don't offer sacrifice to the earth? the earth is not eternal it will die off some day. . define your god, give it attributes and roles and watch how it will be debunked. . Unlesss if you just change labels then that remains just nothing but play on words. . .

Oh. . . . .religions definition is now what you disbelieve in and not social definition? Lol

god is God. Clarify your position on disbelieve and lets know. Atheism does not have anything to do with definition, you just disbelieve with anything called God either socially or religiously.

Thischasing of tail tatics wont work. . . . .because you will always be turn down to what you are. . . . 'a confused noisemaker'. You ran from declining pantheistic God disbelieve as non-sense. . . You only argued rationally against monotheistic concept of God. . . Now you are saying separating social definition from religion definition. I wonder which category you would put theather gallery which is defined as God.

Atheism is disbelieve in God. It doesnt mention what God is disbelieved on specific. . . .it just negation of God (what so ever it is), which is irrational and not making any sense like you agreed.

Like I remember in those days when I do follow my dad to farm, he will cut a tuber of yam to pieces and spread it on mothe earth. This is sacrifice but scientifically, it is application of manure. I do reason like you are doing now. . .but I know this is reality. . . .and Earth receives sacrifices. Are we not blessed? Is our land not green? This guy must be crazy.


God socially defined is respected Human.

God defined pantheistically is Universe.

God defined spinozistically is Nature.


Do you disbelieve in those God?

I know you will run. .. .from the question.


Label thus exist. It is not possible for nothing to exist. Label is something not nothing. Stop deluding yourself.

I call you by name. . .you are not your name but it is mere tag for identity. If I dont believe in mazaje's word. . . .it then mean I do not believe in your statement. But if mazaje is defined or found to have another meaning or person bearing such name that differs from you, then it mean I have to pinpoint who the mazaje I am referring to is. Afterall, mazaje is just a label which this guy sitting behind computer uses on nairaland. When you say it is nothing, then you should know something is wrong with your reasoning.

To answer the question of the thread. I became an atheist at a point in my life when I thought that belief in God ran contrary to common sense. Then I questioned my convictions and I found out that I couldn't make any consistent logical sense of anything I hold to be true without a belief in God. Therefore, I rejected atheism as a false belief.

MrAnony1: To answer the question of the thread. I became an atheist at a point in my life when I thought that belief in God ran contrary to common sense. Then I questioned my convictions and I found out that I couldn't make any consistent logical sense of anything I hold to be true without a belief in God. Therefore, I rejected atheism as a false belief.

Nice to see you again, Anony

1) There are millions of things that are true without God. The whole arena of Science is without God or anything supernatural

2) Atheism is not a belief

FOLYKAZE:

Coward

there is a being called God. . . .twins, heroes, admired, adored person, art gallery, and natural entities. They can be touch, seen and smell. . . . . .

When you believe in president as tangible being, what happenes to God as tangible being?

Guy, enough of these nonsense rantings. who told you twins, heroes, adored person, art gallery and natural entities are God?

TheBigUrban2:


Nice to see you again, Anony

1) There are millions of things that are true without God. The whole arena of Science is without God or anything supernatural

2) Atheism is not a belief

Hi BigUrban, good to see you.

1) Actually, you've just made a strawman of what I said right there. I didn't say that "things aren't true without God", rather I said that it is impossible to have logically consistent explanations for truth without God.

To explain what I mean with regards to science; I don't have to invoke God to know that scientific knowledge is true. It is observable. However, it is impossible for me to have a logically consistent explanation of scientific truths without God.

The universe functions in an orderly way such that it is intelligible and not chaotic. Science takes it for granted that the universe is orderly and then seeks to find out how this order works. The moment you question why the universe is orderly, the best logically consistent way to explain it is by the means of a creator, ditto moral truths and philosophical truths.




2) Are you saying that atheists don't believe that God doesn't exist?

FOLYKAZE:

Death means many thing. It doesnt necessarily mean termination of life.

Yoruba would say knife has died. This doesnt mean it has lost it life but mean it is not sharpen. Same Yoruba would say Instead of the earth to die, it will become infertile. Commonsense would show you here that death in this context is not biological. . . . .I dont know why your brain can not be used expansively. There is nothing you debunk or false here, it is just not what you want to see.

You are just every where. . .You don't even know what you are saying, lets take death in what ever concept you describes a god and gave it an attribute that it can never die, what do you mean that mother earth can never die?. . In what context do you use the word the earth can never die?. . .saying the earth will never die means it will remain positively active, but that is false. . .A time will come when the earth will not be active meaning it will die, in what ever context that remains false, the earth will die, saying the earth will never die is FALSE. . .Just accept that the attribute you have given to your god has shown that it is false. . .Your mother god based on the attribute you have given it has already debunked it. . .

