jaephoenix:

Lol. Another JW ignoramus putting up the ignorance banner. Since u guys have sworn not to learn, let me bring the knowledge to u.
Since like TenQ, definitions is a problem for you theists

agnostic
1 of 2
noun
ag·​nos·​tic ag-ˈnä-stik əg-
Synonyms of agnostic
1
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (such as God) is unknown and probably unknowable
broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
2
: a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something
political agnostics
agnostic

2 of 2
adjective
1
: of, relating to, or being an agnostic : involving or characterized by agnosticism
2
: NONCOMMITTAL, UNDOGMATIC
3
a
: not preferring a particular device or system —usually used after a noun
"Children are platform agnostic," said Alice Cahn, vice-president of development for Cartoon Network. "If you want to look foolish with a preschooler, say, 'Sorry, you can't watch that. It's not on.' It's TiVoed, it's online, it's on video on demand."
—Business Wire
b
: designed to be compatible with different devices (such as computers or smartphones) or operating systems —usually used after a noun
content that is OS agnostic
—often used in combination
The application is platform-agnostic, so it can work on your tablet or cell phone.


The bolded definition is the one I'm talking about now, which is my opinion about creation, AND NOT MY OPINION ABOUT GOD/GODS.
Learn book, no. Use your brain, no.
Na wao

MaxInDHouse:


Ọmọ Bible said there is an highly intelligent evil genius who is the god of faithless miscreants {2Corinthians 4:4} Jesus said this evil genius will brainwash billions so that you people will continue assuming you're using your brains but then with all your stubbornness you will never be able to reason along with your neighbours who is behind the killings going on in the world while you are going to kill and supporting the killing of your neighbours and your own relatives are also getting killed! Revelations 6:3-4

Try to figure it out first before concluding that you're using your brain wisely!

jaephoenix:

And once again, he dodges the main point here and veers off into more of his asinine and inane posts on JW. How is this related to the answer I gave?

jaephoenix:

I just answered it. Are you sure your brain has rebooted this morning?

jaephoenix:

Are you mentally retarded? Seriously asking here.
Maybe if I use caps your brain can comprehend.
I AM AN ATHEIST TO GODS BUT AN AGNOSTIC TO CREATION
My position on gods/deities is atheism is because there is no single proof to their existence. An example. If I tell you shgdbrnen exists and it created the world, would you believe me, and why won't you?
Please answer the question and don't dodge

jaephoenix:

The second law of thermodynamics states that as energy is transferred or transformed, more and more of it is wasted.
Please how does this imply that the universe was created?
These theists are something else

jaephoenix:

1. Did your babble claim the world was created or not? This guy stop dodging
2. I say I'm agnostic to creation, meaning I don't know how the world was created. Its different from agnostic to gods(which is knowledge about gods). Agnosia is a Latin word meaning 'lack of knowledge'. It can mean be applied anywhere. There is what we call spatial agnosia(in medicine) which is a symptom that occurs when one doesn't know where he/she is. You JW guys should start imbibing higher knowledge. Your organization banning it is bringing down your IQ
3. Like TenQ again u r dodging the implications of your posts which is that your brand of god created the world

Aemmyjah:

1. Agnostic, Does the universe have a Cause or not?
2. Yo don't know but you want to argue
3. Ok na

hopefulLandlord:
Aemmyjah read about William Lane Craig's "Kalam cosmological argument". Probably watched a few debates that some "atheist professor" went up against Craig and couldn't satisfactorily, according to Craig, dismantle the argument and felt hes finally gotten an eureka moment that would not only demolish atheism but also prove Christian god is actually real and true.
He however made one fatal mistake, he used the argument in a way that the "original" arguer, Craig, never intended it to be used. Craig, whenever he's making the argument always shy away from saying this is proof Christianity is true and says something like "This is just an argument for a generic god, not the Christian god" which means he's making th argument for "Deism" not even "Theism" let alone "Christianity". Craig wouldn't dare do that because he knows he would be demolished which is why he would then move to other arguments very fast. Infact Craig's only argument for Christianity is that "Christ rose from the dead because if he didn't then bla bla bla bla". Same Craig however was once asked a question by a debater saying "If it happens that we invent a time machine tomorrow and we go back in time on the so-called resurrection day and we wait but jesus doesn't come out of the tomb would he still believe Christianity is true"
Craig said he would still be a Christian regardless lol


I would've loved to debate a nairalander based on the arguments you copied and pasted asides the last part about it being the bible god but looking at your conclusion it won't take long before someone like you will expose the fact that you don't even understand enough the position you chose


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-y-IbL-yLkk


That's video of WLC debating an actual Cosmologist using Kalam cosmological argument and you can see Craig seems like a fish out of water. Sean argument boils down to "Craig, you're not even knowledgeable enough to be labeled 'wrong'"

Emusan:


Yet you believe that Jesus is a created being when the same Jesus fulfilled the two answered you put forth here.

