Sapiosexuality:

But this one group speak of revelations from a supreme being, speak a strange language(speaking in tongues) which even our science have not shown to be forged, does some healings which their members attest to. Aren't their stories logical enough for a belief in whatever they believe in? I'm not holding brief for theism. Do we just assume they are all lying to themselves?

Now let's look at the atheist. First, the absence of evidence is neither the absence nor presence of existence. The atheist's hold on truth here is on the absence of evidence. Is this logical. Shouldn't criticism and any position come with understanding? What's the 'understanding' behind atheism?

Is this why atheism is more sensible?

Then what are we talking about. Isn't atheism a belief? Aren't beliefs built on faith even though there could be sometimes some logic behind them? How's atheism different or even smarter than theism?

all those "evidences" have been dealt with ad naseusm

absence of evidence is not evidence of presence either

you're defining atheism in a strawman kinda way, like I said atheism isn't a claim, its a counterclaim especially countering the theistic version of god

you might try searching Nairaland for posts about people like me claiming no god exists; just five people making the claim out of the many active members of this section would be enough

Sapiosexuality:
Newton was too smart for atheism. Same with Einstein.

These guys may not believe in God but to become Atheistic because of a lack of evidence can only be rational if their is presence of evidence.

Where is the evidence? How can any thinking man call self Atheist? While the theist may not provide a really palpable evidence how does the atheist logically become atheist?

They didn't believe in a personal God. Einstein said

"“The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend a personal God and avoid dogmas and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity. Buddhism (a religion without a personal God) answers this description.”

Sapiosexuality:

But this one group speak of revelations from a supreme being, speak a strange language(speaking in tongues) which even our science have not shown to be forged, does some healings which their members attest to. Aren't their stories logical enough for a belief in whatever they believe in? I'm not holding brief for theism. Do we just assume they are all lying to themselves?

Now let's look at the atheist. First, the absence of evidence is neither the absence nor presence of existence. The atheist's hold on truth here is on the absence of evidence. Is this logical. Shouldn't criticism and any position come with understanding? What's the 'understanding' behind atheism?

Is this why atheism is more sensible?

Then what are we talking about. Isn't atheism a belief? Aren't beliefs built on faith even though there could be sometimes some logic behind them? How's atheism different or even smarter than theism?

actually all athiests...or most are agnostic when it comes to the concept of god outside religious fables

When God created man, God created a perfect man but with a Bible as an instructor. Man left the Bible God gave them, and listened to the voice of a stranger(devil)

We might be fooled to think that Adam and Eve saw lack and needs and inadequacies during the duration of their stay in Eden. It was said that, man shall die if man eats, evidently, Man has an eternal life.

If man hadn't fall, God won't send Jesus to come, and moreover, if Adam or Eve had eaten, the other who have not chosen to eat, would be a cover to the other, so evidently, someone would stand as a covering to the other in the sense that, the prince with a purr blood line is on the front seat- Kingly.

But, here is Adam and Eve, they ate, but what we ignorantly ignore from the story is the fact that mam died spiritually, and that was what Jesus came to restore. Our ability to live forever as God has predestined for man. I wouldn't say man lived in the flesh in those days, there was a glory covering around them.

I believe they were naked, and their eyes was closed. Those are two mysteries, I think the third is, they ran to gather leaves, they never did this before, why now, I still don't understand how man was before man fell, but I doubt if man was a flesh.

I also ask, when Adam got up when God took his rib to form Eve, Adam was deep asleep, but his spirit was not sleeping. So God took the rib, Adam was sleeping, but his spirit was with his body, and God went somewhere where Adam could not see the creation of Eve and God came with Eve, and Adam could scan and see this woman, he sees the bone, and here is another point.

God brought all animals to Adam to name, Adam didn't name them, but God programmed Adam for that assignment, so whenever Adam looks at an animal. He just from programming know what to name those animals, and here is Adam naming Eve with that same programmed system, a program that didn't see the unclothedness of Eve, but saw a different view, that view is not the sight, the view is seeing as God sees, the view is faith, Shalom

DoctorAlien:


The last line of the post you quoted answers you. GOD, by definition, cannot be caused. He is the Cause of all that exists.

what is your religious view?

jonbellion:
actually all athiests...or most are agnostic when it comes to the concept of god outside religious fables

exactly what I've been telling them

but I guess it's easier to attack atheism while arguing for deism as we've seen Christians turn fake deists recently

GodsMopol:
When God created man, God created a perfect man but with a Bible as an instructor. Man left the Bible God gave them, and listened to the voice of a stranger(devil)

We might be fooled to think that Adam and Eve saw lack and needs and inadequacies during the duration of their stay in Eden. It was said that, man shall die if man eats, evidently, Man has an eternal life.