Paganism is polytheism and at the same time nature worship. Abeg is nature worship not pantheism? In this case Mother earth is pantheism.

Mother earth as god has been debunked. . .

Again, you defined pantheism as Nature worship. . . . .Venerating mother earth is same thing as worshipping nature. This mean Nature worship is pantheism going by your definition. And Mother earth is pantheistic God. It suprise me you can turn the table around with balant lies just because you want to disagree with me. Unfortunately, you keep deluding yourself.

You are theone actually lying. . .The link you posted does not in any way describes mother earth as a pantheist god but as one of the goddesses among many other gods in greek mythology and other mythologies. . .It even gives her roles and describes her actions. .

In Greek mythology, Persephone, the daughter of Demeter, goddess of the harvest, was abducted by Hades, god of the dead, and taken to the underworld as his queen. Demeter was so distraught that no crops would grow and the "entire human race [would] have perished of cruel, biting hunger if Zeus had not been concerned" (Larousse 152). Zeus forced Hades to return Persephone to her mother, but while in the underworld, Persephone had eaten pomegranate seeds, the food of the dead and thus, she must spend part of each year with Hades in the underworld. Demeter's grief for her daughter in the realm of the dead, is reflected in the barren winter months and her joy when Persephone returns is reflected in the bountiful summer months.

In Inca mythology, Mama Pacha or Pachamama is a fertility goddess who presides over planting and harvesting. Pachamama is usually translated as "Mother Earth" but a more literal translation would be "Mother Universe" (in Aymara and Quechua mama = mother / pacha = world, space-time or the universe).[6] Pachamama and her husband, Inti are the most benevolent deities and are worshiped in parts of the Andean mountain ranges, also known as Tawantinsuyu (stretching from present day Ecuador to Chile and Argentina).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Nature

Others describes mother earth as a monotheist god with special abilities and super powers, no mention of mother earth as a pantheist god was made in the link. . .I really do not know what you are saying. . .

And what benefit does worshiping nature adds to any body that does that?. . .How does worshiping trees help humans?. . .What about worshiping rain, how does it help humans?. . .

What the pantheist call God is the presence of Divinity in the Totality. To them, there is presence of totality in the universe. . .therefore it is God.

What is divinity?. . .

1. of or pertaining to a god, especially the Supreme Being.
2.
addressed, appropriated, or devoted to God or a god; religious; sacred:
divine worship.
3.
proceeding from God or a god:
divine laws.
4.
godlike; characteristic of or befitting a deity:

What is divine totality?. . .You are just making things up. . .From wiki it simply says a pantheist describes all that exist as god. . .On these your play on words like divinity and totality brouhaha doesn't appear there. . .

Spinozist like to spell Nature as God. Nature is there own God. Maybe you would go on deluding with yourself that Nature is nature and not God. Meanwhile, God is defined as Nature to them.

Forget about the name, what we are dealing is God. . . . .then believe you have in it when defined.

So far you have just shown that god actually is nothing but a play on words and just a label, not actually something distinct. . .Sure nature is nature, there is no definition of god in nature labeling nature does not make it god unless i define what god is and how it relates to nature or what role it plays in nature. .Define god, give it a role and attributes and what how it will be shown to be false and non existent. . .What makes nature god?. . .Saying that nature is god means nothing because there is nothing like god in the definition of nature or are pantheist just redefining things and giving them new names?. . .

MrAnony1:


The universe functions in an orderly way such that it is intelligible and not chaotic.

I disagree. The universe includes ISIS, Boko Haram, Ebola, the animals on the Serengeti, and stars that are constantly collapsing. We live in a relatively stable section of the universe, but even earth is bombarded by chaos. Our meat vessel in which we move around begins deteriorating the moment we're born. The only thing separating us from corpses is father Time.

Don't just look at the caterpillar which turns into a beautiful butterfly, but consider also the birds that rip them apart for calories.

FOLYKAZE:


Like I remember in those days when I do follow my dad to farm, he will cut a tuber of yam to pieces and spread it on mothe earth. This is sacrifice but scientifically, it is application of manure. I do reason like you are doing now. . .but I know this is reality. . . .and Earth receives sacrifices. Are we not blessed? Is our land not green? This guy must be crazy.

