₦airaland Forum

akintom:
Do really strive to understand, the difference between scientific propositions and atheistic views?

Not believing in God has consequences just as Not believing in gravity does

akintom:
1 Thessalonians 5:21(BBE)

Let all things be tested; keep to what is good;


1 Thessalonians 5:21(KJV)

prove all things; hold fast that which is good;

Of course, the stimulus of the pathologic rage of Christians, is the cognitive dissonance, which is secondary to the conflicting verses in the Bible.

This condition is further complicated, by their intellectual dishonesty and arrogance.

Prove that God exists? Ok sure

IF everything Exists then God Exists
Everything Exists
Therefore God exists

pls don't conflate Existence for Realness, would be your strawman , u can attempt to refute the premises

4kings:
First of all, why do you have to be rude, especially over stuff you are totally wrong about.


Which first link are you talking about?
The first link i posted talks about a model that outrightly debunks the Big Bang.
The second link on the other hand, talks about another theory(Large Hadron Collider in Black holes) that could also debunk the big bang.
I guess you clicked on the second one, for you to type this nonsense.
I don't even have the time to address your fallacy issue, here.

For goodness sakes, do you really think i can talk about the big bang without knowing Wilson and Penzias.
Abeg stop arguing with outdated information.


Wetin this guy dey yarn sef.

Hawkings used Einstien theory of general relativity, Quantum theory and logical deductions to come to the conclusion that the universe and time had a beginning in the big bang.

Abeg can you show me where he used ( could, would, should), in coming to his conclusion among the two links i posted.
Irrelevant.

Wowww, anyway i brought up a science issue on time and big bang, this seems to be Hawking's specialty not "philosophy".

Hmmm

I wonder how you arrived at these conclusion after giving you relevant articles to read up.


Mr. Man, it is apparent that you did not understand my posts.
What i said does not attack Intelligent design in any way. That was why i asked you those questions to make sure you understood the terms i used.
Next time try getting well informed before you pick up an argument.

---

And what's NUD, i don't like groups very well.

NUD Nigerian union of Deists, or u can add my number 07034362071 so we can discuss better on whatsapp. I repeat, no model has refuted Big Bang because of the Strong evidences supporting it CMB , Cosmic inflation and 2nd law of thermodynamics if any has we will be hearing of their Nobel Prize, this is a FACT !

if your city experiences lots of sunshine, why keep complaining about the epileptic Power supply in your Area or running Gen just to charge phones and devices when u can get this solar phone charger and stay online all through the day till the sun sets? it amazingly it charges 2v and 5volt efficiently and guess what ? it sells for only 7k. contact Bob on 07034362071

Note: price is Negotiable depending on your location

4kings:
How recent is this your information?

Do yourself a favour and go through this link.
https://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/large-hadron-collider/11489442/Big-Bang-theory-could-be-debunked-by-Large-Hadron-Collider.html

And next time you do not have to be rude, especially when you are not well informed on what you're arguing about.

Even at that, Stephen Hawkings has a different view about the beginning of time and big bang.
http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe.html
http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html






Before i reply these posts appropriately, let me ask you few questions to know if u understand what you're saying.

1)What distinguishes a personal God from an impersonal God.
2)What do deists think about God's intelligence.
3)How does this(answer 2), affect Deists believe in a non-interventionist God.
4)What distinguishes INTELLIGENT DESIGN from CREATIONISM.
5) Finally, please name some self proclaimed deist philosophers you know that believe in a personal God and state why or what made you think they held on to this believe.

your first link was an Ad futuris fallacy which u gullibly hold as true , it even clearly stated " could " there, guess u didn't see that, no model so far has been able to refute or explain origin of the universe better than the Big Bang because of the strong evidences supporting it with discovery of CMB in 1978 that got the discoverers Wilson and Penzias a Nobel Prize.

I have read Hawkins lecture on beginning of the universe where he tried to describe what happened prior to Big Bang with lots of probability statements ( could, would, should) and mere personal opinions which again u took to heart, by the way there is something called Presuppositional fallacy , look it up, Hawking's is a good physicist but he is surely terrible when it comes to philosophy, even appealing to him during a philosophical discuss is a fallacy , I suggest u read WLC instead . since our universe (time space matter) had a beginning then its logical to think the cause be timeless, spaceless and matterless hence supernatural .

for your other questions, join NUD on whatsapp 07034362071

all codes of known origin are a product of intelligence, the DNA is code therefore The DNA is a product of intelligence

deductive logical inference

IgboLoyalist:
Taking a abrupt digression from this dispute, the discrepancies in euhemerisms is quite a beauty. I actually sense some compatibilities with deistism to my irreligious stance. If God exists, because it would be intellectually insensible to denounce him altogether. We humans are preposterously pompous to believe that he gives a shred of care about us. Maybe I will do more research.

join Nigerian union of deists watsapp group on 07034362071 let's reason together

JackBizzle:
Spoken like a true ignorant fellow.

