₦airaland Forum

CAPSLOCKED:
one, two, ready, go! excuses!!

I wouldn't expect much from a god that drowned little children including foetuses in a global flood for the sins of only adults.

Who is Leah Sharibu to such a masochist arrogant monster? Christians hate the devil but the god they worship is more vile, distasteful and evil than Lucifer himself.

kernniejay:
Christianity is not a religion. And it is expected to mock Christianity because Jesus has told us how we will be mocked and persecuted, so all forms of mockery are welcomed, our aim is to make heaven, not to make earth. We just pray that God will open your eyes to see, know and accept the TRUTH.

Oh nice. I have actually made a post for folks like you so I will just refer you to that post when I see you lot present your arguments.

The post contains everything I would have said to you here so to prevent me from repeating myself I'll just post the link.



https://www.nairaland.com/5647531/4-quick-ways-identifying-dishonest

kernniejay:
Christianity is not a religion. And it is expected to mock Christianity because Jesus has told us how we will be mocked and persecuted, so all forms of mockery are welcomed, our aim is to make heaven, not to make earth. We just pray that God will open your eyes to see, know and accept the TRUTH.

Oh nice. I have actually made a post for folks like you so I will just refer you to that post when I see you lot present your arguments.

The post contains everything I would have said to you here so to prevent me from repeating myself I'll just post the link.

https://www.nairaland.com/5647531/4-quick-ways-identifying-dishonest

Read my first point very carefully.

A lot of Christians will avoid this thread.

An all-powerful god that refuses to save an incredibly loyal kid like Leah Sharibu.

But instead cares about the kind of clothing you wear, your tithe and seed, the kind of food you eat, the kind of people you have sex with and all other sorts of minor irrelevant things is a sorry excuse for a god.

Christians that choose to make excuses for this kind of god are as equally mentally depraved and outrightly evil.

The poor girl was merely being loyal. Albeit to the worst possible cause and to the worst type of people -religion and religious people.

Waiting for the "god of the gaps" fallacy crew here.


Read about it here:
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps

Oh We don't know therefore "god must have done it."

We don't know therefore "Satan did it."

We don't know therefore " a ghost did it."

We don't know therefore "your village people did it."

ABINTUK:
Thanks for your understanding....

And thank you for understanding why we do not take you lots a tad seriously when you say that Christianity is the most tolerant and loving religion.

Your initial reply will be evidence for me and so many others that will go through the thread now and in the distant future that one of the most uncouth, barbaric and hateful minds you will find are Christians.

ABINTUK:
Another mumu here.

Go fix your mother and father first before coming to talk with me.

God punish your useless mother.

Ah yeah. As usual... A loving Christian sharing all that love Christ preached.

Your actions -more than words- will be what motivates most people to either embrace your religion, tolerate, criticize or actually despise it.

So thank you for showing how loving Christians often are.

ABINTUK:
The mumuu seun won't do this...

He enjoys seeing Christian tread being bastardized and made mockery of.

Christianity is being mocked because your religion is capable of being mocked. Fix your religion and fix yourselves.

OpenYourEyes1:

Not asking GOD for forgiveness during prayers or when you mistakenly commit sin.
 There are sins we commit that are not deliberate. We must always ask our FATHER to pardon us for such sins, HE will pardon us.
HE is pleased with our humility. HE will forgive you and cleanse you.

Always remember to praise & show HIM great appreciations for prayers answered. This pleases HIM too, alot! I normally say "FATHER, I love you with all my heart. Thank you so much for all you have done for me"

"God's word." Funny how it's always HUMANS doing the talking.

A god that creates the whole universe with billions of gallaxies and trillions of planets gives a hoot and gets angry over what I wear, what I do and/or who I have sex with. What a piss-poor god y'all serve.

Realtalk20:
How the brain of one who can type such rubbish works is a marvel to me

This rubbish you wrote shows you couldn't even muster the slightest effort to understand the write up at all. Infact I suspect it would have fried your brains out to even try to comprehend this article ..

Hence you decided to try and be funny hoping it would distract from your lack of basic comprehension skills found in 5 year old children .

You might be a retárd without knowing. You should seek medical help

So many trolls on nairaland. Might interest them to know that excessive trolling is a sign of mental illness.

