Cloudgoddess's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Cloudgoddess's Profile › Cloudgoddess's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 (of 24 pages)
Nmadichi:Smh ![]() |
HardMirror:YES! Perception is everything. |
Strawman:You must be new to the internet. |
UyiIredia:Sigh ![]() So are you ever going to actually read a legitimate book on evolutionary biology, or are you just going to keep arguing from ignorance forever? |
Good. Bigotry should not be tolerated at any public institution. |
I agree. If childhood indoctrination suddenly became illegal, the major world religious would likely see a tremendous decline in adherents, if not total collapse within a few generations. This is because the powerful force of indoctrination is the only thing that keeps many people unquestioningly dedicated to their religions. Without it, people are free to explore science and other realms of thought, without guilt, fear of familial/societal rejection, religious bias clouding all their perceptions, or fear of hell - all which are just a few of the various factors that keep indoctrinated people subconsciously entrenched in & dedicated to their belief systems. |
DANO1011:In other words, thinking of other human beings sexually, while touching your genitals, is a sin, while slavery is not. That makes it better? (By the way, it is very possible to masturbate without imagining any other person.) Masturbation is a natural biological function that even children, chimpanzees, & bonobos have been examined doing. It's a healthy signal of puberty. It makes absolutely no sense to consider such a natural aspect of human sexuality as something worthy of an eternity in hell. Especially, as I said before, when things like slavery, the stoning of children & women, and mass genocide, go uncondemned in the bible. Here are just a few instances of the first. Leviticus Chapter 25, verse 44:The reason you did not know that slavery is uncondemned, and even glorified/encouraged by your own holy text, is because it is common practice for Christians (& Muslims, but I'll stay on topic) to CHERRYPICK - choose the portions of the text that support a certain perception of their religion that is culturally or personally acceptable to them, and ignore all of the questionable, inaccurate, or inhumane parts in the text. Pastors are the leaders of this cherry-picking practice. If you want to really get to know your religion, read the entire book, cover to cover, with as much of an unbiased, objective lens as you can muster. Then see for yourself if you still think it's the pinnacle of human guidance. |
ifenes:I like this idea. |
So according to Christianity touching your own genitals is a sin but owning slaves is not. ![]() It's hard to imagine how any sound-minded person can fail to see the incongruency & nonsensicality of such values. But, that is the power of indoctrination. It saps people dry of their reasoning faculties. |
ElCount:Again, you've proved you're not knowledgable on it's basic points and refuse to learn, so you're in no place at all to make any judgment on it's validity. What you're doing is the equivalent of me having not read a single book on astrophysics and then trying to spout that microwave radiation is made up. You're arguing from ignorance and it's making you look foolish. I don't know why the emphasis on gay, are you? AnywayWow, the gay references really went over your head. Their purpose was to point out the ridiculousness of the idea that the creator of the entire universe and all of the millions of species on earth, would view homosexual behavior amongst a single primate species as a valid reason to destroy all life on the planet. It sounds eerily like something an egotistical man-baby with middle-eastern 1st century values would do. Certainly not an all-knowing, all-loving, infinitely understanding god. |
ElCount:...psychological projection of the highest order. How can you say this, given your stance on things? How can you genuinely believe atheists are the ones deserving of such labels, but not you? It is like, you took the precise statement that would apply to you and those who agree with you, and flipped it on the people it would least apply to. Masterful projection, I've never seen anything like this. Applying critical thought to your beliefs then renouncing them is literally the reversal of indoctrination. Comparing modern scientific knowledge to the 2,000 year old Hebrew scripts you were read as a child and deciding the former made more sense, is the definition of using scrutiny. Moreover, there is nothing at all illogical about accepting the idea of "generations upon generations of environment-directed genetic change leading to new organisms over millions of years," over the idea that "an emotional, invisible, supernatural man who hates gay sex, used the power of his words to poof all of the different species on earth all at once, because he wanted to give humans stuff to rule over and eat. and also he drowned all those species later when people were having too much gay sex. even though he knew it would happen because he knows everything. but he was still pissed off." Also, the following show that