₦airaland Forum

KingEbukasBlog:
Are you denying that the classical deists of the early centuries BC never had a view of the after-life ? Or are you saying there are no religious atheists ? Are you saying that the unaffiliated cannot have beliefs that are considered religious ? What are you saying my nigga ? You sound confused bro

You acknowledge that the priests and self acclaimed Christians that carried out the crusades, witch huntings, drinking dettol(lol) and so on, are not true Christians because they are not inline with the tenets of Christianity right?

So on what basis is the tenet of deism or atheism in conformity with these guys beliefs?
The unaffiliated like i said could be peeps like Chopra so let's leave them outta this since we don't have a clear definition.

JackBizzle:
I also have a picture of Jesus in my house but I dont worship him................

But wait, it is not really Jesus is it? Its Cesare Borgia

Why do you have Cesare Borgia's picture in your house?
just asking...

KingEbukasBlog:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegorical_interpretations_of_Genesis

OLAADEGBU made a point of inferring that if Adam is a metaphor then Jesus should be too...
How does the interpretation make Jesus(as a man that existed) real?

KingEbukasBlog:
Hmmm . Good point bro. But an allegorical view of the creation story does not mean that Adam as a man is mythical .

When I have a stable network , I'll post like three allegorical views of the creation story for you to decide

Interesting, what are the views?

Johnkey where you able to get it?

PM sent...

OLAADEGBU:
It is an indirect salvation issue as well as an authority issue. Faulty fallible human interpretations vs God's final authority.

Well your God's final authority is wrong.
The world has been in existence longer than 6000 years and it is mathematically impossible for Noah's four sons to produce 6 billion people in less than 5000 years.
Please don't be too dogmatic.

seunthomas:
Will re-upload it on several sites.

Okay Sir.

seunthomas:
For those interested in the buildable glass interpreter for windows
I uploaded it here
https://filebin.ca/3fw9PvvquK2c
You can use "make" on windows to compile the source code.
Happy Glassing..

This is what the page returns; Sorry, the file you requested was not found. You may wish to upload your own file at the main page.

Please do check again, thanks.

OLAADEGBU:
Being an Old earth creationist may not take away from your salvation but it denies their followers from taking the Bible as their final authority.

Maybe in some cases, but i think it's more of given a new interpretation of what's written to be compatible with reason.

KingEbukasBlog:
There are atheists in religion and even though deism rejects religion , there are some deistic beliefs that were already religious . Eg the classical deist believed in after-life and some kind of reward-punishment system that would be used by God to judge man . Some can have personal and transpersonal relationship with God - some people can consider this to be a religious way of life.

Many who are unaffiliated don't identify with any particular religion but this does not mean they won't have even a smattering of beliefs that one can consider as religious .

I don't know why you fail to see that you are still describing the religious.
It's because of you i don't like labels or being called a deist again ever since you started these nonsense last year, those that believe in what you mentioned, don't you think the belief contradicts the very definition of deism and the proper application of reason to life which deism is supposed hold dear?
The unaffiliated ones, aren't they similar to Deepak Chopra?
My friend, those that you cherry picked are religious, not true deists, not true atheist.

I think i have to have a proper discussion with any confused one in this category that still calls him/herself a deist/atheist if they're in nairaland.

And studies have revealed that atheists born in atheist homes abandon atheism later in life lending credence to the what I mentioned earlier about man being hard-wired to be religious (atheism used here to refer to the irreligion )

This is interesting, can you provide a link to the paper for scrutinization?

hahn:

Very funny.

dalaman:
More fallacy. Religion isn't natural to man. If it is then tell me the name of man's natural religion.

Lol

KingEbukasBlog:
But bro , you do realize that man has the propensity or is hardwired to be religious . Man also has strong emotional ties to his religious beliefs . So your claim is totally incongruous with the nature of man .

Can you expantiate on this for clarification?
Those born in atheist homes in denmark, what "religious beliefs" do they have emotional ties to?