Biodun556:
Various Holy Bibles

It is worth mentioning that the Bible references cited might not be exactly as the Bible you are using. There are MANY Bibles on the market that are used by different Christian sects and all of these sects say that their book, though different, is the word of God. Such Bibles are: The Revised Standard Version 1952 & 1971, New American Standard Bible, The Holy Bible; New International Version, the Living Bible, New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures used by Jehovah Witnesses, Roman Catholic Version and the King James Version. A special note: I have not found in any of these Bibles where the "New Testament" calls itself the "New Testament," and nowhere does the "Old Testament" call itself the "Old? Testament." Also, the word "Bible" is unknown within the pages of the Bible.

This in itself is enough to classify Christianity as a false religion.

It would interest a lot of Christians to know that the KJV version of the Bible is just a collection of books out of a bigger collections of the original bible/scripture. How did you think they selected the right books? By Congress. By voting!

Google search the "Apocrypha" or the "Coptic Bible" if you doubt me.

Even new world translations of the Bible are "omitting" verses that were initially present in the KJV for lack of "authenticity" or "credibility." That is obviously ignoring the fact that King James himself was an homo-sexual -people the same Bible instructs them to kill at sight.

The Bible has been translated, retranslated, edited, re-edited so much that it is very hard to conclude that this could actually STILL be the Divine words of God. If god did, in fact, speak.

However, the obvious discovery that Christianity is false does not make Islam automatically true.
Both religions are actually just derivatives of Judaism. Christianity is Judaism version 2.0 while Islam version 3.0 if you study religions very closely.

You will still have to demonstrate that Islam is correct and doesn't contains the same flaws that exposed Christianity for the scam that it is.

So during my short time in the religion section of nairaland I have seen quite a lot of Christians with a lot of issues.

I spend little time creating topics compared to reading the topics of others and comments. And while doing both actions I have seeing a lot of Christians who are just plain dishonest and it'll be a total waste of time to try and have any reasonable discussion with them.

The following is a number of utterances/arguments (long post warning!) from a Christian that will prove to you that you're wasting your time trying to expect a reasonable discussion from these people.

_________________________________________


1. Claim Christianity is not a religion.

The very first sign of a dishonest Christian.

This is usually a case of "special pleading" where a Christian tries to assume a unique status for their faith or to "special plead" Christianity from the common pitfalls of religion. You hear stuff like:

"All religions are lies but Christianity is not a religion. It is a relationship with God"

"Religions makes laws but Christianity does not have laws because of grace."

Some have even gone further to argue that because Christianity is not a religion The separation of religion and state does not apply to Christianity. And so the teachings of christianity can be used to pass laws into the constitution.


It is rather ironic that these sort of people dust their bags and go to church every sunday. Not going to church on certain service days is termed a "sin." Even though there are no "set/written" laws.

They pray to God in a certain way, ending their prayers in a certain way. And offering responses to those prayers in a certain way using a certain phrase. And is not a religion.

Most all Christians have a certain doctrine they follow in their churches.
A doctrine which is a carefully selected set of behavioural standards (dressing, eating, sexuality etc). But they insist it is not a religion. Because they have no "laws."

These people fill in "Christianity" into forms and questionnaires when asked about their religion. Even though they claim to have "no religion."

It is even more ironic that these people do not ask their churches to begin paying taxes. Since the tax exemption for religious institutions no longer applies to them.

A Christian that claims Christianity is not a religion is a dishonest Christian. Because Christianity sure fits both the colloquial and dictionary definition of religion.

Religion
/rɪˈlɪdʒ(ə)n/

noun
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

Christianity believes, references and worships a god called Yaveh. So it is by definition a religion.

Christians who deny this have shown a very clear sign of intellectual dishonesty and should be avoided at all cost. As any expectation of a fruitful discussion with them will -more often than not, result in futility.

_________________________________________


2. Atheism is a religion.

This is another case of a Christianity trying to dishonestly equate atheism to other religions.

According to the above definition of religion, Atheism does not fit in. Because Atheism does not believe in any god. Atheists do not have a certain kind of practice like a "church" or any other common gathering they are obligated to attend. There are no doctrines in Atheism. No set dress code, No set sexual preferences, no set lifestyle. Zero. Zilch.