If man hadn't fall, God won't send Jesus to come, and moreover, if Adam or Eve had eaten, the other who have not chosen to eat, would be a cover to the other, so evidently, someone would stand as a covering to the other in the sense that, the prince with a purr blood line is on the front seat- Kingly.

But, here is Adam and Eve, they ate, but what we ignorantly ignore from the story is the fact that mam died spiritually, and that was what Jesus came to restore. Our ability to live forever as God has predestined for man. I wouldn't say man lived in the flesh in those days, there was a glory covering around them.

I believe they were naked, and their eyes was closed. Those are two mysteries, I think the third is, they ran to gather leaves, they never did this before, why now, I still don't understand how man was before man fell, but I doubt if man was a flesh.

I also ask, when Adam got up when God took his rib to form Eve, Adam was deep asleep, but his spirit was not sleeping. So God took the rib, Adam was sleeping, but his spirit was with his body, and God went somewhere where Adam could not see the creation of Eve and God came with Eve, and Adam could scan and see this woman, he sees the bone, and here is another point.

God brought all animals to Adam to name, Adam didn't name them, but God programmed Adam for that assignment, so whenever Adam looks at an animal. He just from programming know what to name those animals, and here is Adam naming Eve with that same programmed system, a program that didn't see the unclothedness of Eve, but saw a different view, that view is not the sight, the view is seeing as God sees, the view is faith, Shalom

most Christians in developed countries have dumped the idea of literal "Adam and Eve"


I guess the "holy spirit" that ministered that to them forgot to minister same to you

hopefulLandlord:


all those "evidences" have been dealt with ad naseusm

absence of evidence is not evidence of presence either

you're defining atheism in a strawman kinda way, like I said atheism isn't a claim, its a counterclaim especially countering the theistic version of god

you might try searching Nairaland for posts about people like me claiming no god exists; just five people making the claim out of the many active members of this section would be enough

A counterclaim built on a counter belief with counter faith. I don't need search anywhere to see claims made by atheists on the existence of any God. I'd be deceiving myself to pretend atheists don't say that.

But on a rational level isn't a counter claim still a claim? If 'claims' are simply statements of truth doesn't atheism qualify as one? Maybe my learning is poor, please, what is a counter claim?

onyenze123:


They didn't believe in a personal God. Einstein said

"“The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend a personal God and avoid dogmas and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity. Buddhism (a religion without a personal God) answers this description.”

Of course they didn't.

jonbellion:
actually all athiests...or most are agnostic when it comes to the concept of god outside religious fables

What does this mean?

hopefulLandlord:


exactly what I've been telling them

but I guess it's easier to attack atheism while arguing for deism as we've seen Christians turn fake deists recently

I don't take them seriously anymore
The Abrahamic god is always crushed when the arguenent is solely on Christianity so they start hiding under diestic views like they have a valid point

Sapiosexuality:
A counterclaim built on a counter belief with counter faith. I don't need search anywhere to see claims that God exists or doesn't.

But on a rational level isn't a counter claim still a claim? If 'claims' are simply statements of truth doesn't atheism qualify as one? Maybe my learning is poor, please, what is a counter claim?

nope atheism simply states "there's no evidence for the existence of god"

you've already tactfully admitted this in your first post

enshy:

Bro Welldone!
Like I used to say only a fool would not understand this!
These are tools in the hands of the devil to deceive the simple. They will surely be doomed of they dont repent! If this angers them, then, its cos perdition is imminent.
They cant stop us! We are on mission!! See their criticisms as that of a drunkard whose consciousness is but dead and needs awakening.
May God reward your labour in Christ!

militant for Christ.

you can't called them fools since you have no evidence. Before you start quoting the bible, remember it is full of contradictions and confusion.

hopefulLandlord:


nope atheism simply states "there's no evidence for the existence of god"

you've already tactfully admitted this in your first post

So who is an atheist?

When a mind is intoxicated with creationist filths, there is no limit to the depth, of regression into idiocy that such mind, will automatically not descend.

DoctorAlien:


Anything created by the Supreme Being must have begun to exist, and thus must be a part of the universe(creation) which the Supreme Being made.