even after all of the discourse in this thread, my OP, and links/resources I provided, you still don't understand what evolution actually involves and need to read up more on this topic if you want to have even the slightest idea what you're talking about: If we all evolved from a rock (prebiotic soup)...Abiogenesis... not evolution. And rocks are not the same as prebiotic soup - different chemical constituents. Read up. how then did we come to know that lying, murder, false witness etc is wrongAltruism & kinship... is... observed... in thousands of other... nonhuman species... it confers survival benefit and is thus part of our DNA. Read up. where the evolutionist have problem is that "if I break this rules what will happen"?Evolution is not a philosophy... it's a field of biological study concerned with how genetics and the environment interact to create species. There are christians who accept evolution, along with buddhists, taoists, jews, humanists, the list goes on. And not all atheists accept evolution or are even educated on it. Evolution =/= atheism or theism. Read up. Thanks. |
Fearcom:What is your evidence for any of these claims? "Revelations verse X" isn't evidence btw. And if it's not an earthly fire then why does it run on earthly matter (sulfur)..? I'm sorry but something's not adding up. |
senbonzakurakageyoshi:But atheists wouldn't even have to answer this question for their position to still be the more valid and logical one. Even if we had no clue what led to the universe in it's present state, "A Jewish God Yahweh poofed it here in 7 days, then morphed humans out of clay" would STILL be just as unsupported of a claim to make. Just like "The universe is a simulation being run by alien cats", or "A great goat burping the galaxy into existence." No proof, no acceptance. The atheist position is simply to not accept any claims of a supernatural deity that are unsupported. If theists were saying, "I think some form of a creator deity exists, but I'm aware that could very well be false, or a different entity entirely that's nothing like Yahweh", there would be little need for these discussions. But theists, depending on their specific religions, are putting forth a specific named deity, who supposedly performs specific acts in our world, and insisting that it is absolutely real and true without any doubt. Yet they have not put forth sufficient evidence at all for any reasonable, unindoctrinated person to believe in said deity, so those assertions are rejected by the atheist. Atheists are not bound to the big bang, or any other idea of how the universe came about. We are willing to change our views on that particular issue based on logical, reliable & un-biased or emotional evidence. Which no religion to date has provided. |
Tijay90: |
Nonsensical bafoonery ![]() |
blueAgent:Nope. You still don't properly understand how evolution works and are arguing from that ignorance. Nice try though. |
analice107:Nice; lose an argument, dish out a few more condescending cliches & pretend the argument never mattered anyway. Well, I suppose that's all you can do at this point. |
analice107:You have killed reason so you no long have any. Empty insult. It's quite clear my reasoning is more well thought out than a story equating a mother spicing her children's nether regions, to the (supposed) creator of the universe subjecting his creations to neverending flames. Let me take it that you didn't read the illustration @dorox made which I responded to. I did. Cloudgoddess, It was my mother's prerogative to raise her children as she saw fit. Just as it's God's prerogative to burn trillions of humans for eternity if they don't subscribe to him, even if doing so contradicts all logic and evidence. I get it. No authority is subject to criticism in your view, regardless of how sadistically they behave. We all turned out very responsible. All of us. Oprah turned out responsible, and a billionaire. Doesn't mean the abuse her relatives inflicted on her during childhood was not still abuse. I can see how well your mother raised you, If you can talk about God the way you do, I wonder how you deal with people around you. You love to imagine that because atheists & others don't subscribe to your supernatural ideas, they must be terrible people. The irony is that although all groups have their share of as*holes, atheists worldwide seem to act far more civilly than Christians (shown by violence & crime rates, national peace indexes, etc), and they don't need threats of hellfire to do so. Cloudgoodness Why was hellfire created and for who was it created? It doesn't, and will never matter what it's original use supposedly was. If Yahweh, who is supposedly capable of doing anything he wants at any moment, is PRESENTLY using hell for a certain purpose, then he still holds responsibility; if he is indeed all powerful, then all uses of hell that were ever put in place were intentionally decided on and maintained by him. |
2cato:Miss*, and that sentence was incomprehensible. Under what conditions does logic become destructive? When it unravels a concept you personally subscribe to? ![]() |
