Aseity

a·se·i·ty (ə-sē′ĭ-tē, ā-, -sā′-)

n. Philosophy
The state or quality of existing in and of oneself, without external cause.

Well atheists will never stop asking that foolish question. Since they disbelieve in the notion of God they try to discredit it by foolishly applying the same ideas of contingent beings to the self-existent being God is.

It is really unfortunate. Clearly, they can't wrap their heads around the idea of an eternal, independent and immaterial Mind. They want causality to stop at the material world which is why they demand causality to dismiss the idea of God.

UyiIredia:
Well atheists will never stop asking that foolish question. Since they disbelieve in the notion of God they try to discredit it by foolishly applying the same ideas of contingent beings to the self-existent being God is.

It is really unfortunate. Clearly, they can't wrap their heads around the idea of an eternal, independent and immaterial Mind. They want causality to stop at the material world which is why they demand causality to dismiss the idea of God.

Anyone can wrap their mind around the idea of an eternal, independent and immaterial mind- the issue is that it is a concept that has no validity or evidence in the real world.

Please, reason before you talk

DeepSight:

Aseity

a·se·i·ty (ə-sē′ĭ-tē, ā-, -sā′-)

n. Philosophy
The state or quality of existing in and of oneself, without external cause.

How long will it take you to come to realization, that metaphysical science is obsolete long time ago.

Rational folks now find meaning and answers in physical science sphere.

Indeed a very foolish question.

Richirich713:
Indeed a very foolish question.

Of course- it is foolish to limited minds.

A skeptic will put on his tin foil hat and ask 'what brings about this quality of existence without causality'

I get where you are going but i think the bigger problem is the triangle between Traditional theism, Non-traditional theism and atheism. A lot of atheist are just opposed to traditional theism outside which they have no stance.

Even you present conjuncture will be seen as an attack from a traditional point of view to the Nairaland atheist

JackBizzle:



Anyone can wrap their mind around the idea of an eternal, independent and immaterial mind- the issue is that it is a concept that has no validity or evidence in the real world.

Please, reason before you talk

That's my problem with all these hypothesis. They keep talking about abstracts as if they are factual.

JackBizzle:


Of course- it is foolish to limited minds.

Actually it's foolish to anyone who has a PhD in philosophy and is competent in philosophy of religion. Richard dawkins for example has neither of those things, which pretty much explains why this question is usually asked by laymen online atheists since his fans tend to think he knows wat he's talking but in reality he aint got a clue

DeepSight:

Aseity

a·se·i·ty (ə-sē′ĭ-tē, ā-, -sā′-)

n. Philosophy
The state or quality of existing in and of oneself, without external cause.

Job 36:26
Yes, God is exalted beyond our knowledge; the number of His years cannot be counted.

akintom:

How long will it take you to come to realization, that metaphysical science is obsolete long time ago.

It is not obsolete and never will be; also philosophy is not obsolete.

Rational folks now find meaning and answers in physical science sphere.

There is no single living human being who finds meaning in the physical and material alone.

Richirich713:



Actually it's foolish to anyone who has a PhD in philosophy and is competent in philosophy of religion. Richard dawkins for example has neither of those things, which pretty much explains why this question is usually asked by laymen online atheists since his fans tend to think he knows wat he's talking but in reality he aint got a clue

Ignorance is worrying you.

One does not need a degree in philosophy to understand philosophy.

Secondly, doing a Phd in any field requires a basic knowledge of philosophy.

JackBizzle:



Anyone can wrap their mind around the idea of an eternal, independent and immaterial mind- the issue is that it is a concept that has no validity or evidence in the real world.

Please, reason before you talk

As I said a blind man won't see the evidence for light even if it's in his face. So also, you won't see the evidence for God although it has been made clear.

JackBizzle:


Ignorance is worrying you.

One does not need a degree in philosophy to understand philosophy.

I never said u need one, u said "Of course- it is foolish to limited minds.", which is what I find highly odd since no pro philosopher of religion takes this objection seriously. Ur comment implies that only people with limited minds will find the question foolish, which is a very bigoted comment take make.

