banom:

Nice one,
let me devote this evening for us to argue this once and for all,but you must assure me that if you are unable to prove the existence of God to me, then you will stop any further campaign for the existence of God ?and if you win, i will denounce atheism this evening , is that a deal ?

Banom has challenged me to a duel on the Cosmological Argument.

Let's go.

*hiss*

Nairaland Smackdown edition. oya lets go

ok, come up with that your empirical logic for the existence of God.

First, let us make clear that God, is herein defined as "Creator."

The argument is not about religion, heaven, hell, the mercy or goodness of God, his wisdom or fairness, or indeed any other attributes ascribed to God by man or religion, save as the Creator.

Banom is this agreed?

Deep Sight:

First, let us make clear that God, is herein defined as "Creator."

The argument is not about religion, heaven, hell, the mercy or goodness of God, his wisdom or fairness, or indeed any other attributes ascribed to God by man or religion, save as the Creator.

Banom is this agreed?

Good this is the part i wanted us to specify before we proceed,

1, I want you to define [b]Existence [/b]for me.

2, I want you To Define God for me,

Finally i agree with your post above that our discussion is not about ,heaven,hell, wisdom, etc, but i disagree with the definition of God above as Creator,

A person can be a God over some thing without necessary creating it,
The other way  round, a person can create something without being a God over it,

I pity you for saying there is no God. the did say the fool said in his heart there's no God

banom:

Good this is the part i wanted us to specify before we proceed,

1, I want you to define Existence [/b]for me.

2, I want you To Define God for me,

Finally i agree with your post above that our discussion is not about ,heaven,hell, wisdom, etc, but i disagree with the definition of God above as Creator,

A person can be a God over some thing without necessary creating it,
The other way  round, a person can create something without being a God over it,

Let's try to make it simple, and not get over-complicated or lost in definitions.

I think it is clear within all religions and myths that the primary function ascribed to God is the fact of his being responsible for Creation. The Bible opens with the account of God creating the world. The Quoran also states that God created all things. Indeed the fact of his being "the creator" has been the source of his supposed authourity over all things within the context of religion. I do not think there is any attribute ascribed to God that is more cardinal that the [b]creative attribute, and this should form the plank for discussion.

Secondly, even outside the religious context, the whole purport of existential discussion centres around the question of existence: namely - how did all that exists come into existence/ or - how did the world start/ or what is the origin of all that we see. Thus, inherently, any discussion about the existence of God must have as its cardinal focus the cosmological question of how things came to exist. For this reason, we must focus on the key attribute of God, namely that he is "The Creator."

That is the best definition we can work with, - a Supernatural Entity that Created all that exists.

Please agree with this, as i think its the only rational way to define him for this discussion.

On your question as to what "existence" is, i will say two things -

 1. To exist means "to be". Something that is, in reality.

 2. Please do not make me fearful that you are going to drag me into a whirlwind of un-ending definitions. . . because it is quite clear what it is to say that something exists or does not exist. . .

So are we agreed on the definition of God as "A supernatural Entity that created all that exists"?

These are all efforts in futility, only the good Lord can convince and convert you anti-God folks.

Deep Sight:

Let's try to make it simple, and not get over-complicated or lost in definitions.

So are we agreed on the definition of God as "A supernatural Entity that created all that exists"?

What is supernatural ?

Banom, so that we do not get into a whirlpool of un-ending definitions, i will leave out the word supernatural.

Let us simply Define God as "That which created all that exists."

Happy now?

Let us simply Define God as "That which created all that exists."

Consciously?

@Deep

If you keep on engaging yourself in this elusive game of definition this thread ll soon shut down.

Deep Sight:

Banom, so that we do not get into a whirlpool of un-ending definitions, i will leave out the word supernatural.

Let us simply Define God as "That which created all that exists."

Happy now?

Chrisbenogor:

Consciously?

^^^ Great question. But really and truly, i am not sure it makes a difference. If God takes a conscious decision to create, that's fine. He would be no less God, if his intrinsic nature spawns creation. That would only confirm his nature as a creator. What we need to establish is if there is such an entity at all, which is responsible for the creation of all that exists.

Deep Sight:

Banom, so that we do not get into a whirlpool of un-ending definitions, i will leave out the word supernatural.

Let us simply Define God as "That which created all that exists."

Happy now?

You are fooling yourself,You have not defined,God and Supernatural, and you want me to agree that your undefined God created all that was created, how ?

Banom wadz up

banom:

You are fooling yourself,You have not defined,God and Supernatural, and you want me to agree that your undefined God created all that was created, how ?

^^^^ No, maybe you are misunderstanding me.