"Many religious people love to talk about how god has a plan for each of us. If we die early, that's god's plan. If we win the lottery, god's plan again. If our baby has cerebral palsy, once again, god's plan. God works in mysterious ways, doesn't it? Yet then to explain away the evilness of humans, these same religious people use the concept of 'free will', saying that humans were given the power to choose for themselves, and some choose evil. So I must ask, how can both be true? How can god have a plan for us, AND give us free will? Free will by definition means that we can choose our own path. If we can choose our own path, how can we not change our future depending on the choices we make? If the believer then argues that you can choose a path, but all paths lead to the same place, which is god's plan, then he has contradicted free will. If I have a pre-determined destiny which cannot be changed, then I don't have any power in my own life, my choices ultimately are meaningless, and I never did have free will. So I argue that both the concept of effective prayer and of free will contradict the concept of a divine plan. Free will and effective prayer do not contradict each other. So believers, you must either throw away the concept of a divine plan, or throw away belief in both the effectiveness of prayer and of free will. If you choose to throw away the divine plan, then you have to admit that sometimes good things happen, sometimes bad things happen, and it is not determined by god. When bad things happen to good people, such as children being gang-raped, god does not intervene, and didn't plan it either. Sh*t happens, and god doesn't seem to care. Also, it would shorten a lot of post-sports-match interviews, and awards acceptance speeches if we admit that god didn't have anything to do with it. If you choose to throw away the concepts of effective prayer and free will, then you could save a lot of time and money. Praying for events no longer works, so you can shorten services in churches, and stop giving money to those fraudsters on TV. There is no such thing as free will, so you'll have to admit that god created some people to be evil, and part of its plan is for them to be evil. Why would your supremely-good god create people to be evil? This would surely have an effect on the morality teachings of most religions. It seems that either of these options would be somewhat devastating for religions. In order to continue, they need all 3 (divine plan, free will and effective prayer) to be true. They're relying on it. And most religious sheep will never figure out that there is a problem with all 3 being true." Source |
analice107:And not once throughout your life have you considered other ways she could have effectively taught you that lesson? Burning you and potentially causing serious irritation to delicate body tissues, was necessary for you to learn to respect peoples' things? Your mother was abusive and probably borderline psychotic, and you rejoice for it. This clarifies so much about your way of thinking. You've been desensitized to abuse, so understandably your sense of justice is skewed and inhumane. And on top of that, this analogy is still lacking because it does not even remotely reflect the hell situation in severity or implication. A more equal comparison would be, instead of putting pepper in your eyes and anus ( ), your mother splashing petrol on your eyes and anus, lighting them on fire, and repeating this process for literal infinity, with no chance of you returning to a state of non-suffering. Repeated pain and torture for the rest of existence, far longer than any human lifespan. Eternal punishment for a finite crime. |
So the OP puts forth a perfectly legitimate question, with no sign of bias towards any position and welcomes responses from all perspectives, even acknowledging that the aim is not to dispute hell's existence. And all he is met with are insufficient reasonings which resort to dogmatic assertions when substantiation is requested, accusations of being angry at God, ridicule, and denial of the value in his question. This is unfortunately what tends to happen when you ask victims of extreme indoctrination to use their brains for anything other than reinforcing their pre-existing religious beliefs. If your questions might invoke any doubt in the supposed "perfection" of said deity then that is an insult, there is danger there and now they must defend the deity at all costs, like robots. So instead of answers, careful thought & consideration, you get dogged assertions, deflections and irrelevant insults as we see here. OP I think you asked a very important question, unfortunately the people who need to consider it the most are the most brainwashed and thus the most likely to percieve your question as a threat & an insult for even being asked. Hopefully more open-minded theists respond to this thread and a productive discourse can be had. |
KGBEAST:Oh okay, perhaps the person who wrote the comment was inspired by him? I personally haven't watched most of his videos, only one or two, so I wouldn't know either way. Sure, post the link! |
johnydon22:Yikes, this one struck hard ooo |