When i say god you know very well that i am talking about the theistic definition. . .Now you are back to your nonsense, does this mother earth god of yours only make land green when people sacrifice things to her?. . .There are many green vegetation all over the world where humans do not even visit talk more of offering any sacrifice to any mother earth god there. . .So when I apply fertilizer i am making a sacrifice to mother earth, eh?. . .The problem is when you define your god, give it an attribute and a role, it will be shown to be false. . .The earth as it exist does not need any sacrifice, sacrificing millions of tubers of yam to a desert land like the sahara desert will never make it green. So what role does this yam sacrifice of yours do? how does it apply to the mother earth god, or is the sahara desert not part of the earth? Does your mother earth god only accept sacrifices in some parts and not in others, why or what not?. .Am tired of your mythical tales abeg. . .You are just jumping from one mythology to another. . .applying organic manure to make the land more fertile is now sacrifice to mother earth god abi?. . .

mazaje:

When i say god you know very well that i am talking about the theistic definition. . .Now you are back to your nonsense, does this mother earth god of your only make land green when people sacrifice things to her?. . .There are many green vegetation all over the world where humans do not even visit talk more of offering any sacrifice to any mother earth god. . .So when I apply fertilizer i am making a sacrifice to mother earth en?. . .The problem is when you define your god, give it an attribute and a role, it will be shown to be false. . .The earth as it exist does not need any sacrifice, sacrificing millions of tubers of yam to a desert land like the sahara desert will never make it green. So what role does this yam sacrifice of your apply to the mother earth god, or is the sahara desert not part of the earth? Does your mother earth god only accept sacrifices in some parts and not in others, why or what not?. .Am tired of your mythical tales abeg. . .You are just jumping from one mythology to another. . .applying organic manure to make the land more fertile is now sacrifice to mother earth god abi?. . .

Classic!

Weah96:

I disagree. The universe includes ISIS, Boko Haram, Ebola, the animals on the Serengeti, and stars that are constantly collapsing. We live in a relatively stable section of the universe, but even earth is bombarded by chaos. Our meat vessel in which we move around begins deteriorating the moment we're born. The only thing separating us from corpses is father Time.

Don't just look at the caterpillar which turns into a beautiful butterfly, but consider also the birds that rip them apart for calories.

This is a strawman of my position once again. When I spoke about order there, I wasn't referring to order in a moral sense rather I was speaking about order in a purely physical/"scientific" sense. The order of the physical elements of the universe is a different category from the order of it's moral beings.

MrAnony1:
Hi BigUrban, good to see you.



To explain what I mean with regards to science; I don't have to invoke God to know that scientific knowledge is true. It is observable. However, it is impossible for me to have a logically consistent explanation of scientific truths without God.

How do you use god to logically explain gravity or the principle of flotation?. . .How do you use god to explain how the sun is powered by nuclear fusion?. . .

MrAnony1:
Hi BigUrban, good to see you.

1) Actually, you've just made a strawman of what I said right there. I didn't say that "things aren't true without God", rather I said that it is impossible to have logically consistent explanations for truth without God.

To explain what I mean with regards to science; I don't have to invoke God to know that scientific knowledge is true. It is observable. However, it is impossible for me to have a logically consistent explanation of scientific truths without God.

The universe functions in an orderly way such that it is intelligible and not chaotic. Science takes it for granted that the universe is orderly and then seeks to find out how this order works. The moment you question why the universe is orderly, the best logically consistent way to explain it is by the means of a creator, ditto moral truths and philosophical truths.




2) Are you saying that atheists don't believe that God doesn't exist?

Anony- I don't have to invoke God to know that scientific knowledge is true. It is observable. However, it is impossible for me to have a logically consistent explanation of scientific truths without God.


1) Science is logically consistent without God. Scientific facts are explainable without God. Science is Godless. End of story. You are wrong





Anony- Are you saying that atheists don't believe that God doesn't exist?

2) In trying to be smart, you debunked yourself. You employed a double negative, hence, your question is nonsensical

mazaje:

How do you use god to logically explain gravity or the principle of flotation?. . .How do you use god to explain how the sun is powered by nuclear fusion?. . .

Point of correction: I am not "using God to explain the said phenomena". I am saying that God is the explanation of the phenomena. The existence of specific principles that define the behavior of the physical bodies in the universe necessarily leads us to the existence of a creator that defines these principles. If atheism were true, i.e. "there is no God" then we don't have a way of explaining the existence of the principles that put the universe in order.

TheBigUrban2:
1) Science is logically consistent without God. Scientific facts are explainable without God. Science is Godless. End of story. You are wrong

I see that you have no intention of having a discussion.

2) In trying to be smart, you debunked yourself. You employed a double negative, hence, your question is nonsensical

You have just displayed an ignorance of an understanding of double negatives.

MrAnony1:
I see that you have no intention of having a discussion.


You have just displayed an ignorance of an understanding of double negatives.

Whatever.


Science has nothing to do with God

Atheism is not a belief, it is a disbelief