The only common ground for any two Atheists even under the same roof is their non belief in all the gods.


Atheism is a lack of belief in all the gods and it is no less a religion just like not watching TV or not swimming is a hobby.

No one answers "Not Samuel" or "Not Anita" or "Not Buhari" to the question "What's your name?" So "Not believing in all religions/gods(Atheism)" cannot be an answer to the question; "What's your religion?"

Christians that classify Atheism as a religion are ignorant about what it means or more frequently, lying. It is a dishonest attempt to undermine atheism and bring it on par with other religions including Christianity.


________________________________________


3. Quoting the Bible as evidence for God.

This is one of the most common signs of an intellectually dishonest Christian.

This is chiefly because the actual foundation of a Christians belief in God is based on the Bible. And so it will be illogical to try to use the Bible to try and justify a belief that was born from reading the Bible in the first place.

It is like providing the evidence of Superman using a Superman comic.

Or providing evidence that Harry Potter exists based on what was written in the book of Harry Potter.

Santa Clause books cannot serve as evidence for Santa Clause.

Christians that do this are engaging in a circular form of reasoning and are dishonestly presenting
a circular argument:

Why do you believe God? Because the Bible says so.

Why do you believe what the Bible says is true? Because the Bible is the Word of God.

Why do you Believe the Bible is the word of God? Because the Bible says so.

Again, Why do you accept what the Bible says as true?
Because I believe in God and Bible is God's word."

And the cycle repeats itself.


A Christian quoting biblical text as evidence for Yahweh is not any different from a Muslim quoting Quran text as evidence for Allah or a fanatic Harry Potter follower quoting Harry potter's books as evidence for Harry Potter.

Christians who do this are unable to argue for their God based on neutral grounds and are being intellectually dishonest.

When discussing with Christians that quote the Bible as an evidence for the Bible or the God of the Bible, it is a clear sign of dishonesty. And they're best avoided as trying to reason with their ilk is surely an exercise in futility.


_________________________________________






4. Prophecies as evidence of Bible and God.

This in itself has been the downfall of a lot of Christians in the religion section of nairaland.

Some Christians claim that the Bible contains a lot of prophecies that have been fulfilled. some also go on to vouch for their pastors to have made prophecies that indeed happened to come true. And therefore their religion must be true.

This is a dishonest argument because

A. Prophecies are being made across all major religions. And all major religions also do claim their books to have predicted certain events that did happen to have come through. So if indeed prophecies come true it happens in other religions as well so it is not an unfalsifiable evidence of the true religion.

B. We have cases of other documents which are not at all religious and that have predicted events that did happen to come through. There are experts in various fields of study who predict what will happen( like discoveries, new challenges etc) in their fields of study, 30 to 50 years and we find it to be so. This does not make them "divinely inspired or infallible."

The recent black hole image that was captured in 2019 was theorized and predicted by Albert Einstein. This does not mean that Albert was necessarily a man of God or a prophet.

Prophecies are often a result of mere predictions or at best, a calculated guess.

C. A lot of prophecies in religious books are ambiguous. Specificity is one of the properties of an actual prophecy. And the religious books fail woefully in that area. A lot of prophecies in the Quran and the Bible are vague and several events could be fitted to match these "prophecies" and tagged as "fulfilment."

D. Christians usually ignore the unfulfilled prophecies in the Bible when they say that prophecies validate their claims. Does that also mean that the unfulfilled prophecies invalidate their claims?

Or perhaps, the prophecies that were "fulfilled" are merely predictions that could have happened anyway given the non-existent timeframe given to expect the fulfillment.

Also, there is no way to reject the possibility of prophecies that were "fulfilled" being, in fact orchestrated. Someone who prophecies the death of a man, for example, could send killers after that man. And claim it was a "fulfilled prophecy" when, in truth, he orchestrated the whole process himself.

Prophecies are not evidence and it is a nonsensical way of proving that your religion must be true when, in fact, other religions also claim to have prophecies and you don't regard them as true because of that.

Until you can do that, you are presenting a dishonest argument based on the bias you previously held.




I will halt here for now but as I see more nonsensical arguments from Christians I will add it to this list and with debunking (of course!).