Man is more of an emotional being than a rational one and coupled with his propensity to be religious ? I don't see any level of science advancement that would make man disabuse himself of his religious beliefs .

Wow, address the above first for clarification.

I mean can you compare the level of superstitious beliefs anywhere to what Asians have ? Yet they are seemingly at the helm of scientific and technological advancement . Look at Islamic states like Dubai , they recently appointed a minister for artifical intelligence and with the level of scientific and technological advancement going on there they are still intransigent with their religious beliefs . Even many citizenx of European countries who claim to be less religious depend so much on revelations made by horoscopes , psychic reading and the likes .

Stop this generalisation, these beliefs are only among the religious, whether they stay in a country with scientific advancement or not and not with those that disassociate themselves with religion.
Can you imagine Richard Dawkins or Dan Barker under those circumstances.

No matter what, man will be drawn to what appeals to his nature - this is a fact .

It is therefore not a fact because the hypothesis does not apply to every part of the population.

KingEbukasBlog:
I already addressed this before. I'm talking of atheists alone not agnostics or people without religion who are very most likely theists (deists and agnostics ) .

Hmmm, well in that case...

And the religious nones are declining when compared to the world's population by 2050 - theses a sniped post from Pew Research in the previous page to buttress this . You are making me repeat myself uncessarily my brother

Make we just dey observe...

KingEbukasBlog:
Read my comment again bro and find the correlation. If you can't find it , alert me asap.

Da comment does not make any sense.
That's just nonsense redefinition.
And going by that, then i'm a magician because i'm using my laptop(which was a concept not yet understood 50 years ago).
What nonsense...

KingEbukasBlog:
Lying in the face of facts ? Such audacity bro ... smh

When will this unholy romance with atheism end ? Even after atheism has been exposed to be the rejection of deification. ?

U still dey repeat this thing. I just address logical issues, i've told you this a thousand times.

BTW, what "facts" are you talking about?
Do you know what makes up a "fact", are you classifying that constrained statistical analysis as "fact"?

Even at that the analysis goes in contrast to what you're trying to portray.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/09/14/the-factors-driving-the-growth-of-religious-nones-in-the-u-s/
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/11/religious-nones-are-not-only-growing-theyre-becoming-more-secular/

KingEbukasBlog:
Lol . The witches in Wicca describe magic as the law of nature not yet understood by contemporary science. A future advancement in science is therefore a welcome development to witchcraft.

Bro , this "L" wey you carry heavy sha . You fit share with JackBizzle?

Which "L" ?

Wikipedia definition of Magic: Magic or sorcery is the use of rituals, symbols, actions, gestures, and language with the aim of utilizing supernatural forces.

How the Bleep does scientific discovery and magic correllate, what then makes it magic?

Ebuka no fall my hand oo.

Atheism is not in massive decline like the OP says...
But wetin concern me, future advancement in science will most likely make mainstream religions redundant.

DanielTheGeek:
Didn't you see that the build of rust-glass failed on GitHub? The error is from the glass library not being found. Just go back and download the latest version of the interpreter from https://esolangs.org/wiki/Glass and run on your Linux distro

The glass library is not being imported so the program won't run...

OK, would run on a linux environment, thought cygwin would do the trick...

hopefulLandlord:
how is that brilliant?

Your next statement answers this.

while its well said

There it is...

it veers off the topic at hand;

My comment was based off topic... Oops

OP is not arguing for just a creator but for a specific creator who created things in a particular way, a literal Adam and Eve Creation, OP is a young earth creationist who is certain the world is 6000 years old.

when Christians argue against evolution and "random chance" they're not arguing because such things show there's no "creator" but because those things go against the way they think the creator "created" the "creations"; evolution being true screws the entire tenets of Christianity from bottom to top cuz a literal Adam and Eve is very necessary as its the foundation on which Christianity is actually built

Evolution demolishes the idea of an "Adam and Eve," who are depicted as being created by "God" in the last part of Biblical Creation in the Book of Genesis. They are unrelated to any life form that came before them, per the Bible.