Why didn't this your own line make you agreed with yourself about Jesus Christ?

Aemmyjah:


The Creator does not have a Father
Jesus has a Father
The Father produced him as the beginning of his way


This Post is directed to atheists using the material universe as a reference.
You're own is to find relevance on NL by tackling me n Max
Why not create your own thread?

Aemmyjah:
"If I were still an atheist, this one line of evidence would convince me that God exists


Virtually every scientist believes that the universe began at some point in the past
It is not eternal or always existed. Alexander Vilenkin, the head of cosmology, institute at Tufts University said, 'The Proof is now in place that the universe had a beginning'

That makes a strong argument for God because whatever begins to exist has a Cause
We now know the universe began to exist. Therefore, there must be a Cause behind the universe.
Well, then let me ask you a question
"What kind of a Cause would bring the universe into existence?"
1. It must be transcendent, because[b] it existed apart from the creation[/b]
2. It must be timeless or eternal because it existed before physical time came into being.
3. It must be immaterial or Spirit because it existed before the physical world was created
4. Must be powerful, given the immensity of the creation event
5. Must be smart given the precision of the creation event
6. Must be caring because he created such a wonderful habitat for us to exist in
7. Must be personal because he has to make the decision to create
8. And then the scientific principle of Occam's Razor tells us that there would be just one Creator

... Transcendent, Spirit, Eternal, Powerful, Smart, loving, unique... That's the description of the God of the Bible

I personally, anyway would come to the conclusion that there's a divine creator"

LordReed:


We have no evidence for the conditions that preceded the formation of our universe so why should the formation of the universe convince me of a god? Why can't I be fine with accepting that the formation of the universe follows the pattern of all the other processes which we see all the time i.e. natural processes borne out of physical constraints?

KnownUnknown:


I always find it hilarious that these imaginary friend of theirs is one of one and it’s always a man never a woman. If one god can exist, then multiple gods can exist.

LordReed:


We have no evidence for the conditions that preceded the formation of our universe so why should the formation of the universe convince me of a god? Why can't I be fine with accepting that the formation of the universe follows the pattern of all the other processes which we see all the time i.e. natural processes borne out of physical constraints?

Aemmyjah:


The Creator does not have a Father
Jesus has a Father
The Father produced him as the beginning of his way


This Post is directed to atheists using the material universe as a reference.
You're own is to find relevance on NL by tackling me n Max
Why not create your own thread?

capnies:
THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD and ONE MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MEN- JESUS CHRIST

Jesus cannot be God and mediator at the same time

jaephoenix:
We aint hooked. We are driven by evidence.

The creation/origin of the universe is still being unraveled.

And no scientist would tell you they have concluded in it.

But u guys decide that u know how the earth is created.

But despite the fact that the creation story is illogical, filled with all kinds of lies and contradictions, u still stick to it.

Same with thousands of other creation stories that came before yours, and the ones that came after.

Not only that, the bible which is your source of creation story has been found to be flawed and in fact copied from ancient scrolls like Epic of Gilgamesh, Hammurabi Scrolls etc.

Also the bible is replete with all sorts of bare-faced lies.

Also your creation story has been debunked by science and history.
Do I need to go on?

My point is your story doesn't hold water and lacks evidence.
Suck it up!

Steep:
All processes which we see all the time usually have a cause, so we can also assume the universe itself had a cause which is outside of itself, so the cause itself would be outside of the universe and timeless, because space and time are characteristics of the universe and due to the order and design inherent in the universe, that cause must be personal and intelligent, and also the cause must be more powerful than the universe and since it is timeless, it must be all powerful, all knowing and since itself must be beyond space it must be omnipresent, a super personal being.
Order and design are characteristics of intelligence and intelligence a property of personhood, so the timeless, spaceeless being must be powerful beyond time, knowledgeable beyond time and a super person.
This is God.

The creation is a proof of the existence of God.

To know which God is the true God, you have to also seek out evidence.
out of all religion, evidences point to judeo Christian God.
The greatest test is to test the claim of each religion.
In Christianity the test is Jesus christ, The life, death and resurrection of christ is the test for Christianity.
Jesus lived a perfect life no religion on earth has any bad thing to say about Jesus christ, some call him a prophet, a teacher or a good man, every founded of religion apart from Christianity has one flaw or the other but Jesus is exactly perfect.
Jesus claimed to be the Son of God, the literal revelation of God in the flesh.
Predicted his death and resurrection.
Jesus said when he dies he would rise again on the third, meaning he had power over life and death.
Jesus truly was killed ( he allowed his death) and on the third day he rose.
His resurrection is proven by the many witnesses after his resurrection. The witnesses saw Jesus and died to defend their claims.