Language evolves. "gay" does not mean the same thing it meant in the 19th century.

Origin of a word is very different from its use in modern times.

if I call u a pseudo intellectual now u will start frowning face like over night fufu, if u seek the true definition of a philosophical term, u should contact encyclopedia of philosophy, or philosophical dictionary not Oxford dictionary that only gives u the common usage of the words ( note: the definition of words u get on your Google page is not OED but rather OD) don't be a pseudo intellectual

hopefulLandlord:
I don't care about the post or origin; if you've got anything contrary to my post, kindly lay it out

how can u gain true knowledge with this your " I don't care" attitude? ehn? Oya start from here

www.nairaland.com/3559976/proof-there-no-such-thing

4kings:
I really don't like labels or grouping myself to a sect because of this kind of situation.

But let me ask you, have you asked or read on deists websites on how this orchestration may have taken place?
I follow some deists site(like deism.com and positivedeism.com even patheos.com) and also feeds tagged with deism on Quora and other online forums and i have observed that most consider this God as an IMPERSONAL BEING.
If this is the case then this "orchestration" is not thought as, the same way you are thinking about it.

Deists have different opinions on some issues, that's why i didn't want to attack your ignorant post straight up.

study renowned deistic philosophers most didn't believe in an impersonal creator , an impersonal creator automatically refutes the idea of Intelligence design which is part of the core beliefs of deism, intelligence can only come from a mind , so u made a false dichotomy, it doesn't hav to either be impersonal or personal when it's a supernatural entity we talking about here

KingEbukasBlog:
Then God has the freedom of will . Its by God's will that the universe exists in the first place ; if he didn't decide to cause the existence of the universe then it wouldn't have existed . Its by his will that the universe exists . Therefore , since God has the freedom of will , its logical to conclude that God through his freedom of will should and can intervene in the affairs of man and the universe .

And that's where deism bleeped up

freedom of will is a human attribute based on empirical observation
God is not human
therefore God doesn't need to have freedom of will

God could have something different since supernatural , but if A is not B then A is not B

even if God has freedom of will, the fact that he can intervene in affairs of man if he wanted to doesn't mean u can start presupposing that he does, the fact that I can kill someone if I wanted to , doesn't in anyway mean I have killed anyone

KingEbukasBlog:
IgboLoyalist , bro I think you should read this write up . And ask yourself : if God didn't reveal Himself to the deists how could they deduce that He as a creator exists . You can make more researches on natural theology - this should open up a whole new perspective of this matter .

God revealed himself through designs in Nature , man seeing intelligent designs deducted that it must be from a supreme being or creative mind .only intelligence begets intelligence.

4kings:
Does your definition of God have a mind of his own or is it solely an impersonal creator as most deists think?

only few deists believes in impersonal creator actually, reason is because of evidences supporting intelligent design, and intelligence can only come from a mind, think about the information process in a DNA code . these and many more evidences for Intelligent design even help convinced late former renowned Atheist philosopher Anthony flew ( noted for redefining atheism as lack of belief) into dumping atheism for deism

KingEbukasBlog:
But either way , reincarnation is a superstitious belief ; I wonder why a deist would even subscribe to such beliefs .

don't strawman what I said pls, I clearly stated that I HOPED for it to be true, don't conflate it with believing in it.

also if reincarnation according to you is superstitious it logically applies to believing in heaven or some hell. since there are no Empirical evidences for both, only anecdotal evidences on both sides and in religious books

hopefulLandlord:
Gnostic and agnostic represents "Knowledge"

gnostic is someone who claims to know

agnostic is someone who doesn't claim to know


gnostic atheist is someone who doesn't believe in any god and also claims to know there is no god

agnostic atheist is someone who doesn't believe in any god but is not claiming to know there is no god

is this what they taught you in your atheism whatsapp group or u saw it on some meme ? lol, go an read T H Huxley and stop spewing ignorance, atheism and agnosticism are mutually exclusive, stop appealing to epistemic luck, it's a fallacy. I made a post about this a while back, go through it

JackBizzle:
An agnostic is an atheist.