KGBEAST:I don't think so, I saw it in the comment section of some youtube video. I don't recall it being one of his. |
blueAgent: Conspiracy theories? Really?There's a reason that video has more dislikes than likes. |
blueAgent:How can Evolution explian the origin of Life.becos a none living thing .which includes evolution cannot give another life. which itself does not have. Evolution does not set out to explain the origin of life. That is a seperate study altogether. Secondly how can a process ( elvolution) design and create Man and Woman with all its complexities.considering the fact that evolution does not think .neither does it have hands ,legs ,eyes. It's called population genetics: changing allele frequencies due to mutation, genetic isolation, etc. Simple biological principles that rest on the foundations of chemistry & physics (DNA is a double helix, certain base pairs match with others, errors in DNA copying that lead to mutation, etc etc). Its like Saying a hurricane wind will blow and result or create a Boeing 727 with all its components. Not really. Hurricanes are chaotic, quick events. Evolution is tiny changes to DNA molecules over multiple generations, major changes taking millions of years to occur in mammals. It's not a fast process or a chaotic one. An analogy I like to use is the necklace and beads. Take a necklace, with perhaps 10 different colored beads on it. Every 10 minutes (representing a new generation) one bead is either added, or replaced with a different color bead. After 30 minutes the necklace will not look very different than how it started. But give it a few days, a week, even a month, and the necklace will look very different than when it started. That is how the process of evolution works on the DNA of organism populations. Tiny changes that add up over time. |
mrofficial:You did nothing to refute logic boy's position and just wrote irrelevant things that don't even support your position. Yes, we know that everyone will die one day. We know our understanding of nature is limited (for now) and that we can't access most of our brains (for now). What does any of that have to do with the subject at hand -- god failing to act consistently with the laws he supposedly created? Man made god in their own flawed image. That is exactly the point here, saying "oya fight god" is failing to see the glaring truth behind the criticisms of biblical god Yahweh being presented in this thread. Middle-eastern human beings, from 2000+ years ago, made up a god character, wrote stories about his supposed personality and doings, and then compiled them into a book and gained followers partly through word of mouth, and mostly through violence/plundering. Nothing about the process was divinely inspired, people are just told it is by authority figures (parents, pastors) and believe it because of groupthink, peer influence, and of course fear of eternal hellfire (another implausible, unproven phenomenon). |
How does someone burn without a body in the first place? Pain receptors and nerve cells are required to feel burns. |
Great post OP. Everything here is so common sense for people living in reality but for the religious it is nearly impossible to comprehend. Religion causes minds to operate off confirmation bias - seeing only what you want to see given your pre-existing beliefs, and ignoring everything else that is happening in the world. |
Wow, did you even read anything I replied in the other thread? I refuted over half of these points in my response to you yet you still post this. Did you attempt to comprehend what I typed there or did i just waste my time? And the site title is "Eternal Perspective Ministries", go figure. Interesting how the only websites writing these confused displays of ignorance are always Christian websites. Never actual science websites like NASA, National Academy of Sciences, Harvard, Cambridge Biology Department, etc. This is like a Muslim sending you a web page called "Praise Allah" explaining why Jesus wasn't the son of God. It's a clearly biased, religiously motivated source with no credibility in the science world. Can you bring an actual, reputable science website with actual research studies pointing out actual flaws in the actual premises of evolution? Not lazy creationist propaganda pages written by religious zealots who are just as uninformed as you are of what evolution is in the first place? |
odijeks:What study are you referring to? Post the link. Given the fundamental misunderstandings you displayed in your prior post, I can't help but be doubtful that you correctly understood the premise of the study or what it was out to achieve. Evolutionary "leaps" are not proposed to occur in a single generation, and abnormal development is an expected result of radiation-induced mutations - the theory doesn't claim otherwise. |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 (of 24 pages)



), your mother splashing petrol on your eyes and anus, lighting them on fire, and repeating this process for literal infinity, with no chance of you returning to a state of non-suffering. Repeated pain and torture for the rest of existence, far longer than any human lifespan. Eternal punishment for a finite crime.