A proper definition of the universe precludes the existence of any other Creator apart from the Supreme Being.

Remember the universe has been in existence for billions of year. how sure are you?

GodsMopol:
When God created man, God created a perfect man but with a Bible as an instructor. Man left the Bible God gave them, and listened to the voice of a stranger(devil)

We might be fooled to think that Adam and Eve saw lack and needs and inadequacies during the duration of their stay in Eden. It was said that, man shall die if man eats, evidently, Man has an eternal life.

If man hadn't fall, God won't send Jesus to come, and moreover, if Adam or Eve had eaten, the other who have not chosen to eat, would be a cover to the other, so evidently, someone would stand as a covering to the other in the sense that, the prince with a purr blood line is on the front seat- Kingly.

But, here is Adam and Eve, they ate, but what we ignorantly ignore from the story is the fact that mam died spiritually, and that was what Jesus came to restore. Our ability to live forever as God has predestined for man. I wouldn't say man lived in the flesh in those days, there was a glory covering around them.

I believe they were naked, and their eyes was closed. Those are two mysteries, I think the third is, they ran to gather leaves, they never did this before, why now, I still don't understand how man was before man fell, but I doubt if man was a flesh.

I also ask, when Adam got up when God took his rib to form Eve, Adam was deep asleep, but his spirit was not sleeping. So God took the rib, Adam was sleeping, but his spirit was with his body, and God went somewhere where Adam could not see the creation of Eve and God came with Eve, and Adam could scan and see this woman, he sees the bone, and here is another point.

God brought all animals to Adam to name, Adam didn't name them, but God programmed Adam for that assignment, so whenever Adam looks at an animal. He just from programming know what to name those animals, and here is Adam naming Eve with that same programmed system, a program that didn't see the unclothedness of Eve, but saw a different view, that view is not the sight, the view is seeing as God sees, the view is faith, Shalom

Don't even go there. The book of Genesis is a mere folktale.

akintom:
When a mind is intoxicated with creationist filths, there is no limit to the depth, of regression into idiocy that such mind, will automatically not descend.

lol

Sapiosexuality:
So who is an atheist?

Atheism in broad sense is lack of belief in deities

Atheism is in the less broadly sense, the absence of belief in the existence of deities

even less broadly, atheism is the rejection of belief that any deities exist.

In an even narrower sense, atheism is the position that there are no deities.


anyone who has one or more of that position is an atheist

Isaac Newton was a great guy
He invented calculus- the course that gave me a hard time in my first year in college
Interestingly he was also an Aryan christian- an outdated form of Christianity which did not believe in the trinity- a sect of christians that DoctorAlien would have made conspiracy theories about if they were popular today and would also be rejected by christian fundamentalists
But hey
just realise that you can never win with the christians

hopefulLandlord:


most Christians in developed countries have dumped the idea of literal "Adam and Eve"


I guess the "holy spirit" that ministered that to them forgot to minister same to you

Looool, God bless you sir. That was the Holy Spirit man in Eden, looool, anyhow you see it, whether they drop.it or not, the scriptures can't be uttered by mans perspective. If a teacher define maths as bodmas, and during the exam, they were asked to define maths, and in the course of answering they omit Bodmas, lemme ask, if you are the marker, would you follow general opinion or your marking script. Its like saying a man employed to mark a script noticed a mass failure in those that he's making their script, his opinion doesn't change the standard laid down, you can't add marks, I love your intellectual dialogue. People turn me off when they go insulting

Sapiosexuality:
What does this mean?

it means that why they don't believe any gods exist they can't say so with absolute certainty.
So though it is very unlikely it is not improbable- like a celestial teapot
PS: religion answers nothing

hopefulLandlord:


Atheism in broad sense is lack of belief in deities

Atheism is in the less broadly sense, the absence of belief in the existence of deities

even less broadly, atheism is the rejection of belief that any deities exist.

In an even narrower sense, atheism is the position that there are no deities.


anyone who has one or more of that position is an atheist

Would I be wrong to say an atheist is someone who believes there's no God?

jonbellion:
it means that why they don't believe any gods exist they can't say so with absolute certainty.
So though it is very unlikely it is not improbable- like a celestial teapot
PS: religion answers nothing

Can one also be permitted to say that Theists are those who belief there's a God but can't say with absolute certainty?