JackBizzle:

Secondly, doing a Phd in any field requires a basic knowledge of philosophy.

Sure, but if u going to write a book addressing philosophical arguments for God u will need more than just "basic" knowledge of philosophy, otherwise u just going to make tons of mistakes like dawkins did.

DeepSight:


There is no single living human being who finds meaning in the physical and material alone.

Many people do.

Richirich713:


I never said u need one, u said "Of course- it is foolish to limited minds.", which is what I find highly odd since no pro philosopher of religion takes this objection seriously. Ur comment implies that only people with limited minds will find the question foolish, which is a very bigoted comment take make.



Sure, but if u going to write a book addressing philosophical arguments for God u will need more than just "basic" knowledge of philosophy, otherwise u just going to make tons of mistakes like dawkins did.

Lying has become part of you so much that you dont even realise how silly you sound.


First, even christian writers and philosophers admit that it is a difficult and interesting question to answer. I don't know which "pro philosophers" you are referring to.

Secondly, questioning God's origin does not require any degree in philosophy.

Just shut up, abeg

DeepSight:





There is no single living human being who finds meaning in the physical and material alone.

Such a dirty lie.

akintom:

How long will it take you to come to realization, that metaphysical science is obsolete long time ago.

Rational folks now find meaning and answers in physical science sphere.

You are being extremely idiotic. Science itself depends on metaphysics specifically the metaphysical philosophy of empiricism and methodological naturalism.

dalaman:


That's my problem with all these hypothesis. They keep talking about abstracts as if they are factual.

Abstracts are factual. I mean how silly would one be to suggest that are not.

JackBizzle:



Such a dirty lie.

Meaning is itself immaterial so Deep Sight's point is true.

God came from God. He is the beginning without beginning. He has no beginning. Whats so hard to understand there?

dalaman:


Many people do.

No. They think they do. They are deluded. Meaning is immaterial and as long as it is then one can't say one finds meaning in the material alone. The closest you can find meaning in the material is to kill yourself. Then you'll be a useless corpse that can know no meaning.

UyiIredia:


Abstracts are factual. I mean how silly would one be to suggest that are not.

UyiIredia:


Abstracts are factual. I mean how silly would one be to suggest that are not.

what the fork did I just read?

Richirich713:



Actually it's foolish to anyone who has a PhD in philosophy and is competent in philosophy of religion. Richard dawkins for example has neither of those things, which pretty much explains why this question is usually asked by laymen online atheists since his fans tend to think he knows wat he's talking but in reality he aint got a clue

That guy says idiotic things and his moronic ass lickers will gorge on anything he says uncritically .

JackBizzle:



Anyone can wrap their mind around the idea of an eternal, independent and immaterial mind- the issue is that it is a concept that has no validity or evidence in the real world.

Please, reason before you talk

1. Infinite regress is an impossibility

2. Something can't create itself or come from nothing uncaused or without deterministic conditions

3. You are left with an eternal independent (non-contingent ) immaterial mind

Simple

dalaman:

Abstract objects like numbers , sets , properties are factual .

KingEbukasBlog:


1. Infinite regress is an impossibility

2. Something can't create itself or come from nothing uncaused or without deterministic conditions

3. You are left with an eternal independent (non-contingent ) immaterial mind

Simple

Number 2 and 3 are contradictory.

Such an independent immaterial mind didnt create itself

JackBizzle:




Number 2 and 3 are contradictory.

Such an independent immaterial mind didnt create itself

Please explain how 2 and 3 are contradictory

An eternal being did not create itself

KingEbukasBlog:


Please explain how 2 and 3 are contradictory

An eternal being did not create itself

If the eternal being did not create itself, from whence did it come?

JackBizzle:

If the eternal being did not create itself, from whence did it come?

Only things they are created or caused to exist that you can ask where they came from not an eternal being .

KingEbukasBlog:


Only things they are created or caused to exist that you can ask where they came from not an eternal being .

Mr man you repeat the same thing is every goddamn thread
Go and find another hobby