What other bullshit Christian arguments can you add to this? Let me know.

AOOkeowo:
Some people are claiming to be christains whereas they are fake. Some of them are scammers while some are fetish (i.e those ones that scam people to hell). May the Lord God deliver us from fake christains.

No true Scotsman fallacy or appeal to purity fallacy.

Read about it and why it is a nonsensical way of reasoning here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

"We have this calculation, if 200,000 people can give 500 naira each, we could be able to reach our target. I wanna thank you as you do this. God bless you."


Typical religious Nigerian. Claims to be someone who loves God and is free from sin yet is fantastically corrupt and still uses God as an excuse to bail himself out when being punished for his own dishonesty. Smh

Corruption is the single greatest thing that has plauged nigerians. Every single thing the first world enjoys that we don't enjoy is because of no other thing than corruption. Corrupt people must PAY for their actions.

And if you're indeed guilty and proven guilty, then no nigerian in their right mind would help you. Who knows how many talents and lives may have been ruined or even lost due to your corrupt practices before you were caught.

I don't pity your kind. Please SiaSia, don't use religious sentiments to garner sympathy.

Daejoyoung:
Because l know the bolded doesn't exist. l know all the passages that are believed to be about hell, and they are just probably 5% of the bible. When you read the translation and context of those so called passages about a literal eternal hell, you'll see they are usually a kind of misunderstanding.
ln the history of the church, there are three major interpretations of the biblical teaching of the afterlife:
Eternal literal hell fire( mainstream teaching)
Death or Annihilation ( second most popular interpretation and probably closest to the teachings of the bible)
Universalism ( a believe that all would eventually be saved even the devil).

All of these teachings seem to have biblical verses supporting them.

The Bible is a pretty ambiguous book. It could be twisted to support and condemn anything. Anything at all.

I could, in fact, have used it (albeit dishonestly) to support the erroneous claim I made above.

Daejoyoung:
what the hell are you talking about? where in my post did l assert this?

Where did I say that you said it?

Daejoyoung:
Read what l wrote again, l said "if" there is a soul. l hope you understand what the conditional clause "if" indicates?
l am not trying to prove anything, l am agreeing with you that a physical torture to an immaterial soul(as in the christian understanding) makes no sense.

It also does not make sense that a loving, omni-benevolent, all merciful God would create a place of unimaginable suffering for the creation he created with his own hands.

mansakhalifa:
So many imbeciles, I tell you.

Imagine how much space we could free up in this country if only we could just identify and exterminate these retards from top to bottom.

Nigeria will definitely be better for it. Who says we need a 100 million+ people when a large chunk are no good at using their bloody brains to think constructively?

We must consider this deeply.

I completely agree.

Daejoyoung:
what parts of the bible says this?

I think I made an error there. I can't seem to find references to that quote yet. I will keep checking but I take that back till I can provide the references.

However, why did you choose to ignore that other parts and specifically highlight the bolded?

TheMan3:
don't worry you will soon know

Yes..when I die!

Isn't it funny how religion has existed for 2000+ years and the best evidence they have is "you will find out when you die?"

Pataricatering:
The owl was sent to peck him to death ? Lol ! Superstition will be d death of us in this country ! U went to school , right ? Wonder what the point of education is .

Schools only give knowledge not wisdom. A lot of Nigerians have knowledge but they are not wise. And religion doesn't help either..does it..it helps to further dumb down the ability to think critically.

I'm not surprised why the average Nigerian IQ is less than 75.

TheMan3:
it is foolish and very naive to think the spiritual doesn't exist

no actually it is foolish and very naive AND DISHONEST to think that the supernatural exists while having NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER to back up that belief.

DoctorAlien:

First, let me expose a potential fallacy which may rear its deceptive head up at this point. The fact that there are many different religions and perceptions of God is not proof that there is no true religion and perception of God, just like the fact that there are many versions of the story of how a dead person died is not proof that there is no true version of the story of how that person died. But just like it is natural for us to conclude, in the case of the dead man, that there must have been a true story of his death which has been distorted to produce many different versions of the story, even so it is natural for us to conclude that there must have been an original true revelation of God which became distorted with time to produce many different and often conflicting religions we see today.