Agnostics do not believe in a God or gods. They believe that it can't be proved either way. So they live a life without bothering about the question of God.


I am agnostic atheist.


Learn.

newly indoctrinated atheist like you are always ignorant and incredulous, T H Huxley who coined the term agnosticism didn't want anything to do with Atheism or theism, hence he coined the term agnosticism , research alil, u won't die

4kings:
This "scientific evidence" is currently debated.
So it's not valid for this argument, at the moment.
I'm not an atheist oo, but using that theory is not valid anymore for this kind of debate, at-least for now.

what's this? did u not hear me say that the scientists that discovered evidences supporting Lemaitre's Big Bang won Nobel prizes? google it and research for yourself, well except they did the debate in your fathers compound lol

[quote author=JackBizzle post=55369634]Thanks for confirming your ignorance.

[/quote

imagine someone ignorant of the etymology of a word calling another person ignorant, lol no need to bother explaining anything to u, it will be like trying to teach maths to a fish

KingEbukasBlog:
But sir , the idea of reincarnation is of religion , Buddhism exactly . God gave us reason not religion remember ? Why do you hope reincarnation is true ? And what do you think could be God's intention if reincarnation is true ?

Buddhism exactly? really? even in Nigeria alot of cultures believed in reincarnation, they believe that a late relative can be reborn, they go as far as naming the child with the name of the late relative, it's mostly due to a particular birth mark shared between the late relative and the baby or some other reasons like a kid dying at a young age and they think he didn't fulfil his mission in the world. were they Buddhists? no ofcoz ,

it's has been scientifically shown that humans are born with innate belief in God, but religion was made by man, just like how we are born with ability for speech and man made sign language

I hope reincarnation is true because I'd love to live some more, even if it's with a different consciousness and no memory of previous life, non existence won't be a nice thing u know. but hey, it's all wishful thinking. remember even as classic Deists don't believe in God intervening with humanity, we cannot say if God doesn't after we die.

Pastafarian:
Big bang doesn't prove anything, cosmologists build models and there are models that fit the data which doesn't need any god, Carroll-Chen is one such many models anyone of the numerous models could be wrong and anyone could be right; that makes it still up for debate



I'm now doubting your intelligence, what does inputting personal opinion have to do with this? didn't WLC also do the same? I respect you too much to watch you embarrass yourself like this

BTW, how many atheists on Nairaland have brought up Carroll Craig debate asides me? try get sense small, its not sin against your deist god or is it


cosmologists build models that fit the data, Theologists build arguments that fit their preconceived conclusions; that was why WLC was no match for Carroll in the debate cuz Carroll challenged one of WLC Kalam premise and he couldn't defend his premise properly and spent the rest of the debate attempting to invalidate Carroll-chen model and failing woefully at it cuz Carroll never for once claimed his model is the be all and end all; any cosmologist that puts "god" in his data should never be taken seriously

most importantly, it should be pointed out that Carroll made it clear that whatever discoveries are made does not in anyway disprove the possibility of the existence of god

I see deism as just a weaker form of atheism, someone too afraid to admit ignorance but not deluded enough to believe in an interventionist god

are u aware that the Big Bang was postulated by a Belgian priest? a theist?

2ndly did u go through the link I posted ? it showed that Caroll made baseless assumptions during the debate which he later admitted to after he was called out by a physicist. the universe began to exist and until that has been refuted it implies that the universe must have a cause because Something can not come from nothing, that's common logic, well except u are kraus lol

KingEbukasBlog:
Do you believe in life after death ?

I'd say I hope for it, especially the idea of reincarnation. my theory is this, Everything exists because nothing cannot exist. but don't conflate existence for Realness or Truth. so I hope reincarnation is true

KingEbukasBlog:
Thanks for the offer . I'm a christian .
But can I ask you a question about beliefs as a deist ?

sure

dalaman:
You don't know what caused the universe to begin to exist.

we know from Nobel Prize winning scientific evidences that the universe (time space and matter) began to exists 13.8 billion years ago after the Big Bang , and we deduce that since its evident that our universe is not eternal, the cause will be timeless, spaceless and matterless hence supernatural, and God (capital G) by definition has those attributes

now if u claim not to know what caused the universe, are u Open minded to the idea that it could be God?