Was it some mass disillusion?
They didn't just say they saw Jesus, but he stayed with them they touched him and ate with them, he stayed with them for days before his ascension before their very eyes.

For one, Jesus body was guarded by the authorities and it was not possible for his body to be stolen, the soldiers who guarded Jesus body knew the repercussion of allowing Jesus body stolen.
The Disciples could not have stolen Jesus body knowing the repercussion and could not have died defending a lie.
The theory of mass disillusion have being ruled out by experts.
There was zero benefit for defending christ resurrection, rather everything to lose.

The eye witnesses testimony of Jesus resurrection are different from terrorists that die for their religion.
The Disciples didn't kill themselves or others to defend their claim.
The eye witnesses were not defending religion but were defending their claim that Jesus rose on the other hand many religious zealous are defending what others told them without proof.

Emusan:


How many evidence do you have that there's no God?



By who you or?



Which means you base your evidence on WHAT you are told and not your personal EVIDENCE.



We didn't, we said THE CREATOR INFORMED US.



Who concluded that it's illogical, filled with all kinds of lies and contradictions?



Story.



And you believe because you're present when it was being copied.



Says you or who?



Yes go on and present your EVIDENCE AS YOU CLAIM not just emotional talk.



We never tell you any story here but using the same SCIENCE, you're the one who started telling stories when no one asked you.

So focus on the OP and stop telling stories that you never asked.

MaxInDHouse:

Please i beg you to tell me what benefits is in your answer when people are killing people out there and you're doing nothing as in NOTHING at least to change the mindset of some among the killers?

Guy your knowledge is futile if it can't bring any positive effect on what is affecting people around you!

TenQ:

Give me the link as I can't find it!

TenQ:

I am using your preferred definition of Atheism dear:

Why is your position NOT Silence as you have not committed yourself to either believing or disbelieving?


Your Question:
If you ask me about the existence of shgdbrnen , I will not believe you because I HOLD a contrary opinion to that.

Meaning that I have committed myself to not believing your shgdbrnen because it goes contrary to my knowledge and experience.



Unlike you, Do you disbelieve in God because you Lack a Believe or you have come to a rational or emotional conclusion that God does not exist?

Steep:

If the quality of energy is reducing (entropy) then the universe cannot have existed in an infinite time past else all the useful energy would have being wasted in infinite time past ago.

It means the universe definitely has a beginning.

hopefulLandlord:
Aemmyjah read about William Lane Craig's "Kalam cosmological argument". Probably watched a few debates that some "atheist professor" went up against Craig and couldn't satisfactorily, according to Craig, dismantle the argument and felt hes finally gotten an eureka moment that would not only demolish atheism but also prove Christian god is actually real and true.
He however made one fatal mistake, he used the argument in a way that the "original" arguer, Craig, never intended it to be used. Craig, whenever he's making the argument always shy away from saying this is proof Christianity is true and says something like "This is just an argument for a generic god, not the Christian god" which means he's making th argument for "Deism" not even "Theism" let alone "Christianity". Craig wouldn't dare do that because he knows he would be demolished which is why he would then move to other arguments very fast. Infact Craig's only argument for Christianity is that "Christ rose from the dead because if he didn't then bla bla bla bla". Same Craig however was once asked a question by a debater saying "If it happens that we invent a time machine tomorrow and we go back in time on the so-called resurrection day and we wait but jesus doesn't come out of the tomb would he still believe Christianity is true"
Craig said he would still be a Christian regardless lol


I would've loved to debate a nairalander based on the arguments you copied and pasted asides the last part about it being the bible god but looking at your conclusion it won't take long before someone like you will expose the fact that you don't even understand enough the position you chose


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-y-IbL-yLkk


That's video of WLC debating an actual Cosmologist using Kalam cosmological argument and you can see Craig seems like a fish out of water. Sean argument boils down to "Craig, you're not even knowledgeable enough to be labeled 'wrong'"

Aemmyjah:


1. Agnostic, Does the universe have a Cause or not?

2. Yo don't know but you want to argue

3. Ok na

Aemmyjah:


The universe has a Cause
Yes or No?

jaephoenix:

I'm sorry, u can't debate Aemmyjah. Dude is denser than they come. You'll just collapse out if his sheer retardation. Don't bother

StillDtruth:


And if they existed, they would have shown themselves

jaephoenix:

Has anyone ever shown themselves to u?