You still haven't answered my question. 4000+ religions say that they are god is the true god and their message about god is the true message about god..

How do we determine which one is correct and which one is false? how do we determine which one is telling the truth or which one is lying?


Do we just go with the one we are born into (which I assume with a certain level of confidence is in your case and that of many others)?

If not, how did you come to a conclusion that Christianity is the true one and that the others are false?

Because you only sound like "Oh I'm going to point out a possible fallacy here while also committing another fallacy by saying that the messages of an eternal god who wants us to know the truth could have been manipulated and distorted by humans."

By saying that you're assuming that God only communicates once and goes into hiding afterwards thereby leaving humans to be able to twist and misinterpret his messages.

As a Christian that will be dishonest, because the average christian really believes that god still talks to us till today.


So if we have a dead man who is still able to communicate about how we actually died I don't see how his message can be twisted.

But your analogy to compare God to a dead man actually looks on point. God has a lot of properties that are similar to that of a dead man who no longer exists and can't do anything.

DoctorAlien:
That said, I think it's time to know what you think. What qualities would you expect the true religion to have? What criteria do you expect the true religion to fulfill?

I don't believe that there can be anything like a true religion because I don't accept that there's any God to have a religion for in the first place.

Daejoyoung:
of course if the soul survives after death as is also believed by many christians, then the soul would have no skin to feel the heat/torment of fire.

But you cannot prove that this soul exists
OR
that it does, in fact, not have a skin
OR
that it does not have a skin that feels heat or torment.

And since whatever can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence... including hell...then...

DoctorAlien:
But the whole confusion clears up when we understand that Satan himself, his evil angels and evil human beings will be punished together in the same fire, and all of them annihilated.

Ook...So a god creates EVERYTHING in the whole universe including evil and then creates human beings (and some angels) with the ability to commit evil.

Then turns around to blame humans and the angels for the same mess he created in the first place.

Your god, if he exists at all, is a moral thug.

DoctorAlien:
[s]
"Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into the eternal fire which is prepared for the devil and his angels:" Matt. 25:41 [/s]

Do not preach or quote the Bible at me. I'm not interested in discussing a book that was used to justify the enslavement of my ancestors.

If you want to talk about the Bible maybe let's bring out the parts where owning other people as property(slavery) is justified, homosexuals can be killed and women cannot teach in churches because they're women. Or where people picking up sticks or herding their cattle on the Sabbath can be put to death.

DoctorAlien:
The fire was prepared for (the punishment of) Satan and his angels, but those sinners will partake in it because they chose to side with Satan against God.

What a loving god we have here... right.

A god that says: "oh love me and obey me or else you will burn in the fire I prepared for my enemy Satan(whom I created anyway)"

Like who the füčk creates his own enemy?

And how are most of you Christians comfortable with this kind of love? And have the guts to call it unconditional?

"Love me or Burn in hell." Isn't unconditional love. Unconditional love makes no demands. It loves WITHOUT CONDITIONS. A god that punishes people forever for finite crimes, is again, a masochistic, moral thug.

DoctorAlien:
And no, they will not burn for eternity, even though the fire is called eternal fire. The fire will consume them "forever and ever" in the sense that they will cease to exist in entirety.

NO..in the sense that you choose to interpret it. Some parts of the Bible even says a particular part of the body will burn for certain thousand of years.

But yeah...anything to defend god..


Jesus Christ!! How are a lot of you not disgusted by the concept of an eternal fire created by a so-called loving god?

. (Edit: it has been brought to my notice that there are no biblical references that states that the body burns for a certain number of years.)

Daejoyoung:
Hellfire is not what jesus or the bible teaches, only in Revelation do you find lake of fire. The bible teaches about a fire that destroys the enemy. Think about it for a second, how does a soul without nerves and receptors associated with the skin and brain feel pain and hot torments from a fire? This shows the fire is not literal burning but a form of anguish and torment in jesus parables.

You have to prove that a soul is those things you mentioned before I could accept that souls can not possibly feel pain.

Heck! even those that threaten others with hell cannot prove that there is hell. .so yeah there's that...