Without Adam and Eve . . . you have no disobedience based on them eating the fruit from the wrong tree.

Without this disobedience -- called "Original Sin" -- you have NO reason for "God" to later send a "Redeemer" for the human race (each of whose members somehow "inherited" that "Original Sin" LOL) . . . and that Redeemer = Jesus. Without Jesus, you have no basis for Christianity. . . . hence, the panic that Christians feel about Evolution, "Random chance" and their goal to discredit it and – instead – to pretend that a folk tale version of “Biblical Creation” accurately describes what actually “happened”

so when OP is arguing against random chance, he's not arguing just against it but also indirectly arguing FOR literal biblical creation

Well OP being a young earth creationist is a special case...
But not all "Christians" are...
The Gnostics for example treat most biblical accounts as symbols for esoteric understanding, including Abraham, the Exodus and so on...
"Jesus" to them is an embodiment of knowledge don't want to go into details, I discussed this with KingEbukasBlog last year.
So your interpretation of the Bible and evolution does not change the value "Jesus" is to them, unless you are talking to a Christian fundamentalist.
Even the Catholic does not acknowledge the literal account of the book of Genesis(though this is another issue but hope you get my point).

KingEbukasBlog:
Random chance does not disprove God or intelligent design in anyway. You can a radical view that God knows the possible outcomes from any random event and that He designed the universe in a way that every random event can produce a desired outcome.

Even computer programs can be designed like this . So random chance claimants ain't really making any serious argument .

Secondly, an event can appear to an observer as random or chaotic but it is not perceived that same way to the person who initiated it. You might think we got everything by chance , but does God or every other observer see it that way ? So the issue of chaos and randomness producing intelligent design is subjective not objective.

Brilliant!!!

neahyo:
Hello bro,

Ah! I've forgotten about this thread already . Since i left Nigeria, I've been occupied with a lot of things; I thought schooling abroad was meant to be easy oh, never knew i was on a long thing. Anyways, i don't want to exonerate myself, let's see how things pan out.

Okay...

seunthomas:
The language is actually hard but i already have an insight into it. Let him up the stakes na....
I want to say there will be only a handful of people that can actually solve it using this glass lang.

Very very true...
But let me compile it first.

DanielTheGeek:
Bro, really hectic, I'm tired and worked up too. But seems no one could come up with a solution.

I don't have a Mac so i'd use a virtual machine to test the installation on Mac and let you know what to do to make it work. Till then bro.

Okay...
What operating system do you test glass with?
Did you check the rust code, I think figuring the error will be better for the compilation on all OS platforms...

Oga Seunthomas I dey wait for the windows binary oo.

What's up guys? Even danielthegeek has not logged in , looks like this week is hectic...

neahyo:
Dear All,

I'm sorry i haven't been able to update this thread as much as I want. I think i opened it at the wrong time as i have many projects ongoing, I hope to update it this weekend as i would have enough time for myself. Thanks for caring enough to visit, I hope to make it up to you.

Best,

Neahyo

Hey, still busy?

seunthomas:
All the codes successfully. I will see if i can finish the task and then build the interpreter for windows also. So i can upload a windows binary.

Okay...

seunthomas:
I have not really had time to seat and face the challenge ohhh.

But were you able to compile any sample code successfully?

dhtml118:
Crate of eggs missing. . .i taya o

Lol, did you try it?

I can't figure out how glass file is supposed to be structured.

dhtml118 i see you, any help?

E be like say i don give up.
@DanielTheGeek and seunthomas how the fu[k did you compile your glass code?
Been at that for close to hour, just compilation, wetin sef.

Just incase you log in before the deadline, please help me out on how to use this to compile glass. https://github.com/C-Bouthoorn/rust-glass It's written in rust and i have issues running the file.

The command rustc main.rs
returns error
error[E0463]: can't find crate for 'glass'
--> main.rs:1:1
|
1 | extern crate glass;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ can't find crate

error: aborting due to previous error

I've been busy and don't want to stop my other plans cos of just compilation.