Sapiosexuality:
Can one also be permitted to say that Theists are those who belief there's a God but can't say with absolute certainty?

yes
When I was a thiest I was also agnostic

Sapiosexuality:
Would I be wrong to say an atheist is someone who believes there's no God?

no you would not
Depends on the athiest

akintom:
When a mind is intoxicated with creationist filths, there is no limit to the depth, of regression into idiocy that such mind, will automatically not descend.

Sir, I have ran into some of your dialogue between Enshy n Akintom which I randomly run into sometimes. But there are questions about creation that has been left unanswered. Well, I look forward to the day when science as you believe in would provide a better definition for creation and the essense of creation.

Anyone who.creates anything would certainly have two things in mind, a connection to the one he created and a purpose for the created. The creator of nairaland was presumptuously Seun and lalastical or so.

I really don't know, and they know their personal purpose, either financial or whatever, at least, to.my best knowledge, I think networking like we are doing now, and he has a connection or a channel by which he can interact and supervise what's going on, that's why, there are always 21 rules up there telling us, this is our guide, anyone who does not conform with such standard which is monitored by the owner of this blog, we would assume that's a form of connection or a interaction which many times might not be seen on this side, there are codes running underground as we chat of which we can't see. We can't delve from creation. The best way to understand now, is to.understand creation

GodsMopol:
When God created man, God created a perfect man but with a Bible as an instructor. Man left the Bible God gave them, and listened to the voice of a stranger(devil)

We might be fooled to think that Adam and Eve saw lack and needs and inadequacies during the duration of their stay in Eden. It was said that, man shall die if man eats, evidently, Man has an eternal life.

If man hadn't fall, God won't send Jesus to come, and moreover, if Adam or Eve had eaten, the other who have not chosen to eat, would be a cover to the other, so evidently, someone would stand as a covering to the other in the sense that, the prince with a purr blood line is on the front seat- Kingly.

But, here is Adam and Eve, they ate, but what we ignorantly ignore from the story is the fact that mam died spiritually, and that was what Jesus came to restore. Our ability to live forever as God has predestined for man. I wouldn't say man lived in the flesh in those days, there was a glory covering around them.

I believe they were naked, and their eyes was closed. Those are two mysteries, I think the third is, they ran to gather leaves, they never did this before, why now, I still don't understand how man was before man fell, but I doubt if man was a flesh.

I also ask, when Adam got up when God took his rib to form Eve, Adam was deep asleep, but his spirit was not sleeping. So God took the rib, Adam was sleeping, but his spirit was with his body, and God went somewhere where Adam could not see the creation of Eve and God came with Eve, and Adam could scan and see this woman, he sees the bone, and here is another point.

God brought all animals to Adam to name, Adam didn't name them, but God programmed Adam for that assignment, so whenever Adam looks at an animal. He just from programming know what to name those animals, and here is Adam naming Eve with that same programmed system, a program that didn't see the unclothedness of Eve, but saw a different view, that view is not the sight, the view is seeing as God sees, the view is faith, Shalom

your own is bad oo

The annoying thing is that the christians make the claim of not just any god- the god of Isreal will start
-arguing for diesm
Or
-tell you to probe them wrong

onyenze123:


militant for Christ.

you can't called them fools since you have no evidence. Before you start quoting the bible, remember it is full of contradictions and confusion.

Its my Bible I read not yours.
My Bible isnt filled with contradictions and confusions, maybe yours is.
What other evidence than asking an atheist what the concept of death, birth and life is and he says honestly I dont know, science is working on it but it cant be God for he doesnt exist?
What other malady on planet earth exists?
Please if you wouldnt repent, then you can as well allow our preachers reach out to their audience!
Thank you!

jonbellion:
yes When I was a thiest I was also agnostic

Just like you are an atheist now and also agnostic. Smh.

GodsMopol:


Looool, God bless you sir. That was the Holy Spirit man in Eden, looool, anyhow you see it, whether they drop.it or not, the scriptures can't be uttered by mans perspective. If a teacher define maths as bodmas, and during the exam, they were asked to define maths, and in the course of answering they omit Bodmas, lemme ask, if you are the marker, would you follow general opinion or your marking script. Its like saying a man employed to mark a script noticed a mass failure in those that he's making their script, his opinion doesn't change the standard laid down, you can't add marks, I love your intellectual dialogue. People turn me off when they go insulting

thanks for the compliment, I avoid ad hominem like a plague


onto your post, you do agree with me that many things in the bible people thought its meaning was literal centuries ago under guidance of the holy spirit have been changed to be metamorphical in today's world under guidance of the same holy spirit

or do you disagree?