Maximus69:
[s]
(1) A powerful WICKED spirit being is behind the idea of a place of eternal torment. God only told the first human pair "you will certainly die". Genesis 2:17

DEATH is the DIRECT opposite of LIFE, but because it's been so long this pronouncement was made, religionists (under the influence of Satan) kept twisting it until they finally concluded "certainly they will NOT die". Genesis 3:4
You can easily read their WICKED hearts as they keep meditating on DEATH being a means of escape for those who wronged them, their assumption is that since both good and bad people do die, there should be an aftermath punishment for the bad ones apart from DEATH!

(2)Well i personal only witnessed where people die through explosives due to the nature of my former profession. But i've never seen someone burnt to death before, i only hear or read it in the news. Ironically this same God that WICKED religionists claim they're worshiping said he detests the sight of people being roasted alive and such idea has NEVER come up into his heart!! Jeremiah 7:31

(3)Satan is their God! He has the mind to think or do anything because of the inclination of his own heart, so WICKED religionists are part of his seeds! John 8:44
God strictly warned his LOYAL servants (who already understood his judicial decisions) that they must try all within their capability to enlighten their neighbours regarding his judgment. Failure to do this, they'll also DIE along with those who DON'T know his judicial decisions! Ezekiel 3:17-21
[/s]

Religious platitudes aka preaching. Thanks I'm not interested. Save it for the sheeple in their slaughterhouse called the church.

Maximus69:
I never thought you could think of EMPATHY!

This nonsense alone makes you undeserving of a concrete reply from me. Ever. So don't bother to quote me again. Because you will be ignored.

4words:
Obviously these are man made viruses. ..

it's really sickening that one idiot will go into his laboratory and produce things that are deadly to human race just because he or she wants to sell the anti virus.

The same way they create virus to computer and sell the anti virus just to make money.

Lastly, these Chinese guys are pretty disgusting, eating life rat, mice, fish etc and thinking all is well. Or am I the only one that have been seeing such video on instagram?

They are all just a pain in the butt keep give us problems.

I am just pissed

What's your fuc**ng evidence that they're man-made?

Well you can keep believing in lies. But prepare for even more "man-made" viruses because as the ice glaciers melt due to global warming a lot of crystallized viruses which were imprisomed in these environments will now begin to enter into the ecosystem as the ice melts into sea then into sea animals and finally man.

Maximus69:
Hmmmmmmmmm,

You're a TRUE atheist!

A truck carrying bread had an accident, (unfortunate event) the loafs scattered on the road, paupers rushed to the site, started picking the loafs and eating, the driver is badly wounded and crying for help.

But all what the supposed rich man's son (who promised a total stranger the favour of quenching his hunger) could do is to join the hungry paupers in causing more harm to the owner of the bread.
What's the difference between the stranger he is taking home and the wounded truck driver?
If he truthfully had GOOD intentions for a hungry stranger, what stops him from helping the wounded driver?

Never mind Sir it's OK, I PERFECTLY understood you now much more than before!

Again another false equivocation fallacy.

First, I pointed out that the guy didn't act at his best behaviour. So your attempt to tag me as someone who doesn't have compassion is moot.

Also, does the fact that he has good intentions for the stranger he had been talking to automatically means he definitely must have good intentions for the wounded driver? Lol

No, it does not follow.

I am saying they are different scenarios that could have warranted the guy to actually ignore the wounded driver and go on to eat the spoils of the crashed vehicle.

The driver could very well be someone the dude previously knew, (you said he was on his way home so probably was in the vicinity). So the driver could have been someone who has had once tried to kill him or something like that.

Soo...Because he wants to help a stranger does not automatically means he should help the driver because there are circumstances where it would be possible he couldn't or didn't want to.

Your reasoning is flawed and that is why I called it a false equivocation fallacy. Your analogy contains a lot of loopholes and plot twists.

Also when you say I am a "true atheist."

I understand you're trying to paint a picture that atheists are people who don't have empathy. Very rich coming from a Christian whose Bible contains a lot of scenarios way worse than this and empathy was thrown out of the window.

BIBLESPEAKS:
I do have faith that whatever I throw up will come down...i do have faith in the laws of the universe of which gravity is one of them.

oh good...so why not bother to look up the evidence for these things so that you can have a more certain level of confidence in them than just faith?