I am trying to set the tone for the conversation.

The argument is "Does God exist?"

To argue constructively, we've got to know what the word "God" means.

My understanding of that word is "Creator".

But if you have a better understanding of the word, please proffer it, and maybe we can use that understanding.

If not, then maybe we cant even discuss at all, since we cannot agree on the definition of the word "God" to start with.

Or maybe we can use an independent source to define it, such as a dictionary.

Tell me what you think.

Abuzola:

Banom wadz up

Alhaji , kosi trouble.


@ Deap Sight

Do you believe that Kadashada exist ?

What is Kadashada, never heard of that before. Please hope this is not a game

@deepsight, *wink* don't be scared, relax, take it cool, its just a cool game

It looks like we will have to abandon this thread, i wanted a serious discourse and not games.

We have not even been able to lay out the Fundamentals of the Cosmological Argument and rationalize those fundamentals because we are stalemated on defining the word "God"!

Sorry Banom, i'm out.

Peace.

Deep Sight:

It looks like we will have to abandon this thread, i wanted a serious discourse and not games.

We have not even been able to lay out the Fundamentals of the Cosmological Argument and rationalize those fundamentals because we are stalemated on defining the word "God"!

Sorry Banom, i'm out.

Peace.

You see, you cannot even define the God you propose and you want to impose it on people to believe ,

Now can you say it is the fault of an atheist for not believing or your fault for not proving it ?

C'mon deepsight, you can't be defeated so easily

No, thanks, i can't participate in this.

We said, Define God, before we proceed. I gave him a definition. He's not happy with the definition. I said - ok, propose a definition, so we can proceed. He won't propose one. I even told him i would be happy for us to use a dictionary definition.

Look, i don't have the time for games, and that's what this is about for Banom.

I'm out. Good night.

Banom is being dishonest here, . . there is no reason to play pranky definition games.

Deepsight has constructively defined God and I dont think that his definition of the creator provokes or refutes any atheistic concept. . . , "God is the creator" is a simple definition that should allow this debate to flow. Existence can be buttressed by the created object of the creator. So if the opening definition of God is a creator, then the existence of God is permissible, since the creation is visible.

Deepsight has set a good tone for this discussion. . . . . .Banom should for once in his nairaland life take the initiative. where are the other pathetic atheists? where is tudor and mazaje?   . . . . . .I would like to see deepsight construct his argument.

@ Abuzola

I leave you to judge the debate, what do you say about it ?

noetic15:

Banom is being dishonest here, . . there is no reason to play pranky definition games.

Deepsight has constructively defined God and I dont think that his definition of the creator provokes or refutes any atheistic concept. . . , "God is the creator" is a simple definition that should allow this debate to flow. Existence can be buttressed by the created object of the creator. So if the opening definition of God is a creator, then the existence of God is permissible, since the creation is visible.

Deepsight has set a good tone for this discussion. . . . . .Banom should for once in his nairaland life take the initiative. where are the other pathetic atheists? where is tudor and mazaje?   . . . . . .I would like to see deepsight construct his argument.

Uncle welcome, why not help Deap Sight out?

what is God,?
What is creation,?
What is creator ?
What is existence ?
What is supernatural ?

banom:

Uncle welcome, why not help Deap Sight out?

what is God,?
What is creation,?
What is creator ?
What is existence ?
What is supernatural ?

I will answer ur questions on 2 conditions. . . . namely:

1. if u dont agree with my definition, u would define urs

2. u will subsequently continue ur debate with deepsight . . , . . . . .is this a deal?

noetic15:

I will answer your questions on 2 conditions. . . . namely:

1. if u dont agree with my definition, u would define urs

I will not define what i don't know any thing about, rather i will accept yours if you define and defend every content of your definition,

noetic15:

I will answer your questions on 2 conditions. . . . namely:

2. u will subsequently continue your debate with deepsight . . , . . . . .is this a deal?

deal if you agree with me above .

dgreatrock:

@Deep

If you keep on engaging yourself in this elusive game of definition this thread ll soon shut down.

See You are all back to what i said - effort in futility

haha.

My honest assessment is that most atheist are worried that someone is going to make an argument that they can not refute. i think this deadlock over definitions is unnecessary.

Deep Sight:


Let us simply Define God as "That which created all that exists."

I think that works. . .

Abeg deep sight, no vex. if u're still interested i wont fight over words. . .unless absolutely necessary. But I won't let u force things down my throat. Beautiful wings and "order in the universe" and stuff like that won't do it unless u make really sound arguments, that do not appeal to "intuition" or some other spiritual shit that means nothing to me.