MrMontella:
polydeism is the belief in multiple creators ..
Agnostic polytheism would be belief in personal gods...but their nature and interference is unknowable or unknown...

And agnostic and theism or deism or atheism are compactible...
A belief can comprise of both certainty and uncertainty...likewise a disbelief.....
And yes all na labels

TH Huxley didn't die for this

dalaman:
Outside space and time means you aren't talking about anything. Things that exist, exist within space and time. You are talking about nothing because your God is nothing.

are u implying that nothing caused the universe to begin to exist? kraus much?

JackBizzle:
Good. From your definition, does the agnostic believe in God? No.

he holds judgement on the does God exists question, or he says " I don't know "

JackBizzle:
An agnostic is an atheist

that's quite falls, according to TH Huxley who coined the term agnosticism, an agnostic is neither a theist nor an atheist, it's the middle ground

KingEbukasBlog:
And so, what's my point?

The precis of this yarn is to expose everyone to different religions and propositions which show the distinction between God and Religion . Are you questioning different religious beliefs right now ? Are you impugning certain verses of the scripture , you can peruse this thread for answers and discussion . I want to let you know that your skepticism does not imply that you longer believe in God . If anyone gives you pejorative labels because of your religious beliefs , direct them to this page .

Have a great Sunday !

cc : lalasticlala , mynd44

show some love pls

if you have deistic beliefs, feel free to join other Nigerian deists on our whatsapp group Nigerian union of deists whatsapp group 07034362071

remember, God gave us reason not religion

hopefulLandlord:
lots of (probably) false assumptions that have been repeated many times

Vilenkins said he thinks the universe is probably eternal

again, the law that everything needs a cause is a law IN the universe and may not necessarily apply as law FOR the universe

you can watch WLC debate with Sean Carroll on YouTube, watch all three hours and get a bit of education cuz you're just regurgitating guesses that they have repeated to you many times

lol, u atheist say u don't have faith but we now know that's false, u guys have alot of faith faith that science would answer all the questions, faith in an eternal universe, multiveverse theory, abiogenesis, faith faith! blind faith! are u aware scientist that discovered evidences for the Big Bang actually won Nobel prizes? look it up.

mind u as for that popular debate that u online atheists hold on to like your purposeless lives depended on it, it has been debunked, awwn don't cry, Sean Caroll admitted to have inputed his baseless personal opinions in that debate which makes Craig right after all.

read about it here http://www.wall.org/~aron/blog/did-the-universe-begin-iv-quantum-eternity-theorem/

akintom:
0/100 that's your score, on a simple question of HOW did you KNOW, that the universe/life was created/caused?

little godist, no rational mind rely on theory to make a statement of fact.

Wait until we scientists, come up with the laws that governs the origin of life precursor.

Assuming life has cause, who/what is the cause?

cheap Ad futuris fallacy! look it up lol, your faith in Scientism has made you gullible just like the religious people indoctrinated atheists like u mock.

for the fact that it's absurd to think that random processes of mindless atoms can give rise to intelligence is proof that 1st life form is a product of an intelligence mind. the law of biogenesis states that life can only arise from life, the odds of life beginning randomly is mathematically impossible,

expand your knowledge alil Stephen Meyers peer reviewed paper here http://www.discovery.org/a/2177

gabe:
thats why philosophical posturings are useless in this God argument. If everything has a beginning or a cause, what is the beginning or cause of God? Why is God exempt from the law? Give us evidence instead of parroting well worn arguments...

great question, now we all know that based on available scientific Nobel Prize winning evidences, the universe began to exist and therefore has a cause, but how about God? except God began to exist himself only then that logic would apply . but that's not the case , since time began to exist it's quite logical to think that the cause of time will be timeless and eternal, so that answers your question, God is without beginning or end and won't need a cause

DeSepiero:
I see you never wished to convert an open minded atheist at all?

the open minded ones are adding me on whatsapp, the incredulous ones with poor logic cannot be saved they rather keep their atheism like its some kind of new cool

DeSepiero:
Yes!
Zero is a word for nothing.
Zero means nothing.
Zero is naught (nothing).

Can't you see that zero is something and nothing at once? SMH

strawman! if zero exists as a word with a meaning then it exists as something and not nothing because the fact is Nothing doesn't exist, can u think of a new colour in your mind?