BIBLESPEAKS:
AMONG the definitions that one dictionary gives for faith is “firm and unquestioning belief in something for which there is no proof.”

Haha look!! FINALLY SOMEONE gets the original definition of faith I was talking about while writing the OP. You're the first Christian who comes at me within this read and understands what I actually was talking about before they bothered to reply. I have to thank you for that.

BIBLESPEAKS:
But, really, that definition more accurately describes credulity, a readiness to believe regardless of evidence. Credulity is really not faith.

You just agreed that it is a dictionary definition of faith and you are now telling me again that it is not Faith.

So you sound like: " oh I know that is actually what the dictionary says but I am going to ignore that because is not what I like to believe it to be."

Well you can always ascribe your own definition to any word you like but when you're discussing with other people please stick to the dictionary or at least the colloquial definition.

BIBLESPEAKS:
The faith in God the Creator that the Bible calls for, and for which it also furnishes the basis, is a faith based on clear evidence and sound reasoning.

Okay so please provide evidence for this "Christian God" and evidence that he is indeed "the creator", and that the Bible which calls for it is actually true.

I'm waiting.

BIBLESPEAKS:
As the Bible uses the term “faith,” it might be said to relate to two kinds of things: First, to the certainty of things hoped for, things not seen because of their being in the future.

Okay so YOU interpret it to mean two kind of things. First, being the certainty of things not seen because YOU think those things are in the future.

Other sects of Christianity would argue that those things may not necessarily be in the future or even, in fact, be real at all. Just like you ascribe YOUR second interpretation of faith to things that are not detectable by the human senses at all.

BIBLESPEAKS:
[s]
And, secondly, to faith in the existence of spirit beings, who are not visible to the human sight because of their not having material bodies; in other words, faith in God and in his promises. Thus we read at Hebrews 11:1 ( New English Bible ): “What is faith? Faith gives substance to our hopes, and makes us certain of realities we do not see.” That is why we are told that Christians must walk by faith and not by sight.​— 2 Cor. 5:7 .
Faith that God exists can be firmly established by contemplating the power and wisdom manifest in visible creation, including its order and harmony. [/s]

Religious platitudes aka Preaching.

Kindly do not preach to me in future. I am not interested.

BIBLESPEAKS:
All reasonable persons will agree that every effect has a competent cause. A watch argues for the existence of a watchmaker. So, look where we may in the universe, from the complex eye of an insect to the mighty galaxies in outer space, we come to the conclusion that there simply must be a mighty and wise Maker, or Creator, of these things.

Yes! If everything that looks complex has a creator. Then where is the creator that created god? Because I assume that as a Christian, your idea of a god is a complex supernatural deity.

So definitely ALL reasonable people would agree that every effect has a competent cause and come to the conclusion that there simply must be a mighty and wise maker, or creator of God. Since God is complex...lol

Hmm can't think of the creator of God or scared of the infinite regress? Then maybe you made an error in your reasoning? Yes you did.

You committed a fallacy!

Your fallacy is called the watchmaker fallacy and here is why it is flawed

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmaker_analogy

DoctorAlien:


The first point to note is that this is just it: you putting it to me. It does not amount to proof. Next, anything you have to say about the laws of logic can equally be said by Christians about their own axioms. One of such Christian axioms is "The Bible is true". So with equal breadth we say "The veracity of the Bible is the single most honest way of explaining reality". And I really mean it. What makes sense in the world today apart from the revealed light of the Word of God? Life, death, suffering, happiness, beauty, logic, morality all make sense only in the light of the Word of God, which is the Bible.

Things that you can explain, starting with what as axiom(s)? Or has it not occurred to you that every single thought takes for granted (i.e. as given) some other thought(s), until you certainly arrive at the axioms which cannot be proven true?

Correct with reference to what? Let me help you: it is still the laws of logic - the same things we're yet to determine on whose authority we are to receive it as true and thus totally binding on our thought processes.

This is the conclusion of an elaborate circular argument. You're essentially saying "all the statements we're able to formulate while today which are in agreement with the laws of logic, we formulated taking for granted (without proof) that the laws of logic are true". That amounts to saying nothing.

see above.

You mean taking them as true? But that is exactly what is in question. Why should they be accepted as true? Why should their negations not be accepted as true?

The person is able to do so building on the same laws of logic whose source of supreme authority over our thought processes as truisms we're trying to determine.

see above.

whether mathematics is real or not has no bearing on this issue. It is not news that mathematics is analogous to logic, and logic is not tangible too.

On whose authority should we believe that 1=1 is true? Someone can as well believe that "1 = not 1". Such a person can conclude too that you have "not 2" plates. You have to prove him wrong then, and you can't do so by starting with the assumption that "1=1" is true.

Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions. Someone can know too that 1+1 = not 2, based on another set of laws of "mathematics", say one which permits e.g. that N = not N. Why then must N = N govern our thought processes as true? On whose authority do we accept that law of identity as a truism on which to build our thoughts? Christians say that the laws of Logic are grounded in God, the supreme Lawgiver, Whose sanction certifies the veracity of those laws, and Who imprinted them in our minds.

You mean a conclusion starting with the assumption that the laws of logic are true? But why should we believe that they are true? Why are their opposites not true?

see above

Oh yeah. I don't just have the faith that God exists. You say I should prove it? I say you should prove that 1+1 = 2.

Same applies to God. God is the only meaningful explanation of reality. In fact, more than that, it is on the authority of God who sanctions them, that I receive the laws of logic as truisms on which to build my thought processes. Without such authority, the negations of the laws of logic stand on equal footing with the laws of logic themselves.

proven, taking what statements as starting point? Still the laws of logic. You can't escape it

correct/in agreement with what? Still the laws of logic, whose claims to truth we're calling into question apart from the authority of a universal Lawgiver (God). that comes a bit closer to the argument.

Someone can know too that 1 = 2. But you're assuming for example that 2 people = 2 people. That is essentially the law of identity. Prove the person wrong who says that you can give 1 whole thing to 2 people because 2 people = 1 person (negation of the law of identity). In fact prove the person wrong who says that it is true that "not whole = whole".

Elaboration of a circular argument, which avoids the main question. You've already landed at point where a division of 1 gives 1/2. But we're yet to agree on whose authority we should receive it as true that 1 is always equal to 1. You're yet to address the equal claims of a hypothetical different set of mathematical rules which permits for 1 to be divided and 50 gotten as the answer.

you can do so assuming that the laws of mathematics are true. But we're yet to agree on whose authority those laws stand to be compulsorily accepted universally as true, since they cannot be proven, and their negations stand on equal footing with them.

The question here is not the consistency of a logical system. Rather, the question here is the veracity of the axioms of that logical system. Any logical system is as good as its axioms. Should it be found that there is no basis on which to receive the axioms of that system as true, then the whole system is on shaky grounds, no matter how internally consistent it is. Christians posit that it is on God's universal authority that we receive the laws of logic as truisms. It is God's special sanction that elevates the laws of logic above for e.g. their negations.

when you're yet to prove that you do not receive it by faith that the laws of logic are true.

Faith is also the reason why an atheist would look at the statement "A thing is itself" and say "Oh this statement is true, even though I cannot prove it."

Yeah. In fact the Bible says that the just shall live by faith. It appears that the starting point of our logical system is faith in the trueness of the axioms our logical system. In fact, the faith is this, that the laws of logic have the sanctions of a universal authority, which sanctions makes them true, and their negations false. Without that special sanction from the universal authority, both the laws of logic and their negations stand on equal footing on the scale of acceptance. That universal authority is God.

But your logic has not asked you for the evidence that the axioms underlying your logic are true?

Lol. What are the evidences you examined before concluding, for example, that "a thing is itself"?


Creationists and evolutionists observe the same things in the natural world, yet they come to different conclusions as to the origin of those things. Which of them uses faith and which of them uses logic?

red herring. That is neatly and entirely out of the discussion.

Logic which begins with faith - faith that its axioms are true? It seems faith is everything.



Nah bro. You're yet to show how faith is not a good way to determine truth, especially when the way in which we determine truth (logic) is built on the faith that its axioms are true.

Ok so how does Faith lead us to the true god? If it is indeed a good way to determine truth which religious faith is the true one?

4000 religions claim they have the true god based on Faith...how do we determine which one is lying and which one is true?